Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-15-23 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: 2557 377 3911 B.Disclosures C.Changes to the Agenda D.Approval of Minutes D.1 050123 Minutes(Sagstetter) E.Consent Items E.1 Design Recommendation for Barnard Headquarters Site Plan on Royal Wolf Way and Prince Lane, Application 23015(Hyde) E.2 Design Recommendation for North 3rd Apartments Affordable Housing Project on North 3rd THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CDB AGENDA Monday, May 15, 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 Street, Application 22375.(Hyde) 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.FYI/Discussions G.1 Review of Bozeman Community Plan 2020, Chapter 5, Criteria for Zoning Amendments(Saunders) G.2 Overview of 2023 Montana Legislative Session and Impacts on On-Going City of Bozeman Code Update Work(Saunders) G.3 Upcoming Items for the June 5, 2023 Community Development Board Meeting (Bentley) H.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:050123 Minutes MEETING DATE:May 15, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative 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: 050123 CDB Minutes.pdf Report compiled on: May 10, 2023 3 Bozeman Community Development Board Meeting Minutes, May 1, 2023 Page 1 of 2 THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MINUTES May 1, 2023 General information about the Community Development Board is available in our Laserfiche repository. Present: Allison Bryan, Brady Ernst, Henry Happel, Padden Guy Murphy, Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd Absent: None Excused: Nicole Olmstead, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue A) 00:02:09 Call to Order - 6:00 pm B) 00:02:57 Disclosures C) 00:03:05 Changes to the Agenda D) 00:03:10 Approval of Minutes D.1 041723 CDB Minutes 041723 CDB Minutes.pdf 00:03:18 Motion to approve as amended D) Approval of Minutes Jennifer Madgic: Motion Ben Lloyd: 2nd 00:04:25 Vote on the Motion to approve as amended D) Approval of Minutes The Motion carried 6 - 0. Approve: Allison Bryan Brady Ernst Henry Happel Padden Guy Murphy Jennifer Madgic 4 Bozeman Community Development Board Meeting Minutes, May 1, 2023 Page 2 of 2 Ben Lloyd Disapprove: None E) 00:04:40 Consent Items F) 00:04:44 Public Comments G) 00:05:16 Action Items G.1 00:05:21 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 4-17-2023 CDB Parking Work Session Background Information memo.pdf 00:05:48 Open discussion and presentation between board members and consultant Colin Scarf. 01:17:31 Mary Wictor provides public comment. G.2 01:19:27 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 Residential Zoning Districts and B2/B2M Map Changes, Application 21381 May 1, 2023 CDB Work Session cover memo .pdf 01:19:49 Open discussion and presentation between board members and consultant Colin Scarf. 02:19:34 Mary Wictor provides public comment. H) 02:20:35 FYI/Discussions H.1 Upcoming Items for the May 15, 2023 Community Development Board Meeting I) 02:22:15 Adjournment This board generally meets the first and third Monday of the month from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm. 5 Memorandum REPORT TO:Community Development Board FROM:Lynn Hyde, Planner Brian Krueger, Development Review Manager Erin George, Deputy Director of Community Development Anna Bentley, Director of Community Development SUBJECT:Design Recommendation for Barnard Headquarters Site Plan on Royal Wolf Way and Prince Lane, Application 23015 MEETING DATE:May 15, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Quasi-Judicial RECOMMENDATION:Recommend approval for the Barnard Headquarters Site Plan, Application 23015, to the Community Development Director as presented, and provide design recommendations and board memeber discusion. 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 as their capacity to act 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 5 provides code provisions regarding those aesthetic considerations. Those include Block Frontage (38.510), Site Planning and Design Elements (38.520), Building Design (38.530), Parking (38.540), Landscaping (38.550), Signs (38.560), and Lighting (38.570). Sections 7a through 7g of the staff report attached discuss these code provisions. 6 The property has been annexed, zoned, and subdivided with previous review by the Planning Board, Zoning Board, and City Commission approval is in place. Discussion of land use policy, zoning, and community design is irrelevant to this meeting. The purpose of this meeting is the proposed design contained in the applications. This Site Plan is for the construction of a commercial office building on three vacant lots located within the Nelson Meadows Subdivision. The site is currently vacant and zoned M-1, Light Manufacturing District. The proposed building is four stories and totaling 131,944 gross square feet. The proposal includes applicable infrastructure, parking lot, sidewalk and trail construction. The design has been reviewed by all applicable departments and has been found consistent with the Unified Development Code. Application materials for Barnard Headquarters. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:None FISCAL EFFECTS:Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time, but will include increased property tax revenues from new development, along with increased costs to deliver municipal services to the property. Attachments: 23015 Barnard HQ Community Development Board Staff Report.pdf Report compiled on: April 27, 2023 7 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 1 of 15 Application No. 23015 Type Site Plan Project Name Barnard Headquarters Summary A proposal for the construction of a commercial office building on three vacant lots located within the Nelson Meadows Subdivision. The site is currently vacant and zoned M-1, Light Manufacturing District. The proposed building is four stories and totaling 131,944 gross square feet. The proposal includes applicable infrastructure, parking lot, sidewalk and trail construction. Zoning M-1 Growth Policy Industrial Parcel Size 424,710 sf 9.75 acres Overlay District(s) None Street Address XXXX Royal Wolf Way Legal Description Lot 26, Block 7 and Lot 24 & 25, Block 8, Nelson Meadows Subdivision, Plat J-680, Section 22, Township 1 South, Range 5 East of P.M.M. City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. Owner Barnard Construction Company Inc., Kent Merselis, 701 Gold Ave, Bozeman, MT, 59715 Applicant Sanderson Stewart, Lenna Johnson, 106 E Babcock St, Suite L1, Bozeman, MT, 59715 Representative Sanderson Stewart, Dena Knutson, 106 E Babcock St, Suite L1, Bozeman, MT, 59715 Staff Planner Lynn Hyde Engineer Noticing Public Comment Period Site Posted Adjacent Owners Newspaper Legal Ad 4/30/2023 – 05/15/2023 4/30/2023 4/28/2023 NA Advisory Boards Board Date Recommendation Development Review Committee 4/19/2023 The application is adequate, conforms to standards, and is sufficient for approval with conditions and code provisions as noted below. Design Review Board 5/15/2023 TBD Recommendation The application is adequate, conforms to standards, and is sufficient for approval with conditions and code provisions as noted below. Decision Authority Director of Community Development Date Full application and file of record: Community Development Department, 20 E. Olive St., Bozeman, MT 59715 8 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 2 of 15 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this report. Additional conditions of approval and code corrections are required and will be included with the final report provided to the Director of Community Development. 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. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 - 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) on a City standard form provided at informal review. Please provide hard copy of this completed and filed form to the review engineer prior to site plan approval. 3. Prior to building permit occupancy, the applicant must demonstrate that they have obtained a water right for the geothermal system. CODE REQUIREMENTS 1. BMC 38.230.100.A.11 and BMC 38.350.030 Use of lands, buildings and structures. There are currently three lots underlying the proposed site plan. Prior to final plan approval, the applicant must perform a subdivision exemption to aggregate the lots. 2. BMC 38.270.030.C.- Concurrent Construction. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant must show that all criteria found within BMC 38.270.030.C.1 have been met in order to be eligible for concurrent construction. 3. BMC 38.400.060 Easements – Prior to site plan approval all applicable easements must submitted to the city for review, executed, and a hard copy be returned to the review engineer to go before the city commission for approval and to be filed by the county clerk and recorder. The following easements are required: a. A 20' public utility easement around the fire hydrant extending into the site. Please find the city standard Sewer and Water Pipeline Access Easement and Agreement in the city documents file. b. A 30' trail corridor easement through the property along the West side of the building. Be advised, the template language will need to be updated to allow for the curb and gutter, and parking structures planned within the easement. 9 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 3 of 15 Figure 1: Current Zoning Map 10 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 4 of 15 Figure 2: Future Land Use Map 11 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 5 of 15 Figure 3: Proposed Site Plan - East Figure 4: Proposed Site Plan - West 12 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 6 of 15 Figure 5: Proposed Site Plan – North Figure 6: Exterior Elevations (Colored) 13 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 7 of 15 Figures 7: Exterior Elevations (Colored) 14 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 8 of 15 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 Industrial Yes Zoning M-1, Light Manufacturing District Yes Comments: Industrial Land Use: This classification provides areas for manufacturing, warehousing, technology industries, and transportation hubs. Development within these areas is intensive and is connected to significant transportation corridors. Uses that would be harmed by industrial activities are discouraged from locating in these areas. Although use in these areas is intense, they are part of the larger community and standards for architecture and site design apply. In some circumstances, uses other than those typically considered industrial have been historically present in areas that were given an industrial designation in prior growth policies. Careful consideration must be given to public policies to allow these mixed uses to coexist in harmony. Light manufacturing district (M-1). The intent of the M-1 light manufacturing district is to provide for the community’s needs for wholesale trade, storage and warehousing, trucking and transportation terminals, light manufacturing and similar activities. The district should be oriented to major transportation facilities yet arranged to minimize adverse effects on residential development, therefore, some type of screening may be necessary. This project is furthering the goals of the industrial growth policy and light manufacturing district by providing headquarters to Barnard Construction Company and potentially other compatible tenants. The site is in a newly created industrial subdivision with convenient access to major transportation networks. In addition, the proposal provides landscaping and design modifications to minimize any adverse effects on adjacent properties. 2. Conformance with Article 1 - All other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations (38.100.080) Condominium ownership NA Comments: Not applicable to this project. 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 with the site or application. 4. Conformance with Article 2 - Submittal material (38.220) requirements and plan review for applicable permit types (38.230) Meets Code? Site Plan Yes 15 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 9 of 15 Submittal requirements 38.220.100 Yes Phasing of development 38.230.020.B No. of phases: NA Comments: No phasing is proposed There are currently three lots underlying the proposed site plan. Prior to final plan approval, the applicant must perform a subdivision exemption to aggregate the lots into one lot. Refer to Code Requirement 1. The applicant has requested concurrent construction pursuant BMC 38.270.030.C. The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the concurrent review request and found it adequate, so long as criteria found in BMC 38.270.030.C.1 is satisfied prior to building permit issuance. Refer to Code Requirement 2. Any additional use permit (Conditional Use Permit) 38.230.120 or (Special use Permit) 38.230.120 NA Comments: No additional permits are required for the proposed use. 5. Conformance with Article 3 - Zoning Provisions (38.300) Meets Code? Permitted uses 38.310 Office Yes Form and intensity standards 38.320 Zoning: Setbacks (feet) Structures (allowed) Parking / Loading Yes Front Refer to block frontage standards. Rear 3’ NA Side 3’ NA Alley NA NA Comments: The proposed use is for offices which is an allowed use in the M-1 zoning district. Offices are defined in BMC 38.700.140 as “Buildings or portions of buildings in which commercial activities take place but where goods are not produced, sold or repaired. These include but are not limited to general and professional offices . . . “. Front setback provisions are set forth in the block frontage standards. Refer to Section 7a below for an analysis of the block frontage standards. All form and intensity standards set forth in the M-1 zoning district are satisfied. Lot coverage Allowed: 100% 7.37% Yes Building height Allowed: (50’ + 2’-6”) = 52’-6” 51’ Yes Comments: The maximum height limit is 50’, however in the building height (found in BMC 38.700.030.B) it states “where the vertical difference between grade as defined in this section is greater than two feet between opposite elevations of the building, the height of the building may be increased by one foot for every one foot in grade difference, up to a maximum of six additional feet”. The grade change on this site allows the building height to be increased to 52’-6” rather than the standard maximum height of 50’. In addition, the applicant is utilizing encroachments allowed above the maximum height limit for a parapet to encroach above the maximum height limit. Refer to below discussion in regards to general land use standards and allowed height encroachments. Applicable zone specific or overlay standards 38.330-40 NA Comments: There are no applicable zone or overlay standards. 16 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 10 of 15 General land use standards and requirements 38.350 Yes Comments: The proposed design is utilizing height encroachment provisions that allow elements of the building to extend above the maximum limiting height, which for this building is 52’-6”. Parapets walls are proposed to encroach above maximum height limit 4’ as is allowed per 38.350.050.D.2.a. In addition, there is a stairwell ‘penthouse’ that extends an additional 7’ above the top of the parapet wall, or 11’ above the maximum height limit which is allowed per 38.350.050.D.2.c. These height encroachments are permissive. Applicable supplemental use criteria 38.360 NA Supplemental uses/type NA Comments: There are no applicable supplemental criteria. Wireless facilities 38.370 NA Affordable Housing 38.380.010 NA Affordable housing plan NA Comments: There are no wireless facilities nor affordable housing with this proposal. 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 Level of Service 38.400.060 Transportation grid adequate to serve site Yes Comments: The north south oriented mid-block crossing that was required with the original subdivision is being relocated slightly. The easement is required to be released and reconveyed prior to final site plan approval. Refer to Code Requirement 3. The applicant provided a Trip Generation Comparative analysis that compares the original traffic impact study that was done for the Nelson Meadows Subdivision with what is actually being proposed. The comparative analysis shows the updated projected vehicular trips are slightly less than what was originally forecasted for Nelson Meadows Subdivision. From the analysis, it is recommended that a traffic signal study be conducted for the intersection of Nelson Road and the I-90 Frontage Rd. Sidewalks 38.400.080 Yes Comments: Sidewalks are being constructed along Prince Lane and Royal Wolf Way. Drive access 38.400.090 Access to site: 3 Yes Fire lanes, curbs, signage and striping Yes Comments: The proposed design has three curb cuts to public rights-of-way, one access point on Prince Land, and two onto Royal Wolf Way. A utility easement is required to provide access to the fire hydrant located within the site. Refer to Code Requirement 3. Street vision triangle 38.400.100 Yes Transportation pathways 38.400.110 Yes Pedestrian access easements for shared use pathways and similar transportation facilities Yes Public transportation 38.400.120 NA 17 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 11 of 15 Comments: Street vision triangles were reviewed and found to be adequate. There is an existing ten-foot asphalt transportation pathway that runs east/west along the southern side of the property. 6b. Conformance with Article 4 – Community Design Provisions: Community Design and Elements (38.410) Meets Code? Neighborhood centers 38.410.020 NA Comments: NA Lot and block standards 38.410.030-040 NA Midblock crossing: rights of way for pedestrians alternative block delineation Yes, with code requirement Comments: There is an existing north south mid-block crossing that was designated during the original Nelson Meadows Subdivision. The applicant will need a new to record a new 30' trail corridor easement corridor through the property along the West side of the building prior to final plan approval. Refer to Code Requirement 3. 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) NA Comments: To satisfy the City’s water adequacy requirement, a cash-in-lieu of waters rights was required to be paid prior to final site plan approval. The applicant paid $39,851 on 3/23/2023. In addition, the applicant is proposing a geothermal system. Prior to building permit occupancy, the applicant must demonstrate that they have obtained a water right for the geothermal system. Refer to Condition of Approval 3. Municipal infrastructure requirements 38.410.070 Yes Comments: Municipal infrastructure requirements have been reviewed by the Engineering Department and found to be adequate. 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: The stormwater plan proposes a series of underground chamber systems for infiltration and treatment of stormwater runoff. Engineering has reviewed their stormwater plan and found it adequate. Watercourse setback 38.410.100 Yes Watercourse setback planting plan 38.410.100.2.f Yes Comments: There is an existing creek, Cattail Creek, on the eastern side of the property. Watercourse setback plantings were done with the original subdivision. Any disturbed areas will be reseeded with the native glasses. 6c. Conformance with Article 4 – Community Design Provisions: Park and Recreation Requirements (38.420) Meets Code? Parkland requirements 38.420.020.A NA 18 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 12 of 15 Cash donation in lieu (CIL) 38.420.030 NA Improvements in-lieu NA Comments: No parkland is required for this project. Park Frontage 38.420.060 NA Park development 38.420.080 NA Recreation pathways 38.420.110 NA Park/Recreational area design NA Comments: NA 7a. Conformance with Article 5 – Project Design: Block Frontage Standards (38.510) Meets Code? Block frontage classification Other Yes Departure criteria Yes Yes Comments: The site has three applicable frontages. Frontage Road to the south is a “Gateway Block Frontage”, Royal Wolf Way and Prince Lane to the north and west are “Other Block Frontage”. BMC requires the ‘Gateway’ block frontage takes precedence per BMC 38.510.020.F. The applicant is requesting a departure to use Royal Wolf Way as the primary block frontage to orient the building towards. Staff supports the departure request as it is compatible with the character of the area and will enhance Royal Wolf Way which has many projects currently proposed along that will all orient towards Royal Wolf Way. With the approval of the departure, the site is meeting the block frontage requirements in regards to building placement (varies from 100-200’) and parking location, weather protection, landscaping and sidewalk. In addition, a building entrance facing the street is encourage. At least one building entry visible and directly accessible from the street is required. The proposed building has its main entry oriented towards Royal Wolf Way and there is a pedestrian connection connecting the entrance to the public right of way. For buildings setback greater than 10’ from the sidewalk, must provide transparency of at least 10% for the entire façade. The building is providing 45% transparency for the northern façade facing Royal Wolf Way. 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 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 sites non-motorized circulation was found to be adequate. Pedestrian paths are provided throughout the site including the parking lot. Crosswalks throughout the parking lot contain contrasting material and patterns. In addition the site is providing a pathway that connects easterly to the trail that travels along the watercourse throughout the Nelson Meadows Subdivision. 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 19 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 13 of 15 7d. Conformance with Article 5 – Parking (38.540) Meets Code? Parking requirements 38.540.050 350 Yes Parking requirements residential 38.540.050.A.1 NA Reductions residential 38.540.050.A.1.b NA Parking requirements nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2 350 Reductions nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2.c NA Provided off-street 352 Provided on-street NA Bicycle parking 38.540.050.A.4 40 Comments: There are 350 vehicular parking spaces required and 36 bicycle parking spaces. The applicant is proposing 352 vehicular parking spaces and 40 bicycle parking spaces, meeting the requirements. The bicycle parking spaces are proposed with 20 outdoor spaces and 20 internal spaces. Loading and uploading area requirements 38.540.080 NA First berth – minimum 70 feet length, 12 feet in width, 14 feet in height NA Internal roadway design 38.520.050.D NA Comments: There is no internal roadway proposed. The parking lot has been designed to ensure vehicles can move safely throughout the site. On-site open space 38.520.060 NA Total required NA Total provided NA Comments: Developments in the industrial zones are not required to provide onsite open space. Location and design of service areas and mechanical equipment 38.520.070 Yes Comments: Trash enclosure screened with juniper species that reach a mature width of 6’ wide and 16’ tall. The majority of the mechanical equipment for the building is located internally. Secondary equipment, such as small exhaust fans, intake air infrastructure etc., is screened on the roof by a 4’ parapet wall. 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: BMC 38.530.040.E requires building with facades wider than 150’ to include at least one of the listed features to break up the massing of the building and add visual interest. The building’s design proposes a curvature. The curvature provides a vertical modulation that exceeds the minimum 6’ deep and 10’ wide. Windows are deep set approximately 6 inches from the dominant masonry wall. Proposals in the M-1 zoning district are required to provide one articulation feature every 60’. Building provides structural expression through the curvature. The applicants narrative states “the building is designed as a continuous curve such that from all vantage points and perspectives it has a dynamic modulating expression, creating a unique dialog with both the Royal Wolf Lane and Frontage Road frontages. Further, the upper three levels of the building cantilevers outward from the building’s base floor, creating a dynamic structural expression and dynamic shadow-play at the ground level.” 20 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 14 of 15 Additional berth – minimum 45 feet length NA Comments: The projects gross office floor area is 87,500sf, less than the 100,000 sf threshold that triggers an off-street loading berth. 7e. Conformance with Article 5 – Landscaping (38.550) Meets Code? Mandatory landscaping requirements 38.550.050 Yes Drought tolerant species 75% required Yes – 80% provided Parking lot landscaping Yes 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 NA Comments: The project is in conformance with the landscaping requirements, including, but not limited to, minimum drought tolerant species proposed, parking lot landscaping, street frontage landscaping, acceptable landscape materials and street frontage trees. The 100’ wide Yellowstone Pipeline easement runs through the site. This easement is shown in the image below. The easement language precludes the planting of trees, therefore in areas of the parking lot, and along the frontage, trees are not provided. Where the applicant was unable to plant street trees, the trees were located internally on the site where the easement is not present. Landscaping of public lands 38.550.070 Yes Comments: 21 Community Development Board Staff Report Barnard Headquarters Application 23015 5/10/2023 Page 15 of 15 The applicant is providing the required number of street trees which includes 12 large canopy trees along Prince Lane and 24 large canopy trees along Royal Wolf Way. As mentioned above, the existing Yellowstone Pipeline easement precludes the planting of street trees in some areas. Where the trees cannot be located along the street, they are provided internally on the site, outside of the easement boundaries. 7f. Conformance with Article 5 – Signs (38.560) Meets Code? Allowed SF/building 38.560.060 NA Proposed SF/building NA Comments: A comprehensive sign plan must be submitted for all commercial, office, industrial and civil uses consisting of two or more tenant or occupant spaces on a lot, or two or more lots subjective to a common development permit or plan. A separate comprehensive sign plan approval is required prior to the installation of any signs on the property. 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 conforms to the lighting standards found within BMC 38.560. 8. Conformance with Article 6 – Natural Resource Protection Meets Code? Floodplain regulations 38.600 NA Wetland regulations 38.610 Yes Comments: There are no floodplains present. The original subdivision provided the wetland setback plantings. This proposal has a trail extension to the existing trail network that encroaches into the Zone 2 setback which is an allowed encroachment. Any disturbed areas are proposed to be replanted with appropriate species. 9. Relevant Comment from Affected Parties (38.220) Meets Code? Public Comment Yes Comments: The public comment period ran from May 30 to June 15, 2023. At the time this report was written, no comments had been received. 10. Division of Land Pertaining to Subdivisions (38.240-Part 4) Meets Code? Subdivision exemptions Yes Required easements Yes Comments: There are two required easements, as well as a subdivision exemption that must be completed prior to site plan approval. Refer to Code Requirement 3. 22 Memorandum REPORT TO:Community Development Board FROM:Lynn Hyde, Planner Brian Krueger, Development Review Manager Erin George, Deputy Director of Community Development Anna Bentley, Director of Community Development SUBJECT:Design Recommendation for North 3rd Apartments Affordable Housing Project on North 3rd Street, Application 22375. MEETING DATE:May 15, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Quasi-Judicial RECOMMENDATION:Recommend approval for the North 3rd Apartments Site Plan, Application 22375, to the Community Development Director 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 as their capacity to act 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 5 provides code provisions regarding those aesthetic considerations. Those include Block Frontage (38.510), Site Planning and Design Elements (38.520), Building Design (38.530), Parking (38.540), Landscaping (38.550), Signs (38.560), and Lighting (38.570). Sections 7a through 7g of the staff report attached discuss these code provisions. The property has been annexed, zoned, and subdivided with previous review 23 by the Planning Board, Zoning Board, and City Commission approval is in place. Discussion of land use policy, zoning, and community design is irrelevant to this meeting. The purpose of this meeting is the proposed design contained in the applications. This Site Plan is for an affordable housing development that will provide 216 housing units with a mix of 1, 2, 3, & 4 bedroom units, all of which are proposed to be deed restricted for thirty years at 60% AMI (average medium income) levels. The proposal is utilizing shallow incentives allowed per BMC 38.380 Affordable Housing which were created to incentivize the increased production of affordable housing to meet the needs of city residents and the goals of the adopted growth policy and the community housing action plan. The shallow incentive being implemented are one parking stall per unit. In addition, the applicant is requesting departure for housing creation to allow reduced common open space. The applicant is requesting 20% reduction from required on-site residential open space. This development is adjacent to the City owned and maintained Westlake Park and meets the criteria in outlined in BMC 38.320.070.C to make the site eligible. The proposal includes the buildings, sidewalk construction and the extension of existing underground utilities as well as street improvements on North 3rd. The design has been reviewed by all applicable departments and has been found consistent with the Unified Development Code. Application materials for North 3rd Apartments. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:None FISCAL EFFECTS:Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time, but will include increased property tax revenues from new development, along with increased costs to deliver municipal services to the property. Attachments: 22375 N 3rd Apts Community Development Board.pdf Report compiled on: April 27, 2023 24 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 1 of 22 Application No. 22375 Type Site Plan Project Name North 3rd Apartments Summary A proposal for an affordable housing development that will provide 216 housing units with a mix of 1, 2, 3, & 4 bedroom units, all of which are proposed to be deed restricted for thirty years at 60% AMI (average medium income) levels. The proposal is utilizing shallow incentives allowed per BMC 38.380 Affordable Housing which were created to incentivize the increased production of affordable housing to meet the needs of city residents and the goals of the adopted growth policy and the community housing action plan. The shallow incentive being implemented is to require one parking stall per unit. In addition, the applicant is requesting departure for housing creation to allow reduced common open space. An applicant may request 20% reduction for any new development within one-quarter mile pedestrian travel distance of an existing park. This development is adjacent to the City owned and maintained Westlake Park and meets the criteria in outlined in BMC 38.320.070.C to make them eligible. The proposal includes the buildings, sidewalk construction and the extension of existing underground utilities as well as street improvements on North 3rd. Zoning R-5 Growth Policy Urban Neighborhood Parcel Size 308,392 sf 2.3 acres Overlay District(s) None Street Address None Legal Description Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 of Westlakes Fourth Subdivision, located in East ½ of Section 1, Township 02 South, Range 05 East of P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana. Owner DK Martinen, LLC, 401 Sunnyslope Rd., Yakima, WA 98908 Applicant Hooker DeJong Inc., Tiffany Ackerman, 316 Morris Ave, Suite 410 410 Muskegon, Michigan, 49440 Representative North 3rd Apartments, LLC, Chase Huber, PO Box 4108, Bellevue, WA 98009 Staff Planner Lynn Hyde Engineer Suzanne Ryan Noticing Public Comment Period Site Posted Adjacent Owners Newspaper Legal Ad 5/7/2023 to 5/29/2023 5/7/2023 & 5/12/2023 5/5/2023 & 5/12/2023 NA Advisory Boards Board Date Recommendation Development Review Committee 4/26/2023 The application is adequate, conforms to standards, and is sufficient for approval with conditions and code provisions as noted below. Design Review Board 5/15/2023 TBD Recommendation The application is adequate, conforms to standards, and is sufficient for approval with conditions and code provisions as noted below. Decision Authority Director of Community Development Date Full application and file of record: Community Development Department, 20 E. Olive St., Bozeman, MT 59715 25 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 2 of 22 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this report. Additional conditions of approval and code corrections are required and will be included with the final report provided to the Director of Community Development. 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. The applicant and owner, if different, must consent to the City recording a summary of the affordable housing plan immediately following conditional approval of the Site Plan. 3. The applicant and owner, if different, must consent to the City recording an affordable housing covenant that implements the affordable housing plan immediately following conditional approval of the Site Plan. 4. A development agreement must be in place between the city and the applicant regarding the improvements to North 3rd Avenue pavement, curb and gutter, water, and sewer mains prior to final site plan approval. 5. Approval of the final engineering design must be obtained from the Engineering Department and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality prior to issuance of any building permit for the development. CODE REQUIREMENTS 1. BMC 38.230.100.A.11 and BMC 38.350.030 Use of lands, buildings and structures. There are currently two lots underlying the proposed site plan. Prior to final plan approval, the applicant must either aggregate the lots, or perform a boundary line adjustment that locates the lot lines in a manner that comply with all zoning requirements for lot size, dimensions, and setbacks to structures. In addition, reciprocal parking, access and stormwater easements may need to be provided. The parcels must either be aggregated into one lot, or a boundary line adjustment performed prior to final site plan approval. 2. BMC 38.410.030 – Water Adequacy. To satisfy the City’s water adequacy requirement a cash in lieu of water rights (CILWR) must be paid prior to final site plan approval. A preliminary fee determination totals $161,114 however prior to finalizing the fee the landscaping irrigation source and demands must be identified on the plans. If supplied from the City's domestic system then demand will be included in the fee calculation. If a well will be used the demand will be excluded however a pre-determination from the DNRC confirming allowable use of the well must also be provided. The City encourages the use of groundwater wells for irrigation when permitted. 3. BMC 38.410.060 – Provide a plan sheeting showing the existing and proposed easements. All new easements will be required to be recorded in a form acceptable to the city including, but not limited to: a. 10 foot front setback private utility easement; b. public utility easements; c. 25’ pedestrian easement that travels east west through the site to access the park from N 3rd Ave; d. Pedestrian easement over sidewalk that runs north south on the western side of the property, immediately adjacent to Westlake Park; and e. Vehicular and pedestrian access along Drive Aisle D from North 3rd Ave to North 4th Ave. 4. BMC 38.420.030.D. Where a cash donation has been accepted in-lieu of land dedication the amount of cash donation must be stated on the final plat or plan as appropriate. Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant must submit a new cover sheet showing the correct parkland tracking calculations. The cash in lieu of parkland must be paid prior to final site plan approval. 26 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 3 of 22 5. BMC 38.420.060 – Park Frontage. In order to mitigate for not providing 100 percent street frontage around Westlake Park, the applicant has proposed mitigation measures. Two of the mitigation measures proposed is to construct parking lot or service access pads east of the existing community gardens as well as a drive access for the BMX park. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the applicant must have constructed these park improvements in a manner acceptable to the Parks Department. 6. BMC 38.270.030.C.- Concurrent Construction. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant must show that all criteria found within BMC 38.270.030.C.1 have been met in order to be eligible for concurrent construction. 27 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 4 of 22 Figure 1: Current Zoning Map 28 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 5 of 22 Figure 2: Future Land Use Map 29 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 6 of 22 Figure 3: Proposed Site Plan - North 30 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 7 of 22 Figure 4: Proposed Site Plan - South 31 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 8 of 22 Figure 5: Proposed Landscape Plan – North 32 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 9 of 22 Figure 6: Proposed Landscape Plan - South Figures 7: Elevations – Building 1 / Clubhouse 33 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 10 of 22 Figures 8: Elevations – Building 2 & 6 34 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 11 of 22 Figures 9: Elevations – Building 3 & 5 35 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 12 of 22 Figures 10: Elevations – Building 4 Figures 11: Elevations – Building 7 36 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 13 of 22 Figures 12: Elevations – Building 8 37 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 14 of 22 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 Urban Neighborhood Yes Zoning R-5, Residential Mixed-Use High Density Yes Comments: Growth Policy: The Urban Neighborhood District primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. . . The Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal boundaries.’ Zoning: The Residential mixed-use high density (R-5) district’s intent is to provide for high-density residential development through a variety of compatible housing types and residentially supportive commercial uses in a geographically compact, walkable area to serve the varying needs of the community’s residents. This proposed project is consistent with the growth policy by a small infill development of a greater density. This project is an infill project providing a higher density project in a walkable area of town with easy access to adjacent park and nearby schools. In addition, the project meets the goal of the growth policy of providing affordable housing units to the community. 2. Conformance with Article 1 - All other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations (38.100.080) Condominium ownership NA Comments: The units are proposed as rentals. Should the owners desire to convert them to condominiums at a later date, a separate Condominium Review application must be submittal for review. Condominium developments must comply with all provisions of the Unit Ownership Act, MCA 70-23-101 and must comply with BMC 38.360.100. 3. Conformance with Article 2, including the cessation of any current violations (38.200.160) Meets Code? Current Violations NA Comments: There are no known violations on the property or with the application. 4. Conformance with Article 2 - Submittal material (38.220) requirements and plan review for applicable permit types (38.230) Meets Code? Site Plan Yes, with conditions & code requirements Submittal requirements 38.220.100 Yes 38 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 15 of 22 Phasing of development 38.230.020.B No. of phases: 1 Yes Comments: The project is proposed to be completed in one phase. The applicant has requested concurrent construction pursuant BMC 38.270.030.C. The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the concurrent review request and found it adequate, so long as criteria found in BMC 38.270.030.C.1 prior to building permit issuance. Refer to Code Requirement 6. Any additional use permit (Conditional Use Permit) 38.230.120 or (Special use Permit) 38.230.120 Yes Comments: An affordable housing plan is required to be submitted, review and approved to receive the incentives requested within the Site Plan. Refer to Affordable Housing, BMC 38.380 discussed below in Section 5 for additional information. 5. Conformance with Article 3 - Zoning Provisions (38.300) Meets Code? Permitted uses 38.310 Apartments Yes Form and intensity standards 38.320 Zoning: R-5 Setbacks (feet) Structures Parking / Loading Yes Front 15’ NA Rear 20’ NA Side 5’ NA Alley NA NA Comments: The applicant is requesting departure for housing creation to allow reduced common open space. An applicant may request 20% reduction for any new development within one-quarter mile pedestrian travel distance of an existing park. This development is adjacent to the City owned and maintained Westlake Park. In order to qualify for this reduction, must meet criteria outlined in BMC 38.320.070.C. The proposal must meet criteria 1 and 2, and at least one of criteria 3-5 must be met. 1. The departure will result in at least one more home than would otherwise be possible. Applicant has stated the reduced open space requirement will result in 8-11 additional units. This criterion is met. 2. The purpose of the standard can still be accomplished if the departure is granted. The Applicant states that “the purpose of the standard is still accomplished by providing a dog park, playground, gazebo, open exterior green space which all provide usable space that provides leisure and recreational space for residents. The open space areas are all situated to accommodate or add to the residential setting and adjacent parks. The open space design that is provided will enhance the character and attractiveness of the development.” Staff concurs that the intent of the on-site residential open space which is to create useable open space that contributes to the residential setting is met. In addition, the proximity to the city park ensures the future residents will have adequate open space to enjoy. This criterion is met. 3. The departure will not impose negative impacts on surrounding property. There are no anticipated negative impacts on adjacent properties. Adequate setbacks are still being provided. This criterion is met. 4. The departure is applicable to missing middle housing. Not applicable as missing middle is defined as “a residential building containing two, three, or four dwellings in any configuration, as well as townhomes and cottage housing.” This criterion is not met, however it is not mandatory to be met so long as either 3 or 5 are being met, which they both are. 39 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 16 of 22 5. The departure is applicable to an infill site. An infill site is defined as “The development or redevelopment of vacant, abandoned, or underutilized properties within or wholly surround by the City, and where water, sewer, streets, and fire protection have already been developed and are provided. Infill is development proposed or located within land that has been subdivided for at least 35 years.” This site meets that definition. This criterion is met. Lot coverage Allowed: NA Yes Building height 52’ Allowed: <3:12 – 50’ >3:12 – 60’ Yes Comments: There is no maximum lot coverage. The larger apartment buildings are 52’, with a roof pitch of 12:9 which meets the maximum height limit. Applicable zone specific or overlay standards 38.330-40 NA Comments: The project does not have a zone specific or overlay standards. General land use standards and requirements 38.350 Yes Comments: There are currently two lots underlying the proposed site plan. Prior to final plan approval, the applicant must either aggregate the lots, or perform a boundary line adjustment that locates the lot lines in a manner that comply with all zoning requirements for lot size, dimensions, and setbacks to structures. In addition, reciprocal parking, access and stormwater easements may need to be provided. The parcels must either be aggregated into one lot, or a boundary line adjustment performed prior to final site plan approval. Refer to Code Requirement 1. The design includes front patios with weather protection that encroach 5’ into the front setbacks which is allowed per 38.350.050.A.3. Applicable supplemental use criteria 38.360 NA Supplemental uses/type None NA Comments: Not applicable. Wireless facilities 38.370 NA Affordable Housing 38.380.010 Yes Affordable housing plan Yes Comments: The proposal includes 216 affordable housing units. All units are offered at 60% AMI (Average Medium Income) for Gallatin County for a period of 30 years. The applicant is requesting a shallow incentive in the form of a parking reduction to one stall per dwelling unit which is allowed per BMC 38.380.020.C.3.d. In order to be eligible for the shallow incentives, the project must be providing greater than 5 percent of the homes less than 120% AMI. This project is proposing 100 percent of the homes at 60% AMI, which is meeting the threshold to be eligible for both shallow and deep incentives. Note that while the proposal is eligible for deep incentives, the applicant is only requesting one shallow incentives. In order to be eligible for the incentives, the developer must submit to the city an affordable housing plan (AHP) that includes the information found within BMC 38.380.040.A. The Director of Economic Development (the review authority for the AHP) reviewed and approved the submitted Affordable Housing Plan (AHP) which is required in order to be eligible for the incentives. In addition to the approval of the AFP the applicant is required to enter into a binding contract with the city that is included in a separate 40 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 17 of 22 recorded written agreement between the developer and the city, or incorporated into another recorded document in which the developer is required to implement the AHP. Refer to Conditions of Approval 2 & 3. 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 Level of Service 38.400.060 Transportation grid adequate to serve site Yes Comments: The Engineering Department finds that the adjacent streets exist to serve the site and no additional dedication is required. Sidewalks 38.400.080 Yes Comments: Sidewalks along North 3rd will be provided by the development. Drive access 38.400.090 Access to site: 2 Yes Fire lanes, curbs, signage and striping Yes Comments: The proposal has two drive accesses to public rights-of-way (ROW). There is a connection to North 3rd Avenue to the east as well as North 4th Avenue to the south. Street vision triangle 38.400.100 Yes Transportation pathways 38.400.110 Yes Pedestrian access easements for shared use pathways and similar transportation facilities Yes Public transportation 38.400.120 NA Comments: Street vision triangles were reviewed and determined to be adequate. A pedestrian easement is required to provide access into the park. This pedestrian easement is discussed in further detail under Section 6C. Refer to Code Requirement 3. 6b. Conformance with Article 4 – Community Design Provisions: Community Design and Elements (38.410) Meets Code? Neighborhood centers 38.410.020 NA Comments: The proposed project does not require a neighborhood center. Lot and block standards 38.410.030-040 NA Midblock crossing: rights of way for pedestrians alternative block delineation Yes Comments: A mid-block crossing was not required, however a 25’ easement is required to provide pedestrians access into the park in lieu of park frontage being provided along 100 percent of the park. This 25’ easement will act as a mid-block crossing and improve pedestrian connectivity and break up the length of the block 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 Yes 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 41 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 18 of 22 Other utilities (electric, natural gas, communications) Yes CIL of water rights (CILWR) Yes Comments: In order to ensure adequate public access to Westlake Park, the applicant is providing easements to access the park (Refer to Code Requirement 3). In addition, the applicant is construction a parking pad adjacent to the Community Gardens as well as vehicular drive access adjacent to the BMX Park. These park improvements are required to be completed prior to the first certificate of occupancy. Refer to Code Requirement 5. To satisfy the City’s water adequacy requirement a cash in lieu of water rights (CILWR) must be paid prior to final site plan approval. A preliminary fee determination totals $161,114 however prior to finalizing the fee the landscaping irrigation source and demands must be identified on the plans. If supplied from the City's domestic system then demand will be included in the fee calculation. If a well will be used the demand will be excluded however a pre-determination from the DNRC confirming allowable use of the well must also be provided. The City encourages the use of groundwater wells for irrigation when permitted. Refer to Code Requirement 2. Municipal infrastructure requirements 38.410.070 Yes Comments: Municipal water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer systems proposed with this project have been reviewed by the Engineering Department and have received approval. Water and sewer reports must be finalized and certified by a professional engineer with infrastructure submittal. Refer to Condition of Approval 5. 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: Location, design and capacity of stormwater facilities were reviewed by the Engineering Department and found adequate. Watercourse setback 38.410.100 NA Watercourse setback planting plan 38.410.100.2.f NA Comments: There are no watercourses present on the site, or adjacent to it, thus no setbacks or plantings are required. 6c. Conformance with Article 4 – Community Design Provisions: Park and Recreation Requirements (38.420) Meets Code? Parkland requirements 38.420.020.A 8.02 acres X 8 units/ac = 64 units 64 units – 43 units (credit) = 21 units 21 du x 0.03 ac/du = 0.63 acres of land Yes Cash donation in lieu (CIL) 38.420.030 8.02 x 4 du/ac x 0.03 ac/du = 0.96 acres Yes Improvements in-lieu NA Comments: The subject parcel had a credit from the previous Westlake’s 4th Subdivision Plat which estimated 43 units on the subject parcel, thus there is a credit for 43 units. The applicant has requested to pay cash in lieu (CIL) of parkland dedication for the .63 acres of land owed. The Parks Department concurs with the justification provided by the applicant. In addition to the CIL for parkland owed, the proposal also owes cash in lieu for all units over 8 du/acre (not to exceed 12 du/acre). The combined total of these two CIL requirements will be required to be paid prior to final site plan approval. Refer to Code Requirement 4. In addition, the cover sheet of the submittal is required to provide a parkland tracking table. Prior to final site 42 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 19 of 22 plan approval, the applicant must submit a new cover sheet showing the correct parkland tracking calculations. Refer to Code Requirement 4. Westland Park is immediately to the west and borders the subject parcel. BMC 38.420.060.A states parks must have frontage along 100 percent of its perimeter on public or private streets or roads. The intent of this section is to provide for full public access to all perimeters of parks including bike/ped and vehicular access. In the case of Westlake Park, there are service access issues for the proper functioning of the BMX program and the community gardens that also must be considered in choosing mitigation options. Park Frontage 38.420.060 Yes, with code requirement Park development 38.420.080 NA Recreation pathways 38.420.110 NA Park/Recreational area design NA Comments: The city may consider not less than 50 percent of the perimeter if additional criteria or conditions are met. The applicant is proposing the below mitigation measures: 1. Pathways and drives with public access easement for pedestrians and vehicles east/west and north/south along the internal Drive D. 2. Parking lot service access/pad located east of community gardens. These improvements must be completed prior to certificate of occupancy. Refer to Code Requirement 5 3. Hybrid drive and pathway to the rear of BMX, potentiallyl coinciding with the pathway of the stormwater sewer main. 4. North/south pathway along the west side of the development with public access easement. Refer to Code Requirement 3. 5. to provide pedestrian access in the form of pedestrian easements from N 3rd that travels west into the park and a pedestrian/ vehicular access easement that travels north from N 4th Avenue into the park, generally where the existing community gardens are. Refer to Code Requirement 3. 7a. Conformance with Article 5 – Project Design: Block Frontage Standards (38.510) Meets Code? Block frontage classification Landscape Yes Departure criteria None NA Comments: North 3rd Ave has a landscape block frontage classification. Buildings 1 (clubhouse), 2, 3, and 4 (apartment buildings) all face the N 3rd and are required to meet the landscape block frontage designation. The buildings are placed 15’ back, meeting the 10’ requirement. All buildings have entrances facing the street with adequate weather protection provided. In addition, landscaping is provided as is adequate sidewalks. The parking is located primarily to the rear of the buildings and in the limited cases where it is to the side of the building, adequate screening landscaping has been provided. Building 1 (the clubhouse) is required to have at least 25% transparency between 4’ – 8’ above the sidewalk. There is a proposed 27.5% transparency on the street side. For residential, at least 15% of the entire façade. Windows must be provided on all habitable floors. Buildings 2 & 3 have 19.6% transparency and windows on each habitable floor. Building 4 has 18.2% transparency on street facing side. 43 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 20 of 22 Buildings 5 and 6 have a façade along a park, triggering the trail/park block frontage per 38.510.030.I which they are meeting the requirements for. All of the buildings have a façade that triggers the special residential block frontage standards along sidewalks and internal pathways. This is triggered when a residence with ground floor living spaces faces a sidewalk or pedestrian path in a residential development. The objective of this standard is to ensure privacy and security for residents, and an attractive and safe pathway. The applicant has worked to meet the intent of the special residential block frontage. 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 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 sites non-motorized circulation was found to be adequate. Pedestrian paths are provided through the site as well as connecting entrances to the public rights-of-way. The site is providing public access easements to the park in two locations, as well as a north south connection on the eastern edge of the site (just west of Westlake Park). 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 Yes Comments: The internal drives meet the municipal code standards. On-site open space 38.520.060 Yes Total required 28,400sf (20% reduction) = 22,720sf Yes Total provided 26,238 sf Yes Comments: The applicant is requesting a 20% reduction in required on-site residential open space as the reduction will provide for additional housing. The project was found to meet the applicable criteria found in BMC 38.320.070.C required to allow for the reduction in open space. Refer to Section 5 for additional discussion on required open space departure. The open space is provided via a combination of clubhouse (community / exercise rooms / patio), shared common open space and private patio open space. Location and design of service areas and mechanical equipment 38.520.070 Yes Comments: The trash enclosures are located for convenient access and are appropriately screened from adjacent public common areas, residential areas, as well as upper story residential uses with the trash enclosures covered horizontally as required. 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 44 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 21 of 22 7d. Conformance with Article 5 – Parking (38.540) Meets Code? Parking requirements 38.540.050 Yes, with code requirements Parking requirements residential 38.540.050.A.1 216 Reductions residential 38.540.050.A.1.b See below discussion Parking requirements nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2 NA Reductions nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2.c NA Provided off-street 282 Provided on-street NA Bicycle parking 38.540.050.A.4 33 Comments: The applicant is requesting a shallow incentive in the form of a parking reduction to one stall per dwelling unit which is allowed per BMC 38.380.020.C.3.d. Refer to Section 5 for additional discussion. Using the incentive, the applicant is required to provide on stall per unit, which totals 216 units. The applicant has exceeded the minimum and is providing 282 parking spaces including 8 accessible spaces. The number of bicycle parking spaces required is based on ten percent of the number of parking stalls required before any reductions are taken. Before the shallow incentives were applied, the projects parking calculations required 318 parking spaces, which then required 32 bike parking spaces. The proposal is providing 33 spaces for bikes to park. The applicant is proposing an inverted U bike rack which is an acceptable design. 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: Not required for this project. 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 Yes Additional screening Yes Street frontage Yes Street median island NA Building details, materials, and blank wall treatments 38.530.050-070 Yes Comments: The residential buildings are providing façade articulation through entries, weather protection features, change in building material and style and change in vertical modulation tied to a change in roofline. The largest buildings are approximately 170’ long and required to provide a feature to break up the massing of the building and add visual interest. The building is meeting the option found in BMC 38.530.040.E.2 which is 1. use a contrasting vertical modulated design component that utilizes a change in building materials that effectively contrast from the rest of the façade and 2. Is modulated vertically from the rest of the façade by an average of six inches. The design has articulate building entrances that are clearly defined and scaled proportionally. Where there is a blank wall present (considered a blank wall if it is over ten feet in height, has a horizontal length greater than 15 feet, and does not include a transparent window or door), the applicant has treated it with additional landscape which is an acceptable treatment found in BMC 38.530.070.C. 45 Community Development Board Staff Report North 3rd Apartments Site Plan Application #22375 5/9/2023 Page 22 of 22 Acceptable landscape materials Yes Protection of landscape areas Yes Irrigation: plan, water source, system type Yes Residential adjacency Yes Comments: The project is in conformance with the landscaping requirements, including, but not limited to, minimum drought tolerant species proposed, parking lot landscaping, street frontage landscaping, acceptable landscape materials and street frontage trees. Landscaping of public lands 38.550.070 NA Comments: No landscaping of public lands is required other than the street tree along the frontages. 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 this project. Any future signs proposed will require a sign permit. 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 conforms to the lighting standards found within BMC 38.560. 8. Conformance with Article 6 – Natural Resource Protection Meets Code? Floodplain regulations 38.600 NA Wetland regulations 38.610 NA Comments: There are no mapped or known floodplains or wetlands. 9. Relevant Comment from Affected Parties (38.220) Meets Code? Public Comment Yes Comments: The public comment period will run from May 7 to May 29, 2023. Note the public comment period was extended due to an error in the original noticing mailing that did not include all owners within the 200’ radius. Future summary of the public comment will be provided below. 10. Division of Land Pertaining to Subdivisions (38.240-Part 4) Meets Code? Subdivision exemptions Yes Required easements Yes Comments: All required easements must be provided in an exhibit, approved and recorded prior to final site plan approval. In addition, either a lot aggregation or boundary line adjustment must be performed to ensure the lots are meeting the general land use standards. Refer to Code Requirements 1 and 3. 46 To: Director of Community Development Fr: Brit Fontenot, Director of Economic Development C: Anna Bentley, Director of Community Development Date: April 28, 2023 RE: Approval of Affordable Housing Plan for Community Development Project North Third Apartments Site Plan identified as 22375 Pursuant to Sec. 38.200.010.H, BMC, as the duly appointed Director of Economic Development, I am the review authority for an affordable housing plan submitted pursuant to Chapter 38, Article 3 3, Division 300, BMC. I hereby approve the attached Affordable Housing Plan for the 22375 North Third Apartments Site Plan (the “Project”). I request you include in your approval of the North Third Apartments Site Plan the following conditions: 1. The applicant and owner, if different, must consent to the City recording a summary of the affordable housing plan immediately following conditional approval of the North Third Apartments Site Plan. 2. The applicant and owner, if different, must consent to the City recording an affordable housing covenant that implements the affordable housing plan immediately following condition approval of the North Third Apartments Site Plan. The notice of the affordable housing plan and the restrictive covenant must be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit for the North Third Apartments Site Plan. The proposed project will provide approximately 216 affordable housing units to the City of Bozeman. These units will be a mix of one-, two-, three-, and four-bedroom apartments all income and rent restricted at 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI). The project is seeking new issuance of tax-exempt bonds and 4% Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) through the Montana Board of Housing and will extend the affordability requirements for a period of no less than 30 years. The proposal is utilizing the Shallow Incentives allowed per BMC 38.380 Affordable Housing, which were created to incentivize the increased production of affordable housing to meet the needs of city residents and the goals of the adopted Bozeman Community Plan, and the Community Housing Action Plan. The review authority has approved the Affordable Housing Plan for the N. 3rd Apartments project and finds that the plan includes all information required for the City to confirm compliance with the standards and criteria in BMC 30.380, including the standards in 38.380.030.A Incentives Available. The requested incentives include a reduction in the parking ratio to one stall per dwelling unit. The Affordable Housing Plan has been incorporated by reference in the Site Plan documents. 47 48 49 Memorandum REPORT TO:Community Development Board FROM:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager Erin George, Community Development Deputy Director Anna Bentley, Community Development Director SUBJECT:Review of Bozeman Community Plan 2020, Chapter 5, Criteria for Zoning Amendments MEETING DATE:May 15, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:Receive information 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 Community Development Board considers and make recommendations to the City Commission regarding zone map and text amendments. The state has established criteria which must be the basis for any recommendation. The City adopted the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (BCP2020) in November 2020 as the latest edition of the growth policy. Compliance with the growth policy, BCP2020, is the first criteria of evaluation for any zoning amendment. The BCP2020, Chapter 5, addresses the criteria for amending the growth policy itself as well as criteria for zoning text and map amendments. The public had opportunity to review and comment on the criteria and how they are interpreted during the growth policy development. The City Commission adopted the BCP2020. All application and consideration of amendment criteria need to be consistent with the direction provided in Chapter 5. Staff will go through the zoning criteria in Chapter 5 and review key elements of application. Chapter 5 is attached with this memo item. This review is part of the on-going training provided for the Board and public regarding Community Development Board functions. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:None. 50 FISCAL EFFECTS:None. Attachments: Bozeman_Community_Plan_2020_Chpt_5.pdf Report compiled on: May 10, 2023 51 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN 65 05 05 | AMENDMENTS + REVIEW PLAN AMENDMENTS NEED FOR BALANCE A growth policy must balance consistency with responsiveness to the needs of the community. If the policy is not consistent, it will have little value as a planning tool, nor provide an adequate basis for implementation actions, nor have the confidence of the community. If the policy is not responsive, policies and actions are continued that no longer address community needs, and less than optimal guidance for future actions is provided. This Plan was prepared based on information and circumstances as understood at this time. The nature of planning for the future is imprecise. As situations change it is important that the Plan be reviewed, and when necessary updated, to accommodate future events. 52 66 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN State law requires review and consideration of the need for amendments through Section 76-1-601(3) (f), of the Montana Code Annotated which reads: “(f) an implementation strategy that includes: (i) a timetable for implementing the growth policy; (ii) a list of conditions that will lead to a revision of the growth policy; and (iii) a timetable for reviewing the growth policy at least once every 5 years and revising the policy if necessary;” Assumptions regarding population growth, land use, and other subjects are embedded in the Plan. Significant changes in the rates or the interaction of these items necessitate a review of the Plan; although, a review may find that no changes are needed. Reviews, if properly done, will help to ensure that the information upon which the Plan is based remains accurate and timely and that the goals and objectives of the Plan reflect the desires of the community. Evaluating the existing growth policy text and maps is an essential part of any review. New inventory maps should be made available for consideration during the review process if the new map would display materially changed information. Any review of the growth policy should consider the triggers presented below. Periodic formal and informal reviews of the implementation policies as well as the growth policies themselves are desirable. REVIEW TRIGGERS, AMENDMENTS, AND AMENDMENT CRITERIA REVIEW TRIGGERS The following events require a formal review of the plan: Five years after the plan is adopted it must be reviewed. If a review of the plan is required it should consider: 1. Are the community’s goals current and valid? 2. Have the community conditions or legal framework materially changed? 3. Where have problems appeared since the last review? 4. Can this Plan be modified to better serve the needs and desires of the community? This Plan provides progress indicators as described in Chapter 4. The annual review of those indicators may suggest conducting a review prior to the required five year period. AMENDMENT PROCESS The Bozeman Community Plan was formed on the basis of significant community outreach efforts and the input of many persons and groups. Alterations, whether the result of a review as triggered above or another reason, to the growth policy must provide a significant opportunity for public participation and understanding of the proposed changes. Amendments to the growth policy must meet the same statutory standards as the original adoption. Therefore, prior to the adoption of any amendment to the Plan, a public process must be provided. A fundamental requirement for public participation is time for individuals to become aware of proposed amendments and to study the proposed changes. A minimum active public review period of three months is to be expected. This Plan has been prepared to balance a wide variety of interests. Changes to the Plan must continue the balance of needs and interests. This Plan has been prepared to be internally consistent. Internal consistency meets one of the fundamental purposes of community planning— coordination between government programs and policies. All amendments must be carefully evaluated to ensure that changes do not create conflicts between goals, maps, or implementation tools. If a proposed amendment would cause conflicts within the Plan, additional amendments must be identified and reviewed so that conflicts are resolved. 53 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN 67 WHO MAY INITIATE AMENDMENTS 1. City Commission; independently or at the suggestion of the Planning Board or the City Staff; 2. One or more landowner of property that are the subject of the amendment to the future land use map; and 3. Interested members of the public may suggest modifications to the text. Any proposed changes to either the text or maps contained in this Plan must comply with all of the criteria described below. The burden of proof for the desirability of a proposed amendment and its compliance with the criteria lies with the applicant. Unless all criteria are successfully met by demonstrable facts, an amendment may not be approved. AMENDMENT CRITERIA When an amendment to either the text of the Plan or the future land use map is requested it must be reviewed against the following criteria: 1. The proposed amendment must cure a deficiency in the growth policy or improve the growth policy to better respond to the needs of the general community; 2. The proposed amendment does not create inconsistencies within the growth policy, either between the goals and the maps or between different goals and objectives; 3. The proposed amendment must be consistent with the overall intent of the growth policy; and 4. The proposed amendment may must not adversely affect the community as a whole or any significant portion thereof by : a. Significantly altering land use patterns and principles in a manner contrary to those established by this Plan, b. Requiring unmitigated improvements to streets, water, sewer, or other public facilities or services, thereby impacting development of other lands, c. Adversely impacting existing uses because of inadequately mitigated impacts on facilities or services, or d. Negatively affecting the health and safety of the residents. SUBDIVISION REVIEW Subdivisions set the “bones” for a community by establishing the locations for roads, parks, and lots for development. How a subdivision is designed and reviewed can impact Bozeman’s residents for many years to come. Review must be fair to all, allow for identification and resolution of concerns, and provide meaningful opportunities for participation. INTENT AND BACKGROUND Local governments in Montana must review proposed subdivisions. Section 76-3-101 et seq. Montana Code Annotated governs the review of subdivisions. Section 76-3-501 et seq. MCA requires all municipal and county governments to establish subdivision review regulations and establishes the minimum requirements for those regulations. In addition, Section 76-1-601 MCA requires that a growth policy discuss and address various elements of the subdivision review process. This section meets the requirement. Title 76, Chapter 3 MCA contains the requirements and restrictions upon both public and private parties for subdivision review and platting. For full information on this subject interested parties are referred to Title 76, Montana Code Annotated, and Division 38.240 Unified Development Code, City of Bozeman municipal code. Creation of a subdivision often precedes or accompanies a change in the use of that land. A subdivision generally remains in perpetuity and continues to influence the location and intensity of land uses within and adjacent to the subdivision. Therefore, subdivisions are strongly connected to the planning process and may significantly advance or hinder public goals. Because of this strong influence, all subdivisions must comply with the Bozeman growth policy. The subdivision regulations adopted by the City are to direct and 54 68 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN govern the review and use of land to ensure they conform to the Bozeman growth policy. REVIEW PARTICIPANTS Many agencies and review bodies review subdivisions. Reviews are to be conducted by each agency, as needed. The purpose of these reviews is to verify compliance with the law and identify concerns which may require mitigation. These entities may include, but are not limited to the following: • City staff • Recreation and Parks Advisory Board • Private utilities such as power and telecommunications • Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks • Montana Department of Transportation • Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee • Irrigation companies • Planning Board • Gallatin County DEFINITIONS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES This section defines the six state established primary criteria for subdivision review and provides an overview of how those criteria are used during the review of subdivisions AGRICULTURE Agriculture is defined as follows: The cultivation or tilling of soil or use of other growing medium for the purpose of producing vegetative materials for sale or for use in a commercial operation and/ or the raising or tending of animals for commercial sale or use. Agriculture does not include gardening for personal use, keeping of house pets or animals as authorized under Chapter 8 of the municipal code, service animals as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act, or landscaping for aesthetic purposes. The following presumptions apply: 1. Property annexed or seeking to be annexed within the depicted urban area shown on the future land use map will generally not be utilized for agricultural purposes over the long term. 2. Agriculture may be appropriate within the City in limited areas where physical constraints make an area undesirable for the construction of buildings, or in support of a commercial business such as a plant nursery or a common community garden. 3. Urban density development within the City of Bozeman facilitates the preservation of agriculture in Gallatin County. It provides a location for the development of residential and employment activities in a compact and efficient manner. This reduces pressure to convert agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses in the county. 4. Undeveloped lands within the City not constrained by physical features should be developed at urban densities. This enables infill development and reduces outward expansion of the City. AGRICULTURAL WATER USER FACILITIES Agricultural water user facilities are defined as follows: Those facilities, which include but are not limited to ditches, pipes, and other water- conveying facilities that provide water for irrigation and stock watering on agricultural lands, with said lands being defined in MCA 15-7-202 The following presumptions apply: 1. Agricultural uses are not generally urban uses. The transition of agricultural lands to urban uses will often remove the need for agricultural water user facilities within the urbanized area. Where a need for protection due to ongoing use for water conveyance can be demonstrated, provision for protection of the facility must be made. 2. The formal abandonment and removal of all agricultural water user facilities within the City must occur in accordance with Montana law. Should the beneficial use cease in the future, an easement for protection of agricultural water user facilities may be removed. 3. The use of agricultural water user facilities 55 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN 69 for stormwater does not constitute beneficial use for the purposes of presumption 2 above unless agreed to by the facility owner. Stormwater facilities may require separate easements or other procedures. 4. Agricultural Water User Facilities are subject to Section 70-17-112, and Section 85-7-2211 and 85-7-2212, MCA. LOCAL SERVICES Local Services mean all services provided by governmental bodies for the benefit of residents. This includes, but is not limited to, police, fire, water, recreation, streets, parks, libraries, schools, wastewater, and solid waste collection and disposal. Those criteria to which a specific response and evaluation of impact must be made are listed within the City subdivision regulations. The following presumptions apply: 1. When the City assessed needs and the means of addressing those needs, subdividers will not be required to duplicate that work without good cause. If the City has completed a portion of a required assessment, the subdivider may be required to submit the remaining portion of the necessary information. 2. Capacity and capability in local services is limited. All development shall equitably participate in providing adequate services for itself, including replacement of consumed reserve capacity. Development shall meet levels of service and facility design standards established by the City. 3. Response times, physical space within facilities, compliance with applicable facility Plans, and general design of local service facilities within proposed subdivisions shall be addressed during the preliminary plat review and necessary mitigation is to be provided. 4. Lack of adequate service capacity and capability within local services is grounds for denial of subdivision approval when impacts of proposed subdivisions are not mitigated. EFFECT ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT The natural environment is defined as the physical conditions which exist within a given area, including land, water, mineral, flora, fauna, noise, light, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. The following presumptions apply: 1. The natural environment is fundamentally linked with our economic development, as an attraction to new and expanding businesses, a tourist destination, and a basic component of Bozeman’s character. 2. The natural environment should be conserved and development should respect significant natural features and systems. Impacts to consider include road locations, stormwater treatment and discharges, potential contamination of ground or surface water, building placement, and others that may be identified through subdivision, zoning, data inventories, and other implementation tools. Mitigation of negative development impacts is required. WILDLIFE AND WILDLIFE HABITAT Wildlife means animals that are neither human, domesticated, nor feral descendants of commonly domesticated animals. Wildlife habitat means the place or type of habitat where wildlife naturally thrives. Habitat excludes areas developed for human use including agriculture. The following presumptions apply: 1. Lands within the designated urban area are typically utilized for development purposes and will have a minor impact on wildlife habitat. Watercourse corridors and wetlands are an exception to this presumption. The designated urban area includes all lands except the No City Services category shown on the future land use map. 2. The habitat needs of larger and/or predatory wildlife species such as deer, moose, bears, coyotes, or similar species will not be met within urban density development and will likely be in conflict with people. Therefore, 56 70 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN these types of animals are found to be undesirable within the City boundaries. 3. Smaller species, especially birds, are compatible within urban density development and should be preserved, including the encouragement of suitable habitats. 4. High value wetlands, stream corridors, and similar high value habitats should be preserved in accordance with the City’s adopted standards. These provide a variety of recreational, environmental sustainability, and safety values such as flood control as well as habitat. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY Public health and safety means a condition of optimal well-being, free from danger or injury, for a community at large, as well as for an individual or small groups. The following presumptions apply: 1. Health is a comprehensive subject and threats to health include chronic as well as acute hazards. 2. Subdivision design should encourage physical activity and a healthy community. 3. The creation of hazards to public health and safety are not acceptable and appropriate mitigation must be provided. 4. Some level of risk is always present despite efforts to prevent harm. Developments are not solely responsible for the correction of risks common to all. They should equitably participate in common solutions to common problems. However, the presence of common risks, such as inadequate public services, may prevent approval of a development until the hazard has been removed or corrected. The developer of a subdivision may not accept hazards to public health and safety on behalf of future residents or owners of a subdivision by declaring that necessary infrastructure improvements or other actions are unnecessary. PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES An important part of the subdivision review process is the opportunity to offer comments on the proposal. Comments may be given by any interested person. This opportunity is formally provided by the public comment/hearing process. Persons for, against, or seeking information about the proposal may send written comments to the City for transmittal to the appointed or elected officials who review the subdivision, or they may speak at a public hearing. The public hearing, when one is required by state law, on a subdivision proposal may be held by either the Planning Board and/or the City Commission. Planning Board makes the recommendation to the City Commission regarding the proposed subdivision’s compliance with the Bozeman Community Plan. Regardless of which body holds a hearing, a similar procedure is required. Generally, the format for a subdivision public hearing is as follows: 1. The public hearing will be advertised as required by state law and Divisions 38.220 and 38.240 of the City of Bozeman Municipal Code. 2. The public hearing will be conducted at the time and place advertised. 3. A report on the project by the Department of Community Development, including an analysis of compliance with the Plan, regulatory standards and a recommendation of approval, denial, or approval with conditions is given. 4. Presentation by the applicant and the applicant’s representative(s). 5. Questions from the Commission or Planning Board to staff or the applicant. 6. The public hearing/comment is opened with persons able to speak for, against, or to seek additional information from applicant or staff. A time limit may be established for each speaker. The public is encouraged to provide a factual basis for their support or opposition to a subdivision and base their 57 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN 71 comments on subdivision review criteria. 7. When all persons have had opportunity to speak, the public hearing/comment will be closed and the Commission or Planning Board will then return to its discussion of the project. They will evaluate the application materials, the staff report, public testimony, and the requirements of subdivision law and regulations. The Commission or Planning Board may inquire of staff, applicants, or the public for clarification or additional information in order to complete their evaluation. 8. The Planning Board will forward a recommendation to the City Commission. 9. The City Commission will make their decision on record during the review of the subdivision. The record includes all application materials, staff review, public comments, and other materials provided prior to the Commission’s action. 10. When the City Commission has rendered their decision, the City will prepare findings of fact which establish the official record and decision. 11. An approval or denial of a subdivision may be appealed to the District Court after a final decision has been rendered. Appeals are subject to state law requirements. ZONING AMENDMENT REVIEW Zoning establishes many of the standards and review processes for the use of land. Amendments to zoning change the rules with consequence. Therefore, zoning amendments are reviewed deliberately and in public. Review must be fair to all, allow for identification and resolution of concerns, and provide meaningful opportunities for participation. INTENT AND BACKGROUND Sections 76-2-301, et seq., Montana Code Annotated, authorizes local governments to adopt zoning. As each community uses zoning differently, the authorization identifies certain purposes and processes but leaves most of the details to each community. Chapter 38, Unified Development Code, City of Bozeman municipal code outlines local details. “76-2-301. Municipal zoning authorized. For the purpose of promoting health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the community, the City or town council or other legislative body of cities and incorporated towns is hereby empowered to regulate and restrict the height, number of stories, and size of buildings and other structures; the percentage of lot that may be occupied; the size of yards, courts, and other open spaces; the density of population; and the location and use of buildings, structures, and land for trade, industry, residence, or other purposes.” WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE ZONED? It means the City has adopted standards and procedures for the development and use of property within the City. Zoning indicates the character of an area by applying use and development standards to an individual property. Essentially, zoning addresses public safety, public welfare, and compatibility between uses. Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code is the zoning code. The City applies standards and procedures to individual properties through the zoning map. The City will not modify those standards and procedures without public notice and participation. The City does not represent or commit to anyone that the standards and procedures will not change. HOW IS ZONING APPLIED TO PROPERTY? The zoning map shows the designation that applies to each property. The zoning map covers the entire area within City boundaries. The zoning district map assigns a designation to each property in the City. Once applied, the standards and procedures for each district apply to land designated within each district until the City amends the map or text of Chapter 38. Since 1935, the City has adopted a change to the zoning map or text over 500 times including replacing 58 72 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN the entire code 19 times. The most recent overall replacement took effect in March 2018. WHO CAN CHANGE THE ZONING TEXT OR MAP? Only the City Commission can approve an amendment and only after notifying the public of the possible change and giving people a chance to participate in the change. As a legislative action, amendments are made through a process called a “map” or a “text” amendment. There is a defined public process for amendments to occur. See below for a summary of that process. The process to initiate amendments is established in 38.260, BMC. The City has created a process for anyone to suggest potential changes. WHAT IS NEEDED TO JUSTIFY A CHANGE IN A ZONING DISTRICT MAP OR TEXT? A change to the zoning text or map is a legislative action. The City Commission can initiate or approve amendments when they believe they are appropriate. In determining whether to begin a City initiated amendment, the Commission can consider broad legislative factors such as the passage of time, changes in the needs of the community, outside actions like court decisions or new laws, whether the existing map or text is reaching the intended outcome, and changes like installation of new infrastructure. Some examples include the following: a. Changes to state or federal law that the zoning must address or if it is in conflict with the changes, zoning must address. b. Court decisions changing the interpretation of meaning of the law that interacts with zoning. c. Change in circumstances including the current zoning does not comply with the City’s adopted Community Plan (i.e. its growth policy), policies within the Growth Policy have changed, land is annexed, or infrastructure is newly available. d. An owner requests the change and the request meets required standards. Items a and b are most likely to generate changes in the text; items c and d are more likely to generate changes in the zoning map. In considering zoning map amendments, the City’s longstanding practice is to consider item d as an adequate justification for consideration of a zoning map change. In doing so, the applicant/property owner must demonstrate the requested change meets the required criteria and guidelines for an amendment. The City’s zoning establishes what responsibilities exist, such as controlling stormwater, and requires people to meet those responsibilities. Zoning also addresses the balance of interests between adjacent properties by defining districts where similar uses can be compatible and providing for transitions and buffers between zoning districts where the City determines it is necessary to control impacts and prevent the use of one person’s property right from inappropriately impacting another. When such protections are in place it is appropriate for the property owner to have an opportunity to ask for changes to zoning. If an owner does not show that criteria and guidelines are successfully met the City Commission can choose not to approve the change. This does not prevent the City from initiating a change on its own. To provide transparency in decision making, accountability, and public participation the zoning map or text amendment process requires public notice and hearings. Before any action to approve an amendment, the Commission must address the criteria, which provide guidance in deciding whether an amendment is acceptable. WHEN DOES THE CITY INITIATE ZONING CHANGES TO INCREASE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES? The City Commission may initiate an amendment to the zoning map to enable additional development in a specific area. In examining whether to do so, the Commission may consider many factors including but not limited to the following: • The existing zone district does not match the 59 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN 73 growth policy future land use map in Chapter 3. • Forty percent or more of the existing uses within an area are not principal uses within the zone district presently in place. • There is 40% or more available sewer capacity and there is less than 10% vacant land within the sewer drainage area. • Proximity to parks that are larger than 1 acre. • Vacant annexed areas which are 10 acres or larger in size. • Areas within ¼ mile of MSU (roughly 4 blocks) and not in a National Register Historic District. • Revising zoning boundaries to better follow preferred dividing lines such as streets or watercourses. • Request of multiple landowners in the area. • Available capacity in the water plant and water reclamation facilities and permits. REVIEW CRITERIA FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS AND THEIR APPLICATION This section includes the four criteria and five guidelines for zoning amendments. These are from state law. This section gives an overview of how those criteria and guidelines apply during the review of individual zoning map amendments. Section 76-2-304 of state law establishes the criteria, section (1), and guidelines, section (2), for the creation and amendment of zoning. Due to the range of subjects, the applicability of any individual criterion may be of more or less importance. The City Commission must evaluate whether the applicable criteria are met, not applicable, or if the benefits of the change offset negative impacts. Below is the state statute that provide the criteria and guidelines for zoning decisions: 76-2-304. CRITERIA AND GUIDELINES FOR ZONING REGULATIONS. 1. Zoning regulations must be: a. Made in accordance with a growth policy; and b. Designed to: i. Secure safety from fire and other dangers; ii. Promote public health, public safety, and the general welfare; and 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: a. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air; b. The effect on motorized and nonmotorized transportation systems; c. Promotion of compatible urban growth; d. The character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses; and e. Conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. HOW THE CRITERIA AND GUIDELINES ARE APPLIED 76-2-304(1) criteria. Under state law, (1) zoning regulations must be “(a) made in accordance with a growth policy.” This criterion gives the Commission latitude. Zoning map amendments’ are to correlate to the future land use map. Beyond that, policy statements such as goals and objectives are weighed. In a text amendment, policy statements weigh heavily as the standards being created or revised implement the growth policy’s aspirations and intent. The City must balance many issues in approving urban development. Therefore, it is not unusual if there is some tension between competing priorities, even if there is no explicit contradiction of policy. As shown in the state statute, zoning must also “(b) be designed to”: i. Secure safety from fire and other dangers; ii. Promote public health, public safety, and the general welfare; and iii. Facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements. 60 74 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN For a map amendment, all three of the above elements are addressed primarily by the City’s long range facility Plans, the City’s capital improvements program, and development standards adopted by the City. The standards set minimum sizing and flow requirements, require dedication of parks, provision of right of way for people and vehicles, keep development out of floodplains, and other items to address public safety, etc. It is often difficult to assess these issues in detail on a specific site. For example, at the time of annexation, the final intensity of development is unknown and it may be many years before development occurs and the impacts are experienced. The availability of other planning and development review tools must be considered when deciding the degree of assurance needed to apply an initial zoning at annexation. The City’s building codes reduce reliance on zoning to address other elements of public safety. For example, requirements for fire sprinklers for larger buildings are addressed in the building codes, but not in the zoning code. In addition, the subdivision review process outline’s the backbone for public infrastructure. This includes most water, sewer, stormwater, and street facilities. Development review under zoning procedures gives a final check on infrastructure capacity when there is a known intended intensity of use and condition of facilities. Considering what infrastructure is already present, such as in infill situations, or whether placing one zoning district next to another may reduce travel distances and increase walkability, are also factors that can play into this criterion. It is not only about production of more, but also of best use of public facilities. If a proposed change to the map is contrary to the facility plans, or causes substantial inadequacy over the long term, then denial of the amendment may be warranted. (2) In the adoption of zoning regulations, the municipal governing body shall consider the following: (a) Reasonable provision of adequate light and air; Bozeman has established generally applicable standards for setbacks, park dedication, on-site open space, and building design standards to address this requirement. This is done during the creation of the zoning text. Therefore, when considering changes to the map, this issue is addressed for all districts. In addition, the building codes have standards for ingress and egress, ventilation, and related subjects that further support delivery of adequate light and air. Care is needed if the City revises the standards themselves. (b) The effect on motorized and nonmotorized transportation systems; This guideline looks at the anticipated change that may occur due to the amendment. It does not require there be less of an impact than from the existing condition, whether it be text or map that is the focus. The City relies upon its long- range transportation plan to evaluate transportation needs over the long term for motorized vehicles as well as bikes and pedestrians. The park and trail plan also considers options for extending the trail network. Plans are periodically updated to ensure they are applicable to current conditions. Review of development proposals such as subdivisions or site development look at the transportation, park and trail, and facility plans, consider existing conditions, and requires the additional on and off-site improvements needed to meet the additional demand expected from new development. Development creates or funds many of the City’s local streets, intersection upgrades, and trails. Therefore, although a text or map 61 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN 75 amendment may allow more intense development than before, compliance with the adopted Plans and standards will provide adequate capacity to offset that increase. The City’s development standards require on-site parking for bicycles and motor vehicles and pedestrian circulation within each site. Articles 38.4 and 38.5 of the UDC regulate parking and circulation. If the Commission considers a substantial change to the standards it must examine the cumulative impacts. The capacity of a street to handle traffic can be viewed differently by local residents, traffic engineers, and Planners. The long-range transportation plan establishes the standards for what is “too much” on each class of road. The impact of additional development is not excessive so long as the planned capacity of the road is not exceeded. New development contributes to the creation of additional capacity through dedication of right of way, construction or reconstruction of streets, payment of impact fees, and other contributions as may be applicable to a specific project. These requirements may mitigate the impacts of additional development. Development that is more intense requires greater transportation capacity. Therefore, it is good, but not required, to have more intensive districts near arterial and collector roads. (c) Promotion of compatible urban growth; This guideline focuses on what happens at the edge of the City, as well as what occurs in the heart of the City. Section 38.700.040, BMC defines the factors considered in determining compatibility. This definition explicitly rejects uniformity as being necessary for compatibility. Compatibility is considered within and between districts. The determination of compatibility takes place at several levels, including 1) what uses are allowed within each district, 2) creation of standards for new development to lessen impacts to adjacent land/persons, 3) creation of building and site design standards, and 4) application of future land use areas through the community plan and development of the zoning map. When the Commission considers a text amendment, the majority of the focus is on items 1 through 3, above. 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. An example is stormwater management where a certain minimum level of control is required, but there are many acceptable alternative methods to address the issue. When considering zoning map amendments, the Commission first looks at the future land use map created by the growth policy. See discussion under Criterion 1(a) above. The planning process refers to high level various policies to identify community priorities. In Bozeman’s case, those policies consistently emphasize quality of development, infill in a manner that allows for additional intensification over time, connecting land development to other community priorities like multi-modal transportation, cost efficient user-pays provision of facilities, 62 76 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN and reasonable incremental development at the City edge. These and other policies influence the layout of the future land use map. 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. This is seen in the older areas of the City, which were built before zoning. 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. (d) The character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses; and The second element of this guideline reflects the application of the statutory criteria to a wide diversity of purposes and communities. Some land has a unique physical attribute that makes it more appropriate for one use than another. That attribute may be inherent in the land itself or due to proximity to something else. For example, the City’s land adjacent to the East Gallatin River is well suited for the Parks and Open Lands and the Public Institutions districts because it supports both recreational functions in Story Mill Park and an essential water treatment role at the Water Reclamation Facility. The character of a district is seen from two different viewpoints. First, when considering an amendment to the text, the integration of a proposed change is evaluated with the other standards, purposes, and criteria of site review. If the new change conflicts with other text, then the new change should be rejected, or other revisions made, so that the overall standards for a given district support one another. 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. A zoning district change for land already within the City requires greater consideration of the current actual and possible environment. Most of Bozeman has zoning that allows more development than the current owners utilize. This reflects many personal preferences and economic decisions. There is no specified distance in state law or local code outside of the boundary of a map amendment that describes the “district” to be considered. The City provides direct notice to landowners out to 200 feet from the outer boundary of the area to be given a new zoning designation by the map amendment. This is notice, not the distance that dictates the extent of the analysis. Impacts from a zoning change may be less or more than 200 feet depending on the nature of the change and what already exists. State law recognizes that persons owning land within 150 feet have a unique interest in the decision to rezone and gives them the ability to protest the zoning. It is notable that the protest does not stop a rezoning, but requires a greater majority of the Commission to approve. If there is adequate reason for the change, it can go forward. Nothing in the zoning amendment or site review criteria requires the Commission 63 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN 77 restrict one owner because an adjacent owner chooses to not use all zoning potential. The City is not obligated to enforce or recognize any privately imposed restrictions, such as a covenant, on land. Such restrictions are not subject to the same public notice or participation requirements as City actions. Landowners have both rights and obligations. To find that an amendment application should be approved, the application materials and review need show the amendment meets the required criteria for approval. This is a very site specific evaluation and may consider but is not obligated to give preference to what adjacent owners have chosen to do with their property. 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. The City Commission must consider several items in its decision on a zone map amendment. First, the Commission must consider the nature of the dominant uses allowed in a district compared with adjacent properties. For example, are they both residential or is one residential and another non-residential. Bozeman has an existing pattern of diverse zoning districts in proximity to each other. Second, the Commission should consider differences in allowed intensity between the districts such as differences in height, setbacks, or lot coverage. The greater the difference the more likely conflict is possible. An incremental change between two similar districts may, for example, have the same setbacks and very similar maximum heights. Next, the Commission must decide whether a larger community benefit exists such as locating a fire station where it will serve the adjacent property but is different from the surrounding zoning. Finally, the Commission must ask what separates one zone from another. The City strives to locate zoning boundaries along visible and natural dividing lines such as streets, trail corridors, creeks, or parks. At a minimum, zoning boundaries should follow property boundaries. The greater the physical separation, the less likely there may be a conflict. For example, a local street, typically 60 feet wide, when combined with the standards for site development, is generally considered an adequate separation—even for substantially different districts. (e) Conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. There are two elements to this guideline. First, conserving the value of buildings applies to changes that may lessen the functional utility of a property. Changes that increase opportunities on a property are unlikely to fail this test. Some reduction in value can happen with adequate justification. Requiring a development to mitigate impacts on its site that lowers development potential is acceptable. The need for that mitigation must be demonstrated. Assertions that allowing a more intensive zoning may lessen values on adjacent properties is best addressed under the guideline regarding the character of the district. The financial value of land changes constantly based on many factors. Properties considered undesirable at one time may be sought after as circumstances change or the reverse. Value may be primarily in the eye of the beholder and not supported by neutral and objective evaluation. There is no defined decline in financial value or utility that proves an automatic failure of this guideline. 64 78 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN Encouraging the most appropriate use of land connects back to criterion 1(a) and the growth policy and guideline 2(d) and peculiar suitability for particular uses. The future land use map and policies of the growth policy should merge to establish priorities for land use that consider whether a given location is genuinely unique. There are circumstances where combinations of uses, such as high density housing close to employment, community amenities, and transportation, reinforce each other. PUBLIC REVIEW AND HEARING PROCEDURES An amendment to the zoning text or map can be initiated by a property owner or by the City Commission. Division 38.260, BMC has the requirements for initiating an amendment. A general outline of the public hearing process for an application follows. As a legislative process, the City Commission has discretion in making their decision. An important part of the amendment review process is the opportunity to offer comments on the proposal. Any interested person or group may give comments. The public hearing process formally provides this opportunity. Persons for, against, or merely seeking information about the proposal may submit comments to the appointed or elected officials who must review the request. The required public hearings on a zoning amendment are by the Zoning Commission and the City Commission. The Zoning Commission gives a recommendation to the City Commission regarding the proposed amendment’s compliance with the review criteria. The typical format for a public hearing on a zoning amendment follows: 1. The public hearing is advertised as required by state law and Division 38.220 of the City of Bozeman Municipal Code. Written public comments may be submitted to the City prior to the beginning of the public hearing. 2. The public hearing will be conducted at the time and place advertised. 3. A report on the review by the Department of Community Development, including an analysis of compliance with the growth policy, review criteria, and a recommendation of approval or denial is provided. 4. Presentation by applicant and applicant’s representative(s). In the event the amendment is initiated by the City, this is usually the same as step 3 above. 5. Questions from the City Commission or Zoning Commission to staff or applicant 6. The public hearing is opened with persons able to speak for, against, or to seek additional information from the applicant or staff. A time limit may be established for each speaker. Commenters may also submit comments in writing. The public is encouraged to provide in their comments a factual basis related to specific review criteria for their support or opposition to an amendment. 7. When all persons have had opportunity to speak, the public hearing will be closed and the City Commission or Zoning Commission will then return discussion of the project to themselves. They will evaluate the application materials, the staff report, public written and spoken testimony, and the amendment review criteria and procedures. The City Commission or Zoning Commission may inquire of staff, applicants, or the public for clarification or additional information in order to complete their evaluation. 8. A majority of a Zoning Commission quorum is adequate to render a decision. The Zoning Commission forwards a recommendation to the City Commission. 9. After the City Commission has conducted their public hearing, they make their decision on the record established during the public hearing. This includes the application materials, staff report, Zoning Commission 65 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNiTY PLAN 79 recommendation, public comments, and all other relevant material presented during the review. 10. When the City Commission has rendered their decision the process for a formal two- step ordinance adoption as required in state law is required before any amendment is final. An approval or denial of amendment may be appealed to District Court after a final decision has been rendered. Appeals are subject to the requirements of state law. 66 Memorandum REPORT TO:Community Development Board FROM:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager Erin George, Community Development Deputy Director Anna Bentley, Community Development Director SUBJECT:Overview of 2023 Montana Legislative Session and Impacts on On-Going City of Bozeman Code Update Work MEETING DATE:May 15, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative RECOMMENDATION:Receive information STRATEGIC PLAN:4.1 Informed Conversation on Growth: Continue developing an in-depth understanding of how Bozeman is growing and changing and proactively address change in a balanced and coordinated manner. BACKGROUND:The Montana Legislature meets for 90 days every two years in odd numbered years. The 2023 legislative session concluded on May 2nd and was the longest session in many years. It was an active session with many bills relating to land use and development being introduced. Information on the legislative process and the number of bills in this and prior sessions is attached. Bozeman staff actively monitor bills and coordinate engagement through the City's legislative team. Bills frequently require multiple reviews as they are amended through the process. The Governor convened a task force on housing in 2022. That taskforce issued a report making recommendations ranging from additional funding and staff for development related state agencies, funding for infrastructure, and requirements/limitations on local communities and development processes. Many bills were introduced relating to local land use control and regulations. Quite a few did not proceed past the committee stage, some came back as amendments to other bills, and some proceeded to Governor's signature. A strong theme of bill language was to encourage creation of additional housing in the state. Bozeman has been very active in supporting creation of housing as shown in the current and past growth policy, code amendments, and Community Housing Action Plan. Attached is a listing of bills that were introduced and acted upon related to community development. It was updated on May 9th.Those bills which passed must now proceed to the Governor for approval or veto. This is a subset of 791 bills relating to local government that Bozeman tracked, and 67 126 drafts and bills related to land use and planning. As you will see in the titles, several of the bills directly affect areas of the UDC update. Full text of all bills and status updates are available through the Legislature's website, https://leg.mt.gov/ (External link). Impacts of the bills varies widely. For example, HB 299 requires municipalities to allow construction of tiny homes on permanent foundations. Bozeman already allows this, has adopted the necessary building codes for such buildings, and has authorized construction of multiple such homes. Therefore impact is minimal. HB 724, expands requirements for how noticing is provided for public meeting agendas. Bozeman's standard practice already meets the standard. Other bills create modifications in review processes. For example, SB 170 creates an administrative review process for minor subdivisions that previously were required to be decided by the City Commission. Other subdivision review elements such as the three step review process and findings of fact were not changed by the bill. Some bills, like SB 241, directly conflict with UDC update policy direction to support sustainability by prohibiting certain requirements for installation of sustainability features like solar panels. A person could still choose to install panels but the City can't require it. The bill with the potential greatest impact is SB 382. This bill has not been acted on by the Governor as of the writing of this memo. SB 382 establishes new processes for planning, subdivision, and zoning that Bozeman and 9 other larger cities must follow. Other local governments could choose to use the procedures authorized by the bill. The bill replaces all the existing processes and authorization previously applicable to Bozeman for planning, subdivision, and zoning. It is about 52 pages long and addresses many subjects. The bill places strong emphasis on public planning and analysis of impacts early followed by robust public engagement during creation of implementing regulations. Review of specific developments, including subdivisions, will be primarily administrative action including exceptions to standards. Bozeman's zoning already has primary review responsibility at the administrative level so this will be a modest change for the majority of projects. Subdivision review would be substantially impacted. The City Commission continues to be the decision maker for the growth policy, text amendments, and zone map amendments. As shown on page 19 of the growth policy, Bozeman addresses many potential development impacts through a variety of planning documents. SB 382 establishes requirements for public engagement and use of those plans in the development review process. If approved by the Governor, the Community Development Board would have a role in reviewing these "issue plans" prior to any Commission action to amend or adopt such plans. This would be a substantial additional work item for the Board and the next annual work plan would be adjusted to reflect this state change. SB 382 has a timeframe for implementation that keys to five years from the 68 last time the growth policy was updated. This means implementation by November 2025. The City can pursue a sooner implementation. An incremental implementation may be required due to the amount of work necessary. Staff will continue to monitor the bill's status and will finalize an implementation plan once final status is known. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:None FISCAL EFFECTS:No funds are used with this item. Attachments: 2023 Legislative Summary.pdf 2023 Legislative Statistics.pdf MT - How Bill Becomes Law.pdf Report compiled on: May 10, 2023 69 2023 MT Legislation With Status and Effective Date Updated May 9, 2023 Bill # Subject Status Effective Date HJ 15  Study for shared use paths Died in standing committee HJ 22 Interim study of accessory dwellings Died in process HJ 34 Short Term Rentals Died in process HJ 35 Interim study of permitting process Died in process HB 114 Revise timelines for water right permit process Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Jan‐24 HB 187  Private covenants ‐ daycare is residential use Signed ‐ Effective Passage and approval HB 211 Subdivision review process Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Oct‐23 HB 241 Restrict requirement for solar panels or EV chargers Governor action pending 1‐Oct‐23 HB 246  Require allowance for tiny homes on permanent foundations Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Oct‐23 HB 299 Enforcement of zoning ordinances Signed ‐ Effective Passage and approval HB 337 Minimum lot sizes ‐ restrict local authority Tabled in Committee HB 364 Subdivision reviews ‐ DEQ and extension of municipal utilities Governor action pending 1‐Jan‐24 HB 369 Require referrendum for growth policy adoption or amendment Tabled in Committee HB 465 Revise use of building permit revenues Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Oct‐23 HB 483 Subdivision exemptions ‐occassional sale Tabled in Committee HB 553 ADU ‐ zoning preemption Tabled in Committee HB 606 Home based businesses ‐ limit local authority Tabled in Committee HB 642 Exempt wells Tabled in Committee HB 675 Consolidation of water and sewer districts Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Oct‐23 HB 724  Public notice requirements for agendas Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Oct‐23 HB 748 Zoning authorization to separate uses Vetoed HB 825 affordable housing funding Missed transmittal HB 874 Amend subdivision exemption costs Governor action pending 1‐Oct‐23 HB 914 Annexation and non‐conforming uses, contract conflicts of interest Died in process HP 918 DPHHS daycare registration and relation to zoning Governor action pending SB 72 Judicial administration of water rights Tabled in Committee SB 94 Recovery residences Governor action pending 1‐Oct‐23 SB 131 change subdivision exemption review timelines Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Oct‐23 SB 142 Impact fees ‐ refunds and claims Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Jan‐24 SB 152 Revise tract of record requirements for subdivision Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Oct‐23 SB 158 Subdivision exemption review Signed ‐ Effective Passage and approval SB 170 Minor subdivision review  Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Oct‐23 SB 178 Restrict zoning re cryptocurrency Signed ‐ Effective Passage and approval SB 195 Building code fire sprinkler and religious usage temporary Signed ‐ Effective Passage and approval SB 208 Limit local restrictions on energy choices Signed ‐ Effective Passage and approval SB 215 Requirement to connect water sewer from outside user Signed ‐ Effective Passage and approval SB 220 Annexation of infrastructure and parks Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Oct‐23 SB 228 Prohibit local bans on petroleum fuels   Signed ‐ Effective Passage and approval SB 240 Subdivision sanitation review exemption Signed ‐ Effective Passage and approval SB 245 Zoning requirement to allow multiple dwelling in commercial areas Governor action pending Passage and approval SB 247 Covenant enforcement limitations Governor action pending Passage and approval SB 262 Business licensing limits Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Oct‐23 SB 268  Short Term Rentals Died in process SB 285  Sanitation in subdivision exemptions Governor action pending Passage and approval SB 319 Subdivision exemptions Tabled in Committee SB 323 Require multiple home buildings  in all residential districts Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Jan‐24 SB 327 Water well location in setbacks Governor action pending Passage and approval SB 331  Subdivsion exemption for condominiums Signed ‐ Effective Passage and approval SB 335 Fraternity placement near campus Tabled in Committee SB 376 Covenant duration and renewal ‐ recheck Tabled in Committee SB 379 Zoning restrictions Tabled in Committee SB 382 Replace all planning, subdivision, and zoning enabling acts Governor action pending Passage and approval SB 406 Only state adopted building codes may be used Signed ‐ Effective 1‐Oct‐23 SB 407 Limit use of board in application review Governor action pending 1‐Oct‐23 SB 467 Short Term Rentals Postponed Indefinately SB 500 Uniform duration of latecomer agreements Tabled in Committee SB 517 STR fee to fund housing Tabled in Committee SB 528 Accessory dwellings required and standards limited Governor action pending 1‐Jan‐24 70 71 72 DIAGRAM OF HOW A BILL PROGRESSES THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS VETO SIGN INTO LAW INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION GOVERNOR VOTES INTRODUCED IN SENATE INTRODUCED IN HOUSE FLOOR ACTION FLOOR ACTION REFERRED TO SENATE COMMITTEE COMMITTEE HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT 2ND READING 3RD READING3RD READING 2ND READING COMMITTEE REPORT COMMITTEE HEARING REFERRED TO HOUSE COMMITTEE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE HOUSE BILL SENATE BILL 73 HOW A BILL BECOMES A LAW The following 23-step description provides a narrative detail of how a bill becomes law. Step 1. Introduction. Bill is filed for introduction with Secretary of Senate or Chief Clerk of House. Step 2. First reading. Bill's title is posted, and bill is ordered printed on white paper. Step 3. Committee reference. Bill is referred to proper committee by Senate President or House Speaker. Referral is posted. Step 4. Committee consideration. Committee holds public hearing on bill, then discusses it. May vote to amend bill. Step 5. Committee report. Committee reports its recommendation that bill "do pass", "do pass as amended", or "do not pass". Step 6. Placed on calendar. Simple "do pass" and "do not pass" reports are printed as such in journal. Text of amendments reported by committee is printed in full. Bills receiving favorable reports are printed on yellow paper in first house (tan paper in second house), incorporating any reported amendments, and are placed on calendar for second reading. Bills with "do not pass" reports are not placed on second-reading calendar unless a motion is made to that effect and passed. If "do not pass" report is adopted, bill drops out of further consideration. Step 7. Second reading. Entire body debates bill as "Committee of the Whole". Amendments may be offered and voted on. Bill defeated here drops out of further consideration. Step 8. Placed on third-reading calendar. Bill approved by Committee of the Whole is ordered printed on blue paper in first house (salmon paper in second house), incorporating all amendments made up to that point. (This is known as an "engrossed" bill.) Step 9. Third reading. Bill subjected to simple "yes" or "no" vote by entire body, in which (by constitutional requirement) each member's vote must be recorded and printed in journal. No amendments may be considered. Bill defeated here drops out of further consideration. Step 10. Transmittal to other house. Same as Step 1 introduction, except other house works with blue copy. Step 11. First reading. Summary of title and history is posted. Step 12. Committee reference. See Step 3. Step 13. Committee consideration. See Step 4. Step 14. Committee report. Second-house committee phrases a favorable report as "be concurred in" or "be concurred in, as amended". Unfavorable report is "be not concurred in". Step 15. Placed on calendar. Same as Step 6, except that instead of a yellow-paper copy, bill is prepared for second reading with committee amendments to blue copy included in bill and printed on tan paper. Bill with unfavorable report is not placed on calendar unless committee recommendation is reversed by full body. Step 16. Second reading. Same as Step 7. Step 17. Placed on third-reading calendar. Same as Step 8, except reference bill is reprinted on salmon-colored paper and includes all amendments made in second house. Step 18. Third reading. Same as Step 9. Step 19. Bill passed by both houses in identical form. Enrolled and sent to Governor. Step 20. Bill passed by both houses in differing forms: Second house returns bill to house of origin approved with amendments, sent with message requesting concurrence in amendments. Question is voted in Committee of the Whole, e.g., "Shall the (Senate) amendments to (House) Bill No. be concurred in?" If vote in house of origin is in favor of concurrence, bill is enrolled. If a motion is made and adopted that amendments not be concurred in, originating house will usually request a conference committee (or it may send a message to second house asking it to recede from its amendments). If a conference is sought, a motion is made to authorize Senate President or House Speaker to appoint a conference committee (regular or free) to meet with a like committee from other house to resolve differences. (Regular conference committees may consider only disputed amendments; free conference committees may revise any part of bill.) This action, if approved, is communicated to second house in a message, and second house then appoints a conference committee in same manner. Step 21. Conference committee reports. If conferees settle differences, each contingent reports to its parent body that bill be further amended in some fashion or that one house recede from amendments and that bill then be approved. Amendments adopted by conference committees are printed on green (House) or pink (Senate) paper. Adoption of conference committee report means house approves bill as conferees recommend. If conferees cannot settle differences, they report their disagreement and either body may ask that a new conference committee be appointed. Step 22. Enrolling. Bill is checked for accuracy and printed. Correctly enrolled bill is delivered to presiding officer of house in which bill originated. After being signed and recorded in journal, bill is transmitted to other house where same procedure is followed. Step 23. Governor's desk. Governor either signs or vetoes bill or allows it to become law without his or her signature. Legislature may vote to override a veto if it has not adjourned or may be polled under certain circumstances if it has adjourned. (Refer to Montana Constitution, Article VI, section 10.) 74 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 June 5, 2023 Community Development Board Meeting MEETING DATE:May 15, 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 project review items are presently scheduled for the June 5, 2023 Community Development Board meeting. 1. 1825 W. Kagy Blvd Site Plan - Site plan for 176 homes, Application 22395 considered in role as Design Review Board (consent agenda) 2. Jarrett Zone Map Amendment - rezone from R1 to R2, Application 23047 considered in role as Zoning Commission. 3. 1801 and 1805 W. Kagy Blvd Annexation Zone Man Amendment to establish R4 zoning, Application 23016 considered in role as Zoning Commission. 4. Short Term Rental Affirmative Obligation Zone Text Amendment, Application 23147 considered in role as Zoning Commission. The following work session/discussion items are presently scheduled for the June 5, 2023 Community Development Board meeting. 1. Overview of density and walkability standards and functions and how transportation and land use coordinate from Transportation and Engineering staff. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:None. FISCAL EFFECTS:None. 75 Report compiled on: May 10, 2023 76