The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-17-23 CDB Agenda & 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 Video Conference: 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: 2552 273 2700 B.Disclosures C.Changes to the Agenda D.Approval of Minutes D.1 040323 Minutes(Sagstetter) E.Consent Items E.1 Design recommendation regarding 5th and Main Residences site plan and commercial certificate of appropriateness proposal to construct a six-story mixed use building with 121 residential units on the northeast corner of 5th Avenue and Main Street. Application 22321.(Rosenberg) THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CDB AGENDA Monday, April 17, 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 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. 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 Gran Cielo II Annexation Requesting Annexation of 81.468 Acres and Amendment of the City Zoning Map for the Establishment of a Zoning Designation of R-4 (Residential High Density District). Application 22090( Rogers) G.2 UDC Project - Receive information, Review, and Offer Input Regarding the Update to the Unified Development Code, Chapter 38, Bozeman Municipal Code to Address Potential Changes to Standards Relating to Transportation Levels of Service and Traffic Studies, Application 21381(Ross) G.3 UDC Project - Receive Information, Review, and Offer Input Regarding the Update to the Unified Development Code, Chapter 38, Bozeman Municipal Code to Address Potential Changes to Standards Relating to Numbers of Parking Spaces, Application 21381(Saunders) H.FYI/Discussions H.1 Upcoming Items for the May 1, 2023 Community Development Board Meeting (Bentley) 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:040323 Minutes MEETING DATE:April 17, 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: 040323 CDB Minutes.pdf Report compiled on: April 13, 2023 3 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, April 3, 2023 Page 1 of 5 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MINUTES April 3, 2023 General information about the Community Development Board is available in our Laserfiche repository. Present: Allison Bryan, Brady Ernst, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jennifer Madgic, Jason Delmue, Ben Lloyd Excused: Nicole Olmstead, Padden Guy Murphy A) 00:02:39 Call to Order - 6:00 pm B) 00:03:29 Disclosures C) 00:04:21 Changes to the Agenda D) 00:05:14 Approval of Minutes D.1 00:05:18 032023 Minutes 032023 CDB Minutes.pdf 00:05:21 Motion to approve Approve minutes Jennifer Madgic: Motion Chris Egnatz: 2nd 00:05:39 Vote on the Motion to approve Approve minutes The Motion carried 7 - 0. Approve: Allison Bryan Brady Ernst Henry Happel Chris Egnatz Jennifer Madgic 4 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, April 3, 2023 Page 2 of 5 Jason Delmue Ben Lloyd Disapprove: None E) 00:06:01 Consent Items F) 00:06:16 Public Comments G) 00:07:16 Action Items G.2 00:07:25 Annexation Application 22383 Requesting Annexation of Approximately 20.515 Acres and Adjacent Right of Way for Fowler Lane and Amendment to the City Zoning Map for the Establishment of a Zoning Designation of R-4 (Residential High Density District). Approximately 700 feet South of the Intersection of Stucky Road and Fowler Lane, Application 22383 22383 4840 Fowler Ln Annx-ZMA CDB SR.pdf 00:08:02 Planner Liz Cramblet presents to the board. 00:13:10 Planner Liz Cramblet answers questions from the board. 00:16:03 Applicant Tyler Steinway presents to the board. 00:22:44 Applicant Tyler Steinway answers questions from the board. 00:29:39 Marsha Kavoney provides public comment. 00:31:01 William Gavin provides public comment. 00:34:22 Tom Periza provides public comment. 00:38:59 Kevin Haggerty provides public comment. 00:41:23 Renee Gavin provided public comment. 00:58:44 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 22383 and move to recommend approval of the 4840 Fowler Lane Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. Allison Bryan: Motion Jason Delmue: 2nd 01:12:04 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 22383 and move to recommend approval of the 4840 Fowler Lane Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. The Motion failed 2 - 5. Approve: 5 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, April 3, 2023 Page 3 of 5 Henry Happel Ben Lloyd Disapprove: Allison Bryan Brady Ernst Chris Egnatz Jennifer Madgic Jason Delmue 01:13:09 The meeting went into recess. 01:18:54 The meeting reconvened. G.1 01:20:27 Recommend Approval of the Canyon Gate Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat with Conditions and Code Provisions, Application 22264. (Quasi-Judicial) REVISED Date 22264 Canyon Gate PP CDB staff rpt.pdf 22264 Canyon Gate compiled public comment as of 02 28 23.pdf 027 Annexation Covenants.pdf 01:20:57 Planner Susana Montana presents to the board. 01:44:53 Planner Susana Montana answers questions from the board. 02:12:24 Applicant Lindsey presents to the board. 02:21:05 Applicant Lindsey answers questions from the board. 02:57:22 Richard Bacher provides public comment. 03:00:15 Diane Asather provides public comment. 03:02:52 Sean Castow provides public comment. 03:06:28 Marsha Kavoney provides public comment. 03:09:52 Dan Kavoney provides public comment. 03:13:36 Christine Roberts provides public comment. 03:18:32 Mary Wictor provides public comment. 03:23:19 Carie Omland provides public comment. 03:28:21 Molly Castro provides public comment. 03:37:27 Sarah Annabella provides public comment. 03:51:04 Motion to approve 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 22264 and move to recommend approval of the Canyon Gate Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. Jason Delmue: Motion Jennifer Madgic: 2nd 04:13:13 Motion to amend Amend the original motion to include a scheduling and holding of a meeting between the applicant and the neighbors before the next hearing takes place. 6 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, April 3, 2023 Page 4 of 5 Jennifer Madgic: Motion Henry Happel: 2nd 04:16:14 Vote on the Motion to amend Amend the original motion to include a scheduling and holding of a meeting between the applicant and the neighbors before the next hearing takes place. The Motion carried 6 - 1. Approve: Allison Bryan Henry Happel Chris Egnatz Jennifer Madgic Jason Delmue Ben Lloyd Disapprove: Brady Ernst 04:16:35 Vote on the Motion to approve 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 22264 and move to recommend approval of the Canyon Gate Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. The Motion carried 7 - 0. Approve: Allison Bryan Brady Ernst Henry Happel Chris Egnatz Jennifer Madgic Jason Delmue Ben Lloyd Disapprove: None H) 04:17:18 FYI/Discussions H.1 Upcoming Items for the April 17, 2023 Community Development Board Meeting I) 04:17:49 Adjournment This board generally meets the first and third Monday of the month from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm. 7 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, April 3, 2023 Page 5 of 5 8 Memorandum REPORT TO:Community Development Board FROM:Sarah Rosenberg, Associate Planner Anna Bentley, Director of Community Development Erin George, Deputy Director of Community Development Brian Krueger, Development Review Manager SUBJECT:Design recommendation regarding 5th and Main Residences site plan and commercial certificate of appropriateness proposal to construct a six-story mixed use building with 121 residential units on the northeast corner of 5th Avenue and Main Street. Application 22321. MEETING DATE:April 17, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:Recommend approval of the site plan with conditions, application 22321, to the City Commission as presented and provide design recommendations and board member discussion. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND:This review is in front of the Community Development Board in the capacity as the Design Review Board (DRB). The Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) 38.230.040 sets the thresholds for projects that need the review of the DRB, or Community Development Board, and this project exceeds those thresholds. The DRB was established to provide design recommendations regarding larger proposals to the review authority. Per BMC 2.05.3000 – Established Powers and Duties “The community development board established pursuant to Resolution No. 5330 shall act as the design review board for all purposes under this Code. The design review board (DRB) is established to evaluate aesthetic considerations of larger and more complex proposals which are likely to produce significant community impact and to provide recommendations regarding such proposals to the review authority, subject to the provisions of chapter 38.”Chapter 38, Article 3 provides code provisions regarding those aesthetic considerations. Those include Form and Intensity Standards (38.320), Zone Specific Provisions (38.330), and Overlay District Standards (38.340). Chapter 38, Article 5 also contains code provisions regarding aesthetic considerations. These include, Block Frontage (38.510), Site Planning and Design Elements (38.520), 9 Building Design (38.530), Parking (38.540), Landscaping (38.550), Signs (38.560), and Lighting (38.570). Sections 5, and 7a through 7g of the staff report attached discuss these code provisions. A site plan and commercial certificate of appropriateness application to construct a six-story mixed-use building with 121 residential units and 2000 square feet of retail space. There is a deviation request from 38.320.050 to allow for a portion of the footprint to extend into the alley setback which is 5-feet. This deviation request requires City Commission approval as it exceeds the 20% threshold per 38.200.010.A.1.h. The City Commission is set to review the application at its May 2, 2023 meeting. There is also a departure request from 38.400.100 to allow the building to encroach into the vision triangle at 5th and Main. There are three existing buildings that will be demolished, two which are considered contributing, and one which is non-contributing. The property is not located within a historic district but is located within the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. The property is zoned B-3. There are currently no remaining corrections from the Development Review Committee and that the project is found to be adequate with conditions and code provisions. The full application can be viewed at this Laserfiche Link: https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?startid=269415&cr=1 Some materials in the submittal relevant to the DRB's duties include: 119 - Cover Sheet and Project Information 119A - Open Space Plans 127 - Architectural Site Plan 128 - Parking Garage Floor Plan 129 - Level 1 Floor Plan 130 - Level 2 Floor Plan 131 - Level 3-5 Floor Plan 132 - Level 6 Floor Plan 134 - Exterior Elevations 135 - Exterior Elevations 136 - Landscape Plan 138 - Hardscape Plan 138A - 2nd Level Hardscape Plan 138B - 6th Floor Hardscape Plan 139 - Planting Plan 139A - 2nd Floor Planting Plan UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As identified by the Community Development Board. FISCAL EFFECTS:Unknown at this time 10 Attachments: 22321 CDB Staff report.pdf Report compiled on: April 12, 2023 11 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 1 of 17 Application No. 22321 Type Site Plan, Commercial Certificate of Appropriateness, Demolition, Deviation Project Name 5th and Main Residences Decision Type Consent (Quasi-judicial) Summary Site plan and commercial certificate of appropriateness application to construct a six-story mixed use building with 121 residential units and 2000 square feet of retail space. There is a deviation request from 38.320.050 to allow for a portion of the footprint to extend into the alley setback which is 5-feet. There is a departure request from 38.400.100 to allow the building to encroach into the vision triangle at 5th and Main. There are three existing buildings that will be demolished, two which are considered contributing, and one which is non-contributing. The property is not located within a historic district but is located within the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. The property is zoned B-3. Zoning B-3 Growth Policy Community Commercial Mixed Use Parcel Size 31,363 SF Overlay District(s) Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Street Address 421 Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59715 Legal Description Tracys 1st ADD, S12, T02 S, R05 E, Block De, Lot 18-21, Tracys 1st ADD, S12, T02 S, R05 E, Block D, Lot 14 and 15, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. Owner Reuter Walton Development, 4450 Exclesior Blvd, Suite 400, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Applicant SMA Architects, 109 E. Oak Street, Suite 2E, Bozeman, MT 59715 Representative Same as applicant Staff Planner Sarah Rosenberg Engineer Cody Flammond Noticing Public Comment Period Site Posted Adjacent Owners Mailed Newspaper Legal Ad 4/10-5/2/2023 4/10/2023 4/10/2023 4/15, 4/29/2023 Advisory Boards Board Date Recommendation Development Review Committee April 3, 2023 Adequate Community Development Board (Design Review Board) April 17, 2023 TBD Recommendation The application is adequate, conforms to standards, and is sufficient for approval with conditions and code provisions as noted below. Decision Authority City Commission Date: May 2, 2023 at 6:00pm in the City Commission Room at 121 N. Rouse Avenue Motion Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby find application 22321 meets the criteria required for site plan and commercial certificate of appropriateness approval and move to approve the 5th and Main Residences Site Plan and Commercial Certificate of Appropriateness application with a deviation request from 38.320.050 to allow for a portion of the footprint to extend into the alley setback which is 5-feet. Full application: https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?startid=269415&cr=1 Full application and file of record: Community Development Department, 20 E. Olive St., Bozeman, MT 59715 12 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 2 of 17 PROJECT SUMMARY An applicant has applied for a Site Plan (SP) and Commercial Certificate of Appropriateness (CCOA) application to build a six story, 172,768 square feet mixed use building with 121 residential units, commercial space on the ground floor, and a parking garage. The project proposes to demolish three structures, two considered contributing the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD), and one is non-contributing. The contributing structures, the former Bamboo Express and Genuine Ice Cream are vacant. The property is zoned B-3 and is not located in a historic district The Community Development Board in its capacity as the Design Review Board will review the application on April 17, 2023. The applicant is requesting a deviation from BMC 38.320.050 to allow a portion of the north elevation to encroach into the alley setback, which is 5 feet. The deviation request exceeds the 20% threshold and requires City Commission approval per 38.200.010.A.1.h. The City Commission is set to review the application at its May 2, 2023 meeting. This application will be on the consent agenda since deviations are purely a local creation and does not require a public hearing. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this report. 1. 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 (BMC) or State law. 2. BMC 38.540.060. A proof of allowance to use the parking lot to the north is required prior to final site plan approval. CODE PROVISIONS 1. BMC 38.410.130 - The applicant must pay the Cash-in-lieu of Water Rights (CILWR) prior to final site plan approval. 2. BMC 38.420.030 - The applicant must pay the Cash-in-lieu of Parkland (CILP) prior to final site plan approval. 3. BMC 38.240.350 - A subdivision exemption application is required for the lot merger. It must be filed prior to final site plan approval. 4. BMC 38.340.120 – Historic inventory documentation for 407 W. Main is required prior to final site plan approval. 5. BMC 38.220.080 - Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant must provide a copy of the recorded Waiver of Right to Protest Creation of a Special Improvements District. 6. BMC 38.410.060- Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant must provide a signed hard copy of the public access easement for the sidewalk proposed on the subject property. The easement must be provided using the City's standard easement template. 13 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 3 of 17 Figure 1: Current Zoning Map 14 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 4 of 17 Figure 2: Community Plan Future Land Use 15 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 5 of 17 Figure 3: Proposed site plan 16 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 6 of 17 Figure 4: 5’ Alley setback deviation request (area highlighted in blue) 17 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 7 of 17 Figure 5-8: Elevations 18 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 8 of 17 19 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 9 of 17 Figure 9: Existing Conditions 20 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 10 of 17 ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Analysis and resulting recommendations based on the entirety of the application materials, municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis in this report is a summary of the completed review. Plan Review, Section 38.230.100, BMC In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the Director of Community Development shall consider the following: 1. Conformance with Article 1 - Consistency with the City’s adopted Growth Policy 38.100.040.D Meets Code? Growth Policy Land Use Traditional Core Yes Zoning B-3 (Downtown Business District) Yes Comments: Growth Policy: Traditional Core: The traditional core of Bozeman is Downtown. This area exemplifies high quality urban design including an active streetscape supported by a mix of uses on multiple floors, a high level of walkability, and a rich architectural and local character. Additionally, essential government services and flexible spaces for events and festivals support opportunities for civic and social engagement. The intensity of development in this district is high with a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) well over 1. As Bozeman grows, continued evolution is necessary for long-term resilience. Challenges do exist, particularly around keeping local identity intact, balancing growth sensitively, and welcoming more transportation modes and residents. Underdevelopment and a lack of flexibility can threaten the viability of the land use designation. Future development should be intense while providing areas of transition to adjacent neighborhoods and preserving the character of the Main Street Historic District through context-sensitive development. The proposal supports infill with high intensity of development and mix of uses. The future development is more intense than what is existing with a FAR over 5. The design, materials, and solid-to-void ratio emulate similar characteristics of what is found in the downtown core. Zoning District: Downtown Business District: The intent of the downtown B-3 business district is to provide a central area for the community's business, government service and cultural activities with urban residential development as an essential supporting use. The downtown B-3 district should be the area of greatest density of development, intensity of use, and appropriate infill. Design standards reinforcing the area's historical pedestrian-oriented context are very important. This district encourages high volume, pedestrian-oriented uses in ground floor space in the "core area" of the city's central business district, i.e., along Main Street from Grand to Rouse and to the alleys one-half block north and south from Main Street. Lower volume pedestrian uses such as professional offices may locate on ground floor space in the downtown B-3 area outside the above-defined core. The six story mixed use building supports urban residential development and also provides supporting commercial uses. 2. Conformance with Article 1 - All other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations (38.100.080) Condominium ownership Yes, with future submittal Comments: A separate Condominium Review (CR) is required to create condominiums. 3. Conformance with Article 2, including the cessation of any current violations (38.200.160) Meets Code? Current Violations NA Comments: There are no current violations on the subject property 21 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 11 of 17 4. Conformance with Article 2 - Submittal material (38.220) requirements and plan review for applicable permit types (38.230) Meets Code? Site Plan Yes Submittal requirements 38.220.100 Yes Phasing of development 38.230.020.B No. of phases: 1 Yes Comments: The site plan criteria are met with this project. The proposal conforms to zoning provisions, community design provisions, and project design provisions. See analysis below for how each criteria is met in the articles Any additional use permit (Conditional Use Permit) 38.230.120 or (Special use Permit) 38.230.120 NA Comments: The use is allowed by right and no CUP or SUP is required. 5. Conformance with Article 3 - Zoning Provisions (38.300) Meets Code? Permitted uses 38.310 Mixed use – apartments and commercial, parking garage Yes Form and intensity standards 38.320 Zoning: Setbacks (feet) Structures Parking / Loading Yes Front Refer to block frontage under Section 7a Refer to block frontage under Section 7a Rear 0’ 0’ Side 0’ 0’ Alley 5’ 5’ Comments: The proposed setbacks meet the minimum requirements except for a portion of the north elevation that encroaches into the alley setback which requires a deviation request from 38.320.050. The portion of the elevation that protrudes into the alley setback is about 125 feet or roughly 58% of the total wall plane. This is to accommodate for the parking garage and to provide adequate circulation within it. See section 12 for full analysis of the deviation request. The first floor is commercial space, residential amenities, and a parking garage. There is also underground parking. The residential units are located on the second to sixth floor and make up 121 units. Lot coverage 76% Allowed: 100% Yes Building height 69’-6” Allowed: 70’ Yes Comments: The roof maintains a flat pitch. The building is six stories and the top floor steps back at the top level on Main Street and to the east. Applicable zone specific or overlay standards 38.330-40 Yes Comments: The property is located within the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD). See section 11 and 12 below for full analysis. General land use standards and requirements 38.350 Yes Comments: The proposal is consistent with the land use standards and criteria. Applicable supplemental use criteria 38.360 Yes Supplemental uses/type NA Comments: There are no additional uses within this section that are proposed with the project. Wireless facilities 38.370 NA Affordable Housing 38.380.010 NA Affordable housing plan NA Comments: No affordable housing or wireless facilities are proposed with this site plan. 22 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 12 of 17 6a. Conformance with Article 4 - Community Design Provisions: Transportation Facilities and Access (38.400) Meets Code? Streets 38.400.010 Yes Street and road dedication 38.400.020 NA Access easements Yes, with code provision Level of Service 38.400.060 Yes Transportation grid adequate to serve site Yes Comments: A traffic memorandum was provided to the Engineering Division who determined the findings of the study to be adequate for the proposed use. Sidewalks 38.400.080 Yes Comments: Sidewalks are required along all public roads and the aged sidewalks along West Babcock and South 9th Avenue will be replaced. Drive access 38.400.090 Access to site: 1 Yes Fire lanes, curbs, signage and striping Yes Comments: Vehicular access is provided off an alley via North 5th Avenue. Fire lanes, curbing, striping, signage and gutters have been reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and Engineering Division. Street vision triangle 38.400.100 Yes with departure Transportation pathways 38.400.110 Yes Pedestrian access easements for shared use pathways and similar transportation facilities NA Public transportation 38.400.120 NA Comments: The applicant requested a departure from the street vision triangle to allow for encroachment of the southwest corner of the building on 5th and Main. Engineering and Montana Department of Transportation reviewed the departure request and determined that it is appropriate. There are no applicable pathways or transportation facilities, nor public transportation for this project. 6b. Conformance with Article 4 – Community Design Provisions: Community Design and Elements (38.410) Meets Code? Neighborhood centers 38.410.020 NA Comments: Based on the size of the project, a neighborhood center is not required. Lot and block standards 38.410.030-040 NA Midblock crossing: rights of way for pedestrians alternative block delineation NA Comments: The lots exist and meet standards. A subdivision exemption is required to merge the lots. If the development is adjacent to an existing or approved public park or public open space area, have provisions been made in the plan to avoid interfering with public access to and use of that area NA Provisions for utilities including efficient public services and utilities 38.410.050-060 Yes Easements (City and public utility rights-of-way etc.) Yes Water, sewer, and stormwater Yes Other utilities (electric, natural gas, communications) Yes CIL of water rights (CILWR) Yes, with code requirement Comments: A Water, Sewer, and Storm Design Report was prepared by TD&H Engineering and approved by the City for the proposed project. The sewer main will be upgraded as well as the water and fire service line. The CILWR is required to be paid prior to final site approval. Municipal infrastructure requirements 38.410.070 Yes 23 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 13 of 17 Comments: Requirements for municipal infrastructure have been reviewed by the Engineering Department for functionality and compliance with adopted standards. Any applicable conditions and code provisions related to the above-mentioned requirements are included in this staff report. Grading & drainage 38.410.080 Yes Location, design and capacity of stormwater facilities Yes Stormwater maintenance plan Yes Landscaping: native species, curvilinear, 75% live vegetation 38.410.080.H NA Comments: A Stormwater Plan was prepared by TD&H and found adequate by the Engineering Division. The proposed storm water management system consists of rooftop landscaping and drains, parking garage surfaces/drains, sand/oil separator, and floor drain sewer ejector pump. Watercourse setback 38.410.100 NA Watercourse setback planting plan 38.410.100.2.f NA Comments: There is no watercourse on the property. 6c. Conformance with Article 4 – Community Design Provisions: Park and Recreation Requirements (38.420) Meets Code? Parkland requirements 38.420.020.A .865 ac. X 12 units/ac. X 0.03 ac.= .31 acres = 11,325 SF Yes Cash donation in lieu (CIL) 38.420.030 $2.30 per 1 SF (7841 SF) = $18,035 Yes Improvements in-lieu NA Comments: The applicant is proposing cash in lieu (CIL) of parkland. Pursuant to section 38.420.030.A, 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. The Parks and Recreation Director reviewed the criteria for evaluation of requests, as established per Resolution 4784, for use of CIL of parkland and concurred with the justification provided by the applicant. Due to the relatively small lot size and number of units proposed and the aim to create consolidated parkland of 1-acre or larger as established in the Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, staff recommends approval of the CILP proposal. This CIL is required to be paid prior to final plan approval per code requirement. Park Frontage 38.420.060 NA Park development 38.420.080 NA Recreation pathways 38.420.110 NA Park/Recreational area design NA Comments: Project is proposing CIL of parkland. This contribution must be paid to the City prior to final site plan approval. 7a. Conformance with Article 5 – Project Design: Block Frontage Standards (38.510) Meets Code? Block frontage classification Storefront Yes Departure criteria None NA Comments: Main Street and North 5th Avenue are mixed block frontage. The applicant has proposed storefront along both. Storefront Block Frontage: The building is placed right along the property line of Main Street and 7 feet back from the property line along 5th Avenue to accommodate for the larger sidewalk. The uses along it include commercial space and residential amenities. Façade transparency, building entrances, weather protection, parking location and sidewalk meet the storefront block frontage standards. 7b. Conformance with Article 5 – Project Design: Site Planning and Design Elements (38.520) Meets Code? Design and arrangement of the elements of the plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) so that activities are integrated with the organizational scheme of the community, neighborhood, and other approved development and produce an efficient, functionally organized and cohesive development Yes Relationship to adjacent properties 38.520.030 Yes 24 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 14 of 17 7d. Conformance with Article 5 – Parking (38.540) Meets Code? Parking requirements 38.540.050 121 Yes Parking requirements residential 38.540.050.A.1 121 Reductions residential 38.540.050.A.1.b NA Parking requirements nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2 NA Reductions nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2.c 3000 sf of non-residential is not included Provided off-street 138 Provided on-street 9 Bicycle parking 38.540.050.A.4 15 required, 36 proposed Comments: There is parking garage underground and on the first floor. The underground parking has 66 spaces and the first level has 60 spaces. There are 12 parking spaces on the parking lot north of the property and nine on the street. Bicycle parking is located in a bicycle amenity room and along the street. Loading and uploading area requirements 38.540.080 NA First berth – minimum 70 feet length, 12 feet in width, 14 feet in height NA Additional berth – minimum 45 feet length NA Comments: NA 7e. Conformance with Article 5 – Landscaping (38.550) Meets Code? Mandatory landscaping requirements 38.550.050 Yes Drought tolerant species 75% required Yes Parking lot landscaping NA Non-motorized circulation and design systems to enhance convenience and safety across parking lots and streets, including, but not limited to paving patterns, pathway design, landscaping and lighting 38.520.040 Yes Comments: The proposed development conforms to requirements of Section 38.520. The sidewalk along Main Street is 13’ and 12’ along 5th Avenue. Design of vehicular circulation systems to assure that vehicles can move safely and easily both within the site and between properties and activities within the general community 38.520.050 Yes Internal roadway design 38.520.050.D NA Comments: Requirements of BMC 38.520 such as design of vehicular circulation systems were reviewed by the Engineering Department and found adequate. Vehicular access to the parking garage is taken from the alley to the north. On-site open space 38.520.060 Yes Total required 13,650 SF Yes Total provided 14,620 SF Yes Comments: This proposal meets the open space criteria. Shared open space includes two roof decks, an exterior courtyard, common indoor recreation space. Units that face inward to the courtyard have individual balconies. Location and design of service areas and mechanical equipment 38.520.070 Yes Comments: The service areas are located to provide safe and convenient use along the alley. 7c. Conformance with Article 5 – Project Design: Building Design (38.530) Meets Code? Compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the site and the adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development 38.530.030 Yes Building massing and articulation 38.530.040 Yes Building details, materials, and blank wall treatments 38.530.050-070 Yes Comments: The proposed building meets the massing and articulation requirements. The proposed design implements a variety of architectural features to achieve “repetition by variety” including building articulation, change in materials, use of weather protection features, and change in window size and placement. 25 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 15 of 17 Additional screening NA Street frontage Yes Street median island NA Acceptable landscape materials Yes Protection of landscape areas Yes Irrigation: plan, water source, system type Yes Residential adjacency Yes Comments: The project has been reviewed and found to be in conformance with the landscaping requirements, including, but not limited to, minimum drought tolerant species proposed, street frontage landscaping, and acceptable landscape materials proposed. Street trees are along Main Street and 5th Avenue. Landscaping of public lands 38.550.070 NA Comments: NA 7f. Conformance with Article 5 – Signs (38.560) Meets Code? Allowed SF/building 38.560.060 NA Proposed SF/building NA Comments: No signs are proposed with the site plan. A sign permit will be required prior to any signs installed. 7g. Conformance with Article 5 – Lighting (38.560) Meets Code? Site lighting (supports, cutoff, footcandles, temperature) 38.570.040 Yes Building-mounted lighting (supports, cutoff, footcandles, temperature) 38.570.040.B Yes Comments: The project proposes wall mount lighting that is full cut off. There is no measurable lighting proposed that leaves the site. The project lighting is found to be sufficient and meets code. 8. Conformance with Article 6 – Natural Resource Protection Meets Code? Floodplain regulations 38.600 NA Wetland regulations 38.610 NA Comments: NA 9. Relevant Comment from Affected Parties (38.220) Meets Code? Public Comment Yes Comments: The public notice period runs from April 10 to May 2. No public comment has been received at the time of writing this staff report. 10. Division of Land Pertaining to Subdivisions (38.240-Part 4) Meets Code? Subdivision exemptions Code provision Required easements Code provision Comments: A subdivision exemption is required for the merger of the lots prior to final site plan approval. 11. Standards for Certificate of Appropriateness (38.340) Meets Code? Certificate of appropriateness standards Yes Secretary of the Interiors Standards NA Architectural appearance 38.340.050 Yes Comments: The proposed project is located within the NCOD but is not within a historic district. This means that the project must address the standards of 38.340.040 and the Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation and the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District for new construction and subchapter 4B for infill development in the B-3 zone. Review of demolition of historic structures or sites 38.340.080 Yes Historic Structure per 38.700.090 Yes 26 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 16 of 17 Comments: The proposed project includes demolition of three structures. 421 W. Main (former Bamboo Garden) and 411 W. Main (former Genuine Ice Cream) are considered contributing structures and eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. 407 W. Main (office space) is not considered eligible but requires an updated inventory form as outlined in code provision. Approval of the proposed subsequent development is required for all historic structures proposed for demolition and for the proposed movement of any structure of site 38.340.090. Yes Public Notice Yes Criteria for demolition of a historic structure Yes 1. The property’s historic significance. 421 and 411 W. Main are considered eligible structures. Yes 2. Whether the structure has no viable economic life remaining. The existing structures are not appropriate for the underlying zone district. Yes 3. Whether the subsequent development complies with Section 38.340.050 (standards for certificates of appropriateness). The subsequent development meets design standards. Yes 4. Whether the subsequent development includes construction of new building(s) unless the existing character of the area does not include buildings. The proposal includes new construction. Yes 5. Subsequent development requires a building permit and does not include proposals which leave the site without building(s) or structure(s). The proposal will not leave the site vacant. Yes Notwithstanding the above, for projects proposing the removal of a historic structure, which do not qualify for sketch plan review pursuant to 38.230.070, the review authority may determine the proposed subsequent site development is more appropriate for the site based upon the criteria in 38.230.100 (plan review criteria). Yes Comments: No demolition of the structures are permitted until the site plan and building permit for the subsequent development is approved. Since the property is zoned as B-3, the subsequent development is more appropriate for the site and zone district and will leave the site with a new infill building and will not result in a vacant site. The Director determines that the proposed subsequent site development is more appropriate for the site than the existing building and use based on the criterial in 38.230.100. 12. Deviations from Underlying Zoning Requirements (38.340.070) Meets Code? Criteria for Granting Deviations Yes Comments: The deviation request is from 38.320.050 to allow encroachment into the 5-foot alley setback. There are three criteria for granting deviations from the underlying zoning requirement. 1. Modifications must be historically appropriate The portion of the elevation that protrudes into the alley setback is about 125 feet or roughly 58% of the total wall plane. Within the B-3 zone district, historically, many buildings abut the property line or encroach into the 5-foot setback. The existing structures that front the alley encroach into this setback. The intent of the B-3 zone district and Community Plan Future Land Use “traditional core” is to encourage high density that fits within the existing fabric of downtown. Staff finds that this criteria is met. 2. Modifications will have minimal adverse effects on abutting properties. As stated above, the entire wall plane is not encroaching into the alley setback. Meter locations and dumpster pads are located where the building does meet the 5-foot setback. The Engineering Division, Fire Department, Solid Waste Division, and NorthWest Energy reviewed the alley width and find that there is still adequate alley width for vehicles to get through and the vision clearance triangle is not impacted at the intersection of 5th and the alley. Snow storage will be located in the parking lot to the north of the property. Staff finds that this criteria is met. 3. Modifications must assure the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The alley width and relocation of the utilities assure that there are no potential issues related to public health, safety and general welfare. 27 Staff Report 5th and Main Residences Site Plan/CCOA Application 22321 April 12, 2023 Page 17 of 17 28 Memorandum REPORT TO:Community Development Board FROM:Tom Rogers, Senior Planner Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager Erin George, Deputy Director of Community Development Anna Bentley, Director of Community Development SUBJECT:Gran Cielo II Annexation Requesting Annexation of 81.468 Acres and Amendment of the City Zoning Map for the Establishment of a Zoning Designation of R-4 (Residential High Density District). Application 22090 MEETING DATE:April 17, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative RECOMMENDATION:Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 22090 and move to recommend approval of the Gran Cielo II Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND:The applicant and property owners seek to annex two parcels totaling 81.468 acres plus adjacent rights-of-way into the City limits and establish an initial zoning of R-4, Residential High Density District. The property is currently zoned “Agriculture Suburban” (AS) within the County administered Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District (the Donut). Considerable development activity is occurring in the vicinity including the Gran Cielo I subdivision, Buffalo Run development on the south, and the existing Meadow Creek subdivision. The Future Land Use Map in the Bozeman Community Plan (BCP) 2020 designates the property as “Urban Neighborhood” which includes the R-4 district as an implementing zoning district. Nearby municipal zoning includes R-4 on a portion of the southern border, R-3 on the south, east, and northeast sides. The remaining area is bordered by un-annexed property zoned A-S in the Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District. The subject properties are within the urban planning and municipal service area for the City. 29 This report is based on the revised application. The original application proposed a mix of R-3 and R-4 on the property and was subsequently amended after initiating the public notice period. The revised application is proposing R-4 for the entire property. The proposed annexation would bring in additional right of way to build out sections of Kurk Drive, West Graf Street, Fowler Lane, and upon future development additional internal street network. There are no structures on the property. On March 20, 2023 the Community Development Board voted to continue the public hearing to April, 17, 2023. During public comment period at this meeting four members of the public testified. Comments zeroed in on the inadequate street network for traffic volume, specifically the substandard roads of Fowler Lane, South 27th, and Stucky Road, and defined these roadway as dangerous for all users except vehicular traffic. In addition, comments addressed the poor condition of intersections of Fowler Lane and Stucky Road. Also, comments were received about impacts of the natural environment and water availability. Public comment has been received on this application. All written comments can be reviewed at the following link. https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx? id=273672&dbid=0&repo=BOZEMAN UNRESOLVED ISSUES:There are no identified conflicts on this application at this time. ALTERNATIVES:1. Approve the application with contingencies as presented; 2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended zoning; 3. Deny the application based on findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. Open and continue the public hearing, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. FISCAL EFFECTS:No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment. Attachments: 22090 Gran Cielo II Annx-ZMA CDB.pdf Report compiled on: April 11, 2023 30 Page 1 of 44 22090 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA Public Hearings: Community Development Board (map amendment only) March 20, 2023, continued to April 17, 2023. City Commission (Annexation and map amendment) April 11, 2023, continued to May 2, 2023. Project Description: Gran Cielo II Annexation requesting annexation of 81.468 acres and amendment of the City Zoning Map for the establishment of a zoning designation of R-4 (Residential High Density District). Application 22090. Project Location: Property is located south of West Graf Street between South 27th Avenue and Fowler Lane and more particularly described as Tract 1 of COS 2074 and Parcel A, COS 1861, located in in the Southwest One-Quarter of Section 23, Township Two South (T2S), Range Five East (R5E) of P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana. Recommendation: Meets standards for approval with terms of annexation and contingencies. Recommended Zoning Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 22090 and move to recommend approval of the Gran Cielo II Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. Recommended City Commission Annexation 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 22090 and move to approve the Gran Cielo II Annexation subject to the terms of annexation and direct staff to prepare an annexation agreement. Recommended City Commission Zoning Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, recommendation of the Zoning Commission, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 22090 and move to approve the Gran Cielo II Zone Map Amendment with contingencies of approval necessary to complete adoption of an implementing ordinance. Report Date: April 12, 2023 Staff Contact: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner Lance Lehigh, City Engineer Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative 31 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 2 of 44 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is based on the application materials submitted and public comment received to date. This report addresses both the zoning amendment for Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission, as well as the annexation and the zoning amendment for the City Commission. The application materials are available on the City’s website in the laserfiche archive. Unresolved Issues There are no identified conflicts on this application at this time. Project Summary The applicant and property owners seek to annex two parcels totaling 81.468 acres plus adjacent rights-of-way into the City limits and establish an initial zoning of R-4, Residential High Density District. The property is currently zoned “Agriculture Suburban” (AS) within the County administered Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District (the Donut). Considerable development activity is occurring in the vicinity including the Gran Cielo I subdivision, Bennett Property Annexation, Buffalo Run development on the south, and the existing Meadow Creek subdivision to the east. The Future Land Use Map in the Bozeman Community Plan (BCP) 2020 designates the property as “Urban Neighborhood” which includes the R-4 district as an implementing zoning district. Nearby municipal zoning includes R-4 on a portion of the southern border, R-3 on the south, east, and northeast sides. The remaining area is bordered by un-annexed property zoned A-S in the Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District. The subject properties are within the urban planning and municipal service area for the City. This report is based on the revised application. The original application proposed a mix of R- 3 and R-4 on the property and was subsequently amended after initiating the public notice period. The revised application is proposing R-4 for the entire property. The proposed annexation would bring in additional right of way to build out sections of Kurk Drive, West Graf Street, Fowler Lane, and upon future development additional internal local street network. There are no structures on the property. In determining whether the criteria applicable to this application are met, Staff considers the entire body of plans and regulations for land development. Standards which prevent or mitigate possible negative impacts are incorporated in many locations in the municipal code but are principally in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code. References in the text of this report to Articles, Divisions, or in the form xx.xxx.xxx are to the Bozeman Municipal Code. 32 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 3 of 44 Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on March 20, 2023 which was continued to April 17, 2023. After the completion of the public hearing a report on their deliberations will provided to the City Commission. On March 20, 2023 the Community Development Board (CDB) voted to continue the public hearing to April, 17, 2023. The CDB heard public comment on the application. Comments zeroed in on the inadequate street network for traffic volume, specifically the substandard roads of Fowler Lane, South 27th, and Stucky Road, and defined these roadway as dangerous for all users except vehicular traffic. Comments addressed the poor condition of the intersection of Fowler Lane and Stucky Road. Also, comments were received about impacts of the natural environment and water availability. Public comment has been received on this application. All written comments can be reviewed at the following link. https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=273672&dbid=0&repo=BOZEMAN Alternatives 1. Approve the application with contingencies as presented; 2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended zoning; 3. Deny the application based on findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. Open and continue the public hearing, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. 33 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 4 of 44 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 2 Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 2 Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2 Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary ................................... 3 Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 3 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES: ................................................................................................... 5 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED TERMS OF ANNEXATION .......................................... 10 SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT... 13 SECTION 4 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ...................................... 14 Annexation ........................................................................................................................ 14 Zone Map Amendment ..................................................................................................... 14 SECTION 5 - ANNEXATION STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ................................ 15 SECTION 6 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ........... 21 PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ......................................................... 41 APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT .................................................... 41 APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING ................... 41 APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ............................ 44 FISCAL EFFECTS ................................................................................................................. 44 ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................... 44 34 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 5 of 44 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES: Map 1: Project Vicinity Map 35 Page 6 of 44 Map 2 Vicinity Map Subject Property Subject Property 36 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 7 of 44 Map 3: BCP 2020 Future Land Use Map Subject Property 37 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 8 of 44 Map 4: BCP 2020 Future Land Use Map – Future commercial node locations are shown in PINK. One mile radius from exterior boundary One half mile radius from exterior boundary 38 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 9 of 44 Map 5: Existing City Zoning Subject Property 39 Page 10 of 44 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED TERMS OF ANNEXATION The following terms of annexation are recommended to enable the application to comply with the City’s Annexation Policy and the requirements of state law for the provision of services. Recommended terms of annexation: 1. The documents and exhibits to formally annex the subject property must be identified as the “Gran Cielo II Annexation”. 2. An Annexation Map, titled “Gran Cielo II Annexation Map” with a legal description of the property and any adjoining un-annexed rights-of-way and/or street access easements must be submitted by the applicant for use with the Annexation Agreement. The map must be supplied as a PDF for filing with the Annexation Agreement at the County Clerk & Recorder, and a digital copy for the City Engineers Office. This map must be acceptable to the Director of Public Works and City Engineers Office, and must be submitted with the signed Annexation Agreement. 3. The applicant must extend the annexation map to the full width of Fowler Lane for the full length of the subject property adjacent to Tract 1, COS 2074. 4. The applicant must execute all contingencies and terms of said Annexation Agreement with the City of Bozeman within 60 days of the distribution of the annexation agreement from the City to the applicant or annexation approval shall be null and void. 5. The land owners and their successors must pay all fire, street, water and sewer impact fees at the time of connection; and for future development, as required by Chapter 2, Bozeman Municipal Code, or as amended at the time of application for any permit listed therein. 6. If they do not already exist the applicant must provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SIDs) for the following: a. Street improvements to S. 27th Avenue between Stucky Road and Blackwood Road including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. b. Street improvements to Stucky Road between Fowler Lane and South 19th Avenue including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. c. Street improvements to West Graf Street between Fowler Lane to South 19th Avenue including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. d. Street improvements to Fowler Lane between Blackwood Road and Stucky Road including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. 40 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 11 of 44 e. Intersection improvements at South 27th Ave and West Graft Street including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. f. Intersection improvements at Fowler Lane and West Graf Street including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. g. Intersection improvements at West Graf Street and South 19th Ave including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. h. Intersection improvements at Stucky Road and South 19th Avenue including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. i. Intersection improvements to Fowler Lane and Stucky Road including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. j. Intersection improvements to Fowler Lane and Blackwood Road including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. k. The document filed must specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the developer agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of the improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. The applicant must provide a copy of the SID waiver in conjunction with the Annexation Agreement. l. The applicant may obtain a copy of the template SID waiver from the City Engineering Department. The document filed must specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the applicant agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of said improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. The applicant must provide a copy of the SID waiver filed with the County Clerk and Recorder prior to annexation. 7. The Annexation Agreement must include the following notices: a. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that, prior to development, the applicant will be responsible for preparing a storm water master plan in conjunction with future development. The storm water master plan shall address maintenance and operations until and unless the City affirmatively assumes responsibility for maintenance and operations of stormwater facilities within the area of the annexation. b. The Annexation Agreement must include notice the City will, upon annexation, make available to the Property existing City services only to the extent currently available, or as provided in the Agreement. 41 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 12 of 44 c. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that there is no right, either granted or implied, for Landowner to further develop any of the Property until it is verified by the City that the necessary municipal services are available to the property. d. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that, prior to development, the applicant will be responsible for installing any facilities required to provide full municipal services to the properties in accordance with the City of Bozeman's infrastructure master plans and all City policies that may be in effect at the time of development. e. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that utility easements may be required to be provided by the landowner at the time of development to ensure necessary municipal services are available to the property. f. The agreement must include notice that charges and assessments may be required after completion of annexation to ensure necessary municipal services are available to the property. g. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that the City will assess system development and impact fees in accordance with Montana law and Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9, Bozeman Municipal Code. h. All procedural terms necessary to establish the Annexation Agreement in conformance with state law and municipal practice will be included with the final Annexation Agreement. 8. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that the applicant must connect to municipal services and will be responsible for installing any facilities required to provide full municipal services to the property in accordance with city policy at the time of connection. 9. CIL of Water Term. The applicant must contact the City’s Engineering Department to obtain an analysis of cash-in-lieu of water rights for the proposed annexation. The determined amount must be paid prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation, if applicable. 10. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 South 27th Street is classified as a collector in the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP), which has a minimum right-of- way ROW width of (90) feet. The applicant must provide their respective South 27th Street ROW from the centerline of the existing ROW as a public street and utility easement where South 27th Street is adjacent to the property prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation. 11. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 Graf Street is classified as a collector in the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP), which has a minimum right-of-way ROW width of (90) feet. The applicant must provide their respective Graf Street ROW from the centerline of the existing ROW as a public street and utility easement where Graf Street is adjacent to the property prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation. 12. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 Fowler Lane is classified as a Minor Arterial in the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP), which has a minimum 42 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 13 of 44 right-of-way ROW width of (100) feet. The applicant must provide their respective Fowler Lane ROW (50) feet from the centerline of the existing ROW as a public street and utility easement where Fowler is adjacent to the property prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation. 13. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 Kurk Drive is classified as a Local Street and is adjacent to the subject property. The applicant must provide their respective Kurk Drive ROW in order to provide the City with a 60 foot width public street and utility easement from the intersection of Kurk Drive & 27th endpoint of Kurk Drive at Fowler Lane ROW, prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation. 14. All final easements provided to the City must be stamped and signed by a professional surveyor. SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Please note that these contingencies are necessary for the City to complete the process of the proposed amendment. These contingencies only apply in the event that the related annexation request has previously been approved. Recommended Contingencies of Approval: 1. That all documents and exhibits necessary to establish an initial municipal zoning designation shall be identified as the “Gran Cielo II Annexation Zone Map Amendment.” All required documents must be returned to the City within 60 days of the City Commission action to annex the property or the preliminary approval shall be null and void. 2. That the Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be finalized until the Annexation Agreement is signed by the applicant and formally approved by the City Commission. If the annexation agreement is not approved, the Zone Map Amendment application shall be null and void. 3. That the applicant must submit a Zone Amendment map, titled “Gran Cielo II Annexation Zone Map Amendment”. The map must be supplied as a PDF. This map must be acceptable to the City Engineer’s Office, and must be submitted within 60 days of the action to approve the zone map amendment. Said map shall contain a metes and bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property including adjacent right-of-ways or street easements, and total acreage of the property to be rezoned; unless the property to be rezoned can be entirely described by reference to existing platted properties or certificates of survey. 4. The Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant provides an editable metes and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed Montana surveyor. 43 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 14 of 44 SECTION 4 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS Annexation Having considered the criteria established for an annexation, the Development Review Committee (DRC) did not find any deficiencies that prohibit annexation at this time that could not be addressed through future development review processes and adopted City Codes. The City Commission will hold a public meeting on the annexation on May 2, 2023. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. Zone Map Amendment Having considered the criteria established for a zone map amendment, the Staff found the requested zoning meets standards for approval as submitted. The Zone Map Amendment (ZMA) is in conjunction with an annexation request. Staff’s recommendation and staff responses are predicated on approval of the annexation, application 22090. The Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the amendment. The DRC did not identify any infrastructure or regulatory constraints that would impede the approval of the application that cannot be addressed with adopted standards and requirements for future development. The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this ZMA on March 20, 2023, continued to April 17, 2023 and will forward a recommendation to the Commission on the Zone Map amendment. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in will be held in the Commission Room at City Hall, 121 N. Rouse Ave, Bozeman, Montana. Members of the public will also be able to participate remotely via WebEx. Instructions for joining the WebEx meeting will be included on the meeting agenda which is published on the City’s website at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. The agenda is available at https://www.bozeman.net/meetings. The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the zone map amendment on April 11, 2023 and continued to May 2, 2023. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in the Commission Room at City Hall, 121 N. Rouse Ave, Bozeman, Montana, the City Commission will conduct a public hearing on the proposed Zone Map Amendment application. Members of the public will also be able to participate remotely via WebEx. Instructions for joining the WebEx meeting will be included on the meeting agenda which is published on the City’s website at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. The agenda is available at https://www.bozeman.net/meetings. 44 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 15 of 44 SECTION 5 - ANNEXATION STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for approval of the requested annexation, the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider the following: Commission Resolution No. 5076 Criteria Commission Resolution No. 5076 Goals Goal 1: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations of land contiguous to the City. Criterion Met. The property in question is contiguous to the City limits on the northeast half, east, and the southern edge of the property. Goal 2: The City encourages all areas that are totally surrounded by the City to annex. Criterion not met. The subject property is not wholly surrounded at this time. Unannexed property lies to the west and northwest. Goal 3: The City encourages all properties currently contracting with the City for City services such as water, sanitary sewer, and/or fire protection to annex. Criterion met. There are no structures onsite contracting for City services. Goal 4: The City of Bozeman requires annexation of all land proposed for development lying within the existing and planned service area of the municipal water and sewer systems as depicted in their respective facility plans, any land proposed for development that proposes to utilize municipal water or sewer systems. Criterion met. The subject property lies within the planned service area of the municipal water and sewer services. Future proposed developments will be required to utilize municipal water or sewer systems. Goal 5: The City encourages annexations within the urban area identified on the future land use map in the current Bozeman Growth Policy. Criterion Met. As shown in Section 1, the subject property is planned as ‘Urban Neighborhood’ and is within the urban area of the growth policy. See the discussion under Criterion A of Section 6 of the report for more information on the growth policy. Goal 6: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations to make the City boundaries more regular rather than creating irregular extensions which leave unannexed gaps between annexed areas or islands of annexed or unannexed land. Criterion Met. The proposed annexation will fill in a missing gap between Buffalo Run to the south, Meadow Creek subdivision to the east, and Gran Cielo subdivision to the northeast. Visual observation shows a more regular city boundary with this property annexed. 45 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 16 of 44 Goal 7: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations which will enhance the existing traffic circulation system or provide for circulation systems that do not exist at the present time. Criterion met. The property is bounded by roadways identified in the Bozeman Area Transportation Plan, 2017 Update as Collector and Arterial streets. In addition, Kurk Drive, a local street, will eventually be constructed to connect the exiting road to Fowler Lane. Terms of annexation include provisions pursuant to City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 to acquire necessary rights-of-way (ROW) to accommodate the development of these streets. Fowler Lane is a designated Arterial street which requires 100 feet of ROW. Both South 27th Avenue and West Graf Street are designated Collector streets which utilize a 90 foot ROW. See Terms of Annexation No. 10 – 13. There are no Class I trails identified in the PROST plan on the subject property. Goal 8: The City prefers annexation of parcels of land larger than five (5) acres in size, but will allow annexation of smaller parcels if factors such as topographic limitations, sanitary disposal needs, fire access, maintenance of public facilities, etc., justify a smaller annexation. Criterion met. The subject property is approximately 81.468 acres. Goal 9: The City seeks to obtain water rights adequate for future development of the property with annexation. Criterion Met. After annexation, the subject property will be bound to the provisions of 38.410.130 which require evaluation of water adequacy and provision of water if needed at time of development. The municipal code section requires water rights or an equivalent to be provided. Exact timing and amounts will be evaluated during development review. There are several methods to address the requirements of 38.410.130. The annexation agreement will provide notice of this requirement, see Terms of Annexation 9. The landowner will consent to this requirement by signature on the annexation agreement. Goal 10: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations for City provision of clean treated water and sanitary sewer. Criterion Met. The subject property is located within the City’s planned water and sewer service area. See Goal 4 above. Any future development will be required to connect to the City systems. Per Term of Annexation 7.d and 8, the Annexation Agreement requires notice that the applicant requires the applicant to design extensions of services to meet the City’s adopted infrastructure standards. These include provisions for minimum water pressure and volumes, adequate sewer flows by volume, gravity flow of sewers, and other standards necessary to protect public health and safety and ensure functional utilities. 46 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 17 of 44 Resolution No. 5076 Policies Policy 1: Annexations must include dedication of all easements for rights-of-way for collector and arterial streets, adjacent local streets, public water, sanitary sewer, or storm or sewer mains, and Class I public trails not within the right of way for arterial or collector streets. Annexations must also include waivers of right to protest the creation of special or improvement districts necessary to provide the essential services for future development of the City. Criterion Met. As discussed in Section 5 Goal 7, additional right of way is being included for the Collector streets of South 27th Avenue, and West Graf Street. And Fowler Lane Arterial Street needs. The Recommended Terms of Annexation include requirements for these right of way provisions. See Terms of Annexation 10 - 12. No Class I trails are designated for the subject property according to the PROST Plan. Policy 2: Issues pertaining to master planning and zoning must be addressed prior to or in conjunction with the application for annexation. Criterion Met. The subject property is planned for Urban Neighborhood. No change to the growth policy is required. The application includes a request for initial zoning of R-4. See the zone map amendment section of this report for analysis of the zone map amendment criteria. Policy 3: The application for annexation must be in conformance with the current Bozeman Growth Policy. If a Growth Policy Amendment is necessary to accommodate anticipated uses, the amendment process must be initiated by the property owner and completed prior to any action for approval of the application for annexation. Criterion Met. The property is designated “Urban Neighborhood” on the future land use map. No growth policy amendment is required. See discussion under zone map amendment Criterion A. Policy 4: Initial zoning classification of the property to be annexed will be determined by the City Commission, in compliance with the Bozeman Growth Policy and upon a recommendation of the City Zoning Commission, simultaneously with review of the annexation petition. The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the City Zoning Commission will be reviewing the requested zoning district designation on April 17, 2023. The Zoning Commission’s recommendation will be passed along to the City Commission for review and consideration along with the annexation request on May 2, 2023. 47 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 18 of 44 Policy 5: The applicant must indicate their preferred zoning classification as part of the annexation petition. Criterion Met. The applicant has requested a zoning designation of R-4, Residential High Density District. See Section 6 of this report for analysis of the requested zoning. Policy 6: Fees for annexation processing will be established by the City Commission. Criterion Met. The appropriate application processing and review fees accompanied the application. Policy 7: It is the policy of the City that annexations will not be approved where unpaved county roads will be the most commonly used route to gain access to the property unless the landowner proposes a method to provide for construction of the road to the City’s street standards. Criterion Met. The subject property is accessed by South 27th Street, Kurk Drive, and Fowler Lane; all of which are paved. Policy 8: Prior to annexation of property, the City will require the property owner to acquire adequate and usable water rights, or an appropriate fee in lieu thereof, in accordance with Section 38.410.130 of the municipal code, as amended. Criterion Met. The property owner shall provide usable water rights, or cash in-lieu of water rights thereof, in an amount to be determined by the Director of Public Works, as outlined by Section 38.410.130 of the municipal code. The calculated amount will be determined by the Director of Public Works and based on the zoning designation approved by the City Commission. Term of annexation 9 requires notice of this requirement to be part of the annexation agreement. Satisfaction of this requirement will occur with future development. Policy 9: Infrastructure and emergency services for an area proposed for annexation will be reviewed for the health, safety and welfare of the public and conformance with the City’s adopted facility plans. If the City determines adequate services cannot be provided to ensure public health, safety and welfare, the City may require the property owner to provide a written plan for accommodation of these services, or the City may reject the petition for annexation. Additionally, the parcel to be annexed may only be provided sanitary sewer service via the applicable drainage basin defined in the City Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan. Criterion Met. City infrastructure and emergency services are available to the subject property. An existing 12 inch ductile iron water pipe is in West Graf Street and South 27th Avenue to the north and east respectively. An additional 8 inch ductile iron water pipe is in Kurk Drive on the south side of the subject property. Any future development will be required to connect to the City systems. The property is located adjacent to existing urban development that is currently served by Bozeman Fire. 48 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 19 of 44 Per Term of Annexation 7a, 7.d, and 8, the Annexation Agreement required to finalize the requested annexation will require the applicant to design extensions of services to meet the City’s adopted infrastructure standards. These include provisions for minimum water pressure and volumes, adequate sewer flows by volume, gravity flow of sewers, and other standards necessary to protect public health and safety and ensure functional utilities. Policy 10: The City may require annexation of any contiguous property for which city services are requested or for which city services are currently being provided. In addition, any person, firm, or corporation receiving water or sewer service outside of the City limits is required as a condition of initiating or continuing such service, to consent to annexation of the property serviced by the City. The City Manager may enter into an agreement with a property owner for connection to the City’s sanitary sewer or water system in an emergency conditioned upon the submittal by the property owner of a petition for annexation and filing of a notice of consent to annexation with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office. The contract for connection to city sewer and/or water must require the property owner to annex or consent to disconnection of the services. Connection for purposes of obtaining City sewer services in an emergency requires, when feasible as determined by the City, the connection to City water services. Criterion Met. City services are not currently being provided to this property as it is vacant. Future development will be required to hook up to City services. This annexation is not a result of an emergency condition requiring connection. Policy 11: The annexation application shall be accompanied by mapping to meet the requirements of the Director of Public Works. Where an area to be annexed can be entirely described by reference to a certificate of survey or subdivision plat on file with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder the mapping may be waived by the Director of Public Works. Criterion Met. Mapping to meet the requirements of the Director of Public Works must be provided with the Annexation Agreement. Mapping requirements are addressed in Recommended Term of Annexation 2. The map must include adjacent right of way and therefore cannot be described solely by reference to platted lands. Policy 12: The City will assess system development/ impact fees in accordance with Montana law and Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9, Bozeman Municipal Code. Neutral. The annexation does not require immediate payment of fees. The annexation agreement will provide notice of obligations to pay impact fees at times of triggers as required in ordinance. Policy 13: Public notice requirements: Notice for annexation of property must be coordinated with the required notice for the zone map amendment required with all 49 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 20 of 44 annexation. The zone map amendment notice must contain the materials required by 38.220.410, BMC. Notices of the public hearing have been mailed, published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle twice, and posted on the site as set forth under this policy. See Appendix A for more details. Policy 14: Annexation agreements must be executed and returned to the City within 60 days of distribution of the annexation agreement by the City, unless another time is specifically identified by the City Commission. Criterion Met. Suggested terms of annexation include a notice that the agreement, once prepared and provided to the applicant, must be signed and retuned within the stated time period. This policy will be implemented only if the Commission acts to grant approval. If the application is denied then no annexation agreement will be necessary. Policy 15: When possible, the use of Part 46 annexations is preferred. Criterion Met. This annexation is being processed under Part 46 provisions. Policy 16: Where a road improvement district has been created, the annexation does not repeal the creation of the district. The City will not assume operations of the district until the entirety of the district has been annexed. Any funds held in trust for the district will be used to benefit the district after transfer to the City. Inclusion within a district does not lessen the obligation to participate in general city programs that address the same subject. Neutral. No road improvement district is associated with this application. Policy 17: The City will notify the Gallatin County Planning Department and Fire District providing service to the area of applications for annexation. Criterion Met. The necessary agencies were notified and provided copies of the annexation. Policy 18: The City will require connection to and use of all City services upon development of annexed properties. The City may establish a fixed time frame for connection to municipal utilities. Upon development, unless otherwise approved by the City, septic systems must be properly abandoned and the development connected to the City sanitary sewer system. Upon development, unless otherwise approved by the City, water wells on the subject property may be used for irrigation, but any potable uses must be supplied from the City water distribution system and any wells disconnected from structures. The property owner must contact the City Water and Sewer Superintendent to verify disconnects of wells and septic systems. Criterion Met. There are no existing septic systems or wells that will need to be abandoned. All future development will be required to connect to city services. 50 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 21 of 44 SECTION 6 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission must consider the following criteria (letters A-K). As an amendment is a legislative action, the Commission has broad latitude to determine a policy direction. The burden of proof that the application should be approved lies with the applicant. A zone map amendment must be in accordance with the growth policy (criteria A) and be designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers (criteria B), promote public health, public safety, and general welfare (criteria C), and facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements (criteria D). Therefore, to approve a zone map amendment the Commission must find Criteria A-D are met. In addition, the Commission must also consider criteria E-K, and may find the zone map amendment to be positive, neutral, or negative with regards to these criteria. To approve the zone map amendment, the Commission must find the positive outcomes of the amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K. In determining whether the criteria are met, Staff considers the entire body of plans and regulations for land development. Standards which prevent or mitigated negative impacts are incorporated throughout the entire municipal code but are principally in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code. Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. Criterion met. The Bozeman Community Plan (BCP) 2020, Chapter 5, p. 73, in the section titled Review Criteria for Zoning Amendments and Their Application, discusses how the various criteria in 76-2-304 MCA are applied locally. Application of the criteria varies depending on whether an amendment is for the zoning map or for the text of Chapter 38, BMC. The first criterion for a zoning amendment is accordance with a growth policy. Future Land Use Map The proposed amendment is a change to the zoning map. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze compliance with the future land use map. Chapter 3 of the BCP 2020 addresses the future land use map. The introduction to that chapter discusses the importance of the chapter. Following are some excerpts. “Future land use is the community’s fundamental building block. It is an illustration of the City’s desired outcome to accommodate the complex and diverse needs of its residents.” 51 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 22 of 44 “The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes where in the community. Each category has its own descriptions. Understanding the future land use map is not possible without understanding the category descriptions.” The area of this application is within the anticipated growth area of the City. As shown on the maps in Section 1, on the excerpt of the current future land use map, the property is designated as Urban Neighborhood. The Urban Neighborhood designation description reads: “This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes. Complementary uses such as parks, home-based occupations, fire stations, churches, schools, and some neighborhood-serving commerce provide activity centers for community gathering and services. The Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development. Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car.” The correlation between the future land use map of the growth policy and the zoning districts is presented in Table 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. As shown in the following Correlation with Zoning Table excerpt, the R-4 district is an implementing district of the Urban Neighborhood. The applicant originally requested a combination of R-3 and R-4 evenly split on the property. After initiating the public comment period the application was amended to request the R-4 zone for the entire property. In finding that this application meets criterion A, with hesitation, the analysis is cognizant that in many planning efforts and discussions over the decades, the Planning Board and City Commission have considered the various elements of the question of to grow or not grow and the consequences of either approach. After considering this question, they have concluded that having growth within the physical boundaries of Bozeman results in better outcomes than not. Therefore, the BCP 2020 approaches growth as something that overall is positive but 52 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 23 of 44 recognizes that it does not come without drawbacks and that the community will change over time. Large swath of single use zoning is generally not supported by the BCP 2020. No metric for what is considered “large” has been established. Although some zoning districts, REMU for example, require minimum areas to qualify most do not. The City’s development code does not include a requirement to mix housing types, we rely on the market, developer preference, and lending practice to influence housing types. The BCP 2020 includes many goals and objectives to encourage a variety of housing types and the production missing middle housing that supports a variety of goals and polices. Establishing R-4 zoning on the entire property may not achieve the desired outcome. The location of this property is unique due its distance to existing commercial activity, employment centers, educational opportunities, and other City services because it is nearing the jump to next Commercial Node identified on the BCP 2020. See Map 4 in Section 1. Viable commercial activity requires sufficient rooftops. As part of the City’s Community Plan Hub web site, the City is tracking its efforts to meet the goals and objectives detailed in the BCP 2020. For example, under the City of Unique Neighborhoods Theme is the Bozeman Residential Density Map – Community Plan Indicators Map. The residential density map shows the nearest development to the subject property, Meadow Creek Phase 1 subdivision, has a living unit per acre of 5 – 10. This data will improve its accuracy as the City infills. Currently, there are undeveloped parcels that skew the results and push the value lower than if you exclude vacant parcels in the calculation. However, the histogram associated with the map shows the following general trends in relation to each zoning district. Figure 1: Average living units per acre by Zoning Designation 53 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 24 of 44 The R-4 zoning district correlates with the principles applied in the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. A few of the ten principles listed under Basic Planning Precepts of the Plan are supported by the R-4 district. For example, “land use designations must respond to a broad range of factors, including infrastructure, natural, and economic constraints, other community priorities, and expectations of all affected parties concerning private development.” And, “gathering places and open spaces, including parks and trails, should be in convenient locations to those they serve. Quality and function is superior to quantity alone.” The latter is achieved by the City’s adopted development code. On the other hand, other precepts are less supportive of the scope of requested R-4 zoning. Specific goals and objectives can be teased out showing conformance of the proposed zoning designation. The primary discussion point is whether or not 80 acres of a single zoning residential designation meet the diverse needs of the City compared a mix of zoning districts. Goals and Policies A zoning amendment is also evaluated against the goals and policies of the BCP 2020. Most of the goals and policies are not applicable to this application. Relevant goals and objectives have been identified by staff. Conflict with the text of the growth policy hasn’t been identified. The Short Term Action list on page 63 of the BCP 2020 describes 14 items to implement the growth policy. The first two relate to direct changes to the zoning map in support of listed goals and objectives. These include increasing the intensity of zoning districts in already developed areas. Beginning on page 71 of the BCP 2020 in the section titled Zoning Amendment Review, the document discusses how the City implements zoning for new areas, amendments to areas, and revisions to existing text. This section includes a discussion of when the City may initiate a zoning change to a more intensive district to increase development opportunities. This section demonstrates that the City, as a matter of policy, is supportive of more intensive zoning districts and development. It is inconsistent with this approach to zone at annexation for lower intensities than what infrastructure and planning documents will support. This policy approach does not specify any individual district but does lean towards the more intensive portion of the zoning district spectrum. The intent described above is strengthened by Objective N-1.11 “Enable a gradual and predictable increase in density in developed areas over time.” It is inconsistent with the approach to increase density within existing already developed area and to zone at annexation for lower intensities than what infrastructure and planning documents will support. This policy approach does not specify any individual district but does lean towards the more intensive portion of the zoning district spectrum. Goal N-3: Promote a diverse supply of quality housing units. 54 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 25 of 44 As noted above the area is designated as Urban Neighborhood according to the FLUM. This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. Although, in limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site constraints and/or natural features, we generally assume the most density permitted by a given zoning district. Without constraints it would be reasonable to assume a developed density of 18 dwelling units per net acre or approximately 1,440 dwellings units on the property. Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car. Goal DCD-1: Support urban development within the City. The proposed zoning is occurring in conjunction with an annexation. Any future development will be required to occur at urban densities and will be within the City. If the City Commission declines the annexation then the requested R-4 zoning will not occur. DCD-2.2 Support higher density development along main corridors and at high visibility street corners to accommodate population growth and support businesses. Fowler Avenue is a planned arterial street as shown in the last three long range transportation plans including the current Transportation Master Plan adopted in 2017. Arterial streets are the most intensive category of streets. Fowler Avenue is planned to extend from Hyalite Canyon to Valley Center Road. This street will develop to be a main corridor. West Graff Street is a designed Collector Street. Therefore, placement of higher density development adjacent to Fowler Avenue and Graff Street is consistent with this objective. Fowler is presently developed as a rural standard road. Graff has not been extended to through the subject property. Evaluation of the degree of required road improvements will occur with formal development review. RC-3.2 Work with Gallatin County to keep rural areas rural and maintain a clear edge to urban development that evolves as the City expands outwards. Gallatin County adopted the Gallatin County/Bozeman Area Plan (GCBA Plan), a neighborhood plan under their growth policy, to identify County priorities for this area of the county. Implementing zoning was updated for the new neighborhood plan and is now in place. “The purposes of the [County] Growth Policy and the 2005 Bozeman Area Plan are to provide comprehensive, long-range guidance relative to the growth and development…” The GCBA Plan recognizes the area is in transition. On page 1 of the GCBA Plan it says, “It is not the intent of this Plan to prematurely discourage existing agricultural operations; rather it is the intent to accommodate the needs of present agriculture while recognizing an inevitable transition to a more urban landscape.” 55 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 26 of 44 The proposed annexation and zoning of this property will extend the municipal boundary to Fowler Lane. Two other properties were recently annexed to the north and south of the subject property; Buffalo Run and the Fowler Lane Annexation properties. Measuring on the north of Huffine Lane City limits extends an additional 1.75 miles to the west and the planning area another three-quarters of a mile beyond City limits. The municipal service area and planning area of the city extends two and half miles west of Fowler Lane. DCD-1.11 Pursue annexations consistent with the future land use map and adopted facility plans for development at urban intensity. The proposed zoning is consistent with the future land use map and is within the current facilities plans. Goal RC-3: Collaborate with Gallatin County regarding annexation and development patterns adjacent to the City to provide certainty for landowners and taxpayers. Gallatin County has been notified of the proposed annexation. RC-3.3 Prioritize annexations that enable the incremental expansion of the City and its utilities. The property in question is contiguous to the City limits on the east, south, and half of the north with approximately 5,200 lineal feet adjacent to existing City limits. It adds approximately 80 acres to the City limits that is available for urban development while creating a more consistent city border. The discussion and analysis for the Buffalo Run Annexation (property directly to the south) noted that it would create a peninsula of 20 acres. It stated that, “it is expected that additional annexations in the future will make the City boundary more regular.” This application brings this expectation to fruition. RC-3.4 Encourage annexation of land adjacent to the City prior to development and encourage annexation of wholly surrounded areas. The property is adjacent to the City and does not create any new unannexed areas surrounded by City limits. The property is seeking annexation and municipal zoning for the purpose of residential development. Annexation is happening before development. In addition to goals and objectives, the BCP 2020 includes descriptive statements regarding what the goals and objectives seek to support and create. Page 27 of the BCP 2020 includes the descriptive language for Theme 2, A City of Unique Neighborhoods. Reviewing the language, themes of housing diversity, inclusion, and equity to serve different housing needs are prevalent. Theme 2 emphasizes the importance of neighborhoods in the City’s development. It is notable that none of the goals and objectives associated with Theme 2 calls for fixing the character of developed areas in their current status or prohibit the evolution of an area’s character. 56 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 27 of 44 There is recognition of the role that a sense of place serves in Goal N-4. Neighborhoods do have physical attributes that help them be distinctive. See also RC – 3.3 response. Goal N-4: Continue to encourage Bozeman’s sense of place. N-4.1 Continue to recognize and honor the unique history, neighborhoods, neighborhood character, and buildings that contribute to Bozeman’s sense of place through programs and policy led by both City and community efforts. The proposed amendment does not alter the zoning on any adjacent property and correspondingly the character of that adjacent property. As noted in other criteria in this report, the proposed amendment is consistent with the planned development of the area as homes with an urban intensity. While the application does not further all goals of the BCP 2020, taken as a whole the application is supportive of and in accordance with, the BCP 2020. B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers. Criterion Met. There are no current buildings, however future development will be served by the Bozeman Fire Department. Fire protection water supply will be provided by the City of Bozeman water system. The property is not within any delineated floodplain nor does it have other known natural hazards. Upon annexation the subject property will be provided with City emergency services including police, fire and ambulance. Future development of the property will be required to conform to all City of Bozeman public safety, building and land use requirements. The City provides emergency services to adjacent properties and no obstacles have been identified in extending service to this parcel. C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. Criterion Met. See comments in Section 6, Criteria A, B and D. City development standards included in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code, building codes, and engineering standards all ensure that this criterion is met. Adequate water and sewer supply and conveyance provide for public health through clean water. Rapid and effective emergency response provides for public safety. The City’s standards ensure that adequate services are provided prior to construction of homes which advances this criterion. General welfare has been evaluated during the adoption of Chapter 38 and found to be advanced. Provision of parks, control of storm water, and other features of the City’s development standards advance the general welfare. Compliance with the BCP 2020 advances the well-being of the community as a whole. D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements. Criterion Met. This property is included in future planning areas. The City conducts extensive planning for municipal transportation, water, sewer, parks, and other facilities and services provided by the City. The adopted plans allow the City to consider existing conditions and identify enhancements needed to provide additional service needed by new development. The 57 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 28 of 44 City implements these plans through its capital improvements program that identifies individual projects, project construction scheduling, and financing of construction. As stated in 38.300.020.C, the designation of a zoning district does not guarantee approval of new development until the City verifies the availability of needed infrastructure. All zoning districts in Bozeman enable a wide range of uses and intensities. At time of future subdivision or site plan review the need for individual services can be more precisely determined. No subdivision or site plan is approved without demonstration of adequate capacity. 38.300.020.C, “Placement of any given zoning district on an area depicted on the zoning map indicates a judgment on the part of the city that the range of uses allowed within that district are generally acceptable in that location. It is not a guarantee of approval for any given use prior to the completion of the appropriate review procedure and compliance with all of the applicable requirements and development standards of this chapter and other applicable policies, laws and ordinances. It is also not a guarantee of immediate infrastructure availability or a commitment on the part of the city to bear the cost of extending services.” The application site is located 2 miles within the City’s land use, transportation, parks, and utility planning areas. Those plans show this property as developing within the City when development is proposed. Adequacy of all these public requirements is evaluated during the subdivision and site development process. All zoning districts in Bozeman enable a range of uses and intensities. At the time of future subdivision or site plan review the need for individual services can be more precisely determined. No subdivision or site plan is approved without demonstration of adequate capacity. The future development of the area will require dedication and construction of streets, provision of parks, extension of water and sewer services, and placement of easements for telecommunication, electricity and similar dry utilities. As noted in Section 6, Criterion A, the Fowler Lane alignment has been designated in multiple City and joint City/County transportation plans as an arterial street. Although presently a gravel rural surface, Fowler Lane is a substantial north-south link in the long range transportation network with a long term width of 110 feet planned for the right of way. With or without this proposed zoning amendment the street will change to an urban paved street at some time. Development of any urban zoning or more intensive County zoning district will require changes to the street to the degree demonstrated as necessary during review of the development. As noted above, the placement of a zoning district does not grant entitlement to construct. West Graff Street is a designated Collector Street and required ROW easements are required with the associated annexation. Similar to Fowler Lane, with or without this proposed zoning amendment the street will change to an urban paved street at some time. 58 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 29 of 44 The site is located within the Cattail Creek drainage basin and Meadow Creek sewer outfall service area. Both have capacity to service additional development. Water mains are located in Kurk Drive, South 27th, and West Graff and can be extended to provide the required looped water service. Responsibility to make those connections lies with the developer. The site is adjacent to Fowler Lane, an arterial street. Kurk Drive, a paved City street with sidewalks on the south side, connects to the property at the east side. South 27th provides access on the east. Review of future development will further verify adequate capacity is present and all needed connections can be provided before any construction may begin. Division 38.420 and Section 38.520.060 require dedication of parks and on-site open spaces to meet the needs of residents. The associated annexation will partially address required compliance with City standards through the Terms of Annexation in Section 2. Dedication of right of way for arterials streets is part of the annexation process as is agreement to follow the City’s development standards. With future development proposals, the applicant must demonstrate not just possible but actual street networks and utility connections existing or to be constructed to support the intensity of development proposed. See also Section 6, Criterion F regarding transportation and Section 5, annexation Policies 8, 9, and 12. The criterion is met. E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Criterion Met. The R-4 zoning designation has requirements for setbacks, height, and lot coverage which provide for the reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Any future development of the property will be required to conform to City standards for setbacks, height, lot coverage, and buffering. In addition to the zoning standards, adopted building codes contain more detailed requirements for air circulation, window placement, and building separation that further ensure the intent of this criterion is satisfied. The site has wetlands and riparian areas running through the property. The City requires protection of wetlands. This requirement applies to all zoning districts. This will support additional light and air beyond what would otherwise be applicable on the site. F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. Criterion Met. The proposed zoning will allow for a higher density of uses than is currently allowed under Gallatin County zoning. As a result, under the proposed zoning, when a development is proposed, they will be responsible for their frontage improvements which will include improvements along Fowler Lane, Graff Street, and 27th Avenue in addition to internal streets required to serve development. The City conducts routine transportation monitoring, modeling, and planning to understand existing conditions and future needs of the transportation system. The 2017 Transportation Master Plan is the most recent transportation plan. Figure 2.5, Existing Major Street Network, shows Fowler Avenue as an arterial street, S. 27th Avenue, and Graf Street as collectors. The 59 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 30 of 44 Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2007 Update, Gallatin County’s adopted transportation plan for this same area, shows the same street classifications on Figure 2.2. These four streets will be the primary collector and arterial accesses to the site over time. Local streets will link the larger arterial and collectors. Both documents show extensions of Graf Street to Fowler as future expansions of the road network. Further capacity expansion to the transportation network is planned, such as upgrading the condition of Fowler Lane, Stucky Road, extending Graff, improving and connecting Blackwood to S. 19th, and signalization of the intersection of Blackwood and 19th. These expected actions to implement the Transportation Master Plan will mitigate impact on the larger transportation network as the overall area develops. Not all of these expansions will be the responsibility of individual projects. The recently adopted Capital Improvement Plan (CIP FY24-FY28) included funds from the Street Impact Fee Fund for improvements to Stucky Road from South 19th to Fowler Road. Fowler Lane is currently a rural standard unpaved road. Development of the site will require development of additional street capacity. Exact routing of travel and character of the improvements is not known at this time. They will be identified during development review when a specific construction proposal is made and impacts can be more accurately identified. Anticipated street capacity for various classes of streets is shown in Table 2.7 of the Transportation Master Plan and discussed in Section 2.4.1 of the same document. Future development of this property provides opportunity to expand the pedestrian network through installation of sidewalks such as a new East-West link connecting Fowler Lane to the sidewalk network along an extension of Kurk Drive. As there are no existing pedestrian or bicycle facilities along this section of Fowler Lane, the future extension of Graff Street and Kurk Drive will substantially shorten the travel distance from the west to reach trails, sidewalks, and parks. Bike and pedestrian travel is much more sensitive to distance than motor vehicle travel. Sidewalk installation is a minimum development standard under Chapter 38. This expands and improves the non-motorized transportation system. These links will be required with any future development under any municipal zoning district. Figure 2.10 of the Transportation Master Plan visually illustrates the Census and American Community Survey data that those living in the census tract including this property commute to work 35% of the time by foot, bike, or transit and likely higher with considerable recent development in the area. This is the 2nd highest rate in the City area. Given the location of the project site Staff expects that the non-motorized work trip will be less than the 35%. However, the extension of Kurk Drive and Graff Street will provides a continuous street connection from the far west of the subject property to the collector and arterial network that would support walking and biking to major destinations like MSU. Non-work travel data is not available from the Census. There are intermittent gaps in pedestrian and bicycle network. It is expected that those will fill in over time, either with development of adjacent properties or overall City improvements. 60 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 31 of 44 The City has set minimum standards applicable to development to limit block length, ensure trail and sidewalk connections, and provide streets adequate to carry traffic projected from development. These standards are not applied at the time of the ZMA but are implemented during the subdivision and site plan processes required before any construction may begin. See also Section 6, Criterion D. The Walk Score is low with a walk score of zero, a transit score of zero, and a bike score of 48. These values are provided by Walk Score, a private organization which presents information on real estate and transportation through walkscore.com. The algorithm which produces these numbers is proprietary. A score is not an indication of safety or continuity of services or routes. Scores are influenced by proximity of housing, transit, and services and expected ability, as determined by the algorithm, to meet basic needs without using a car. Sites located on the edge of the community have lower scores than those in the center of the community as the area is still under development and therefore diversity of uses is less than in fully established areas. There are no adopted development standards relating to the walk score. If, as suggested by the applicant, their statement of constructing mixed-use, may eventually improve these scores. According to Walk Score® the walks score measures the walkability of any address based on the distance to nearby places and pedestrian friendliness. 90 – 100 Walker’s Paradise. Daily errands do not require a car. 70 – 89 Very Walkable. Most errands can be accomplished on foot. 50 – 69 Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot. 25 – 49 Car-Dependent. Most errands require a car. 0 – 24 Car-Dependent. Almost all errands require a car. Prior to occupancy or other appropriate trigger the applicant must show all applicable transportation systems are adequate to serve the proposed development and must meet minimum City standards. The Applicant has been advised of specific code provisions that will apply with future development proposals. G. Promotion of compatible urban growth. Criterion Met. The Bozeman Community Plan establishes a preferred and compatible development pattern. “The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes where in the community… The land use categories and descriptions provide a guide for appropriate development and redevelopment locations for civic, residential, commercial, industrial, and other uses. The future land use designations are important because they aim to further the vision and goals of the City through promoting sustainability, citizen and visitor safety, and a high quality of life that will shape Bozeman’s future.” (Community Plan P. 51) 61 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 32 of 44 Individuals may have widely varying opinions about what constitutes compatibility. To address this wide variation of viewpoint, Compatible development and Compatible land use are defined in Article 38.7 BMC to establish a common reference for consideration of this criterion and application of development standards. They are defined as: “Compatible development. The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use. Compatible land use. A land use which may by virtue of the characteristics of its discernible outward effects exist in harmony with an adjoining land use of differing character. Effects often measured to determine compatibility include, but are not limited to, noise, odor, light and the presence of physical hazards such as combustible or explosive materials.” As noted in the definition of Compatible development, there are many elements that contributed to compatibility. The final sentence of the definition deserves emphasis “Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.” Compatible development can be different than what is already in place. The City has adopted a variety of standards to implement compatibility. The proposed R-4 district is a residential district. The allowed uses for residential districts are set in 38.310.030. Table 38.310.030.A - Permitted general and group residential uses in residential zoning districts, shows permitted uses in the R-4 district and Table 38.310.030.B details permitted accessory and non-residential uses in residential zoning districts. The form and intensity standards for residential districts are in 38.320.030. The existing Meadow Creek subdivision (zoned R-3) has developed between 5 – 10 living units per acre. According to City code the required minimum density for the R-1 through R-3 districts is 5. The minimum density for R-4 is 8 dwelling per net acre. The more intensive development elements allowed in the R-4 district is subject to additional development standards established in Article 38.5, Project Design, of the municipal code. These standards address both site and building design to enable differing uses and scales of development to meet the definition of compatible in the municipal code and presented above. Section 38.500.010. – Purpose states: “This article (38.5) implements the Bozeman's growth policy. Overall, this article: 62 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 33 of 44 A. Provides clear objectives for those embarking on the planning and design of development projects in Bozeman; B. Preserves and protects the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Bozeman; C. Ensures that new commercial and multi-household development is of high quality and beneficially contributes to Bozeman's character; D. Ensures that new developments within existing neighborhoods are compatible with, and enhance the character of Bozeman's neighborhoods; E. Promotes an increase in walking and bicycling throughout the City; F. F. Enhances the livability of Bozeman's residential developments; G. Maintains and enhances property values within Bozeman.” The intent of the R-4 district, 38.300.100.E, BMC, “is to provide for high-density residential development through a variety of housing types within the city with associated service functions. This purpose is accomplished by: 1. Providing for minimum lot sizes in developed areas consistent with the established development patterns while providing greater flexibility for clustering lots and mixing housing types in newly developed areas. 2. Providing for a variety of compatible housing types, including single and multi- household dwellings to serve the varying needs of the community's residents. 3. Allowing office use as a secondary use, measured by percentage of total building area. Use of this zone is appropriate for areas adjacent to mixed-use districts, commercial districts, and/or served by transit to accommodate a higher density of residents in close proximity to jobs and services.” The proposed amendment is associated with an annexation creating an incremental increase in the size of the City. As discussed in Section 6, Criterion A above, both the City’s and County’s growth policies expect this area to transition from rural to urban development. The unannexed areas adjacent to this property are agricultural or detached homes on an individual large lot in conformance with the Gallatin County AS zoning. The City Commission has adopted standards to control development impacts and support compatibility. The following excerpt from the BCP 2020, page 75 describes the City’s approach. “What combination of uses under what conditions can work well together? There is a wide range of possible answers for each community to consider. Some communities take a highly prescriptive worst-case view and try to restrain all possible points of perceived conflict. This tends to create a very homogenous community with little interest or scope for creativity. Bozeman takes a different approach. The worst case 63 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 34 of 44 scenario is recognized as unlikely, but possible. Development standards deal with the majority of cases, while restraining extraordinary problems. The City creates standards under items 1 through 3; when one district is adjacent to another and is consistent with the growth policy, any physical conflicts will be minimal, if present at all. The City’s zoning policy encourages continued development of mixed uses. … The City uses the broad scope of its development standards to enable differing uses to be successful near each other. This shows on the zoning map where districts providing a wide diversity of uses are intermixed.” This proposal amends the zoning map and not the text. Therefore, no element of this amendment modifies the standards of any zoning district. The character of the districts as created by those standards remains intact. As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical extents of a zoning district. Application of any municipal zoning district to the subject property will alter the existing agricultural character of the subject property. It is not expected that zoning freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it provides a structured method to consider changes to the character. The BCP 2020 includes several objectives applicable to this criteria. These are: N-1.11 Enable a gradual and predictable increase in density in developed areas over time. N-1.2 Increase required minimum densities in residential districts. N-3.5 Strongly discourage private covenants that restrict housing diversity or are contrary to City land development policies or climate action plan goals. Application of any municipal zoning district to the subject property and subsequent development will alter the existing character of the subject property; which is fallow historic agricultural land within a rapidly developing area of the City. Likewise, development under any municipal zoning district will be visually different from adjacent unannexed property. This is true even if both are used for similar types of housing due to the differences between municipal and county zoning. Zoning doesn’t freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it provides a structured method to consider changes to the character. The BCP 2020 notes, “…when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an annexation request there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.” 64 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 35 of 44 Staff concludes that although the R-4 is different than some surrounding zoning, it is compatible urban growth as called for in the growth policy. See also discussion for Section 6, Criteria A & H. H. Character of the district. Criterion Met. Section 76-2-302, MCA says “…legislative body may divide the municipality into districts of the number, shape, and area as are considered best suited to carry out the purposes [promoting health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the community] of this part.” Emphasis added. This proposal amends the zoning map and not the text. Therefore, no element of this amendment modifies the standards of any zoning district. The character of the districts as created by those standards remains unaltered. Even though the criterion is most applicable to text amendments it still must be applied to consideration of zoning map amendments. The requested zoning meets the requirements of this criterion because, although different, it is compatible with surrounding zoning, existing roads and a park will provide a buffer between future development on this parcel and existing residential and agricultural uses, and promotes urban growth as called for in the BCP 2020. The proposed amendment only applies to the Applicant’s property and does not change what is or is not allowed on adjacent property. As noted above, the City Commission has discretion within the limits of the State established criteria in considering the location and geographical extents of a zoning district. Implementation of zoning must also be in accordance with the adopted growth policy. As noted in Section 6, Criterion A, the City policy calls for a diverse and densifying land use pattern. See discussion in Section 6, Criterion A. The BCP 2020 includes several objectives applicable to this criteria. These are: N-1.11 Enable a gradual and predictable increase in density in developed areas over time. N-1.2 Increase required minimum densities in residential districts. N-3.5 Strongly discourage private covenants that restrict housing diversity or are contrary to City land development policies or climate action plan goals. Application of any municipal zoning district to the subject property and subsequent development will alter the existing character of the subject property; which is a rural. Likewise, development under any municipal zoning district will be visually different from adjacent unannexed property. This is true even if both are used for similar types of housing due to the differences between municipal and county zoning. Similarly, development will likely be different from other annexed properties. For example, properties to the east are zoned R-3 but are largely developed as detached single-household neighborhoods, well below permitted densities. Zoning doesn’t freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it provides a structured method to consider changes to the character. The BCP 2020 notes, 65 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 36 of 44 “…when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an annexation request there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.” See Section 6, Criterion A above for discussion about the application and growth policy and anticipated change to the character of the area. The City has defined compatible development as: “The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.” As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical extents of a zoning district. To date, the City of Bozeman has not defined a specific area outside of the area itself to be rezoned for consideration of this criterion. A review of the existing uses within a quarter mile radius of the amendment site shows three zoning districts. First is R-4, the same as what is being proposed which allows a variety of housing types in close proximity. Second, R-3, is a municipal district and allows a wide variety of housing types including detached homes, townhomes, and other forms of attached homes, as well as various institutional and light commercial uses. Finally, A-S, is a county zoning district focused on low density residential and preservation of agricultural operation until it transitions to urban development. See discussion under Section 6, Criterion A above. Active uses within a quarter mile include parks, detached individual homes, and agricultural fields. This is a small selection of the potential uses allowed in the existing zoning districts. Single homes and townhomes are beginning construction in the nearby Gran Cielo subdivision. The Buffalo Run development to the south is finalizing their development patterns. About half the area within a quarter mile is undeveloped and remains as fields. In the developed areas, zoned as R-3 and R-4 as detached single household residences are the most commonly constructed structures. Page 77 of the BCP 2020 describing review of zoning map amendments states “When evaluating compliance with criteria, it is appropriate to consider all the options allowed by the requested district and not only what the present applicant describes as their intensions.” When 66 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 37 of 44 evaluating compatibility between zoning districts, Staff considers the full range of allowable uses, not only what is built now or proposed by a specific project. The maps in Section 1, all of the municipally zoned areas west of 19th are in the upper range of zoning district intensity. This is consistent with the City’s previous and current growth policy and infrastructure planning. The character of the larger area is in the process of changing with multiple large and intense developments now under construction or in review. This is illustrated by this excerpt from the Community Development Viewer. All colored or striped shaded areas are in some stage of review and development. This application is the solid green shaded rectangle in the lower left of the image in a red box. Less than half of the area adjacent to the site is agricultural and has already transitioned from rural to urban, as described in Section 6, Criterion A. Therefore, the character is not fully defined, and is suitable to add additional uses. The City, as shown by an examination of the zoning map and authorized uses in all zoning districts, strives to encourage a diverse development pattern and avoid large areas of single use development. This is further supported by the statement in the description of the Urban Neighborhood future land use category, “Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged.” No size is specified for what is a large area. Therefore, when considering the character of an area it is expected that there will be diversity of development types. This diversity is also shown on the zoning maps in Section 1. 67 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 38 of 44 Development within the City is more land efficient than rural or suburban development in unannexed areas. Urban intensity development whether more intensive apartment style development or more typical medium density residential is much more land efficient than rural/suburban development. Suburban development consumes 135 times the amount of land and the rural consumes 594 times the amount of land per home than urban development. Development within the City also provides for a wide range of housing types to meet a wide range of housing needs. Development within the City lessens likelihood of conversion of agricultural and open spaces to other uses but does convert uses on some land with annexation. The City expects urban development within the municipal boundary. Table 4 of the BCP 2020, see Section 6, Criterion A above, identifies the implementing zoning districts of the Urban Neighborhood future land use category. That category allows for zoning districts that authorize a wide range of possible future development. There are no zoning districts which are limited to only one type of development. All zoning districts implementing the Urban Neighborhood category provide for a range of housing types, institutions, and commercial activities. The expansiveness and intensity allowed varies between districts. As noted in this report, the BCP 2020 calls for evaluation of the entire range of uses in zoning districts when evaluating criteria for zoning amendments. The R-4 zoning district and the adjacent R-3 and R-4 zoning districts are residential in nature and are more similar than different in uses and standards. Development in R-4 that is more intensive than that allowed in the R-3 district, such as an apartment building, is subject to the standards of Article 38.5. Article 38.5 imposes a variety of standards on site and building design. However, a recent text amendment allows “limited apartments” in the R-3 district. Limited apartments are structures that host up to eight dwellings units. The present development zoned R-3 near the subject property is developed at the low end of the allowed intensity for the R-3 zoning district. Evaluation of this situation is guided by the growth policy. On page 76 of the BCP 2020 under discussion of application of this zoning criteria is says: “Second, when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an annexation request there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.” The City has adopted many standards to identify and avoid or mitigate demonstrable negative impacts of development. These will support the ability of future development in R-4 to be compatible with adjacent development and uphold the residential character in an area where R-4 is applied even if the intensity between districts is different. The following excerpt from the BCP 2020, page 75 describes the City’s adopted approach. 68 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 39 of 44 “What combination of uses under what conditions can work well together? There is a wide range of possible answers for each community to consider. Some communities take a highly prescriptive worst-case view and try to restrain all possible points of perceived conflict. This tends to create a very homogenous community with little interest or scope for creativity. Bozeman takes a different approach. The worst case scenario is recognized as unlikely, but possible. Development standards deal with the majority of cases, while restraining extraordinary problems. The City creates standards under items 1 through 3; when one district is adjacent to another and is consistent with the growth policy, any physical conflicts will be minimal, if present at all. The City’s zoning policy encourages continued development of mixed uses. … The City uses the broad scope of its development standards to enable differing uses to be successful near each other. This shows on the zoning map where districts providing a wide diversity of uses are intermixed.” The standards adopted by the City prevent physically dangerous spillover effects. An example is the capture, treatment and discharge controls from additional storm water runoff as additional impervious surfaces are built. Required setbacks from property lines, landscaping requirements, and similar site and building standards address character and compatibility. These and other standards carry out the intent and purpose of the City’s land development standards in Chapter 38 of the municipal code. Sec. 38.100.040. - Intent and purpose of chapter. A. The intent of this unified development chapter is to protect the public health, safety and general welfare; to recognize and balance the various rights and responsibilities relating to land ownership, use, and development identified in the United States and State of Montana constitutions, and statutory and common law; to implement the city's adopted growth policy; and to meet the requirements of state law. Zoning does not prohibit change but provides a structure within which change can occur. Such changes include modifications to both the text and zoning map. Such amendments are authorized in the zoning enabling act for municipalities. Landowners have both property rights and responsibilities. The City has adopted development standards to ensure that responsibilities are met while landowners exercise their property rights. The City has not chosen, and is not required, to adopt standards for all issues. For example, standards have not been adopted regarding preservation of view sheds or extra separation of buildings from unannexed property. Finally, Theme 7 of the BCP 2020 includes this statement: “RC-3.2 Work with Gallatin County to keep rural areas rural and maintain a clear edge to urban development that evolves as the City expands outwards.” 69 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 40 of 44 This objective describes the situation now under review. The City is expanding outwards by annexation. Gallatin County has identified this area as a growth area in its land use planning documents. There will be a distinct edge between the AS and R-5 zoning districts with different intensity of residential uses. Staff concludes that although the R-4 is different than the surrounding zoning it is compatible and is urban growth as called for in the growth policy. See also discussion for Section 6, Criteria A, G, and F. I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. Neutral. The proposed amendment does not modify the existing standards of the R-4 district. Therefore the impact of the amendment is limited to this application site. The property is generally flat. A watercourses cross the property from north to south. Groundwater in the area is shallow and potentially at hazard from onsite sewage treatment. The property is within the City’s planning area for land use and utility extensions. There is frontage on Fowler Lane, an arterial street, Graff Street and South 27th Avenue, which are collector streets. Municipal utilities and emergency services can be extended to the area. The site is capable of supporting a more intensive district in the range of zoning districts. These features are not unusual for properties adjacent to the City. The described features support annexation and development within the City. There are not sufficient distinctive characteristics of the property to make a positive or negative findings for this criteria specific to an individual zoning district. J. Conserving the value of buildings. Neutral. The proposed amendment does not modify the existing standards of the R-4 district. R-4 zoning is residential in nature and allows a variety of housing types as long as the minimum density of 8 DU per acre is achieved. The immediate Future land Use and zoning surrounding the property is residential in nature. Future development is not known at this juncture and will emerge with future development applications. The permitted uses must conform to the adopted zoning. A minimum of a 90 feet of right-of-way separate this property from any adjacent property that will act as a buffer to the existing developments. The location of amenities that may increase the value of buildings such as parks, open space, trails, and value added assets is undermined. Any new structures at the site will be required to meet setback and other protective requirements set forth in the Bozeman Municipal Code. Compliance will alleviate potential negative impacts to the value of surrounding buildings and properties. As described in earlier criteria, the proposed zoning is compatible with existing buildings on adjacent properties and does not create any new situations not in compliance with municipal code. K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. Criterion Met. The proposed R-4 zoning designation will encourage the most appropriate use of land as the property is adjacent to both residential and commercial uses. There is access to 70 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 41 of 44 the city’s services, including streets, thus is able to support a higher intensity of uses as allowed within the R-4 zoning district. Furthermore, the proposed R-4 zoning designation is generally consistent with the BCP 2020 future land use map designation of “Urban Neighborhood”. PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE AMENDMENT AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A PROPOSED CHANGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. The City will accept written protests from property owners against the proposal described in this report until the close of the public hearing before the City Commission. Pursuant to 76-2-305, MCA, a protest may only be submitted by the owner(s) of real property within the area affected by the proposal or by owner(s) of real property that lie within 150 feet of an area affected by the proposal. The protest must be in writing and must be signed by all owners of the real property. In addition, a sufficient protest must: (i) contain a description of the action protested sufficient to identify the action against which the protest is lodged; and (ii) contain a statement of the protestor's qualifications (including listing all owners of the property and the physical address), to protest the action against which the protest is lodged, including ownership of property affected by the action. Signers are encouraged to print their names after their signatures. A person may in writing withdraw a previously filed protest at any time prior to final action by the City Commission. Protests must be delivered to the Bozeman City Clerk, 121 North Rouse Ave., PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230. APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT Notice was published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on March 1 and 5, 2023. The notice was posted on site and notices mailed by the applicant as required by 38.220 and the required confirmation provided to the Planning Office. Notice was provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to any public hearing. Public comment has been received on this application and can be viewed at the following link. https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=273672&dbid=0&repo=BOZEMAN APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING Adopted Growth Policy Designation: The property is designated as “Urban Neighborhood” in the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. 71 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 42 of 44 “This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes. Complementary uses such as parks, home-based occupations, fire stations, churches, schools, and some neighborhood-serving commerce provide activity centers for community gathering and services. The Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development. Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car.” Proposed Zoning Designation and Land Uses: The applicant has requested zoning of R-4, Residential High Density District whose intent is to: Residential high density district (R-4). The intent of the R-4 residential high density district is to provide for high-density residential development through a variety of housing types within the city with associated service functions. This purpose is accomplished by: 1. Providing for minimum lot sizes in developed areas consistent with the established development patterns while providing greater flexibility for clustering lots and mixing housing types in newly developed areas. 2. Providing for a variety of compatible housing types, including single and multi- household dwellings to serve the varying needs of the community's residents. 3. Allowing office use as a secondary use, measured by percentage of total building area. Use of this zone is appropriate for areas adjacent to mixed-use districts, commercial districts, and/or served by transit to accommodate a higher density of residents in close proximity to jobs and services. 72 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 43 of 44 73 Staff Report for the Gran Cielo II Annexation and ZMA, Application 22090 Page 44 of 44 APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF Owner: Bozeman Haus Two, LLC, 15267 SE Rivershore Drive, Vancouver, WA 98683 Applicant: Madison Engineering, 895 Technology Drive, #203, Bozeman, MT 59718 Representative: Madison Engineering, 895 Technology Blvd., Suite 203, Bozeman, MT 59718 Report By: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner, Community Development Department FISCAL EFFECTS No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment. ATTACHMENTS The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. 74 Memorandum REPORT TO:Community Development Board FROM:Nicholas Ross, Transportation and Engineering Director Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager Erin George, Community Development Deputy Director Anna Bentley, Community Development Director SUBJECT:UDC Project - Receive information, Review, and Offer Input Regarding the Update to the Unified Development Code, Chapter 38, Bozeman Municipal Code to Address Potential Changes to Standards Relating to Transportation Levels of Service and Traffic Studies, Application 21381 MEETING DATE:April 17, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Policy Discussion RECOMMENDATION:Receive presentation, discuss proposed direction from City Commission, and provide input to staff and consultants. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND: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 the City's regulations should address Levels of Service for the transportation network and traffic studies submitted as part of development review. A memo providing background material is attached. Staff and Consultant had a work session with the City Commission on April 11th (External Source/External Link) and with the Transportation Board on March 22nd. This work session with the Community Development Board will present information and direction from the City Commission and receive input on more detailed elements. The input will then be used to prepare draft materials for further public review and input. 75 Ongoing information about the UDC project can be found on at the engage.bozeman.net/udc (External Source/External Link) website, the official portal for the project. Additional brochures soliciting comment on specific topics were recently added to engage.bozeman.net. 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. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:Community Development Board will give input on specific issues discussed at the meeting. ALTERNATIVES:To be determined. FISCAL EFFECTS:Funds for this work are budgeted and appropriated. Attachments: 4-17-2023 CDB Transportation Work Session Background Information memo.pdf Page 46 TMP.pdf Fig 2.13 TMP.pdf Fig 3.2 TMP.pdf Sec._38.220.060.___Documentation_of_compliance_with_adopted_standards..pdf Report compiled on: April 12, 2023 76 Community Development Board Transportation 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 Plan. Several major amendments were completed in 2022. 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. • Updates 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: The Bozeman Community Plan 2020 contains principles, goals and policies regarding transportation systems. Examples of Bozeman Community Plan 2020 policy direction influencing this work session on transportation include: • Transportation infrastructure is vital in supporting desired land use patterns. Therefore, the two must be coordinated. Future infrastructure should favor interconnected multimodal transportation networks (i.e. infrastructure for bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes of transport in addition to automobiles). (page 20) R-1.1 Be reflective: use past experience to inform future decisions. R-1.7 Be flexible: willingness and ability to adopt alternative strategies in response to changing circumstances. R-2.3 Economic Benefit-Cost: Make good financial investments that have the potential for economic benefit to the investor and the broader community both through direct and indirect returns. 77 R-2.5 Technical Soundness: Identify solutions that reflect best practices that have been tested and proven to work in similar local or regional contexts. R-2.6 Innovation: Advance new approaches and techniques that will encourage continual improvement and advancement of best practices. DCD-1.7 Coordinate infrastructure construction, maintenance, and upgrades to support infill development, reduce costs, and minimize disruption to the public. Goal DCD-3: Ensure multimodal connectivity within the City. EPO-3.2 Ensure complete streets and identify long-term resources for the maintenance of year round bike and multi-use paths to improve utilization and reduce annual per capita vehicle miles traveled. M-1.3 Develop service standard levels for multimodal travel. The City also prepares a Transportation Master Plan (PDF) (TMP). The TMP provides in depth analysis of existing and future transportation conditions and needs, evaluates alternatives, and establishes priorities for expansion and improvement of the transportation system. The most recent version was completed in 2017. The full document including all appendices is available online through the City’s Engineering web page in the Master Plans section. The TMP includes pedestrian and bicycle services as well as motor vehicles. The TMP is the baseline for determining where expansions or enhancement that have system wide benefits are needed. The TMP includes goals relevant to this discussion, such as: GOAL 2: Improve the efficiency, performance and connectivity of a balanced transportation system. GOAL 3: Promote consistency and coordination between land use and transportation planning to manage and develop the transportation system for all modes and users. GOAL 7: Promote a financially sustainable transportation plan that is actively used to guide the transportation decision-making process. Enabling legislation: The City’s zoning is authorized by Title 76, Chapter 2, Part 3 of the Montana Code Annotated. Section 76-2-304 establishes required criteria that any local zoning ordinance must address. Paragraph 1 criteria below are compulsory and paragraph 2 must be considered. Elements specific to transportation include: Criteria and guidelines for zoning regulations. (1) Zoning regulations must be: (b) designed to: 78 (iii) facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements. (2) In the adoption of zoning regulations, the municipal governing body shall consider: (b) the effect on motorized and nonmotorized transportation systems; Work Session Topics: The City Commission conducted a work session to consider the following questions on April 11, 2023. This item had been scheduled earlier but was moved. Video (External Link/External Source) of the meeting is available, the work session begins at 40:00 in the recording. Based on the Commission’s direction, recommendations are being developed prior to incorporation as part of the overall code update draft. The street system, serving both motorized and active transportation, is an essential part of an operational city. Construction and maintenance of streets is expensive and time consuming for both public and private entities. Adequate streets support public safety, public convenience, and a strong economy. The City establishes standards for street construction and operations to help ensure that necessary travel can be accomplished, and costs can be constrained. A Level of Service (LOS) standard is an objective measure of how well infrastructure is functioning. In the case of transportation, the traditional LOS for roadway and intersections measures the amount of delay experienced by the traveler. As delay increases, the LOS declines. LOS is rated from A through F. For a further description of LOS and examples of the use of LOS in analysis of the City’s transportation network see the attached page 46 and Figures 2.13 and 3.2 from the Transportation Master Plan. Traffic impact studies provide data to determine if the LOS is met. The City Commission considered and gave direction on the following questions. Q1: How should the code regulate Level of Service (LOS)? Q2: When and where should traffic impact studies be required? Q3: What items should a traffic impact study include? Q4: When a TIS is required how should the TIS address transportation demand management? Questions for consideration by the Community Development Board are presented below under each description and Commission direction summary. Background Information on Topics: Question 1, How should the code regulate Level of Service (LOS)? The City established a formal level of service (LOS) standard in code as part of subdivision regulations in 1998. The City initially established an LOS of C which is a level attainable in moderate traffic areas. Level of Service measures the amount of delay at intersections, not overall capacity or intersection safety. Longer delays can motivate unsafe driving behaviors. 79 The existing LOS system is also used by the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT). Many of the roads carrying higher traffic loads are controlled in part by MDT. City actions to adjust LOS will need to be coordinated with MDT. A large fraction of the total travel on Bozeman roads is pass through and commuter traffic. Designing the road system to maximize service to these populations impacts local residents and development. LOS does not distinguish between the source or the purpose of travel. The following image provides information on origin and destination of travel from 2019, the most recent data available from the US Census Bureau. Dark green arrows indicate commuter travel into the City for employment, the light green arrow shows outbound commuter travel, and the mid-green is commuting beginning and ending within the City. As shown, nearly half of the employment travel is coming into the City each day. As the City continued to develop, it became increasingly difficult to attain an LOS C for intersections. This was particularly problematic for left turn movements who must yield to all other travelers. The City amended its LOS in 2009, to establish the measure as an average for all travelers on each leg of an intersection rather than the most delayed. The City further amended its LOS standard to recognize that some streets and intersections, such as at Rouse Ave and Main St have reached the maximum reasonably attainable size. Continuing to insist on an LOS of C at such intersections would effectively bar future development in the area as there is no reasonable manner in which additional capacity can be 80 added. In these situations, the LOS standard is waived. See 38.400.060.B.4.a (External Link/External Source) for details. As the traffic flow increases and individual intersections are expanded, an increasing number of intersections are reaching this status. In 2016, the City further amended its LOS standards to allow a waiver from the LOS standard of C if the work needed to address LOS deficiency was scheduled on the City’s Capital Improvement Program. This reflects an increased emphasis on overall system management rather than a focus on single points of failure. A greater emphasis on overall system development avoids placing overly high burdens on individual development projects. This makes it easier for development to proceed and places more responsibility on the City to actively and appropriately manage and develop the transportation system. The past practice of the City placed heavy emphasis on evaluating the transportation network for impact by individual projects. Under a more overall management approach, it is appropriate to look at more holistic travel patterns for long term analysis, needs, and at shorter time periods when evaluating individual projects as overall development is likely to create larger impacts which diminish the impact of those individual projects. Individual developments contribute to impact fees, arterial and collector assessments, and street maintenance fees in support of system development and operations. The growth policy, Theme 5, focuses on multiple modes of transportation and improvements to active transportation systems. Level of Services for motor vehicles is not expressly addressed. However, the existing LOS C only evaluates delay for motor vehicles. Staff has discussed for several years the need for and challenges of developing alternative measures for transportation system function that integrate a mix of travel modes. There are alternative measures being developed across the country. Fully evaluating the alternatives and working with our transportation partners to select the best fit for our community is an extensive project. In the meantime, Staff recommends some adjustment to the existing LOS standards to make them more applicable to the rapidly changing community. Alternatives include but are not limited to: • Changing the LOS standard from C in recognition of the increasingly urban condition of the community. (Priority recommendation) • Clarifying the applicability of where and when the LOS standard applies. • Modifying the time frame over which compliance with the LOS must be demonstrated, current period is 15 years. (Priority Recommendation) • Expanding administrative authority to waive compliance with the LOS standard with appropriate criteria. • Directing relocation of the LOS from the municipal code to the Engineering Design Standards manual to be consolidated with other technical street design and operation standards. City Commission Direction: The City Commission directed that the priority recommendations be included in the update to the UDC. The change in LOS standard will allow slightly longer delays 81 at intersections to be accepted when evaluating compliance of development to adopted standards. The change in evaluation time frame shifted from a fixed period to the expected build out of the development. Few developments require a full 15 years to construct. The shift in time frame supports a more holistic transportation system management approach rather than depending on individual developments. The Commission did ask for follow up review on the impacts of the change in LOS to the impact fee system. The City is completing contracts for an update to the impact fee studies and this follow up can be integrated with that contract. Community Development Board: The Board may comment on the Commission direction. No specific follow up question for the Board is identified. Question 2, When and where should traffic impact studies be required? During the development review process, Bozeman collects information to enable decision making on the basis of facts. One element of information considered during development review is adequacy of the transportation network to carry additional loads and the consequences of new development. As noted above in the general policy background section, provision of adequate infrastructure and impact on the transportation network are key criteria for adoption of zoning. Similar requirements apply for evaluation of subdivision regulations and applications. To enable factual analysis, the City prepares overall system transportation plans. The most recent Transportation Master Plan was completed in 2017. These plans look at large scale demand, projecting expected trends for growth and what construction may be needed to provide increased service capacity. The time horizon for the TMP is 20+ years. Development does not occur only in 20-year blocks but continuously throughout the planning period. Projections are more or less accurate as there are many influences and interactions that cannot be precisely projected. To evaluate status of the transportation system at the time of development, Bozeman may require a development to provide a Traffic Impact Study (TIS). A TIS provides information on existing conditions in the area of the development and projects the impacts on traffic flow when the development is fully built out. This enables determination if impacts should be mitigated concurrently with development or whether impact is small and does not require immediate mitigation. Mitigation timing is important to enable development to proceed and to not duplicate or interfere with governmental projects to improve the transportation system. New development contributes to transportation system development through dedication of right of way, construction of new streets and active transportation facilities, and other means including but not limited to payment of transportation impact fees. Traffic studies can be time consuming and expensive for applicants to prepare and for the City to review. Unless a development is very large, the additional demand is unlikely to represent more than a few percentage points of total traffic in an area. A TIS may identify areas that are or will become unsafe and require immediate correction concurrent with development. 82 The City is in the process of becoming part of Montana’s newest Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Creation of an MPO is federally required when an urban area exceeds 50,000 persons. The 2020 US Census established that Bozeman has passed that threshold. An MPO will be established and completed within a year. As part of MPO status the City must prepare an updated transportation plan every four years. This is more frequently than occurred in the past. The more frequent planning cycle means that more current data will be available for the system as a whole at any given time. This lessens the likelihood that a TIS will provide information not otherwise available. Staff recommends modifications to when and where the City requires preparation and submittal of a Traffic Impact Study. As shown on the commuting map above, a large amount of the traffic on Bozeman roads comes from outside of the community. Overreliance on individual project analysis and management can penalize infill development by expecting a level of capacity either unable to be met due to space limitations or because outside travel has consumed the capacity. Adding more capacity in developed areas is more costly and difficult process than in newly developing areas where right of way is available and design can be more flexible. The BCP makes infill and redevelopment a priority. Acknowledging the limitations when additional capacity cannot reasonably be added by an individual project removes a barrier to infill. Small projects are unlikely to have any material impact on delay and road capacity in isolation from other demand. Collecting detailed information from applications that does not improve code compliance is an expense to no purpose. Establishing clear thresholds for when and where a TIS is required reduces cost and time is a reasonable tradeoff for a minimum reduction in available information. Alternatives include but are not limited to: • Establish specific thresholds of development where a TIS is always required, where the City Engineer may require a TIS depending on local conditions, or when a TIS will not be required. (Priority recommendation) • Identify areas of the community where a TIS will not be required due to known maximum build out of streets or community having already occurred. (Priority recommendation) • Clarify and expand options for administrative waiver of TIS. • Allow for applicants to submit a TIS to present information relevant to their application they believe will help show compliance with standards. City Commission Direction: The City Commission supported the two Staff priority recommendations. If content required as part of TIS is expanded then might have more utility for studies in infill locations to address non-motorized travel. Community Development Board Question: The Engineering Division will provide recommendations on thresholds for when a TIS is required. The Board may provide input on what characteristics of the community provide thresholds for when an area is considered built- out and therefore a TIS is not required. 83 Q: Does the Community Development Board recommend particular thresholds for exemption from preparation of a Traffic Impact Study? Examples could be any area meeting the definition of “infill” in the code, a percentage of the area having been reviewed and approved for construction, or another consistent and replicable threshold. Question 3, What items should a traffic impact study include? Traffic does not move evenly throughout the day. A traffic impact study (TIS) analyzes when and where traffic heading in and out of a development will travel. Insufficient capacity may occur at one part of a day but not another or in different locations. The TIS provides the data to determine if the established LOS is currently met or will be met after development occurs. A TIS does not evaluate local street conditions but conditions for arterial and collector streets. A TIS only measures motor vehicle travel and so omits more or less of the traveling public from analysis. Section 38.220.060, Paragraph A.11, describes the contents of a TIS. A copy of this paragraph is attached. The analysis is focused on the busiest travel period in the morning and evening as those are the times most likely for the LOS to not be met. Presently a TIS evaluates a period of 15 years from development review, a long time in a community changing as rapidly as Bozeman. A TIS must also consider the effects of distance. The City is too large for a TIS to consider the entire community, that is the purpose of the Transportation Master Plan. The City used to require a TIS to consider all arterial and collector intersections within one mile of a development. This has been reduced to a one-half mile distance. Depending on the distribution of traffic not all intersections in that geographic area will be equally affected. When preparing a TIS it may be appropriate to include expected improvements to the transportation system scheduled by the City, MDT, or parties. If an intersection is already known to be scheduled to increase capacity, it may not be helpful to evaluate it again. Reliance by City staff and others on scheduled work increases the importance of consistency in the Capital Improvement Program. Alternatives include but are not limited to: • Modify the future time period over which analysis must be performed; ex. change from a 15-year analysis period to a five year analysis period. (Priority recommendation, coordinated with question 1) • Direct additional research and information development to allow a TIS to address non- motorized travel. (Recommendation, this action will extend beyond the development period of the code update.) • Include explicit consideration of work programmed in the City’s capital improvement program in analysis of available capacity. • Clarify the category and geographic area of streets and intersections for which a TIS must analyze impact. (Priority recommendation) 84 • Directing relocation of the TIS content from the municipal code to the Engineering Design Standards manual. City Commission Direction: The City Commission supported the Staff recommendations. More specifically they directed that a TIS address: multi-modal trip projections, analysis of local street impact, refining the boundary to nearest major intersections affected by the development. Analysis focuses on the possible mitigation needed to offset impacts of additional traffic from new development. For local streets there are limitations on ability to expand a street and mitigation must fit within the parameters of a local street. Community Development Board: The changes directed by the City Commission are technical changes and will be primarily addressed by the Transportation Board and Engineering Division. Staff intends to bring further information to the Board later this year to address interactions between density of development, transportation functionality, and economic viability of commerce. That information may help address issues of proximity and mode of travel options. The Board may comment on the Commission direction. No specific follow up question for the Board is identified. Question 4, When a TIS is required how should the TIS address transportation demand management? Typically, a TIS addresses motor vehicle travel only. The City’s planning documents encourage a broader range of transportation use. The dominant travel mode remains motor vehicles and likely will do so as the City is a national tourism destination and a regional service, education, and employment center. Nonetheless, expanding use of multimodal transportation provides a more robust and resilient transportation system. The City’s transportation demand management (TDM) program focuses on encouraging a greater proportion of walking, biking, transit and other non-single occupancy vehicle use. This is a voluntary, incentive based, program. The City presently has one full-time TDM coordinator who works to expand use of TDM. The City has the option of pursuing a more aggressive TDM program that may move into a regulatory path. It is appropriate to include TDM as part of a TIS analysis as that is the City’s tool to consider transportation impacts. To include TDM as part of a TIS analysis the City would need to create operational standards for non-motorized travel. This is a large effort but one being considered by other communities. Establishing standards for multimodal travel is suggested by M-1.3 in the growth policy as cited above. As discussed above, the TMP is due to be updated in association with creation of an MPO. Including TDM and multimodal standards more extensively in the TMP provides both a policy and an analytical framework to guide creation of specific standards. Substantial additional data collection, analysis, and associated costs will be required to develop, implement, and maintain multimodal standards. Although this work is beyond the scope of the immediate code amendments, this direction is directly related to the overall policy direction of how to address measuring and mitigation of transportation impacts. Alternatives include but are not limited to: 85 • Direct staff to include transportation demand management and levels of service for multimodal travel in the next Transportation Master Plan. • Direct staff to address levels of service for multimodal travel and transportation demand management separately on an as resources are available basis. • Do not pursue this effort. City Commission Direction: The City Commission directed that Transportation and Engineering Department include more robust transportation demand management development in upcoming work plans and planning documents. This is work which goes beyond the current UDC update and will be programmed and budgeted for future work. Community Development Board: The changes directed by the City Commission are work program direction and will be primarily addressed by the Transportation Board and Engineering Division. This is work plan development for another Board and department and is presented here only for information. No action is requested on this item. Additional work that is underway or being considered and related to this work session is: Park, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan - The City’s park plan was last adopted in 2007. The plan includes discussion of recreational trail networks. The City is presently updating the plan with completion expected in 2023. This new plan places greater emphasis on active transportation, ex. walking and biking. Facilities which serve walkers and bikers may have multiple functions for both recreation and work/task travel. The City Commission conducted a work session on the new plan and directed some changes. The document is expected to move through final review and potential adoption this summer. A trails plan for the Triangle area between Bozeman, Belgrade, and Four Corners in Gallatin County was recently completed. There is coordination between the PRAT plan and the Triangle Trails Plan. The updated PRAT plan will provide a policy foundation for updates to trail, shared use path, and other park/recreation related standards. Transportation and Recreation pathway coordination and update – In 2004, the City adopted requirements for transportation and recreational pathways. The Engineering and Park staff are reviewing the existing language and improving consistency between sections and the upcoming PRAT plan terminology. 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: 86 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 (completed) Tuesday, February 28th – Parking (completed) Tuesday, April 11th – Transportation (completed) Ongoing summaries of work sessions and other public engagement and information about the project is available at engage.bozeman.net/UDC. Public Engagement: The City uses a variety of techniques to engage the public during the code update process. A detailed report on the intercept technique was provided with the February 14, 2023, City Commission work session packet. A summary of various meetings and other engagement so far was 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/UDC. New public input brochures have recently been added to gather information on additional subjects. The Transportation Board considered the four questions on March 22, 2023. Discussion was robust and the Board generally supported Staff recommendations. Video of the meeting, packet materials, and minutes are available. Discussion begins at 15:32 and ends at 1:48:18 in the recording. 87 CHAPTER 2: State of the Community Bozeman Transportation Master Plan 46 Figure 2.12: Mode Share at Select Intersections 2.4.3. INTERSECTION OPERATIONS Urban road systems are ultimately controlled by the efficiency of the major intersection. High amounts of vehicle delay at major intersections directly reduces the number of vehicles that can be accommodated along the road during peak hours. Intersection performance is evaluated in terms of vehicle delay. The amount of vehicle delay experienced at an intersection correlates to a measure called level of service (LOS). LOS is used as a means for identifying intersections that are experiencing operational difficulties, as well as a means to compare multiple intersec-tions. The LOS scale represents the full range of operating conditions. The scale is based on the ability of an intersection or street segment to accommodate the amount of traffic using the intersection. The scale ranges from “A” which indicates little, if any, vehicle delay, to “F” which indicates significant vehicle delay and traffic congestion. LOS are a microscopic approach to evaluating traffic operations. Intersection LOS defines intersection performance in terms of vehicle delay and does not factor in alternative travel modes nor does it take into consideration the health of the overall transportation system. Intersection LOS is often based on a single hour, or peak hours, for which the system is most congested. A more macroscopic approach to improving the transportation system, not just reducing peak hour delay at single intersections, should be taken. The LOS at 63 intersections within the study area was calculated. Data were collected during the fall of 2015 at 30 of the 63 intersections (11 signalized and 19 unsignalized locations). Each intersection was counted during the peak hours, defined as 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM. Additionally, peak hour turning movement counts were obtained from MDT for 15 intersections (10 signalized and 5 unsignalized locations). Data at these locations were collected on various dates over the past few years. The remaining intersection counts were provided by various sources and were collected as part of recent planning efforts. The existing intersection LOS is shown in Figure 2.13. 89%7%5%College St&8th Ave60%34%7%11th Ave&Grant St99%1%0%Ferguson Ave & Babcock St95%2%3%7th Ave&Kagy88 April 25, 2017 47 Transportation Master Plan Figure 2.13: Existing Intersection Level of Service 909019186411345205345235191S19THAVEHIGHLAND BLVDS3RDAVEWILLSON AVEGRIFFIN DRKAGY BLVDN 11TH AVEDURSTON RDOAK STCOLLEGE STBOZEMAN TRAIL RDBAXTER LNBABCOCKSTEVALLEYCENTERRDPEACH STMENDENHALL STSCHURCHAVESPRINGHILL RDS11THAVECOTTONWOOD RDS8THAVEHUFFINE LNFRONTAGE RDROUSE AVEBRIDGER DRMAIN STBRIDGERCANYONRDN 7TH AVEN 19TH AVEDURSTON RDS3RDAVEGRAF ST S 27TH AVEFOWLER LNSOURDOUGH RDTAYABESHOCKUP RDFORT ELLIS RDHAGGERTY LNS 7TH AVES 6TH AVEOAK STN 15TH AVEGOOCH HILL RDFERGUSON AVEDAVIS LNN 27TH AVES 23RD AVEL STMC ILH AT TA N R DSTORY MILL RDMANLEY RDHIDDEN VALLEY RDHARPER PUCKETT RDLOVE LNBABCOCK STTAMARACK STCATAMOUNT STCATTAIL STGARFIELD STLINCOLN STGRANT STCLEVELAND STSTUCKY RDGRAF STBLACKWOOD RDGOLDENSTEIN LNBBBBBBBBBBBBBBCBBBCCBBCCCCCCDDCCCCDCBBBBCCFFCECCDCCCBCFFEFEFFFFFBCBCABFFCCCCCCEFCCBCFDBCDDCDBCCCDCDDEDFFBBDBCAABCCC*BBBBBABCAAExistingLevel of Service0½11½¼MilesBOZEMANTMP TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Map LegendRailroadSource: City of Bozeman, MDT, RPASignalized IntersectionsUnsignalized IntersectionsAMPMAM PMLevel of ServiceABCDEF*Data unavailableStudy AreaBozeman City LimitsMontana State University89 April 25, 2017 65 Transportation Master Plan Figure 3.2: Projected Intersection Level of Service 909019186411345205345235191S19THAVEHIGHLAND BLVDS3RDAVEWILLSON AVEGRIFFIN DRKAGY BLVDN 11TH AVEDURSTON RDOAK STCOLLEGE STBOZEMAN TRAIL RDBAXTER LNBABCOCKSTEVALLEYCENTERRDPEACH STMENDENHALL STSCHURCHAVESPRINGHILL RDS11THAVECOTTONWOOD RDS8THAVEHUFFINE LNFRONTAGE RDROUSE AVEBRIDGER DRMAIN STBRIDGERCANYONRDN 7TH AVEN 19TH AVEDURSTON RDS3RDAVEGRAF ST S 27TH AVEFOWLER LNSOURDOUGH RDTAYABESHOCKUP RDFORT ELLIS RDHAGGERTY LNS 7TH AVES 6TH AVEOAK STN 15TH AVEGOOCH HILL RDFERGUSON AVEDAVIS LNN 27TH AVES 23RD AVEL STMC ILH AT TA N R DSTORY MILL RDMANLEY RDHIDDEN VALLEY RDHARPER PUCKETT RDLOVE LNBABCOCK STTAMARACK STCATAMOUNT STCATTAIL STGARFIELD STLINCOLN STGRANT STCLEVELAND STSTUCKY RDGRAF STBLACKWOOD RDGOLDENSTEIN LNBBFCCCFCBBFCFCFCDCDDEDDCEEDCCBDCCCFFDFDDFFDDCEFFFFFFFFFFCFCFDFBCFFCCCDBCFEDEFFFFBBFBBABFDCD*BBCBBBFDBBEFDCFFBBDFBECEBABCCCCCBBProjected (Year 2040)Level of Service0½11½¼MilesBOZEMANTMP TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN Map LegendRailroadSource: City of Bozeman, MDT, RPASignalized IntersectionsUnsignalized IntersectionsAMPMAM PMLevel of ServiceABCDEF* Data unavailableStudy AreaBozeman City LimitsMontana State University90 Created: 2023-02-17 14:28:15 [EST] (Supp. No. 12, Update 1) Page 1 of 2 Sec. 38.220.060. Documentation of compliance with adopted standards. A. The following information must be provided with all subdivision preliminary plat applications in order to document compliance with adopted development standards unless waived by the development review committee during the pre-application process per section 38.240.110. The developer must include documentation of any waivers granted by the city after the pre-application review. Additional relevant and reasonable information may be required to adequately assess whether the proposed subdivision complies with this chapter, the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, and other applicable standards. 11. Streets, roads and alleys. a. Description. Describe any proposed new public or private streets, roads or alley, or substantial improvements of existing public or private streets, roads or alleys. The developer must demonstrate that the land to be subdivided has access onto a legal street and the future streets will be consistent with the city's adopted design standards, article 34.4, the long range transportation plan, and other relevant standards b. Bicycle and pedestrian pathways, lanes and routes. Describe bicycle and pedestrian pathways, lanes or routes to be developed with the development. c. Access to arterial. Discuss whether any of the individual lots or tracts have access directly to arterial streets or roads, and if so, the reason access was not provided by means of a street within the subdivision and how the access complies with section 38.400.090. d. Modification of existing streets, roads or alleys. Explain any proposed closure or modification of existing streets, roads or alleys. e. Dust. Describe provisions considered for dust control on alleys. f. Pollution and erosion. Explain how street, road and alley maintenance will be provided to meet the department of environmental quality guidelines for prevention of water pollution and erosion and who is proposed to provide the required maintenance. g. Traffic generation. Discuss how much daily traffic will be generated on existing local and neighborhood streets, roads and alleys, when the subdivision is fully developed, and provide the following information: (1) The report format must be as follows: (a) Trip generation, using the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual; (b) Trip distribution; (c) Traffic assignment; (d) Capacity analysis; (e) Evaluation; and (f) Recommended access plan, including access points, modifications, and any mitigation techniques if level of service does not meet level of service standard. (2) The report must include the following information: (a) Land use and trip generation in the form of a table of each type of land use, the number of units or square footage, as appropriate, the trip rates used (daily and peak) and resulting trip generation. 91 Created: 2023-02-17 14:28:15 [EST] (Supp. No. 12, Update 1) Page 2 of 2 (b) Traffic graphics, which show: (i) A.M. peak hour site traffic; (ii) P.M. peak hour site traffic; (iii) A.M. peak hour total traffic; (iv) P.M. peak hour total traffic; and (v) Total daily traffic (with site-generated traffic shown separately). (c) A.M. and P.M. capacity analysis with an A.M. and P.M. peak-hour capacity analysis provided for: (i) All major drive accesses that intersect collector or arterial streets or roads; and (ii) All arterial-arterial, collector-collector and arterial-collector intersections within one-half mile of the site, or as required by the city engineer during the pre-application review, concept plan review, or informal project review. (d) For two-way stop controlled intersections, analysis of whether the intersection would satisfy signalization warrants if the two-way stop control was removed. h. Capacity. Indicate the levels of service (before and after development) of existing and proposed streets and roads, including appropriate intersections, to safely handle any increased traffic. Describe any anticipated increased maintenance that will be necessary due to increased traffic and who will pay the cost of maintenance. i. Traffic calming. Detailed drawings of any proposed traffic calming installations, including locations and turning radius templates. j. The information needed to demonstrate proposed compliance with division 38.270. Special care is needed when concurrent construction is proposed. 92 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 - Receive Information, Review, and Offer Input Regarding the Update to the Unified Development Code, Chapter 38, Bozeman Municipal Code to Address Potential Changes to Standards Relating to Numbers of Parking Spaces, Application 21381 MEETING DATE:April 17, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Policy Discussion RECOMMENDATION:Receive presentation, discuss proposed direction from City Commission, and provide input to staff and consultants. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND:On December 21, 2021, the City Commission adopted Resolution 5368 (PDF). 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 non- residential parking requirements. A memo providing background material is attached. Staff and Consultant had a work session on this topic with the City Commission on February 28th (video recording, External Link/External Source); the discussion begins at 2:10:00 in the recording. Staff will meet with the Transportation Board on April 26th to discuss this subject. This work session with the Community Development Board will present information and direction from the City Commission and receive input on more detailed elements. The input will then be used to prepare draft materials for further public review and input. Ongoing information about the UDC project can be found on at the engage.bozeman.net/udc (External Link/External Source) website, the official 93 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. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:Community Development Board will give input on specific issues discussed at the meeting ALTERNATIVES:To be determined FISCAL EFFECTS:Funds for this work are budgeted and appropriated Attachments: 4-17-2023 CDB Parking Work Session Background Information memo.pdf Report compiled on: April 12, 2023 94 Community Development Board Parking Revisions 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 Plan. Several major amendments are completed in 2022. 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. • Updates 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: Parking is not a purpose for its own sake. It supports other necessary activities as part of the transportation network. The introduction to the parking development standards says in part: “Parking is one part of the overall multimodal transportation system. Individual choice of travel mode and development characteristics influence the need for parking” (Section 38.540.010). Land use standards contain distinct elements related to parking including design, operations, and number of parking spaces for different uses. The focus of this work session is the number of non-residential parking spaces to be provided. Changes to parking requirements, as will all zoning standards adopted by the City, apply only to projects approved after the effective date of the standard. They are not retroactive to existing projects. Access to goods, services, housing, recreation, and other activities is essential for a functional community. Bozeman’s original settlement relied upon foot and horse travel. Later, trains and trolleys, bicycles, buses, and personal motor vehicles took a place as part of the travel package as well. As the City expanded physically and economically a reliance on motor vehicles for travel also expanded. Each vehicle trip begins and ends with parking. Bozeman works hard to develop pedestrian and bicycle access and other multi-modal options. All new development is required to provide sidewalks. The City has adopted a complete streets policy. The policy ensures that new road construction and road retrofits include pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The City’s trail network is an important feature of the community. As shown on 95 the following map, there are shared use pathway and bike lane facilities throughout the City. The map is from the online Infrastructure Viewer of the City. A high priority in the growth policy is to close gaps and complete networks so the system can be as effective as possible. The City has provided funding through the CIP for needed work and new development also contributes. On-going maintenance is necessary for these facilities to work year-round. As widespread as they are, these facilities are not sufficient to meet all travel needs. Bozeman is a major tourism destination and an economic hub for a multi-county area. Although not all rely on motor vehicles, Montana has more registered motor vehicles than it has people. The following image is US Census travel data using the On The Map service. It displays the most recently available data from 2019. Recent changes in employment may alter the patterns some 96 but are expected to remain largely as presented. The arrows represent different origins for travel to work trips: Dark green - commuters coming into town, Medium green – traveling from home to work with both ends in Bozeman, Light green – commuters leaving Bozeman for work. Longer distance travelers have less reliable options to use for non-motorized travel. Bozeman first adopted parking standards in 1959. Bozeman has long worked to “right size” its parking requirements and correlate them to Bozeman’s circumstances. The City conducted numerous parking studies on different uses over the past 20 years and locations across the community. That data has informed parking requirements and numbers of parking spaces have been adjusted. The number of parking spaces required with new development has trended down. The City created a variety of incentives for development to support alternate means of travel to reduce demand for parking. A variety of options were created to meet parking requirements while producing less parking. These include authorization for parking shared between different users on and off-site, reductions in required parking near transit, and reductions if suitable bicycle commuting facilities were provided. In the “right size” process the City knew that either excess or inadequate parking results in problems for citizens, visitors, and businesses. While working to “right size” Bozeman followed several principles: 97 1) Parking is not a purpose to itself, it is to support other activities and must be in balance with other functional needs of a site. 2) Development should not cause spillover impacts to others and be functional to its purpose and site. 3) Excess regulation or requirements are to be avoided and removed if identified. 4) Parking demand is evaluated as average use, not maximum day demand. 5) In the absence of a larger coordinating approach each development needed to meet its own needs. Where more coordinated options are available, individual site provided parking may be less. 6) There are multiple options to provide access; which may include a requirement to provide functional parking spaces. 7) Once development is approved the City cannot retroactively change standards or impose new requirements. 8) Parking is not required to be free. Landowners are explicitly authorized to charge for parking. 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. To be “in accord” does not require strict compliance. The courts have recognized that policy can be understood and applied in a variety of ways and must be balanced across many issues. The Bozeman Community Plan 2020 includes direction to amend development regulations. The City recently updated plans for climate action and housing. Development regulations play a role in implementing those plans as well. The updated plans establish the policy direction for code text amendments. The UDC project allows the City to take action on adopted policy. This work is not intended to create new policy or change the policy direction already established. As noted above, parking (specifically numbers of parking spaces) is only one element of the transportation system. Discussion on additional transportation system elements is scheduled for discussion on March 21, 2023. Other land use policies such as discouragement of large areas of single use development and encouragement of mixed uses can lessen demand for overall motor vehicle travel. For example, research on mixed use areas similar to Bozeman’s downtown area showed a reduction of 29% in the number of motor vehicle trips; which influences the need for parking. Methods of parking provision and management other than zoning influence to what degree parking needs to be considered with zoning regulations. The Bozeman Community Plan 2020 contains goals and policies regarding transportation systems. Example of Bozeman Community Plan 2020 policy direction influencing this work session on parking include: 98 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-3.5 Encourage increased development intensity in commercial centers and near major employers. DCD-3.6 Evaluate parking requirements and methods of providing parking as part of the overall transportation system for and between districts. M-1.1 Prioritize mixed-use land use patterns. Encourage and enable the development of housing, jobs, and services in close proximity to one another. M-1.12 Eliminate parking minimum requirements in commercial districts and affordable housing areas and reduce parking minimums elsewhere, acknowledging that demand for parking will still result in new supply being built. The City adopted the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan in 2019. It has recommendations regarding parking, including suggested specific code amendments. If there is a conflict between the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 and the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan the former controls. The Climate Action Plan addresses parking in the context of impacts on greenhouse gas emissions and other climate related issues. As shown in these excerpts from the Climate Action Plan it takes a holistic approach to the issue addressing policy and practice in the public and private realms. “Provide options and incentives for employee telecommuting and alternatives to single occupancy vehicle travel (e.g., bike to work days, preferred parking spots, carpool matching, bicycle racks, wellness programs, etc.) (Actions 4.J.2. and 4.J.5.)” Executive Summary, p. xii. 4.J.3. Improve Maintenance of Multi-Modal Infrastructure “Removing barriers to active modes of transportation can enable community members to engage in more cost-effective means of travel. For example, improving access to public transit for low-income community members can reduce the transportation burden for those forced to live further from goods and services due to the cost of housing. Similarly, this solution expands mobility and accessibility for the portion of the community population that cannot drive due to physical abilities, age, and/or income. Alternatively, some community members may maintain a need for car ownership and travel. Penalizing car trips through disincentives (i.e., restricting parking or increasing the cost of parking) may disproportionately impact residents who rely on car travel.” p. 102 99 Enabling legislation: The City’s zoning is authorized by Title 76, Chapter 2, Part 3 of the Montana Code Annotated. Section 76-2-304 establishes required criteria that any local zoning ordinance must address. Paragraph 1 criteria below are compulsory and paragraph 2 must be considered. Elements specific to parking include: Criteria and guidelines for zoning regulations. (1) Zoning regulations must be: (b) designed to: (iii) facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements. (2) In the adoption of zoning regulations, the municipal governing body shall consider: (b) the effect on motorized and nonmotorized transportation systems; Work Session Topics: The City Commission conducted a work session to consider the following questions on February 28, 2023. Video of the meeting is available, the work session begins at 2:10:00 in the recording. The Code Studio team proposed three questions for Commission consideration. There is some practical overlap between the questions. This is due to the complexity of parking, and the mix of approaches already in place in Bozeman. The Commission gave direction on the following three questions. Q1: Are you ready to expand the no required parking standard to other areas of the City? Q2: At this time, are you comfortable implementing the Downtown Plan’s parking ratio recommendations? Q3: For portions of the City with parking requirements, are you OK simplifying down the existing ratios into broader categories and eliminating many of the reductions? The work session with the Community Development Board is to further develop recommendations prior to incorporation as part of the overall code update draft. The residential parking requirements in Table 38.540.050-1 were materially reduced in fall 2022 in Section 15 of Ordinance 2105. The design standards and operational requirements will be reviewed as part of the UDC update. Those elements are not the subject of this work session. There are three questions for the Community Development Board included with the discussion of individual City Commission questions below. Background Information on Topics: Question 1. The City has a variety of parking approaches for different areas of the community. A key element of distinguishing one area from another has been what alternatives exist to individual on-site provision of parking. For example, the City applied a two part parking standard in the B-2M district. Parts of the Midtown area are both zoned B-2M and are within an urban renewal district. One possible action for an urban renewal district would be to construct shared parking (surface or structured) to encourage and facilitate development within the district. Therefore, properties that are both within the B-2M district and the Midtown urban 100 renewal district are not required to provide on-site parking spaces. The ability to coordinate a shared method of addressing adequate parking through the urban renewal district lessens the need for each project to be independent with provided parking (either on-site or off-site). An urban renewal district provides not just a coordination tool but also a potential funding source to construct shared parking sites. Locations zoned as B-2M but not in the urban renewal district are required to provide on-site parking and have a much-simplified parking requirements table. See Table 38.540.050-6. There are other locations in Bozeman which have the potential for similar provision of commonly managed parking facilities. The City could create a similar two part approach outside of Midtown. If the Commission was not comfortable setting requirements to zero then consideration could be given to a simplified or reduced requirement. The code could be structured so that if common parking management options, parking management districts such as next to MSU or parking benefit districts, are created elsewhere in the future adjustments to required parking could be automatically available. City Commission Direction: The City Commission directed that evaluation of other urban renewal areas be completed to determine if a zero parking standard is appropriate. There are six urban renewal areas that are presently being considered. Some, like the South University Technology District, are owned and being developed as a single site. This makes shared provision of parking simpler than if there are many separate owners needing to be coordinated in needs and use of parking supply. The City Commission directed that the B-3 core (Grand Ave to Broadway Ave and a half block north and south of Main Street be set to a zero parking standard). See further discussion under question two. Community Development Board Question: The areas most likely to have both a coordinated plan of development and funding sources for construction of shared parking are urban renewal areas. All locations in the city continue to have access to shared parking and off-site parking as already authorized in 38.540.060 and 38.540.070. No reductions are planned to these options. Q: Does the Community Development Board recommend particular areas for consideration of a zero parking requirement? Question 2. The City adopted the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan in 2019. Appendix B, pages 10-11, makes two recommendations for parking revisions specific to the downtown area. Portions of the recommendations are addressed with the changes to residential parking requirements last fall. Recommendations for the non-residential parking include a single parking requirement that is uniformly applicable across all uses. This is a more consolidated approach than used elsewhere in the community. A subset of downtown, representing the area generally developed prior to widespread use of automobiles, is suggested to be exempted from parking. There are publicly 101 managed parking assets in the area which help distinguish the downtown from other areas of the community. This question shares elements of the other two questions for this work session. City Commission Direction: The City Commission agreed to implement the two recommendations from the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan. 1) A zero parking spaces requirement for the B-3 core, and 2) a consolidated number of parking spaces with a greatly compressed use table for the B-3 areas outside of the core. The City is also pursuing development of additional shared parking that will create publicly available parking on the site of the Gallatin County Courthouse. This is a separate project and will not be changed with this zoning discussion. Question 3. The non-residential parking requirements address a wide range of uses. Different uses have different characteristics that most closely describe parking needs. The existing parking Table 38.540.050-3 reflects this complexity. Although more accurate to individual uses, sites change use over time. Although the City allows 10% flexibility in parking requirements for redevelopment, the details of parking space provision add complexity to reuse and redevelopment. The City has adopted several options to voluntarily reduce required parking to reflect location in the community, zoning, and other factors. The details are in 38.540.050. These make provision of parking more flexible but also add complexity. The City took a modified approach in the B-2M district. A more consolidated and simplified parking table (38.540.050-6) is less precise for individual uses but provides a simpler calculation. With the simpler table other reductions for parking used elsewhere are not available in B-2M. Not all uses are addressed in the B-2M parking table but it provides an example of how the generally applicable parking requirements could be consolidated and simplified. With the simpler standards the various alternatives could be deleted. City Commission Direction: The City Commission directed staff and consultants to prepare a consolidated and simplified parking table similar to that for B-2M. Evaluation of uses not presently allowed in the B-2M district is needed to determine if additional items need to be included in the consolidated table. As part of the simplification process, the majority of parking reductions currently in code, including SID 565, will be removed as they will be largely duplicative and unnecessary. Community Development Board Question: The City will retain certain parking exemptions including that for car sharing and an exemption for the first 3,000 sq. ft. downtown. One idea the Staff and Code Studio are considering is to allow a 1,500 sq. ft. non-residential exemption in other areas. This correlates with size of allowed commercial uses such as in R-5, which may have a more locally focused customer based. One concern is impact on loss of accessible parking which is only required if parking is provided. 102 Q: Does the Community Development Board agree with the potential 1,500 sq. ft. non- residential parking exemption in residential districts? Q. Does the Community Development Board support retaining the 3,000 sq. ft. non- residential parking exemption in the B-3 district. 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: 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 (completed) Tuesday, February 28th – Parking (completed) Tuesday, March 21st – Transportation (completed) Ongoing summaries of work sessions and other public engagement and information about the project is available at engage.bozeman.net/UDC. Public Engagement: The City uses a variety of techniques to engage the public during the code update process. A detailed report on the intercept technique was provided with the February 14, 2023, City Commission work session packet. A summary of various meetings and other engagement so far was 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/UDC. New public input brochures have recently been added to gather information on additional subjects. 103 Memorandum REPORT TO:Community Development Board FROM:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager Erin George, Community Development Deputy Director Anna Bentley, Community Development Director SUBJECT:Upcoming Items for the May 1, 2023 Community Development Board Meeting MEETING DATE:April 17, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:Information only, no action required. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND:The following work session item is presently scheduled for the April 17, 2023 Community Development Board meeting. 1. Work session regarding residential district and open space metrics as part of the UDC update, considered in capacity as Zoning Commission. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:None. FISCAL EFFECTS:None. Report compiled on: April 13, 2023 104