The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-05-24 CDB Agenda and Packet MaterialsA. Call to Order - 6:00 pm B. Disclosures C. Changes to the Agenda D. Public Service Announcements E. Approval of Minutes E.1 Approval of Minutes(Sagstetter) F. Consent Items G. Public Comments THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CDB AGENDA Monday, February 5, 2024 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 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 +1 346 248 7799 Access code: 954 6079 2484 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 1 H. Special Presentations I. Action Items I.1 Annexation and Zone Map Amendment Requesting Annexation and the Establishment of an Initial Zoning Designation of R-4 and R-5 on 81.468 Acres, the Baxter 80 Annexation, Application 23208(Rogers) I.2 Overview and Orientation Regarding Planned Development Zone Applications (Saunders) I.3 Planned Development Zone Requesting a Sustainability/Resilient Design on 41.97 Acres and Amendment of the City Zoning Map to Change Zoning from BP, Business Park District, to B- 2, Community Business District, Application 23293(Rogers) J. FYI/Discussions J.1 Upcoming Items for the February 26, 2024, Community Development Board Meetings.(Bentley) K. Adjournment 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. 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 that requires assistance, please contact our ADA Coordinator, Mike Gray, at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301). 2 Memorandum REPORT TO:Community Development Board FROM:Sam Sagstetter - Community Development Technician III SUBJECT:Approval of Minutes MEETING DATE:February 5, 2024 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes RECOMMENDATION:Approve STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:None. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:None. FISCAL EFFECTS:None. Attachments: 012224 CDB Mintues.pdf Report compiled on: January 30, 2024 3 Bozeman Community Development Meeting Minutes, January 22, 2024 Page 1 of 5 THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2024 General information about the Community Development Board is available in our Laserfiche repository. Present: Brady Ernst, Nicole Olmstead, Padden Guy Murphy, Chris Egnatz, Jennifer Madgic, Jason Delmue, Ben Lloyd, Mark Egge Excused: Henry Happel A) 00:39:31 Call to Order - 6:00 pm B) 00:42:46 Disclosures 00:42:55 N. Olmstead provides disclosure. C) 00:43:57 Changes to the Agenda 00:44:00 F3 will be moved to last action item. 00:44:56 F4 was proposed to be moved 1st. D) 00:48:53 Public Comments E) 00:50:10 Special Presentations E.1 00:50:23 Overview of the Proposed Water Efficient Landscape and Irrigation Performance and Design Standards 00:50:24 Jessica Ahlstrom presents. 01:33:32 Olmstead recuses herself. 4 Bozeman Community Development Meeting Minutes, January 22, 2024 Page 2 of 5 F) 01:33:27 Action Items F.4 01:35:07 Growth Policy Amendment Application to Revise the Future Land Use Map from Urban Neighborhood to Community Commercial Mixed Use on Approximately 17.485 acres, Application 23063 23063 SRX North GPA CDB SR.pdf 23063 SRX North GPA Boundary.pdf 001 Narrative (1).pdf 01:35:32 City Planner Tom Rogers presents to board. 02:23:30 Parker Lange & Tyler Steinway present to the board. 02:34:05 Parker Lange & Tyler Steinway answer questions from the board. 02:48:30 Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby move to acknowledge the findings presented in the staff report and recommend the City Commission approve the growth policy amendment application 23063. Mark Egge: Motion Padden Guy Murphy: 2nd 03:03:49 Vote on the Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby move to acknowledge the findings presented in the staff report and recommend the City Commission approve the growth policy amendment application 23063. The Motion carried 6 - 1. Approve: Padden Guy Murphy Chris Egnatz Jennifer Madgic Jason Delmue Ben Lloyd Mark Egge Disapprove: Brady Ernst F.2 03:06:25 The South Range Crossing North Zone Map Amendment Requesting Amendment of the City Zoning Map to Change the Zoning from R-1 (Residential Low Density District) and R-2 (Residential Moderate Density District) to B-2M (Community Business District-Mixed) on the Western Half of the Property and from R-1 (Residential Low Density District) and R-2 (Residential Moderate Density District) to REMU (Residential Emphasis Mixed Use) on the Eastern Half of the Property with Four Parcels Totaling 39.86 acres. This Report Only Addresses the B-2M Portion of the Application. The subject site is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of 19th Avenue and Graf Street. Application 23059. 5 Bozeman Community Development Meeting Minutes, January 22, 2024 Page 3 of 5 23059 SRX North ZMA(B-2M) CDB SR.pdf 03:06:25 City Planner Liz Cramblet presents to the board. 03:20:01 City Planner Liz Cramblet answers board questions. 03:22:35 Tyler Steinway and Parker Lange resents to the board. 03:24:00 Tyler Steinway & Parker Lange answers board questions. 03:33:55 Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23059 and move to recommend approval of the B-2M element of the South Range Crossing North Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. Jennifer Madgic: Motion Ben Lloyd: 2nd 03:50:42 Vote on the Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23059 and move to recommend approval of the B-2M element of the South Range Crossing North Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. The Motion carried 5 - 2. Approve: Padden Guy Murphy Chris Egnatz Jason Delmue Ben Lloyd Mark Egge Disapprove: Brady Ernst Jennifer Madgic F.1 03:51:33 The South Range Crossing North Zone Map Amendment Requesting Amendment of the City Zoning Map to Change the Zoning from R-1 (Residential Low Density District) and R-2 (Residential Moderate Density District) to B-2M (Community Business District-Mixed) on the Western Half of the Lot and from R-1 (Residential Low Density District) and R-2 (Residential Moderate Density District) to REMU (Residential Emphasis Mixed Use) on the Eastern Half of the Property with Four Parcels Totaling 39.86 acres. This Report Only Addresses the REMU Portion of the Application. The subject site is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of 19th Avenue and Graf Street. Application 23059. 23059 SRX North ZMA(REMU) CDB SR.pdf 6 Bozeman Community Development Meeting Minutes, January 22, 2024 Page 4 of 5 03:51:38 City Planner Elizabeth Cramblet presents to the board. 03:19:52 City Planner Elizabeth Cramblet answers board questions. 03:56:23 Parker Lange & Tyler Steinway presents to the board. 03:56:41 Tyler Steinway & Parker Lange answer questions from the board. 03:58:38 Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23059 and move to recommend approval of the REMU element of the South Range Crossing North Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. Jennifer Madgic: Motion Mark Egge: 2nd 04:02:22 Vote on the Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23059 and move to recommend approval of the REMU element of the South Range Crossing North Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. The Motion carried 7 - 0. Approve: Brady Ernst Padden Guy Murphy Chris Egnatz Jennifer Madgic Jason Delmue Ben Lloyd Mark Egge Disapprove: None F.3 04:04:39 Discussion of and Input on Possible Commission Priorities 04:32:52 Natsuki Nakumari gives public comment. 04:34:45 Daniel Cardey gives public comment. 04:38:07 Allison Sweeney provides public comment. 04:40:44 Mary Wictor provides public comment. 04:44:39 Motion to approve Recommend prioritize following themes housing, expanding safe program, looking at conducting neighborhood plan (possibly Bozeman Creek), improving communication. Jennifer Madgic: Motion Mark Egge: 2nd 7 Bozeman Community Development Meeting Minutes, January 22, 2024 Page 5 of 5 04:45:44 Vote on the Motion to approve Recommend prioritize following themes housing, expanding safe program, looking at conducting neighborhood plan (possibly Bozeman Creek), improving communication. The Motion carried 10 - 0. Approve: Allison Bryan Brady Ernst Nicole Olmstead Henry Happel Padden Guy Murphy Chris Egnatz Jennifer Madgic Jason Delmue Ben Lloyd Mark Egge Disapprove: None G) 04:46:13 FYI/Discussions G.1 04:46:20 Upcoming Items for the February 5, 2024, Community Development Board Meetings. H) 04:46:21 Adjournment This board generally meets the first and third Monday of the month from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm. 8 Memorandum REPORT TO:Community Development Board FROM:Tom Rogers, Senior Planner Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager Erin George, Deputy Director of Community Development Anna Bentley, Director of Community Development SUBJECT:Annexation and Zone Map Amendment Requesting Annexation and the Establishment of an Initial Zoning Designation of R-4 and R-5 on 81.468 Acres, the Baxter 80 Annexation, Application 23208 MEETING DATE:February 5, 2024 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative RECOMMENDATION:Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23208 and move to recommend approval of the Baxter 80 Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND:The applicant and property owners seek to annex two parcels totaling 81.468 acres plus adjacent rights-of-way into the City limits and establish an initial zoning of R-5, Residential High Density Mixed District, and R-4, Residential High-Density District. The property is currently zoned “Agriculture Suburban” (AS) within the County administered Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District (the Donut). Adjacent developments include the existing neighborhood of Laurel Glen Subdivision to the south and the developing Northwest Crossing subdivision to the east. The property to the north and across Baxter Lane is not annexed and used for agricultural production. The property directly to the west is also not annexed and undeveloped. The Future Land Use Map in the Bozeman Community Plan (BCP) 2020 designates the property as “Urban Neighborhood” which includes both the R-5 and R-4 districts as implementing zoning districts. Nearby municipal zoning includes R-3 and R-4 to the south and the entire eastern boundary is zoned REMU. The subject properties are within the urban planning and 9 municipal service area for the City. The proposed annexation would bring in additional right of way to build out sections of Baxter Lane and Laurel Parkway, and upon future development additional internal local street network. There is one minor ag structure on the property. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:There are no identified conflicts on this application. ALTERNATIVES:1. Approve the application with contingencies as presented; 2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended zoning; 3. Deny the application based on findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. Open and continue the public hearing, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. FISCAL EFFECTS:No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment. Attachments: 23208 Baxter 80 Annex_ZMA CDB.pdf Report compiled on: January 31, 2024 10 Page 1 of 44 23208 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA Public Hearings: Community Development Board (map amendment only) February 5, 2024 City Commission (Annexation and map amendment) February 27, 2024 Project Description: Baxter 80 Annexation requesting annexation of 81.468 acres and amendment of the City Zoning Map for the establishment of a zoning designation of R-5 (Residential High Density Mixed District) and R-4 (Residential High-Density District), Application 23208. Project Location: Property is located on the northwest corner of West Oak Street and Laurel Parkway and more particularly described as Tract 4 of Certificate of Survey 2552, located in the Northwest Quarter of Section 4, Township Two South (T2S), Range Five East (R5E), and the South 50 feet of Tract 4 of Certificate of Survey 2672A, located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 33, Township One South (T1S), Range Five East (R5E), P.M.M. Gallatin County, Montana. Recommendation: Meets standards for approval with terms of annexation and contingencies. Recommended Zoning Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23208 and move to recommend approval of the Baxter 80 Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. Recommended City Commission Annexation Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23208 and move to approve the Baxter 80 Annexation subject to the terms of annexation and direct staff to prepare an annexation agreement. Recommended City Commission Zoning Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, recommendation of the Zoning Commission, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23208 and move to approve the Baxter 80 Zone Map Amendment with contingencies of approval necessary to complete adoption of an implementing ordinance. Report Date: January 23, 2024 Staff Contact: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative 11 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 2 of 44 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is based on the application materials submitted and public comment received to date. This report addresses both the zoning amendment for Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission, as well as the annexation and the zoning amendment for the City Commission. The application materials are available on the City’s website in the laserfiche archive. Unresolved Issues There are no identified conflicts on this application. Project Summary The applicant and property owners seek to annex two parcels totaling 81.468 acres plus adjacent rights-of-way into the City limits and establish an initial zoning of R-5, Residential High Density Mixed District, and R-4, Residential High-Density District. The property is currently zoned “Agriculture Suburban” (AS) within the County administered Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District (the Donut). Adjacent developments include the existing neighborhood of Laurel Glen Subdivision to the south and the developing Northwest Crossing subdivision to the east. The property to the north and across Baxter Lane is not annexed and used for agricultural production. The property directly to the west is also not annexed and undeveloped. The Future Land Use Map in the Bozeman Community Plan (BCP) 2020 designates the property as “Urban Neighborhood” which includes both the R-5 and R-4 districts as implementing zoning districts. Nearby municipal zoning includes R-3 and R-4 to the south and the entire eastern boundary is zoned REMU. The subject properties are within the urban planning and municipal service area for the City. The proposed annexation would bring in additional right of way to build out sections of Baxter Lane and Laurel Parkway, and upon future development additional internal local street network. There is one minor ag structure on the property. In determining whether the criteria applicable to this application are met, Staff considers the entire body of plans and regulations for land development. Standards which prevent or mitigate possible negative impacts are incorporated in many locations in the municipal code but are principally in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code. References in the text of this report to Articles, Divisions, or in the form xx.xxx.xxx are to the Bozeman Municipal Code. 12 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 3 of 44 Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on February 5, 2024, and will forward their recommendation to the City Commission. No public comment has been received on this application at the time of publication of this report. Alternatives 1. Approve the application with contingencies as presented; 2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended zoning; 3. Deny the application based on findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. Open and continue the public hearing, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. 13 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 4 of 44 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 2 Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 2 Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2 Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary ................................... 3 Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 3 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES: ................................................................................................... 5 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED TERMS OF ANNEXATION ............................................ 9 SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT... 12 SECTION 4 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ...................................... 13 Annexation ........................................................................................................................ 13 Zone Map Amendment ..................................................................................................... 13 SECTION 5 - ANNEXATION STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ................................ 14 SECTION 6 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ........... 20 PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ......................................................... 41 APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT .................................................... 41 APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING ................... 41 APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ............................ 44 FISCAL EFFECTS ................................................................................................................. 44 ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................... 44 14 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 5 of 44 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES: Map 1: Project Vicinity Map 15 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 6 of 44 Map 2: Vicinity Map Subject Property 16 Page 7 of 44 Map 3: BCP 2020 Future Land Use Map Subject Property 17 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 8 of 44 Map 4: Existing City Zoning Subject Property 18 Page 9 of 44 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED TERMS OF ANNEXATION The following terms of annexation are recommended to enable the application to comply with the City’s Annexation Policy and the requirements of state law for the provision of services. Recommended terms of annexation: 1. The documents and exhibits to formally annex the subject property must be identified as the “Baxter 80 Annexation”. 2. An Annexation Map, titled “Baxter 80 Annexation Map” with a legal description of the property and any adjoining un-annexed rights-of-way and/or street access easements must be submitted by the applicant for use with the Annexation Agreement. The map must be supplied as a PDF for filing with the Annexation Agreement at the County Clerk & Recorder, and a digital copy for the City Engineers Office. This map must be acceptable to the Director of Public Works and City Engineers Office and must be submitted with the signed Annexation Agreement. 3. The applicant must execute all contingencies and terms of said Annexation Agreement with the City of Bozeman within 60 days of the distribution of the annexation agreement from the City to the applicant or annexation approval shall be null and void. 4. The landowners and their successors must pay all fire, street, water, and sewer impact fees at the time of connection; and for future development, as required by Chapter 2, Bozeman Municipal Code, or as amended at the time of application for any permit listed therein. 5. If they do not already exist, the applicant must provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SIDs) for the following: a. Street improvements to S. 27th Avenue between Stucky Road and Blackwood Road including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. b. Street improvements to Baxter Lane from Rosa Way to Gooch Hill Rd including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. c. Street improvements to Laurel Parkway from Baxter Lane to W Oak St including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. d. Street improvements to Gooch Hill Rd from Baxter Lane to W Oak St including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. e. Street improvements to W Oak Street from Gooch Hill Rd to Rosa Way including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. f. Intersection improvements at Gooch Hill Rd and Baxter Lane including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. 19 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 10 of 44 g. Intersection improvements at Baxter Lane and Laurel Parkway including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. h. Intersection improvements at W Oak Street and Gooch Hill Rd including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. i. Intersection improvements at W Oak St and Laurel Parkway including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. j. The document filed must specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the developer agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of the improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. The applicant must provide a copy of the SID waiver in conjunction with the Annexation Agreement. k. The applicant may obtain a copy of the template SID waiver from the City Engineering Department. The document filed must specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the applicant agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of said improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. The applicant must provide a copy of the SID waiver filed with the County Clerk and Recorder prior to annexation. 6. The Annexation Agreement must include the following notices: a. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that, prior to development, the applicant will be responsible for preparing a storm water master plan in conjunction with future development. The storm water master plan shall address maintenance and operations until and unless the City affirmatively assumes responsibility for maintenance and operations of stormwater facilities within the area of the annexation. b. The Annexation Agreement must include notice the City will, upon annexation, make available to the Property existing City services only to the extent currently available, or as provided in the Agreement. c. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that there is no right, either granted or implied, for Landowner to further develop any of the Property until it is verified by the City that the necessary municipal services are available to the property. d. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that, prior to development, the applicant will be responsible for installing any facilities required to provide full municipal services to the properties in accordance with the City of Bozeman's infrastructure master plans and all City policies that may be in effect at the time of development. e. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that utility easements may be required to be provided by the landowner at the time of development to ensure necessary municipal services are available to the property. 20 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 11 of 44 f. The agreement must include notice that charges and assessments may be required after completion of annexation to ensure necessary municipal services are available to the property. g. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that the City will assess system development and impact fees in accordance with Montana law and Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9, Bozeman Municipal Code. h. All procedural terms necessary to establish the Annexation Agreement in conformance with state law and municipal practice will be included with the final Annexation Agreement. 7. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that the applicant must connect to municipal services and will be responsible for installing any facilities required to provide full municipal services to the property in accordance with city policy at the time of connection. 8. The applicant must contact the City’s Engineering Department to obtain an analysis of cash-in-lieu of water rights for the proposed annexation. The determined amount must be paid prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation, if applicable. 9. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 Laurel Parkway is classified as a Collector in the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP), which has a minimum right-of- way ROW width of 90 feet. The applicant must provide their respective portion of the ROW necessary to follow the alignment shown in the transportation plan as a public street and utility easement where Laurel Parkway Avenue is adjacent to or crosses the property. The city plans to place roundabouts at the intersections with Oak and Baxter and requires a triangular ROW at both corners to accommodate a roundabout. The applicant is advised the easement must be provided prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation. 10. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 Oak Street is classified as a Principal Arterial in the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP), which has a minimum right-of-way ROW width of 125 ft. The applicant must provide their respective portion of the ROW necessary to follow the alignment shown in the transportation plan as a public street and utility easement where Oak Street is adjacent to or crosses the property. The City is in agreement with the proposed easement alignment presented in the application. The applicant is advised the easement must be provided prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation. 11. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 Baxter Lane is classified as a Minor Arterial in the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP), which has a minimum right-of-way ROW width of 100 feet. The applicant must provide their respective portion of the ROW necessary to follow the alignment shown in the transportation plan as a public street and utility easement where Catamount Street is adjacent to or crosses the property. The applicant must provide 50 ft not 30 ft as shown. The applicant is advised the easement must be provided prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation. 12. All final easements provided to the City must be stamped and signed by a professional surveyor. 21 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 12 of 44 SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Please note that these contingencies are necessary for the City to complete the process of the proposed amendment. These contingencies only apply in the event that the related annexation request has previously been approved. Recommended Contingencies of Approval: 1. That all documents and exhibits necessary to establish an initial municipal zoning designation shall be identified as the “Baxter 80 Annexation Zone Map Amendment.” All required documents must be returned to the City within 60 days of the City Commission action to annex the property or the preliminary approval shall be null and void. 2. That the Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be finalized until the Annexation Agreement is signed by the applicant and formally approved by the City Commission. If the annexation agreement is not approved, the Zone Map Amendment application shall be null and void. 3. That the applicant must submit a Zone Amendment map, titled “Baxter 80 Annexation Zone Map Amendment”. The map must be supplied as a PDF. This map must be acceptable to the City Engineer’s Office and must be submitted within 60 days of the action to approve the zone map amendment. Said map shall contain a mete and bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property including adjacent rights-of-way or street easements, and total acreage of the property to be rezoned, unless the property to be rezoned can be entirely described by reference to existing platted properties or certificates of survey. 4. The Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant provides an editable mete and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed Montana surveyor. SECTION 4 – ADVISORY COMMENTS 1. BMC 38.410.070 (A) (1) Municipal water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems - The subject property is located within two identified drainage basin’s, the Upper Baxter Creek Sewer Basin and Aajker Creek Sewer Drainage Basin. Currently there is no physical infrastructure in the Aajker Creek Sewer Drainage Basin. The applicant is advised that the City prohibits wastewater flow transfers into neighboring basins also known as basin jumping. Furthermore, the City does not allow private lift stations. Therefore, all sanitary sewer flows must be routed to the drainage basin that serves the area as identified in the City of Bozeman Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan. Specific sanitary sewer infrastructure improvements will be reviewed with future development applications. The applicant is advised to closely coordinate any future development and sanitary sewer infrastructure improvements with the City’s engineering 22 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 13 of 44 department. Municipal sanitary sewer improvements must be designed in coordination with any road improvements, if applicable. 2. BMC 38.400.010 A.8 Second or emergency access. To facilitate traffic movement, the provision of emergency services and the placement of utility easements, all developments must be provided with a second means of access. If, in the judgment of the development review committee (DRC), a second dedicated right-of-way cannot be provided for reasons of topography or other physical conditions, the developer must provide an emergency access, built to the standards detailed in these regulations. The applicant is advised that the surrounding arterial and collector street infrastructure network that would service the subject property has not yet been constructed. Additional development of the arterial and collector street network in the vicinity of the subject property will be required to accommodate proposed traffic demands anticipated within an R-5 zoned district in order to provide adequate, safe, and sufficient access for vehicular, pedestrian, emergency, and multi-modal forms of transportation upon future development of the property. Given the present conditions, multiple options for offsite improvements to the arterial and collector street network could be employed to satisfy City requirements and cannot be predicted at the time of annexation and will be reviewed with future development applications. SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS Annexation Having considered the criteria established for an annexation, the Development Review Committee (DRC) did not find any deficiencies that prohibit annexation at this time that could not be addressed through future development review processes and adopted City Codes. The City Commission will hold a public meeting on the annexation on February 27, 2024. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. Zone Map Amendment Having considered the criteria established for a zone map amendment, the Staff found the requested zoning meets standards for approval as submitted. The Zone Map Amendment (ZMA) is in conjunction with an annexation request. Staff’s recommendation and staff responses are predicated on approval of the annexation, application 23208. The Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the amendment. The DRC did not identify any infrastructure or regulatory constraints that would impede the approval of the application that cannot be addressed with adopted standards and requirements for future development. 23 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 14 of 44 The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this ZMA on February 5, 2024, and will forward a recommendation to the Commission on the Zone Map amendment. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in will be held in the Commission Room at City Hall, 121 N. Rouse Ave, Bozeman, Montana. Members of the public will also be able to participate remotely via WebEx. Instructions for joining the WebEx meeting will be included on the meeting agenda which is published on the City’s website at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. The agenda is available at https://www.bozeman.net/meetings. The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the zone map amendment on February 27, 2024. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in the Commission Room at City Hall, 121 N. Rouse Ave, Bozeman, Montana, the City Commission will conduct a public hearing on the proposed Zone Map Amendment application. Members of the public will also be able to participate remotely via WebEx. Instructions for joining the WebEx meeting will be included on the meeting agenda which is published on the City’s website at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. The agenda is available at https://www.bozeman.net/meetings. SECTION 6 - ANNEXATION STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for approval of the requested annexation, the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider the following: Commission Resolution No. 5076 Criteria Commission Resolution No. 5076 Goals Goal 1: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations of land contiguous to the City. Criterion Met. The property in question is contiguous to the City limits on the eastern and southerly sides of the property. Goal 2: The City encourages all areas that are totally surrounded by the City to annex. Criterion not met. The subject property is not wholly surrounded at this time. Unannexed property lies to the west and north. Goal 3: The City encourages all properties currently contracting with the City for City services such as water, sanitary sewer, and/or fire protection to annex. Criterion met. There are no structures onsite contracting for City services. Goal 4: The City of Bozeman requires annexation of all land proposed for development lying within the existing and planned service area of the municipal water and sewer 24 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 15 of 44 systems as depicted in their respective facility plans, any land proposed for development that proposes to utilize municipal water or sewer systems. Criterion met. The subject property lies within the planned service area of the municipal water and sewer services. Future proposed developments will be required to utilize municipal water or sewer systems. Goal 5: The City encourages annexations within the urban area identified on the future land use map in the current Bozeman Growth Policy. Criterion Met. As shown in Section 1, the subject property is planned as ‘Urban Neighborhood’ and is within the urban area of the growth policy. See the discussion under Criterion A of Section 6 of the report for more information on the growth policy. Goal 6: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations to make the City boundaries more regular rather than creating irregular extensions which leave unannexed gaps between annexed areas or islands of annexed or unannexed land. Criterion Met. The proposed annexation continues expansion of city boundaries in a methodical regular manner. Visual observation shows a continuance of the regular city boundary with this property annexed. Goal 7: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations which will enhance the existing traffic circulation system or provide for circulation systems that do not exist at the present time. Criterion met. The property is bounded by roadways identified in the Bozeman Area Transportation Plan, 2017 Update as Collector and Arterial streets. Due to the size of the property the south, east, and northern property boundaries are adjacent to significant transportation corridors. Specifically, West Oak Street is a designated principal Arterial, Laurel Parkway is a Collector, and Baxter Lane is considered a Minor Arterial. Terms of annexation include provisions pursuant to City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 to acquire necessary rights-of-way (ROW) to accommodate the development of these streets. Primary Arterials require 120 feet of right-of-way, Minor Arterials require 90 feet, and Collector streets need 90 feet. Upon development these routes must be constricted pursuant to the City’s design and specifications plans. See Terms of Annexation No. 9 - 11. There are no Class I trails identified in the recently adopted 2023 Comprehensive Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan (PRAT). There is, however, a proposed neighborhood trail adjacent to the watercourse that roughly bisects the property. Annexation does not demand easements for neighborhood trails. These types of pathways are arranged through future subdivision and site plan application processes. Goal 8: The City prefers annexation of parcels of land larger than five (5) acres in size, but will allow annexation of smaller parcels if factors such as topographic limitations, 25 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 16 of 44 sanitary disposal needs, fire access, maintenance of public facilities, etc., justify a smaller annexation. Criterion met. The subject property is approximately 82.04 acres. Goal 9: The City seeks to obtain water rights adequate for future development of the property with annexation. Criterion Met. After annexation, the subject property will be bound to the provisions of 38.410.130 which require evaluation of water adequacy and provision of water if needed at time of development. The municipal code section requires water rights or an equivalent to be provided. Exact timing and amounts will be evaluated during development review. There are several methods to address the requirements of 38.410.130. The annexation agreement will provide notice of this requirement, see Terms of Annexation 9. The landowner will consent to this requirement by signature on the annexation agreement. Goal 10: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations for City provision of clean treated water and sanitary sewer. Criterion Met. The subject property is located within the City’s planned water and sewer service area. See Goal 4 above. Any future development will be required to connect to the City’s systems. Per Term of Annexation 6.d and 7, the Annexation Agreement requires notice that the applicant requires the applicant to design extensions of services to meet the City’s adopted infrastructure standards. These include provisions for minimum water pressure and volumes, adequate sewer flows by volume, gravity flow of sewers, and other standards necessary to protect public health and safety and ensure functional utilities. Resolution No. 5076 Policies Policy 1: Annexations must include dedication of all easements for rights-of-way for collector and arterial streets, adjacent local streets, public water, sanitary sewer, or storm or sewer mains, and Class I public trails not within the right of way for arterial or collector streets. Annexations must also include waivers of right to protest the creation of special or improvement districts necessary to provide the essential services for future development of the City. Criterion Met. As discussed in Section 5 Goal 7, additional right of way is being included for the Collector Street of Laurel Parkway, the Principal Arterial for West Oak Street, and the Minor Arterial for Baxter Lane. See Terms of Annexation 9 - 11. No Class I trails are designated for the subject property according to the PRAT Plan. 26 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 17 of 44 Policy 2: Issues pertaining to master planning and zoning must be addressed prior to or in conjunction with the application for annexation. Criterion Met. The subject property is planned for Urban Neighborhood. No change to the growth policy is required. The application includes a request for initial zoning of R-4 and R-5. See the zone map amendment section of this report for analysis of the zone map amendment criteria. Policy 3: The application for annexation must be in conformance with the current Bozeman Growth Policy. If a Growth Policy Amendment is necessary to accommodate anticipated uses, the amendment process must be initiated by the property owner and completed prior to any action for approval of the application for annexation. Criterion Met. The property is designated “Urban Neighborhood” on the future land use map. No growth policy amendment is required. See discussion under zone map amendment Criterion A. Policy 4: Initial zoning classification of the property to be annexed will be determined by the City Commission, in compliance with the Bozeman Growth Policy and upon a recommendation of the City Zoning Commission, simultaneously with review of the annexation petition. The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the City Zoning Commission will be reviewing the requested zoning district designation on February 5, 2024. The Zoning Commission’s recommendation will be passed along to the City Commission for review and consideration along with the annexation request on February 27, 2024. Policy 5: The applicant must indicate their preferred zoning classification as part of the annexation petition. Criterion Met. The applicant has requested a zoning designation of R-4, Residential High- Density District and R-5, Residential High Density Mixed District. See Section 6 of this report for analysis of the requested zoning. Policy 6: Fees for annexation processing will be established by the City Commission. Criterion Met. The appropriate application processing and review fees accompanied the application. Policy 7: It is the policy of the City that annexations will not be approved where unpaved county roads will be the most commonly used route to gain access to the property unless the landowner proposes a method to provide for construction of the road to the City’s street standards. Criterion Met. The subject property is accessed by West Oak Street and Baxter Lane, both of which are paved. 27 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 18 of 44 Policy 8: Prior to annexation of property, the City will require the property owner to acquire adequate and usable water rights, or an appropriate fee in lieu thereof, in accordance with Section 38.410.130 of the municipal code, as amended. Criterion Met. The property owner shall provide usable water rights, or cash in-lieu of water rights thereof, in an amount to be determined by the Director of Public Works, as outlined by Section 38.410.130 of the municipal code. The calculated amount will be determined by the Director of Public Works and based on the zoning designation approved by the City Commission. Term of Annexation 8 requires notice of this requirement to be part of the annexation agreement. Satisfaction of this requirement will occur with future development. Policy 9: Infrastructure and emergency services for an area proposed for annexation will be reviewed for the health, safety and welfare of the public and conformance with the City’s adopted facility plans. If the City determines adequate services cannot be provided to ensure public health, safety and welfare, the City may require the property owner to provide a written plan for accommodation of these services, or the City may reject the petition for annexation. Additionally, the parcel to be annexed may only be provided sanitary sewer service via the applicable drainage basin defined in the City Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan. Criterion Met. City infrastructure and emergency services are available to the subject property. The property is located adjacent to existing urban development that is currently served by Bozeman Fire. Water and sewer infrastructure is installed on the south side of the property within the West Oak Street ROW. An existing 8-inch poly vinyl chloride sewer main being part of the Flanders Creek & Rosa Sewer Main Extension is in the West Oak Street ROW. A 10-inch ductile iron water pipe is in West Oak Street. Additional water and sewer service will be required as the property develops. Per Term of Annexation 6.a, 6.d, and 8, the Annexation Agreement required to finalize the requested annexation will require the applicant to design extensions of services to meet the City’s adopted infrastructure standards. These include provisions for minimum water pressure and volumes, adequate sewer flows by volume, gravity flow of sewers, and other standards necessary to protect public health and safety and ensure functional utilities. Policy 10: The City may require annexation of any contiguous property for which city services are requested or for which city services are currently being provided. In addition, any person, firm, or corporation receiving water or sewer service outside of the City limits is required as a condition of initiating or continuing such service, to consent to annexation of the property serviced by the City. The City Manager may enter into an agreement with a property owner for connection to the City’s sanitary sewer or water system in an emergency conditioned upon the submittal by the property owner of a petition for annexation and filing of a notice of consent to annexation with 28 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 19 of 44 the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office. The contract for connection to city sewer and/or water must require the property owner to annex or consent to disconnection of the services. Connection for purposes of obtaining City sewer services in an emergency requires, when feasible as determined by the City, the connection to City water services. Criterion Met. City services are not currently being provided to this property as it is vacant. Future development will be required to hook up to City services. This annexation is not a result of an emergency condition requiring connection. Policy 11: The annexation application shall be accompanied by mapping to meet the requirements of the Director of Public Works. Where an area to be annexed can be entirely described by reference to a certificate of survey or subdivision plat on file with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder the mapping may be waived by the Director of Public Works. Criterion Met. Mapping to meet the requirements of the Director of Public Works must be provided with the Annexation Agreement. Mapping requirements are addressed in Recommended Term of Annexation 2. The map must include adjacent right of way and therefore cannot be described solely by reference to platted lands. Policy 12: The City will assess system development/ impact fees in accordance with Montana law and Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9, Bozeman Municipal Code. Neutral. The annexation does not require immediate payment of fees. The annexation agreement will provide notice of obligations to pay impact fees at times of triggers as required in ordinance. Policy 13: Public notice requirements: Notice for annexation of property must be coordinated with the required notice for the zone map amendment required with all annexation. The zone map amendment notice must contain the materials required by 38.220.410, BMC. Notices of the public hearing have been mailed, published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle twice, and posted on the site as set forth under this policy. See Appendix A for more details. Policy 14: Annexation agreements must be executed and returned to the City within 60 days of distribution of the annexation agreement by the City, unless another time is specifically identified by the City Commission. Criterion Met. Suggested terms of annexation include a notice that the agreement, once prepared and provided to the applicant, must be signed, and retuned within the stated period. 29 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 20 of 44 This policy will be implemented only if the Commission acts to grant approval. If the application is denied, then no annexation agreement will be necessary. Policy 15: When possible, the use of Part 46 annexations is preferred. Criterion Met. This annexation is being processed under Part 46 provisions. Policy 16: Where a road improvement district has been created, the annexation does not repeal the creation of the district. The City will not assume operations of the district until the entirety of the district has been annexed. Any funds held in trust for the district will be used to benefit the district after transfer to the City. Inclusion within a district does not lessen the obligation to participate in general city programs that address the same subject. Neutral. No road improvement district is associated with this application. Policy 17: The City will notify the Gallatin County Planning Department and Fire District providing service to the area of applications for annexation. Criterion Met. The necessary agencies were notified and provided copies of the annexation. Policy 18: The City will require connection to and use of all City services upon development of annexed properties. The City may establish a fixed time frame for connection to municipal utilities. Upon development, unless otherwise approved by the City, septic systems must be properly abandoned and the development connected to the City sanitary sewer system. Upon development, unless otherwise approved by the City, water wells on the subject property may be used for irrigation, but any potable uses must be supplied from the City water distribution system and any wells disconnected from structures. The property owner must contact the City Water and Sewer Superintendent to verify disconnects of wells and septic systems. Criterion Met. There are no existing septic systems or wells that will need to be abandoned. All future development will be required to connect to city services. SECTION 7 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission must consider the following criteria (letters A-K). As an amendment is a legislative action, the Commission has broad latitude to determine a policy direction. The burden of proof that the application should be approved lies with the applicant. A zone map amendment must be in accordance with the growth policy (criteria A) and be designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers (criteria B), promote public health, public safety, and general welfare (criteria C), and facilitate the provision of transportation, water, 30 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 21 of 44 sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements (criteria D). Therefore, to approve a zone map amendment the Commission must find Criteria A-D are met. In addition, the Commission must also consider criteria E-K, and may find the zone map amendment to be positive, neutral, or negative with regards to these criteria. To approve the zone map amendment, the Commission must find the positive outcomes of the amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K. In determining whether the criteria are met, Staff considers the entire body of plans and regulations for land development. Standards which prevent or mitigated negative impacts are incorporated throughout the entire municipal code but are principally in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code. Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. Criterion met. The Bozeman Community Plan (BCP) 2020, Chapter 5, p. 73, in the section titled Review Criteria for Zoning Amendments and Their Application, discusses how the various criteria in 76-2-304 MCA are applied locally. Application of the criteria varies depending on whether an amendment is for the zoning map or for the text of Chapter 38, BMC. The first criterion for a zoning amendment is accordance with a growth policy. Future Land Use Map The proposed amendment is a change to the zoning map. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze compliance with the future land use map. Chapter 3 of the BCP 2020 addresses the future land use map. The introduction to that chapter discusses the importance of the chapter. Following are some excerpts. “Future land use is the community’s fundamental building block. It is an illustration of the City’s desired outcome to accommodate the complex and diverse needs of its residents.” “The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes where in the community. Each category has its own descriptions. Understanding the future land use map is not possible without understanding the category descriptions.” The area of this application is within the anticipated growth area of the City. As shown on the maps in Section 1, on the excerpt of the current future land use map, the property is designated as Urban Neighborhood. The Urban Neighborhood designation description reads: “This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes. Complementary uses such 31 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 22 of 44 as parks, home-based occupations, fire stations, churches, schools, and some neighborhood-serving commerce provide activity centers for community gathering and services. The Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development. Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car.” The correlation between the future land use map of the growth policy and the zoning districts is presented in Table 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. As shown in the following Correlation with Zoning Table excerpt, the R-4 and R-5 districts are implementing district of the Urban Neighborhood designation. Except from BCP2020 Future Land Use Map: In finding that this application meets criterion A, with hesitation, the analysis is cognizant that in many planning efforts and discussions over the decades, the Planning Board and City Commission have considered the various elements of the question of to grow or not grow and the consequences of either approach. After considering this question, they have concluded that having growth within the physical boundaries of Bozeman results in better outcomes than not. Therefore, the BCP 2020 approaches growth as something that overall is positive but recognizes that it does not come without drawbacks and that the community will change over time. Large swath of single use zoning is generally not supported by the BCP 2020. No metric for what is considered “large” has been established. Although some zoning districts, REMU for example, require minimum areas to qualify most do not. The City’s development code does not include a requirement to mix housing types, therefore consumer preferences, developer preference, and lending practice to influence housing types. The BCP 2020 includes many goals and objectives to encourage a variety of housing types and the production missing middle housing that supports a variety of goals and polices. 32 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 23 of 44 The location of this property is unique due its distance to existing commercial activity, employment centers, educational opportunities, and other City services because it is nearing the jump to next Commercial Node identified on the BCP 2020 proposed just west of the subject property on Baxter Lane. See Map 4 in Section 1. However, there is a developing at the intersection of West oak Street and Cottonwood Road although it is nearly one mile from the center of this property. Viable commercial activity requires sufficient rooftops. As part of the City’s Community Plan Hub web site, the City is tracking its efforts to meet the goals and objectives detailed in the BCP 2020. For example, under the City of Unique Neighborhoods Theme is the Bozeman Residential Density Map – Community Plan Indicators Map. The residential density map shows the nearest development to the subject property, Meadow Creek Phase 1 subdivision, has a living unit per acre of 5 – 10. This data will improve its accuracy as the City infills. Currently, there are undeveloped parcels that skew the results and push the value lower than if you exclude vacant parcels in the calculation. However, the histogram associated with the map shows the following general trends in relation to each zoning district. The R-4 and R-5 zoning districts correlates with the principles applied in the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. A few of the ten principles listed under Basic Planning Precepts of the Plan are supported by these districts. For example, “land use designations must respond to a broad range of factors, including infrastructure, natural, and economic constraints, other community priorities, and expectations of all affected parties concerning private development.” And “gathering places and open spaces, including parks and trails, should be in convenient locations Figure 1: Average living units per acre by Zoning Designation 33 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 24 of 44 to those they serve. Quality and function is superior to quantity alone.” The latter is achieved by the City’s adopted development code. On the other hand, other precepts are less supportive of the scope of requested R-4 and R-5 zoning. Goals and Policies A zoning amendment is also evaluated against the goals and policies of the BCP 2020. Most of the goals and policies are not applicable to this application. Relevant goals and objectives have been identified by staff. Conflict with the text of the growth policy hasn’t been identified. The Short-Term Action list on page 63 of the BCP 2020 describes 14 items to implement the growth policy. The first two relate to direct changes to the zoning map in support of listed goals and objectives. These include increasing the intensity of zoning districts in already developed areas. Beginning on page 71 of the BCP 2020 in the section titled Zoning Amendment Review, the document discusses how the city implements zoning for new areas, amendments to areas, and revisions to existing text. This section includes a discussion of when the City may initiate a zoning change to a more intensive district to increase development opportunities. This section demonstrates that the City, as a matter of policy, is supportive of more intensive zoning districts and development. It is inconsistent with this approach to zone at annexation for lower intensities than what infrastructure and planning documents will support. This policy approach does not specify any individual district but does lean towards the more intensive portion of the zoning district spectrum. Staff generally concurs with the analysis intent provided by the applicant although some of the listed goals and objectives are either not relevant or spurious in nature and there are few details describing how the proposed development will further the stated goals and objectives. Therefore, staff augments the record, in addition to the aforementioned discussion, with the following analysis. Goal N-3: Promote a diverse supply of quality housing units. As noted above the area is designated as Urban Neighborhood according to the FLUM. This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. Although, in limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site constraints and/or natural features, we generally assume the most density permitted by a given zoning district. As noted on the annexation and zoning maps, there are considerable nature features that will limit impervious surfaces. Without constraints it would be reasonable to assume a developed density of 18 dwelling units per net acre for both the R-4 and R-5 zones combined. Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity 34 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 25 of 44 to commercial mixed-use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car. Although there is an evolving commercial area at the intersection of Oak and Cottonwood associated with the Northwest Crossing development it is unlikely it will support sufficient employment to serve this development. The city must balance encouraging housing development with development constraints and proximity to employment, entertainment, education, and supporting its climate action initiatives. Therefore, the proposed combination of R-4 and R-5 zones seems appropriate for this property. Goal DCD-1: Support urban development within the City. The proposed zoning is occurring in conjunction with an annexation. Any future development will be required to occur at urban densities and will be within the City. If the City Commission declines the annexation then the requested R-4 and R-5 zones will not occur. DCD-2.2 Support higher density development along main corridors and at high visibility street corners to accommodate population growth and support businesses. West Oak Street is a Principal Arterial, Baxter Lane is a Minor Arterial, and Laurel Parkway is a designated Collector as shown in the last three long range transportation plans including the current Transportation Master Plan adopted in 2017. Arterial streets are the most intensive category of streets. West Oak and Baxter Lane will be constructed to full arterial cross sections upon further development as required by development code. North Laurel Parkway is a designed Collector Street. Therefore, placement of higher density development adjacent to West Oak Street, Baxter Lane and Laurel Parkway is consistent with this objective. Additional internal street grid will be required and constricted to further improve access in and through the site. Evaluation of the degree of required road improvements will occur with formal development review. RC-3.2 Work with Gallatin County to keep rural areas rural and maintain a clear edge to urban development that evolves as the City expands outwards. Gallatin County adopted the Gallatin County/Bozeman Area Plan (GCBA Plan), a neighborhood plan under their growth policy, to identify County priorities for this area of the county. Implementing zoning was updated for the new neighborhood plan and is now in place. “The purposes of the [County] Growth Policy and the 2005 Bozeman Area Plan are to provide comprehensive, long-range guidance relative to the growth and development…” The GCBA Plan recognizes the area is in transition. On page 1 of the GCBA Plan it says, “It is not the intent of this Plan to prematurely discourage existing agricultural operations; rather it is the intent to accommodate the needs of present agriculture while recognizing an inevitable transition to a more urban landscape.” The proposed annexation and zoning of this property will extend the municipal boundary west towards a future extension of Gooch Hill Road, a designated minor arterial road. This 35 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 26 of 44 application for annexation follows extends previously annexed property directly to the east in 2019 which is now being developed. The Laurel Glen subdivision to the south was annexed in 2004. The municipal service area and planning area of the city extends another three quarters of a mile west. DCD-1.11 Pursue annexations consistent with the future land use map and adopted facility plans for development at urban intensity. The proposed zoning is consistent with the future land use map and is within the current facilities plans. Goal RC-3: Collaborate with Gallatin County regarding annexation and development patterns adjacent to the City to provide certainty for landowners and taxpayers. Gallatin County has been notified of the proposed annexation. RC-3.3 Prioritize annexations that enable the incremental expansion of the City and its utilities. The property in question is contiguous to the City limits on the east and south. It adds approximately 80 acres to the City limits that is available for urban development while maintaining a consistent city border. RC-3.4 Encourage annexation of land adjacent to the City prior to development and encourage annexation of wholly surrounded areas. The property is adjacent to the City and does not create any new unannexed areas surrounded by City limits. The property is seeking annexation and municipal zoning for the purpose of residential development. Annexation is happening before development. In addition to goals and objectives, the BCP 2020 includes descriptive statements regarding what the goals and objectives seek to support and create. Page 27 of the BCP 2020 includes the descriptive language for Theme 2, A City of Unique Neighborhoods. Reviewing the language, themes of housing diversity, inclusion, and equity to serve different housing needs are prevalent. Theme 2 emphasizes the importance of neighborhoods in the City’s development. It is notable that none of the goals and objectives associated with Theme 2 calls for fixing the character of developed areas in their current status or prohibit the evolution of an area’s character. There is recognition of the role that a sense of place serves in Goal N-4. Neighborhoods do have physical attributes that help them be distinctive. In this case the presence of watercourse and sensitive lands there is an opportunity to create unique neighborhoods through a well- planned subdivision or site plan. See also RC – 3.3 response. Goal N-4: Continue to encourage Bozeman’s sense of place. 36 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 27 of 44 N-4.1 Continue to recognize and honor the unique history, neighborhoods, neighborhood character, and buildings that contribute to Bozeman’s sense of place through programs and policy led by both City and community efforts. The proposed amendment does not alter the zoning on any adjacent property and correspondingly the character of that adjacent property. As noted in other criteria in this report, the proposed amendment is consistent with the planned development of the area as homes with an urban intensity. While the application does not further all goals of the BCP 2020, taken as a whole, the application is supportive of and in accordance with, the BCP 2020. B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers. Criterion Met. The property can be served by the Bozeman Fire Department. Fire protection water supply will be provided by the City of Bozeman water system. There is a ag building without services on the property. The property is not within any delineated floodplain nor does it have other known natural hazards. Upon annexation the subject property will be provided with City emergency services including police, fire and ambulance. Future development of the property will be required to conform to all City of Bozeman public safety, building and land use requirements. The City provides emergency services to adjacent properties and no obstacles have been identified in extending service to this parcel. C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. Criterion Met. See comments in Section 6, Criteria A, B and D. City development standards included in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code, building codes, and engineering standards all ensure that this criterion is met. Adequate water and sewer supply and conveyance provide for public health through clean water. Rapid and effective emergency response provides for public safety. The City’s standards ensure that adequate services are provided prior to construction of homes which advances this criterion. General welfare has been evaluated during the adoption of Chapter 38 and found to be advanced. Provision of parks, control of storm water, and other features of the City’s development standards advance the general welfare. Compliance with the BCP 2020 advances the well-being of the community as a whole. D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements. Criterion Met. This property is included in future planning areas. The City conducts extensive planning for municipal transportation, water, sewer, parks, and other facilities and services provided by the City. The adopted plans allow the City to consider existing conditions and identify enhancements needed to provide additional service needed by new development. The City implements these plans through its capital improvements program that identifies individual projects, project construction scheduling, and financing of construction. As stated in 38.300.020.C, the designation of a zoning district does not guarantee approval of new development until the City verifies the availability of needed infrastructure. All zoning 37 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 28 of 44 districts in Bozeman enable a wide range of uses and intensities. At time of future subdivision or site plan review the need for individual services can be more precisely determined. No subdivision or site plan is approved without demonstration of adequate capacity. 38.300.020.C, “Placement of any given zoning district on an area depicted on the zoning map indicates a judgment on the part of the city that the range of uses allowed within that district are generally acceptable in that location. It is not a guarantee of approval for any given use prior to the completion of the appropriate review procedure and compliance with all of the applicable requirements and development standards of this chapter and other applicable policies, laws and ordinances. It is also not a guarantee of immediate infrastructure availability or a commitment on the part of the city to bear the cost of extending services.” The application site is located well within the City’s land use, transportation, parks, and utility planning areas. Those plans show this property as developing within the City when development is proposed. Adequacy of all these public requirements is evaluated during the subdivision and site development process. All zoning districts in Bozeman enable a range of uses and intensities. At the time of future subdivision or site plan review the need for individual services can be more precisely determined. No subdivision or site plan is approved without demonstration of adequate capacity. The future development of the area will require dedication and construction of streets, provision of parks, extension of water and sewer services, and placement of easements for telecommunication, electric service, and similar dry utilities. As noted in Section 6, Criterion A, multiple major transportation corridors serve the site and are paved but do not meet the city’s complete streets policy which will be addressed upon future development. Development of any urban zoning or more intensive County zoning district will require changes to the street to the degree demonstrated as necessary during review of the development. As noted above, the placement of a zoning district does not grant entitlement to construct. Laurel Parkway is a designated Collector Street and required ROW easements are required with the associated annexation. Similar to West Oak and Baxter Lane, with or without this proposed zoning amendment the street will change to an urban paved street at some time. The subject property is located within two identified drainage basins’, the Upper Baxter Creek Sewer Basin and Aajker Creek Sewer Drainage Basin. Currently there is no physical infrastructure in the Aajker Creek Sewer Drainage Basin. Specific development standards apply to these situations and are addressed with further development review. The Engineering Department identified these issues and provided comments to the applicant that specific sanitary sewer infrastructure improvements will be reviewed with future development applications. See advisory comments 1. 38 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 29 of 44 Additionally, the subject property is located outside of the City’s current service area for municipal water. The applicant is advised a minimum of two points of service must be in place to satisfy City standards, and that specific water infrastructure improvements will be reviewed with future development applications pursuant to section 38.410.070.A(1), BMC. See advisory comments 1. Responsibility to make those connections lies with the developer. Review of future development will further verify adequate capacity is present and all needed connections can be provided before any construction may begin. Division 38.420 and Section 38.520.060 require dedication of parks and on-site open spaces to meet the needs of residents. The associated annexation will partially address required compliance with City standards through the Terms of Annexation in Section 2. Dedication of right of way for arterials streets is part of the annexation process as is agreement to follow the City’s development standards. With future development proposals, the applicant must demonstrate not just possible but actual street networks and utility connections existing or to be constructed to support the intensity of development proposed. See also Section 6, Criterion F regarding transportation and Section 5, annexation Policies 8, 9, and 12. The criterion is met. E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Criterion Met. The R-4 and R-5 zoning designations have requirements for setbacks, height, and lot coverage which provide for the reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Any future development of the property will be required to conform to City standards for setbacks, height, lot coverage, and buffering. In addition to the zoning standards, adopted building codes contain more detailed requirements for air circulation, window placement, and building separation that further ensure the intent of this criterion is satisfied. The site has wetlands and riparian areas running through the property. The City requires protection of wetlands. This requirement applies to all zoning districts. This will support additional light and air beyond what would otherwise be applicable on the site. F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. Criterion Met. The proposed zoning will allow for a higher density of uses than is currently allowed under Gallatin County zoning. As a result, under the proposed zoning, when a development is proposed, they will be responsible for their frontage improvements which will include improvements along West Oak Street, Baxter Lane, and Laurel Parkway addition to internal streets required to serve development. 39 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 30 of 44 The City conducts routine transportation monitoring, modeling, and planning to understand existing conditions and future needs of the transportation system. The 2017 Transportation Master Plan is the most recent transportation plan. Figure 2.5, Existing Major Street Network, shows West Oak Street and Baxter Lane as an arterial streets and Laurel Parkway as a collector street. The Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2007 Update, Gallatin County’s adopted transportation plan for this same area, shows the same street classifications on Figure 2.2. These three streets will be the primary collector and arterial accesses to the site over time. Local streets will link the larger arterial and collectors. Both documents show extensions of Baxter and Oak as future expansions of the road network. Further capacity expansion to the transportation network is planned, such as upgrading the condition of Baxter Lane, West Oak Steet and Laurel Parkway including appropriate traffic control measures as warrants dictate. These expected actions to implement the Transportation Master Plan will mitigate impact on the larger transportation network as the overall area develops. Not all of these expansions will be the responsibility of individual projects. Support of multi-modal transportation is limited. Due the property’s location there are limited destinations within walking distance and bicycle infrastructure may not be robust enough to support viable use a bicycle as an alternative mode of transportation. City plans acknowledge the tension created with development. Not all goals and policies are furthered with a particular application. The need for housing, the logical extension of city limits, and planned future commercial and other supporting uses near the subject property outweigh negatives associated with this development. Future development of this property provides opportunity to expand the pedestrian network through installation of sidewalks such as a new East-West link to the development to the east. Bike and pedestrian travel is much more sensitive to distance than motor vehicle travel. Sidewalk installation is a minimum development standard under Chapter 38. This expands and improves the non-motorized transportation system. These links will be required with any future development under any municipal zoning district. The City has set minimum standards applicable to development to limit block length, ensure trail and sidewalk connections, and provide streets adequate to carry traffic projected from development. These standards are not applied at the time of the ZMA but are implemented during the subdivision and site plan processes required before any construction may begin. See also Section 6, Criterion D. The Walk Score is low with a walk score of one, a transit score of 17, and a bike score of 32. These values are provided by Walk Score, a private organization which presents information on real estate and transportation through walkscore.com. The algorithm which produces these numbers is proprietary. A score is not an indication of safety or continuity of services or routes. Scores are influenced by proximity of housing, transit, and services and expected ability, as determined by the algorithm, to meet basic needs without using a car. Sites located on the edge of the community have lower scores than those in the center of the community as the area is still under development and therefore diversity of uses is less than in fully established areas. 40 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 31 of 44 There are no adopted development standards relating to the walk score. If, as suggested by the applicant, their statement of constructing mixed-use, may eventually improve these scores. According to Walk Score® the walks score measures the walkability of any address based on the distance to nearby places and pedestrian friendliness. 90 – 100 Walker’s Paradise. Daily errands do not require a car. 70 – 89 Very Walkable. Most errands can be accomplished on foot. 50 – 69 Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot. 25 – 49 Car-Dependent. Most errands require a car. 0 – 24 Car-Dependent. Almost all errands require a car. Prior to occupancy or other appropriate trigger, the applicant must show all applicable transportation systems are adequate to serve the proposed development and must meet minimum City standards. The Applicant has been advised of specific code provisions that will apply with future development proposals. G. Promotion of compatible urban growth. Criterion Met. The Bozeman Community Plan establishes a preferred and compatible development pattern. “The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes where in the community… The land use categories and descriptions provide a guide for appropriate development and redevelopment locations for civic, residential, commercial, industrial, and other uses. The future land use designations are important because they aim to further the vision and goals of the City through promoting sustainability, citizen and visitor safety, and a high quality of life that will shape Bozeman’s future.” (Community Plan P. 51) Individuals may have widely varying opinions about what constitutes compatibility. To address this wide variation of viewpoint, Compatible development and Compatible land use are defined in Article 38.7 BMC to establish a common reference for consideration of this criterion and application of development standards. They are defined as: “Compatible development. The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use. 41 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 32 of 44 Compatible land use. A land use which may by virtue of the characteristics of its discernible outward effects exist in harmony with an adjoining land use of differing character. Effects often measured to determine compatibility include, but are not limited to, noise, odor, light and the presence of physical hazards such as combustible or explosive materials.” As noted in the definition of Compatible development, there are many elements that contributed to compatibility. The final sentence of the definition deserves emphasis “Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.” Compatible development can be different than what is already in place. The City has adopted a variety of standards to implement compatibility. The proposed R-4 and R-5 districts are residential in character. The allowed uses for residential districts are set in 38.310.030. Table 38.310.030.A - Permitted general and group residential uses in residential zoning districts, shows permitted uses in the R-4 and R-5 districts and Table 38.310.030.B details permitted accessory and non-residential uses in residential zoning districts. Adjacent zoning includes R-3, R-4, and REMU. REMU is allows more intense development pattern that the other residential zones. Multi-household structures are adjacent to the property to the south. The application proposes locating the R-5 zone next to the REMU to the east and R-4 on the western half which corresponds to the existing R-3 and R-4 to on the southern border of the subject property. The form and intensity standards for residential districts are in 38.320.030. The existing Laurel Glen subdivision (zoned R-3 and R-4) has developed between 5 – 20 living units per acre. According to City code the required minimum density for the R-1 through R-3 districts is 5, R-4 is 8 dwelling per net acre, and R-5 is 8 dwelling per gross acre. The more intensive development elements allowed in the R-4 and R-5 district is subject to additional development standards established in Article 38.500, Project Design, of the municipal code. These standards address both site and building design to enable differing uses and scales of development to meet the definition of compatible in the municipal code and presented above. Section 38.500.010. – Purpose states: “This article (38.5) implements the Bozeman's growth policy. Overall, this article: A. Provides clear objectives for those embarking on the planning and design of development projects in Bozeman; B. Preserves and protects the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Bozeman; C. Ensures that new commercial and multi-household development is of high quality and beneficially contributes to Bozeman's character; D. Ensures that new developments within existing neighborhoods are compatible with, and enhance the character of Bozeman's neighborhoods; 42 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 33 of 44 E. Promotes an increase in walking and bicycling throughout the City; F. F. Enhances the livability of Bozeman's residential developments; G. Maintains and enhances property values within Bozeman.” The intent of the R-4 district, 38.300.100.E, BMC, “is to provide for high-density residential development through a variety of housing types within the city with associated service functions. This purpose is accomplished by: 1. Providing for minimum lot sizes in developed areas consistent with the established development patterns while providing greater flexibility for clustering lots and mixing housing types in newly developed areas. 2. Providing for a variety of compatible housing types, including single and multi- household dwellings to serve the varying needs of the community's residents. 3. Allowing office use as a secondary use, measured by percentage of total building area. Use of this zone is appropriate for areas adjacent to mixed-use districts, commercial districts, and/or served by transit to accommodate a higher density of residents in close proximity to jobs and services.” The intent of the R-5 district, 38.300.100.F, BMC, “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. These purposes are accomplished by: 1. Providing for a mixture of housing types, including single and multi-household dwellings to serve the varying needs of the community's residents. 2. Allowing offices and small-scale retail and restaurants as secondary uses provided special standards are met. Use of this zone is appropriate for areas adjacent to mixed-use districts and/or served by transit to accommodate a higher density of residents in close proximity to jobs and services.” The proposed amendment is associated with an annexation creating an incremental increase in the size of the City. As discussed in Section 6, Criterion A above, both the City’s and County’s growth policies expect this area to transition from rural to urban development. The unannexed areas adjacent to this property are agricultural or detached homes on an individual large lot in conformance with the Gallatin County AS zoning. The City Commission has adopted standards to control development impacts and support compatibility. The following excerpt from the BCP 2020, page 75 describes the City’s approach. 43 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 34 of 44 “What combination of uses under what conditions can work well together? There is a wide range of possible answers for each community to consider. Some communities take a highly prescriptive worst-case view and try to restrain all possible points of perceived conflict. This tends to create a very homogenous community with little interest or scope for creativity. Bozeman takes a different approach. The worst case scenario is recognized as unlikely, but possible. Development standards deal with the majority of cases, while restraining extraordinary problems. The City creates standards under items 1 through 3; when one district is adjacent to another and is consistent with the growth policy, any physical conflicts will be minimal, if present at all. The City’s zoning policy encourages continued development of mixed uses. … The City uses the broad scope of its development standards to enable differing uses to be successful near each other. This shows on the zoning map where districts providing a wide diversity of uses are intermixed.” This proposal amends the zoning map and not the text. Therefore, no element of this amendment modifies the standards of any zoning district. The character of the districts as created by those standards remains intact. As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical extents of a zoning district. Application of any municipal zoning district to the subject property will alter the existing agricultural character of the subject property. It is not expected that zoning freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it provides a structured method to consider changes to the character. The BCP 2020 includes several objectives applicable to this criteria. These are: N-1.11 Enable a gradual and predictable increase in density in developed areas over time. N-1.2 Increase required minimum densities in residential districts. N-3.5 Strongly discourage private covenants that restrict housing diversity or are contrary to City land development policies or climate action plan goals. Application of any municipal zoning district to the subject property and subsequent development will alter the existing character of the subject property; which is fallow historic agricultural land within a rapidly developing area of the City. Likewise, development under any municipal zoning district will be visually different from adjacent unannexed property. This is true even if both are used for similar types of housing due to the differences between municipal and county zoning. Zoning doesn’t freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it provides a structured method to consider changes to the character. The BCP 2020 notes, “…when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an annexation request there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In this case, the 44 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 35 of 44 Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.” Staff concludes that although the R-4 and R-5 is less and more intense than some surrounding zoning, it is compatible urban growth as called for in the growth policy. See also discussion for Section 6, Criteria A & H. H. Character of the district. Criterion Met. Section 76-2-302, MCA says “…legislative body may divide the municipality into districts of the number, shape, and area as are considered best suited to carry out the purposes [promoting health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the community] of this part.” Emphasis added. This proposal amends the zoning map and not the text. Therefore, no element of this amendment modifies the standards of any zoning district. The character of the districts as created by those standards remains unaltered. Even though the criterion is most applicable to text amendments it still must be applied to consideration of zoning map amendments. The requested zoning meets the requirements of this criterion because, although different, it is compatible with surrounding zoning, existing roads and a park will provide a buffer between future development on this parcel and existing residential and agricultural uses, and promotes urban growth as called for in the BCP 2020. The proposed amendment only applies to the Applicant’s property and does not change what is or is not allowed on adjacent property. As noted above, the City Commission has discretion within the limits of the State established criteria in considering the location and geographical extents of a zoning district. Implementation of zoning must also be in accordance with the adopted growth policy. As noted in Section 6, Criterion A, the City policy calls for a diverse and densifying land use pattern. See discussion in Section 6, Criterion A. The BCP 2020 includes several objectives applicable to this criteria. These are: N-1.11 Enable a gradual and predictable increase in density in developed areas over time. N-1.2 Increase required minimum densities in residential districts. N-3.5 Strongly discourage private covenants that restrict housing diversity or are contrary to City land development policies or climate action plan goals. Application of any municipal zoning district to the subject property and subsequent development will alter the existing character of the subject property; which is a rural. Likewise, development under any municipal zoning district will be visually different from adjacent unannexed property. This is true even if both are used for similar types of housing due to the differences between municipal and county zoning. Similarly, development will likely be different from other annexed properties. For example, properties to the south are zoned R-3 or R-4 and developed as attached two-household through four attached dwellings and single- household detached neighborhoods, well below permitted densities. 45 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 36 of 44 Zoning doesn’t freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it provides a structured method to consider changes to the character. The BCP 2020 notes, “…when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an annexation request, there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.” See Section 6, Criterion A above for discussion about the application and growth policy and anticipated change to the character of the area. The City has defined compatible development as: “The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.” As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical extents of a zoning district. To date, the City of Bozeman has not defined a specific area outside of the area itself to be rezoned for consideration of this criterion. A review of the existing uses within a quarter mile radius of the amendment site shows three zoning districts. First is R-4, the same as what is being proposed which allows a variety of housing types in close proximity. Second, R-3, is a municipal district and allows a wide variety of housing types including detached homes, townhomes, and other forms of attached homes, as well as various institutional and light commercial uses. REMU which is mixed-use in character and provides options for a variety of housing, employment, retail and neighborhood service opportunities within a new or existing neighborhood. Finally, A-S, is a county zoning district focused on low density residential and preservation of agricultural operation until it transitions to urban development. See discussion under Section 6, Criterion A above. Page 77 of the BCP 2020 describing review of zoning map amendments states “When evaluating compliance with criteria, it is appropriate to consider all the options allowed by the requested district and not only what the present applicant describes as their intensions.” When evaluating compatibility between zoning districts, Staff considers the full range of allowable uses, not only what is built now or proposed by a specific project. The maps in Section 1, all of the municipally zoned areas in the immediate vicinity are in the upper range of zoning district intensity. This is consistent with the City’s previous and current 46 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 37 of 44 growth policy and infrastructure planning. The character of the larger area is in the process of changing with multiple large and intense developments now under construction or in review. This is illustrated by this excerpt from the Community Development Viewer. All colored or striped shaded areas are in some stage of review and development. This application is the solid orange shaded rectangle in the left of the image in a red box. Less than half of the area adjacent to the site is agricultural and has already transitioned from rural to urban, as described in Section 6, Criterion A. Therefore, the character is not fully defined, and is suitable to add additional uses. The City, as shown by an examination of the zoning map and authorized uses in all zoning districts, strives to encourage a diverse development pattern and avoid large areas of single use development. This is further supported by the statement in the description of the Urban Neighborhood future land use category, “Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged.” No size is specified for what is a large area. Therefore, when considering the character of an area it is expected that there will be diversity of development types. This diversity is also shown on the zoning maps in Section 1. Development within the City is more land efficient than rural or suburban development in unannexed areas. Urban intensity development whether more intensive apartment style development or more typical medium density residential is much more land efficient than rural/suburban development. Suburban development consumes 135 times the amount of land and the rural consumes 594 times the amount of land per home than urban development. Development within the City also provides for a wide range of housing types to meet a wide range of housing needs. Development within the City lessens likelihood of conversion of 47 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 38 of 44 agricultural and open spaces to other uses but does convert uses on some land with annexation. The City expects urban development within the municipal boundary. Table 4 of the BCP 2020, see Section 6, Criterion A above, identifies the implementing zoning districts of the Urban Neighborhood future land use category. That category allows for zoning districts that authorize a wide range of possible future development. There are no zoning districts which are limited to only one type of development. All zoning districts implementing the Urban Neighborhood category provide for a range of housing types, institutions, and commercial activities. The expansiveness and intensity allowed varies between districts. As noted in this report, the BCP 2020 calls for evaluation of the entire range of uses in zoning districts when evaluating criteria for zoning amendments. The R-4 and R-5 zoning districts and the adjacent R-3, R-4, and REMU zoning districts are residential in nature and are more similar than different in uses and standards. Development in R-4/5 is more intensive than that allowed in the R-3 district, such as an apartment building, is subject to the standards of Article 38.5. Article 38.5 imposes a variety of standards on site and building design. However, a recent text amendment allows “limited apartments” in the R-3 district. Limited apartments are structures that host up to eight dwellings units. The present development zoned R-3 near the subject property is developed at the low end of the allowed intensity for the R-3 zoning district. Evaluation of this situation is guided by the growth policy. On page 76 of the BCP 2020 under discussion of application of this zoning criteria is says: “Second, when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an annexation request there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.” The City has adopted many standards to identify and avoid or mitigate demonstrable negative impacts of development. These will support the ability of future development in R-4 and R-5 to be compatible with adjacent development and uphold the residential character in an area where R-4 or R-5 is applied even if the intensity between districts is different. The following excerpt from the BCP 2020, page 75 describes the City’s adopted approach. “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. 48 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 39 of 44 The City creates standards under items 1 through 3; when one district is adjacent to another and is consistent with the growth policy, any physical conflicts will be minimal, if present at all. The City’s zoning policy encourages continued development of mixed uses. … The City uses the broad scope of its development standards to enable differing uses to be successful near each other. This shows on the zoning map where districts providing a wide diversity of uses are intermixed.” The standards adopted by the City prevent physically dangerous spillover effects. An example is the capture, treatment and discharge controls from additional storm water runoff as additional impervious surfaces are built. Required setbacks from property lines, landscaping requirements, and similar site and building standards address character and compatibility. These and other standards carry out the intent and purpose of the City’s land development standards in Chapter 38 of the municipal code. Sec. 38.100.040. - Intent and purpose of chapter. A. The intent of this unified development chapter is to protect the public health, safety and general welfare; to recognize and balance the various rights and responsibilities relating to land ownership, use, and development identified in the United States and State of Montana constitutions, and statutory and common law; to implement the city's adopted growth policy; and to meet the requirements of state law. Zoning does not prohibit change but provides a structure within which change can occur. Such changes include modifications to both the text and zoning map. Such amendments are authorized in the zoning enabling act for municipalities. Landowners have both property rights and responsibilities. The City has adopted development standards to ensure that responsibilities are met while landowners exercise their property rights. The City has not chosen, and is not required, to adopt standards for all issues. For example, standards have not been adopted regarding preservation of view sheds or extra separation of buildings from unannexed property. Finally, Theme 7 of the BCP 2020 includes this statement: “RC-3.2 Work with Gallatin County to keep rural areas rural and maintain a clear edge to urban development that evolves as the City expands outwards.” This objective describes the situation now under review. The City is expanding outwards by annexation. Gallatin County has identified this area as a growth area in its land use planning documents. There will be a distinct edge between the AS and R-5 zoning districts with different intensity of residential uses. Staff concludes that R-4 and R-5 are not significantly or detrimental from or to the surrounding zoning is compatible urban growth called for in the growth policy. See also discussion for Section 6, Criteria A, G, and F. 49 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 40 of 44 I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. Neutral. The proposed amendment does not modify the existing standards of the R-4 or R-5 districts. Therefore the impact of the amendment is limited to this application site. The property is generally flat. A watercourses cross the property from south to north. Groundwater in the area is shallow and potentially at hazard from onsite sewage treatment. The property is within the City’s planning area for land use and utility extensions. There is frontage on West Oak Street, an arterial street, Baxter Lane, an arterial street, and Laurel Parkway, which is a collector street. Municipal utilities and emergency services can be extended to the area. These features are not unusual for properties adjacent to the City. The described features support annexation and development within the City. There are not sufficient distinctive characteristics of the property to make a positive or negative findings for this criteria specific to an individual zoning district. J. Conserving the value of buildings. Neutral. The proposed amendment does not modify the existing standards of the R-4 or R-5 districts. R-4/5 zoning are residential in nature and allow a variety of housing types as long as the minimum density standards are met. The immediate Future Land Use and zoning surrounding the property is residential in nature. Future development is not known at this juncture and will emerge with future development applications. The permitted uses must conform to the adopted zoning. Adjacent rights-of-way separate this property from adjacent property and will act as a buffer to the existing developments. The location of amenities that may increase the value of buildings such as parks, open space, trails, and value-added assets is undermined. Any new structures at the site will be required to meet setback and other protective requirements set forth in the Bozeman Municipal Code. Compliance will alleviate potential negative impacts to the value of surrounding buildings and properties. As described in earlier criteria, the proposed zoning is compatible with existing buildings on adjacent properties and does not create any new situations not in compliance with municipal code. K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. Criterion Met. The proposed R-4 and R-5 zoning designation will encourage the most appropriate use of land as the property is adjacent to both residential and commercial uses. There is access to the city’s services, including streets, thus is able to support a higher intensity of uses as allowed within the R-4 and R-5 zoning districts. Furthermore, the proposed R-4 and R-5 zoning designations are generally consistent with the BCP 2020 future land use map designation of “Urban Neighborhood”. 50 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 41 of 44 PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE AMENDMENT AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A PROPOSED CHANGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. The City will accept written protests from property owners against the proposal described in this report until the close of the public hearing before the City Commission. Pursuant to 76-2-305, MCA, a protest may only be submitted by the owner(s) of real property within the area affected by the proposal or by owner(s) of real property that lie within 150 feet of an area affected by the proposal. The protest must be in writing and must be signed by all owners of the real property. In addition, a sufficient protest must: (i) contain a description of the action protested sufficient to identify the action against which the protest is lodged; and (ii) contain a statement of the protestor's qualifications (including listing all owners of the property and the physical address), to protest the action against which the protest is lodged, including ownership of property affected by the action. Signers are encouraged to print their names after their signatures. A person may in writing withdraw a previously filed protest at any time prior to final action by the City Commission. Protests must be delivered to the Bozeman City Clerk, 121 North Rouse Ave., PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230. APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT Notice was published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on January 13 and 20, 2024. The notice was posted on site and notices mailed by the applicant as required by 38.220 and the required confirmation provided to the Planning Office. Notice was provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to any public hearing. No public comment has been received on this application as of the production of this report, APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING Adopted Growth Policy Designation: The property is designated as “Urban Neighborhood” in the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. “This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes. Complementary uses such 51 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 42 of 44 as parks, home-based occupations, fire stations, churches, schools, and some neighborhood-serving commerce provide activity centers for community gathering and services. The Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development. Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car.” Proposed Zoning Designation and Land Uses: The applicant has requested zoning of R-4, Residential High Density District, and R-5, Residential High Density Mixed District, whose intents are: Residential high density district (R-4). The intent of the R-4 residential high density district is to provide for high-density residential development through a variety of housing types within the city with associated service functions. This purpose is accomplished by: 1. Providing for minimum lot sizes in developed areas consistent with the established development patterns while providing greater flexibility for clustering lots and mixing housing types in newly developed areas. 2. Providing for a variety of compatible housing types, including single and multi- household dwellings to serve the varying needs of the community's residents. 3. Allowing office use as a secondary use, measured by percentage of total building area. Use of this zone is appropriate for areas adjacent to mixed-use districts, commercial districts, and/or served by transit to accommodate a higher density of residents in close proximity to jobs and services. The intent of the R-5 district, 38.300.100.F, BMC, “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. These purposes are accomplished by: 1. Providing for a mixture of housing types, including single and multi-household dwellings to serve the varying needs of the community's residents. 2. Allowing offices and small-scale retail and restaurants as secondary uses provided special standards are met. 52 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 43 of 44 Use of this zone is appropriate for areas adjacent to mixed-use districts and/or served by transit to accommodate a higher density of residents in close proximity to jobs and services.” 53 Staff Report for the Baxter 80 Annexation and ZMA, Application 23208 Page 44 of 44 APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF Owner: True North Partners, LLC, 60 Aajker Creek, Bozeman, MT 59901 Applicant: Morrison Maierle, 172 Timberwolf Parkway, Kalispell, MT 59901 Representative: Morrison Maierle, 172 Timberwolf Parkway, Kalispell, MT 59901 Report By: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner, Community Development Department FISCAL EFFECTS No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment. ATTACHMENTS The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. 54 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 and Orientation Regarding Planned Development Zone Applications MEETING DATE:February 5, 2024 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:Receive information and ask questions. 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 City adopted Planned Development Zones (PDZ) as a type of development review in October 2022 by Ordinance 2104 [External PDF]. This work was part of the affordable housing related implementation of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. Planned Development Zones are authorized in Division 38.430 [External link] of the municipal code. Staff will provide an overview of the PDZ purposes and processes to orient the Board before they consider the first PDZ application. A Planned Development Zone generally follows the zone map amendment process and will be shown on the zoning map if approved. The PDZ process replaced the previous Planned Unit Development (PUD) process for new development. Use of a PDZ is voluntary and must be initiated by the landowner. PDZs provide for substantial flexibility for the designer in exchange for providing identified public benefits. There are five different defined types of public benefits which can be used in support of a PDZ. These are: Affordable housing, Historic structure/site, Sustainable/resilient design, Large development, Combined benefits. An additional option for Novel public benefit is also allowed which has less specificity. Unlike a standard Zone Map Amendment which applies an existing zoning district to property, a PDZ provides an opportunity to establish a custom zoning district with unique standards only for the property within the PDZ and requires a general development plan for the site. A PDZ therefore, is expected to include one or more requests to change standards or allow uses 55 not typically allowed in the standard zoning district that forms the beginning point for consideration of a PDZ. A PDZ must be consistent with the land use description applied to the property by the future land use map in the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. Chapter 3 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 contains the land use descriptions. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:Not applicable. FISCAL EFFECTS:Not applicable. Report compiled on: February 1, 2024 56 Memorandum REPORT TO:Community Development Board FROM:Tom Rogers, Senior Planner Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager Erin George, Deputy Director of Community Development Anna Bentley, Director of Community Development SUBJECT:Planned Development Zone Requesting a Sustainability/Resilient Design on 41.97 Acres and Amendment of the City Zoning Map to Change Zoning from BP, Business Park District, to B-2, Community Business District, Application 23293 MEETING DATE:February 5, 2024 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative RECOMMENDATION:Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23293 and move to recommend approval of the MSU Innovation Campus Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND:The applicant is seeking a Planned Development Zone (PDZ) zone map amendment to the parcel known as the MSU Innovation Campus. The applicant is proposing a PDZ based on the B-2 zone with the relaxations outlined below. In exchange for these relaxations the applicant agrees that future development projects on the parcel will meet the conditions of the Sustainability/Resilient Design PDZ. Specifically, any future buildings and their associated site improvement will demonstrate a reduction of non- renewable energy use and water consumption of at least 25 percent. Per the MSUIC Planned Development Zone (PDZ) project narrative submitted as part of preliminary PDZ application 23293, the applicant is seeking a zone map amendment to the parcel known as the MSU Innovation Campus and proposing a PDZ based on the B-2 zone with relaxations, which are outlined in the project narrative. In exchange for these relaxations, the applicant proposes that future development projects on the parcel will meet the conditions of the Sustainability/Resilient Design PDZ (BMC Sec. 38.430.050.C.). 57 1. Authorized uses. Request to include Light Manufacturing and Manufacturing Moderate in addition to the base zoning designation uses (B-2). 2. Building height. Allow an increase of building height from the base B-2 height, implementing the Regional Commercial Future Land Use designation from 75 or 90’ to 120’ for a roof pitch less than 3:12 and 135’ for a roof pitch greater than 3:12. An increase of 44 to 60 percent depending on roof pitch. 3. Parking. Eliminate minimum parking requirements for the district. 4. Non-residential signage. Allow up to 400 square feet of signage per building or an increase of 1,100 percent based on the proposed building areas. 5. Blank wall treatment. Increase blank wall threshold from an area 10’ by 15’ to 24’ by 30’ or an increase of 480 percent. The applicant acknowledges that that any referenced base district standards of the B-2 Zone or other standards not explicitly modified by the PDZ are subject to change if the B-2 base district is amended. The property has an approved Master Site Plan (Application 17027). UNRESOLVED ISSUES:There are no unresolved issues with this application. ALTERNATIVES:1. Approve the application with recommended contingencies and conditions of approval; 2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended conditions of approval; 3. Deny the application based on the Commission’s findings of non- compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. Open and continue the public hearing on the application, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. FISCAL EFFECTS:No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this Planned Development Zone. Attachments: 23293 MSUIC PPDZ Staff Report CDB.pdf Report compiled on: January 31, 2024 58 Page 1 of 38 23293 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Public Hearing: Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) meeting is on February 5, 2024. City Commission hearing is on February 27, 2024. Project Description: Planned Development Zone 23293 requesting a Sustainability/Resilient Design Planned Development Zone on 41.97 acres and amendment 23293 of the City Zoning Map to modify zoning from BP, Business Park District, to B-2, Community Business District. Project Location: Multiple addresses generally located between West College and Garfield Streets and centered on Invention Drive. More particularly described as Tract C1-A of the Amended Plat of West College Minor Subdivision No. 195B along with the south 70 feet of West College Street right of way, located in the NW 1/4 and the NE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. Recommendation: Meets standards for approval with contingencies and conditions of approval. Recommended Zoning Commission Zoning Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23293 and move to recommend approval of the MSU Innovation Campus PDZ Zone Map and Text Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. Recommended City Commission Zoning Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, recommendation of the Zoning Commission, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23293 and move to approve the MSU Innovation Campus PDZ Zone Map and Text Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. Recommended City Commission General Development Plan Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23293 and move to approve the MSU Innovation Campus General Development Plan with recommended conditions of approval. Report: January 30, 2024 Staff Contact: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner 59 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 2 of 38 Agenda Item Type: Action – Legislative EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is based on the application materials submitted and public comment received to date. Unresolved Issues There are no unresolved issues with this application. Project Summary The applicant is seeking a Planned Development Zone (PDZ) zone map amendment to the parcel known as the MSU Innovation Campus. The applicant is proposing a PDZ based on the B-2 zone with the relaxations outlined below. Standards unique to this site are proposed as part of the text component of the PDZ. In exchange for these relaxations the applicant agrees that future development projects on the parcel will meet the conditions of the Sustainability/Resilient Design PDZ. Specifically, any future buildings and their associated site improvement will: 1. Demonstrate a reduction of water consumption of at least 25%. Future developments within the PDZ will provide documentation of the intended path to achieve the proposed 25% or greater reduction in indoor water usage and 25% or greater reduction in outdoor water usage as part of the Site Plan submission documents. This documentation may take the form of modelling prepared by a professional engineer demonstrating the required water usage reduction as compared to a model building that meets City of Bozeman development code requirements and state-adopted plumbing code requirements at the time of the submission, or a declaration of intent to follow the prescriptive path as outlined in the most recent version of the Planned Development Zone Procedures Manual; and 2. Demonstrate a reduction of non-renewable energy use of at least 25%. Future developments within the PDZ will provide documentation of the intended path to achieve the proposed 25% or greater reduction in non-renewable energy usage as part of the Building Permit submission documents. These calculations will be based on the most recently declared percentage of non-renewable energy within the energy mix as published by the energy utility at the time of submission. The reduction of the non-renewable energy portion of the delivered energy may include reductions in the energy use intensity (EUI) over a model building that meets City of Bozeman development code and state-adopted building code requirements at the 60 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 3 of 38 time of the submission, the production of on-site renewable energy, or a combination of the two. Per the MSUIC Planned Development Zone (PDZ) project narrative submitted as part of preliminary PDZ application 23293, the applicant is seeking a zone map amendment to the parcel known as the MSU Innovation Campus and proposing a PDZ based on the B-2 zone with relaxations, which are outlined in the project narrative. In exchange for these relaxations, the applicant proposes that future development projects on the parcel will meet the conditions of the Sustainability/Resilient Design PDZ (BMC Sec. 38.430.050.C.). The changes to standards and uses for this site and requested to be established through the PDZ are: 1. Authorized uses. Request to include Light Manufacturing and Manufacturing Moderate in addition to the base zoning designation uses (B-2). 2. Building height. Allow an increase of building height from the base B-2 height, implementing the Regional Commercial Future Land Use designation from 75 or 90’ to 120’ for a roof pitch less than 3:12 and 135’ for a roof pitch greater than 3:12. An increase of 44 to 60 percent depending on roof pitch. 3. Parking. Eliminate minimum parking requirements for the district. 4. Non-residential signage. Allow up to 400 square feet of signage per building or an increase of 1,100 percent based on the proposed building areas. 5. Blank wall treatment. Increase blank wall threshold from an area 10’ by 15’ to 24’ by 30’ or an increase of 480 percent. The applicant acknowledges that that any referenced base district standards of the B-2 Zone or other standards not explicitly modified by the PDZ are subject to change if the B-2 base district is amended. The property has an approved Master Site Plan (Application 17027). See also Modification 22107. The Plan arranged the street network and general development areas on the site. Subsequently, three site plan applications have been reviewed, approved, and the building constructed including: Advance Research Lab Site Plan. Application 18-225 Industry Bozeman Site Plan. Application 21-304 Aurora Technologies Site Plan. Application 22-114 In determining whether the criteria applicable to this application are met, Staff considers the entire body of plans and regulations for land development. Standards which prevent or mitigate possible negative impacts are incorporated in many locations in the municipal code but are principally in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code. References in the text of this report to Articles, Divisions, or in the form xx.xxx.xxx are to the Bozeman Municipal Code. 61 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 4 of 38 Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on February 5, 2024, and will forward their recommendation to the City Commission. No public comment has been received on this application at the time of publication of this report. Alternatives 1. Approve the application with recommended contingencies to the PDZ and conditions of approval for the General Development Plan; 2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended conditions of approval for the General Development Plan; 3. Deny the application based on the Commission’s findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. Open and continue the public hearing on the application, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. 62 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 5 of 38 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 2 Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 2 Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2 Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary ................................... 4 Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 4 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES .................................................................................................... 6 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT... 11 SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN .......................................... 11 SECTION 4 – CODE PROVISIONS ..................................................................................... 12 SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ...................................... 13 Planned Development Zone (General Development Plan) ............................................... 13 Zone Map Amendment ..................................................................................................... 13 SECTION 6 - ZONING AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ................ 14 SECTION 7 – PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS .......... 30 SECTION 8 – GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ANALYSIS & FINDINGS ............... 34 PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ......................................................... 35 APPENDIX A - DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT .................................................... 35 APPENDIX C - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING ................... 35 APPENDIX D - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF............................ 38 FISCAL EFFECTS ................................................................................................................. 38 ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................... 38 63 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 6 of 38 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES Map 1: Project Vicinity Map 64 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 7 of 38 Map 2: BCP 2020 Future Land Use Map Subject Property 65 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 8 of 38 Map 3: Existing City Zoning 66 Page 9 of 38 Map 4: MSU Master Site Plan 67 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 10 of 38 Map 5: General Development Plan 68 Page 11 of 38 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Please note that these contingencies are necessary for the City to complete the process of the proposed amendment. Recommended Contingencies of Approval: 1. That all documents and exhibits necessary to establish an initial municipal zoning designation shall be identified as the “MSU Innovation Campus PDZ Zone Map Amendment.” All required documents must be returned to the City within 60 days of the City Commission action to annex the property or the preliminary approval shall be null and void. 2. That the Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be finalized until the Annexation Agreement is signed by the applicant and formally approved by the City Commission. If the annexation agreement is not approved, the Zone Map Amendment application shall be null and void. 3. The applicant must submit a zone amendment map, titled “MSU Innovation Campus PDZ Zone Map Amendment”, acceptable to the Director of Transportation and Engineering, as a PDF which will be utilized in the preparation of the Ordinance to officially amend the City of Bozeman Zoning Map. Said map shall contain a mete and bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property including adjacent rights-of-way, and the individual zoning districts, and total acreage of the property. 4. The Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant provides an editable mete and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed Montana surveyor. SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN The following conditions general development plan are recommended to enable the application to comply with the City’s adopted plans and codes and the requirements of state law for the provision of services. Recommended conditions of approval: 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 or state law. 2. No phasing granted with this application. 3. No signage approved with application. 69 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 12 of 38 4. Designated base zoning district will be B-2, Community Business District. 5. Upon final approval of the general development plan and zoning Ordinance the following relaxations are applied to the base zoning. a) Authorized uses. Request to include Light Manufacturing and Manufacturing Moderate in addition to the base zoning designation uses (B-2). b) Building height. Allow an increase of building height from the base B-2 height, implementing the Regional Commercial Future Land Use designation from 75 or 90’ to 120’ for a roof pith less than 3:12 and 135’ for a roof pitch greater than 3:12. c) Parking. Eliminate minimum parking requirements for the district. d) Non-residential signage. Allow up to 400 square feet of signage per building. e) Blank wall treatment. Increase blank wall threshold from an area 10’ by 15’ to 24’ by 30’. 6. That all documents and exhibits necessary to establish the amended municipal zoning designation of PDZ shall be identified as the “MSUIC PDZ Zone Map Amendment”. SECTION 4 – CODE PROVISIONS Development Plan Code Provisions: 1. BMC 38.270.030 requires that all improvements to be dedicated to the public, such as water mains, sewer mains, parkland and related improvements, and public streets, must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications by the developer, and certified by a registered professional civil engineer, licensed in the state, and accepted by the city prior to the approval of the final plat, building permit, issuance of a certificate of occupancy or other identified benchmark as may be appropriate. 2. BMC 38.430.100.C(2). The applicant may submit to the director a written request for extension of time of up to two years to obtain the required building permit, and the director may approve such requests pursuant to section 38.230.140.F. 3. BMC 38.430.100.B. The preliminary development plan is valid for one year from date of approval. 4. BMC 38.430.080.B.1(b) No development granted with PDZ approval. Subsequent site plan review and possible approval is required prior to approval of any building permit(s). 5. BMC 38.430.100.C Upon, and if, Final PDZ GDP approval is granted, the final plan approval period is valid for three (3) years. 70 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 13 of 38 SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS Planned Development Zone (General Development Plan) Having considered the criteria established for a General Development Plan, the Development Review Committee (DRC) did not find any deficiencies that prohibit approval at this time that will not be addressed through future development review processes and adopted City Codes. The City Commission will hold a public meeting on the General Development Plan on February 27, 2024. The meeting will be held at 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. Zone Map Amendment Having considered the criteria established for a zone map amendment, the Staff found the requested zoning meets standards for approval as submitted. The Zone Map Amendment (ZMA) is in conjunction with a planned development zone application. Staff’s recommendation and staff responses are predicated on approval of the general development plan, application 23293. The Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the amendment. The DRC did not identify any infrastructure or regulatory constraints that would impede the approval of the application that cannot be addressed with adopted standards and requirements for future development. The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this ZMA on February 5, 2024, and will forward a recommendation to the Commission on the Zone Map amendment. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in will be held in the Commission Room at City Hall, 121 N. Rouse Ave, Bozeman, Montana. Members of the public will also be able to participate remotely via WebEx. Instructions for joining the WebEx meeting will be included on the meeting agenda which is published on the City’s website at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. The agenda is available at https://www.bozeman.net/meetings. The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the planned development zone and the general development plan on February 27, 2024. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in the Commission Room at City Hall, 121 N. Rouse Ave, Bozeman, Montana, Members of the public will also be able to participate remotely via WebEx. Instructions for joining the meeting through electronic means will be included on the meeting agenda which is published on the City’s website at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. The agenda is available at https://www.bozeman.net/meetings. 71 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 14 of 38 SECTION 6 - ZONING AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission must consider the following criteria (letters A-K). As an amendment is a legislative action, the Commission has broad latitude to determine a policy direction. The burden of proof that the application should be approved lies with the applicant. A zone map amendment must be in accordance with the growth policy (criteria A) and be designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers (criteria B), promote public health, public safety, and general welfare (criteria C), and facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements (criteria D). Therefore, to approve a zone map amendment the Commission must find Criteria A-D are met. In addition, the Commission must also consider criteria E-K, and may find the zone map amendment to be positive, neutral, or negative with regards to these criteria. To approve the zone map amendment, the Commission must find the positive outcomes of the amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K. In determining whether the criteria are met, Staff considers the entire body of plans and regulations for land development. Standards which prevent or mitigated negative impacts are incorporated throughout the entire municipal code but are principally in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code. Planned Development Zone applications amends both the zoning map and text. Both changes to the map and text must be analyzed against State review criteria of 76-2-304, Mont. Code Ann. However, depending on the nature and scope of the request, separate or combined zoning analysis will be provided. The MSUIC Planned Development Zone application proposes changing the zoning classification from BP to a base zone of B-2 and amending five areas of development standards. A combined map and text analysis is suitable for this application. Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. Criterion met. The BCP 2020, Chapter 5, p. 73, in the section titled Review Criteria for Zoning Amendments and Their Application, discusses how the various criteria in 76-2-304 MCA are applied locally. Application of the criteria varies depending on whether an amendment is for the zoning map or for the text of Chapter 38, BMC. The first criterion for a zoning amendment is accordance with a growth policy. 72 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 15 of 38 Future Land Use Map The proposed amendment is a change to the zoning map. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze compliance with the future land use map. Chapter 3 of the BCP 2020 addresses the future land use map. The introduction to that chapter discusses the importance of the chapter. Following are some excerpts. “Future land use is the community’s fundamental building block. It is an illustration of the City’s desired outcome to accommodate the complex and diverse needs of its residents.” “The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes where in the community. Each category has its own descriptions. Understanding the future land use map is not possible without understanding the category descriptions.” The area of this application is within the annexed area of the City and where there is anticipated redevelopment within the City as discussed below. As shown on the maps in Section 1, on the excerpt of the current future land use map, the property is designated as Regional Commercial and Services. The Regional Commercial and Services designation description reads: “Regionally significant developments in this land use category may be developed with physically large and economically prominent facilities requiring substantial infrastructure and location near significant transportation facilities. Due to the scale of these developments, location, and transition between lower density uses is important. Residential space should be located above the first floor to maintain land availability for necessary services. Development within this category needs well-integrated utilities, transportation, and open space networks that encourage pedestrian activity and provide ready-access within and adjacent to development. Large community scale areas in this land use category are generally 75 acres or larger and are activity centers for several surrounding square miles. These are intended to service the overall community as well as adjacent neighborhoods and are typically distributed by a one-to two-mile separation.” The property underwent a growth policy amendment to change the future land use designation from Public Institutions to Regional Commercial and Services in 2022, see Application 22282. According to the application materials, the Innovation Campus had been in development under the auspices of the MSU Foundation and was therefore originally classified as Public Institution on the future land use map. Development oversight and ownership of the Innovation Campus has now transferred to a private entity and the scope of the intended development has shifted. A master site plan for the area has been reviewed and approved. The owners believe that a change in future land use designation and zoning change from PLI to B-P may be beneficial and enable development more consistent with the goals of the growth policy and their goals. 73 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 16 of 38 The correlation between the future land use map of the growth policy and the zoning districts is presented in Table 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. As shown in the following Correlation with Zoning Table, the B-2 district is an implementing district of the Regional Commercial and Services category. Goals and Policies A zoning amendment is also evaluated against the goals and policies of the BCP 2020. Most of the goals and policies are not applicable to this application. Relevant goals and objectives have been identified by staff. Conflict with the text of the growth policy hasn’t been identified. The Short-Term Action list on page 63 of the BCP 2020 describes 14 items to implement the growth policy. The first two relate to direct changes to the zoning map in support of listed goals and objectives. These include increasing the intensity of zoning districts in already developed areas. Beginning on page 71 of the BCP 2020 in the section titled Zoning Amendment Review, the document discusses how the City implements zoning for new areas, amendments to areas, and revisions to existing text. This section includes a discussion of when the City may initiate a zoning change to a more intensive district to increase development opportunities. This section demonstrates that the City, as a matter of policy, is supportive of 74 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 17 of 38 more intensive zoning districts and development, even within already developed areas. This policy approach does not specify any individual district but does lean towards the more intensive portion of the zoning district spectrum. The Applicant argues the proposed zone change in accordance with the Growth Policy by arguing, “The proposed zone map amendment from B-P to PDZ/B-2 will allow for similar land uses that are currently allowed on the parcel but will allow a greater density of this development. The increased density supports several goals and objectives of the Community Plan.” Further, relying heavily on the applicant analysis provided in the narrative submitted with the application, the following goals and objectives are submitted in support of the zoning change. Goal DCD-1: Support urban development within the City. DCD-1.1 Evaluate alternatives for more intensive development in proximity to high visibility corners, services, and parks. The MSU-IC is well situated to support this goal and the relaxations requested will encourage more intensive development on the parcel. The principle arterial West College Street and the collector W. Garfield Street flank the property to the north and to the south. The campus is well supported by commercial services immediately to the west and is a short distance to services to the north and downtown to the east-north-east. Finally, the majority of the MSU campus is within a 1-mile radius. The inclusion of Light Manufacturing uses in this location is appropriate. Recently, the City modified its development code to allow Artisan Manufacturing in all commercial and Industrial zoning districts, except PLI. This change is a response to the changing forms of manufacturing in general. The MSUIC proposed uses integrate these changes. The buffers surrounding the site further support expanded uses on the subject property. Reducing minimum parking requirements in this location is reasonable. There is an approved Master site plan detailing the street network, building locations, general parking areas, and internal multi-modal circulation. The site is surrounded by Collector and Arterial streets that do not allow parking, except in certain situations. Other MSU property adjacent to the subject property are currently used for ag research, no parking allowed. Previously approved development has provided sufficient parking. Although the property is outside of the University Trip Exchange District [External PDF Link], the same principals may apply to this site depressing vehicle trips compared to similar developments elsewhere in the city. Therefore, is likely reduced parking will only impact tenants of the development and not the neighboring properties. DCD-1.2 Remove regulatory barriers to infill. The regulations associated with the existing B-P zoning designation encourages low-rise development with generous amounts of parking. The requested PDZ relaxations will 75 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 18 of 38 provide alternative development options, will potentially attract a more diverse array of potential tenant companies, and will allow for the development of this infill site to be accomplished in a way that is more aligned with the development goals of the city. DCD-1.10 Support University efforts to attract development near campus. The MSU Innovation Campus is designed to facilitate new and in-depth partnerships between MSU and private sector business. It has as a primary goal to accommodate appropriate development adjacent to campus and to foster opportunities for meaningful collaboration. In terms of non-residential development, the MSUIC is among the very most desirable locations, for the city and for the university, to support this goal. Goal DCD 2: Encourage growth throughout the City, while enhancing the pattern of community development oriented on centers of employment and activity. Support an increase in development intensity with developed areas. DCD-2.2 Support higher density development along main corridors and at high visibility street corners to accommodate population growth and support businesses. The Innovation Campus is bounded by the principle arterial W. College Street to the North and the collector W. Garfield Street to the south. The principal arterials W. Main Street/Huffine and S. 19th Street are a short distance to the site. The requested relaxations would support this goal by allowing for a higher density of development along and in proximity to these main corridors. DCD-2.4 Evaluate revisions to maximum building height limits in all zoning districts to account for contemporary building methods and building code changes. The proposed relaxation of the maximum allowable building height for the campus would be in support of the intentions of this goal. Increased building height is appropriate for this location. As noted above there are substantial buffers surrounding the site that will mitigate potential impacts cause by greater building height. The property is designated as Regional Commercial and Services (RCS). When implementing the Regional Commercial and Services, the B-2 zone building height may be increased 50 percent. The applicant is modifying this to allow an additional 15 feet or one more story. The design of the approved master site plan, street configuration, and related conditions make the proposed change reasonable with the offset provided thought resiliency and sustainability. 76 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 19 of 38 DCD-2.9 Evaluate increasing the number of stories allowed in the centers of employment and activity while also directing height transitions down to adjacent neighborhoods. As a center of employment within the city, the proposed relaxation of the maximum allowable building height for the campus would be in direct support of this goal. Goal DCD-3: Ensure multimodal connectivity within the City. DCD-3.5 Encourage increased development intensity in commercial centers and near major employers. The proposed relaxations, particularly those related to maximum building height and to minimum parking, would support this goal by allowing for an increased intensity of development in proximity to the commercial area centered on the intersection of W. College Street and Huffine as well as being adjacent to the city’s largest employer Montana State University. DCD-3.6 Evaluate parking requirements and methods of providing parking as part of the overall transportation system for and between districts. The proposed relaxation to the minimum parking requirements would support this goal and would allow the MSUIC to treat the provided parking as a campus- wide supply rather than creating parking lots that would effectively be assigned to individual buildings. Reducing minimum parking requirements in this location is reasonable. There is an approved Master site plan detailing the street network, building locations, general parking areas, and internal multi-modal circulation. The site is surrounded by Collector and Arterial streets that do not allow parking, except in certain situations. Other MSU property adjacent to the subject property are currently used for ag research, no parking allowed. Previously approved development has provided sufficient parking. Although the property is outside of the University Trip Exchange District [External PDF Link], the same principals may apply to this site depressing vehicle trips compared to similar developments elsewhere in the city. Therefore, is likely reduced parking will only impact tenants of the development and not the neighboring properties. Goal EPO-3: Address climate change in the City’s plans and operations. EPO-3.3 Support water conservation, use of native plants in landscaping, and development of water reuse systems. The applicant is pursuing a PDZ through the Sustainability/Resilient Design path as defined by the City. The applicant will commit that all future development will demonstrate at least a 25% reduction of water consumption over a model building 77 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 20 of 38 allowed by the current plumbing and building codes. The approval of this PDZ, and the water savings that will be achieved in all future phases of development, will be in direct support of this water conservation goal. Comments from the City’s Water Conservation program commented that, “Future developments within the PDZ will provide documentation of the intended path to achieve the proposed 25% or greater reduction in indoor water usage and 25% or greater reduction in outdoor water usage as part of the Site Plan submission documents. This documentation may take the form of modeling prepared by a professional engineer demonstrating the required water usage reduction as compared to a model building that meets City of Bozeman development code requirements and state-adopted plumbing code requirements at the time of the submission, or a declaration of intent to follow the prescriptive path as outlined in the most recent version of the Planned Development Zone Procedures Manual.” EPO-3.4 Review and update landscape and open space standards for public and private open spaces to reduce water use. Likewise, review and update standards for reuse systems. As stated above, the applicant is pursuing a PDZ through the Sustainability/Resilient Design path as defined by the City. The applicant will commit that all future development, including the development of community and open space, will demonstrate at least a 25% reduction of water consumption over a development that would be allowed by the current plumbing and building codes. The approval of this PDZ, and the water savings that will be achieved in all future phases of development, will be in direct support of this water conservation goal. EPO-3.9 Integrate climate change considerations into development standards. As stated in the previous two goals, the applicant is pursuing a PDZ through the Sustainability/Resilient Design path as defined by the City. All future site development will demonstrate at least a 25% reduction of water consumption and a 25% reduction of non-renewable energy usage. As such, future developments on the parcel will provide areas for job growth within the city while reducing the impact of this growth on a finite water supply and on greenhouse gas emissions. Comments from the Sustainability Program commented that, “Future developments within the PDZ will provide documentation of the intended path to achieve the proposed 25% or greater reduction in non-renewable energy usage as part of the Building Permit submission documents. These calculations will be based on the most recently declared percentage of non-renewable energy within the energy mix as published by the energy utility at the time of submission. The reduction of the non-renewable energy portion of the delivered energy may include reductions in the energy use intensity (EUI) over a model 78 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 21 of 38 building that meets City of Bozeman development code and state-adopted building code requirements at the time of the submission, the production of on-site renewable energy, or a combination of the two.” Goal M-1: Ensure multimodal accessibility. M-1.1 Prioritize mixed-use land use patterns. Encourage and enable the development of housing, jobs and services in close proximity to one another. The MSUIC is an infill parcel that is envisioned as a center for technology jobs in southwest Montana. The campus is situated with significant retail and services to the west, single and multi-family neighborhoods to the north, and campus housing east of 19th Avenue. As such, the MSUIC is in a particularly advantageous position to encourage walking and bicycle trips as well as supporting the utilization of the bus network. M-1.12 Eliminate parking minimum requirements in commercial districts and affordable housing areas and reduce parking minimums elsewhere, acknowledging that demand for parking will still result in new supply being built. The approval of the requested PDZ relaxation to remove parking minimums for all future development on the campus would be in direct support of this goal. As noted above, reducing minimum parking requirements in this location is reasonable. There is an approved Master site plan detailing the street network, building locations, general parking areas, and internal multi-modal circulation. The site is surrounded by Collector and Arterial streets that do not allow parking, except in certain situations. Other MSU property adjacent to the subject property are currently used for ag research, no parking allowed. Previously approved development has provided sufficient parking. Although the property is outside of the University Trip Exchange District [External PDF Link], the same principals may apply to this site depressing vehicle trips compared to similar developments elsewhere in the city. Therefore, is likely reduced parking will only impact tenants of the development and not the neighboring properties. Goal EE-1: Promote the continued development of Bozeman as an innovative and thriving economic center. EE-1.1 Support the goals and objectives outlined in the Bozeman Economic Development Strategy. The proposed PDZ relaxations would allow for a significant increase in the density of development on the Innovation Campus. The ability to support more, and larger, technology companies in close proximity to each other supports the goals and objectives 79 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 22 of 38 of the Bozeman Economic Development Strategy. In particular, these increases would be in support of the identified knowledge- based industry cluster of Photonics, Software/IT, and Biotechnology. In addition, Objective 1.2 encourages investment in, and support of employment areas desired by traded sector business expansion; Objective 1.3 encourages the support of industry cluster collaboration; Objective 2.2 encourages the support of existing startup infrastructure; all of which are fundamental to the mission of the MSU-IC. In conclusion, staff finds no conflicts with the Growth Policy by the modification of the zoning map from BP to B-2 or the changes in text associated with the PDZ. Staff finds that the applicant has met the burden of proof in support of this application as required by the growth policy. B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers. Criterion met. The subject property is currently served by City of Bozeman Fire and Police Departments. Future development of the property will be required to conform to all City of Bozeman public safety, building and land use requirements, which will ensure this criterion is met. The change from PLI to B-2 is not likely to adversely impact safety from fire and other dangers. Further, the Fire Department reviewed the application and did not express concerns about serving the site with any of the proposed modifications to the standards of the development code. C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. Criterion met. City development standards included in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code, building codes, and engineering standards all ensure that this criterion is met. Adequate water and sewer supply and conveyance provide for public health through clean water. Rapid and effective emergency response provides for public safety. The City’s standards ensure that adequate services are provided prior to building construction which advances this criterion. General welfare has been evaluated during the adoption of Chapter 38 and found to be advanced by the adopted standards. The proposed revisions to the B-2 base zone will not materially affect this criterion. Provision of parks, control of storm water, and other features of the City’s development standards also advance the general welfare. Compliance with the BCP 2020 as described in Section 6, Criterion A, shows advancement of the well-being of the community as a whole. See also Criterion B. D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements. Criterion met. The BCP 2020, page 74, says the following regarding evaluation of Section 4, Criteria B, C, & D for zoning amendments: “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 80 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 23 of 38 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 conducts extensive planning for municipal transportation, water, sewer, parks, sustainability, and other facilities and services provided by the City. The adopted plans allow the City to consider existing conditions; and identify enhancements needed to provide service to new development. See page 19 of the BCP 2020 for a listing. The City implements these plans through its capital improvements program (CIP). The CIP identifies individual projects, project construction scheduling, and financing of construction for infrastructure. Private development must demonstrate compliance with standards prior to construction. Dedication of school facilities is not required by municipal zoning standards. However, School District 7 will have opportunity to review and comment on future development. The subject properties are within the City’s land use, transportation, parks, and utility planning areas. Those plans show this property as developing within the City when development is proposed. Review of the master site plan now in place for the property evaluated capacity and found sufficient capacity exists. The change in uses is not expected to substantially alter required capacity. As stated in 38.300.020.C, the designation of a zoning district does not guarantee approval of new development until the City verifies the availability of needed infrastructure. 38.300.020.C, “Placement of any given zoning district on an area depicted on the zoning map indicates a judgment on the part of the city that the range of uses allowed within that district are generally acceptable in that location. It is not a guarantee of approval for any given use prior to the completion of the appropriate review procedure and compliance with all applicable requirements and development standards of this chapter and other applicable policies, laws and ordinances. It is also not a guarantee of immediate infrastructure availability or a commitment on the part of the city to bear the cost of extending services.” E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Criterion met. This criterion is not about individual preferences for a given degree of visual openness but about preservation of public health. The B-2 district provides adequate light and air through the Bozeman Unified Development Code’s standards for park and recreation 81 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 24 of 38 requirements, on-site open space for residential uses, maximum building height, lot coverage, and setback requirements. The form and intensity standards, Division 38.320, provide minimum lot areas, lot widths, lot coverage and maximum floor area ratios, and prescribe require minimum separation from property lines and limits building heights. Section 38.520.030 requires building placement to ensure access to light and air. Division 38.420 and Section 38.520.060 require dedication of parks and on-site open spaces to meet needs of residents. The standards provide a reasonable provision of adequate light and air. In addition to the zoning standards, adopted building codes contain more detailed requirements for air circulation, window placement, and building separation that further ensure the intent of this criterion is satisfied. The applicant provided additional support by stating that, “While the applicant is requesting a relaxation of the maximum allowable height, the zoning designation will still have significant requirements for setbacks, buffering and lot coverage. All future developments on the campus will be required to conform to these building requirements which will ensure that future buildings will have adequate access to light and air.” F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. Criterion met. Staff diverges from the applicant’s assessment that this criterion is not met. Although final densities are not known, the existing transportation system including West Garfield, College, internal streets, and the proximity to 19th and Huffine Lane provide adequate infrastructure to support development including the proposed relaxations. All developments in the city are required to construct transportation system to accommodate their impacts on the system and this development is no exception. Internal and surrounding streets are constructed. Additional internal circulation systems will be required to accommodate all transportation needs including pedestrians and bicycles. The proposed zoning with relaxations will allow for a higher intensity than the base code allows. Future development and redevelopment of the property will be required to comply with transportation-related standards and reviewed for impacts on the surrounding streets, intersections, and sidewalks, and improvements to the transportation network to serve the site, which will improve the overall transportation system. These improvements include provisions for non-motorized transportation systems. The change in zoning district will have minimal effect on required road improvements, pedestrian or bicycle facilities, or similar compliance with standards. The application requests a parking requirement of zero for this area. The subject property is a single parcel under control of a single developer. Responsibility for parking provision and management for all on-site users will be the responsibility of the landowner. 82 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 25 of 38 Due to the size and configuration of the property the Walk Score varies depending on where you request the data. Near the center of the subject property reveals a Walk Score of 24, a transit score of 23, and a bike score of 83. Average walk score for the city is 47 (down from 48) out of 100. According to Walk Score® the walks score measures the walkability of any address based on the distance to nearby places and pedestrian friendliness. According to Walk Score® the walks score measures the walkability of any address based on the distance to nearby places and pedestrian friendliness. 90 – 100 Walker’s Paradise. Daily errands do not require a car. 70 – 89 Very Walkable. Most errands can be accomplished on foot. 50 – 69 Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot. 25 – 49 Car-Dependent. Most errands require a car. 0 – 24 Car-Dependent. Almost all errands require a car. These values are provided by Walk Score, a private organization which presents information on real estate and transportation through walkscore.com. The algorithm which produces these numbers is proprietary. A score is not an indication of safety or continuity of services or routes. Scores are influenced by proximity of housing, transit, and services and expected ability, as determined by the algorithm, to meet basic needs without using a car. Sites located on the edge of the community have lower scores than those in the center of the community as the area is still under development and therefore diversity of uses is less than in fully established areas. There are no adopted development standards relating to the walk score. G. Promotion of compatible urban growth. Criterion met. The Bozeman Community Plan establishes a preferred and compatible development pattern. “The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes where in the community… The land use categories and descriptions provide a guide for appropriate development and redevelopment locations for civic, residential, commercial, industrial, and other uses. The future land use designations are important because they aim to further the vision and goals of the City through promoting sustainability, citizen and visitor safety, and a high quality of life that will shape Bozeman’s future.” (Community Plan p. 51). The City’s future land use map designates the properties as Regional Commercial and Services. These designations correlate with several zoning districts including the B-2 base district proposed by the applicants. The districts were developed by the City to promote appropriate urban growth compatible with the areas of the City as identified on the future land use map. Based on the land use map designations and correlated zoning districts in the plan and proposed by the applicants, the zone map amendment would promote compatible urban growth. The uses 83 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 26 of 38 of the B-2 base district are already in place in adjacent property. Also see the discussion in (H) below. The applicant provides additional support by stating, “The future land use map designates the MSUIC as Regional Commercial and Services. This designation correlates to several zoning districts including the B-2 as proposed by the applicant. In addition, the proposed relaxation to the minimum parking requirements is intended to help facilitate the creation of a more urban neighborhood of buildings that relate to each other, rather than being individual buildings separated by parking lots.” H. Character of the district. Criterion met. Section 76-2-302, MCA says “…legislative body may divide the municipality into districts of the number, shape, and area as are considered best suited to carry out the purposes [promoting health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the community] of this part.” Emphasis added. This proposal amends the zoning map and text for this site only. Therefore, no element of this amendment modifies the standards of the B-2 district elsewhere in the city. The character of the districts as created by those standards remains intact. As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical extents of a zoning district. It is not expected that zoning freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it provides a structured method to consider changes to the character. This is especially true when applying zoning to undeveloped areas as any new construction will alter the physical characteristics of the area. The City has defined compatible development as: “The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.” The City has adopted many standards to identify and avoid or mitigate demonstrable negative impacts of development. These will support the ability of future development in the proposed B-2 district, in a Regional Commercial Future Land Use area context, to be compatible with adjacent development’s mixed-use characteristics and uphold the unique character of the area. The site has existing building, parking area, and undeveloped area. The existing buildings on- site are consistent with the requested PDZ. There are a wide variety of uses adjacent to the site 84 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 27 of 38 including residential, agricultural, educational, and commercial. A review of the uses allowed in the proposed PDZ shows many similarities with existing and authorized uses in the surrounding area. Further, the applicant puts forward in support of their application, “While the site and the lands to the west were until recently ag lands, there is a character that is being developed in this Regional and Commercial Services node of the city. The proposed relaxations would be in general support of the character that has begun to develop to the west of the site along Technology Boulevard. In particular, the minimum parking relaxation will allow for a more continuous urban edge along that corridor.” Therefore, the change in zoning does not appear to conflict with the character of the area. I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. Criterion met. Future uses for construction on the site are not finalized at this time and the purpose of this application is to expand permitted uses to include Light Manufacturing in the B-2 zone. Suitability of the site for particular uses is not easily evaluated. The applicant argues, “The property is well situated between centers of commerce, areas of housing and the campus of Montana State University. The MSUIC location is well suited to the creation of an innovation hub that will attract national-level technology firms seeking to leverage collaboration opportunities with the university while providing their workers with access to the cultural and outdoor amenities that Bozeman has to offer.” However, this statement does not directly address whether or not the B-2 zone, and the inclusion of Light Manufacturing uses are suitable for the subject property. As shown in Figure 4, the property is bounded by B-2 zoning to the west known as the Bozeman Gateway development, R-O and R-4 to the north, PLI on the south and east, and BP immediately adjacent to the subject property to the east. First, the Commission recently approved a growth policy amendment to change the future land use designation from Public Institutions to Regional Commercial and Services in 2022, see Application 22282. This action rendered the existing zoning of BP not suitable for the property and indicated one of the implementing districts for the Regional Commercial and Services appropriate which include B-2, B-2M, UMU, and PLI. The UMU and PLI districts are not appropriate in this case due to restrictions on placement or intent of public ownership leaving either the B-2 or B-2M as possible districts to implement the growth policy. The applicant desires B-2 as the base zone for the proposed PDZ. Considering the extra intensity that is allowed through the Regional Commercial and Service FLU designation and the intended purpose of the MSU Innovation Campus, B-2 zoning is suitable for the property. The intent of the B-2 community business district is to provide for a broad range of mutually supportive retail and service functions located in clustered areas bordered on one or more 85 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 28 of 38 sides by limited access arterial streets. Multi-household dwellings, townhouses, and apartments are allowed as a secondary use due to their complementary nature and ability to enhance the walkability of these districts. Design standards emphasizing pedestrian-oriented design are important elements of this district. Use of this zone is appropriate for arterial corridors, commercial nodes, and/or areas served by transit. In comparison, 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. The M-1 district as a whole is not an implementing district for the Regional Commercial and Services designation and there is not a good fit for this site. However, there are some use elements of M-1 which may be appropriate. Permitted uses for both the existing BP as well as the B-2 and M-1 zoning districts are listed in Table 38.310.040.A – E, BMC. Analysis of the districts reveals, in general, the permitted uses have many points in common. For example, both districts allow hotels and motels and Light and Moderate Manufacturing, although these uses may require an approved Special Use Permit (SUP). Truck repair, washing, and fueling services is not permitted in the B-2 zone and may be allowed in the M-1 zone but require a SUP, emphasis added. The inclusion of Light or Moderate Manufacturing uses in this location is appropriate. The site has been designated as BP for many years. The BP district allows artisan, light, and moderate manufacturing as a principal use. Therefore, the request is for a continuation of already allowed uses. Recently, the City modified its development code to allow Artisan Manufacturing in all commercial and Industrial zoning districts, except PLI. This change is a response to the changing forms of manufacturing in general. The MSUIC proposed uses integrate these changes. The buffers surrounding the site further support expanded uses on the subject property. Considering the context of the site with a robust transportation system, major streets serving the property, existing city services established, and the variety of land uses in the immediate area, the proposed B-2 base district with some additional uses added are suitable for this property. Adopted standards and processes will mitigate potential conflict, the context of the property, and the granting of superior performance furthering the City’s Integrated Water Use Plan and the Climate Action Plan. J. Conserving the value of buildings. Criterion met. The site has existing commercial buildings, an approved MSP, unique Gateway PUD west of the subject property, existing street network, and adjacent agricultural lands will minimize any potential negative impacts for the development of buildings on this site. 86 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 29 of 38 B-2 zoning will allow for new and diverse development patterns on the subject parcel that compliment development on adjacent sites. Future development must comply with the Bozeman Unified Development Code which will ensure an appropriate scale and intensity of uses. As a result, the proposed zone map amendment is not anticipated to negatively impact nearby building values as the development pattern will be appropriate to the surrounding character of the district. All future buildings must meet or exceed the development standards for the base zone of B-2. The values of some buildings may improve in the future as new and improved amenities are provided to the area as the site is developed according to the proposed B-2 and M-1 districts, while other buildings’ values are unlikely to be impacted largely due to a robust real estate market and lack of unmitigated offensive uses allowed by the proposed zoning district. Further, as the applicant states, “The proposed change in zone from B-P to a PDZ based on the B-2 zone will allow the continued use of the three buildings that are completed or under construction on the MSUIC. This zone change is in no way expected to negatively impact the value of the existing buildings on the MSUIC, or in its vicinity, in a measurable way.” K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. Criterion met. As stated above, the BCP 2020 illustrates the most appropriate use of the land through the future land use map. This application complies with the BCP 2020 by proposing zone map amendments of districts that continue to implement the future land use map designations. In this case, urban mixed-use development is identified by the community as the most appropriate type of development for the property. The Unified Development Code contains standards, protections, and review processes to ensure the land is developed in ways that are appropriate to a site’s context and according to the BCP 2020. Similarly, as stated by the applicant, “The Bozeman Community Plan illustrates the most appropriate use of the land. The MSUIC has a future land use designation of Regional Commercial and Services. This land use designation supports the creation of regionally significant developments with physically large and economically prominent facilities. The MSUIC forms the eastern edge of a larger swath of land with the same designation centered on the intersection of W. College Street and Huffine Lane. The MSUIC is uniquely situated between this commercial center and the Montana State University campus. As such, the continued use of this land as a technology park partnered with the university, but with allowances for increased density, is seen as a benefit to the city and an appropriate use of this land.” 87 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 30 of 38 SECTION 7 – PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for approval of the requested annexation, the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider the following: Criteria applicable to all PDZ applications. Complies with applicable Montana state law criteria for approval of a zoning map and text amendment, MCA 76-2-304. Criterion met. The PDZ application requests a base zoning designation of B-2 and includes a general development plan. The Future Land Use designation for the subject property is Regional Commercial and Services. The B-2 zone is an implementing district for this classification. The application modifies five standards of the base zoning: building height, more permissible uses, parking, increased signage, and blank wall treatment. As discussed in the zoning map and text amendment criteria analysis in section five, the required zoning and relaxations are commensurate with the proposed Sustainable/Resilient Design program integrated into future buildings. Reduced water consumption and energy use will further the City’s Integrated Water Use Plan and the Sustainability offsetting the impacts of the text changes in this setting. Specific reductions goals are: 1) Demonstrate a reduction of water consumption of at least 25%. Future developments within the PDZ will provide documentation of the intended path to achieve the proposed 25% or greater reduction in indoor water usage and 25% or greater reduction in outdoor water usage as part of the Site Plan submission documents. This documentation may take the form of modeling prepared by a professional engineer demonstrating the required water usage reduction as compared to a model building that meets City of Bozeman development code requirements and state-adopted plumbing code requirements at the time of the submission, or a declaration of intent to follow the prescriptive path as outlined in the most recent version of the Planned Development Zone Procedures Manual; and 2) Demonstrate a reduction of non-renewable energy use of at least 25%. Future developments within the PDZ will provide documentation of the intended path to achieve the proposed 25% or greater reduction in non-renewable energy usage as part of the Building Permit submission documents. These calculations will be based on the most recently declared percentage of non-renewable energy within the energy mix as published by the energy utility at the time of submission. The reduction of the non-renewable energy portion of the delivered energy may include reductions in the energy use intensity (EUI) over a model building that meets City of Bozeman development code and state-adopted 88 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 31 of 38 building code requirements at the time of the submission, the production of on-site renewable energy, or a combination of the two. Context is important. The site is subject to a Master Site Plan (MSP) arranging the circulation system, protecting sensitive; lands, and generally showing building sites. The property is bounded by designated Collector Street on the south and a Principal Arterial Street to the north. In combination these corridors create significant separation between adjacent properties. Montana State University agricultural lands bound the site to the south. The properties to the north are zoned R-O (Residential Office). With required setbacks, utility easements, and right- of-way there is a minimum of 130 feet of separation to the north. In addition, three site plans have been reviewed and approved based on the original MSP and are constructed. If approved, the relaxations proposed will apply to all future and existing buildings within the boundary of the PDZ. The general development plan shows internal circulation, general building locations, parking, and open space. See Section 1 – Map Series. Three sites within the subject property have been developed or are in construction further establishing the character of the site. Section 5 of this report details analysis showing compliance with applicable Montana state law criteria for approval of a zoning map and text amendment, MCA 76-2-304. See section 5, criterion A for additional discussion. The following relaxations are approved with this application. a) Authorized uses. Request to include Light Manufacturing and Manufacturing Moderate in addition to the base zoning designation uses (B-2). b) Building height. Allow an increase of building height from the base B-2 height, implementing the Regional Commercial Future land Use designation from 75 or 90’ to 120’ for a roof pith less than 3:12 and 135’ for a roof pitch greater than 3:12. c) Parking. Eliminate minimum parking requirements for the district. d) Non-residential signage. Allow up to 400 square feet of signage per building. e) Blank wall treatment. Increase blank wall threshold from an area 10’ by 15’ to 24’ by 30’. Complies with general eligibility criteria in 38.430.040; A. An application for rezoning to a PDZ district may only be accepted for review by the city if the review authority determines that the application complies with the following general criterion along with the PDZ type-specific criteria in Sec. 38.430.050, as determined by the director: All property included in the proposed PDZ must be under common ownership or control or must be the subject of an application filed jointly by the property owners of all the property to be included. 89 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 32 of 38 Response: Criterion met. All properties are under the control of a single property owner as listed in the application materials. B. Compliance with the eligibility criteria allows the applicant to begin negotiations with the city regarding the specific uses, structures, layout, and design that will be used to satisfy the eligibility criteria. Response: Criterion met. The application was submitted, approved master site plan, and a three approved site plans on the subject property indicate compliance with this criterion. The requested PDZ includes the necessary eligibility requirements for a sustainability/resilient design PDZ as described in section 38.430.050.C, BMC. C. Compliance with the eligibility criteria does not indicate that the PDZ will be approved by the city. Approval by the city requires a city commission finding that the criteria for approval in section 38.430.090 are met. Response: A hearing is scheduled for the City Commission on February 27, 2024, to meet this requirement. Complies with the specific eligibility criteria for the type of PDZ requested, as listed in 38.430.050, as applicable; The application requests a Sustainable/resilient design PDZ pursuant to section 38.430.050.C, BMC. 1. Eligibility. A sustainable/resilient design PDZ application must propose project, site, or building design features demonstrated to achieve two or more of the following reductions in resource consumption or trip generation when compared to those levels anticipated for developments of a similar type under the reference base district: a. A reduction in water consumption of at least 25 percent; or b. A reduction in non-renewable energy use of at least 25 percent; or c. A reduction in average daily motor vehicle trip generation of at least 25 percent; or d. A combination of reductions in water consumption, non-renewable energy use, or average daily motor vehicle trip generation providing at least an equivalent sustainable/resilient development benefit to the city. Response: Criterion met. Application details proposed sustainable/resilient design meeting subsection “a” and “b”. Condition of approval and code provisions are included to ensure performance standards are met. 2. Flexibility allowed. Eligible application for a sustainable/resilient design PDZ may request an adjustment or waiver of any non-procedural city development standard in this chapter if that adjustment or waiver will contribute to reductions in water consumption, non-renewable energy consumption, or traffic generation when 90 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 33 of 38 compared to development of a similar type under the reference base district standards. The city may not adjust or waive any provision imposed by state or federal law or regulation. Response: Criterion met. No waivers are requested or required with the application. Requested adjustments to base standards are listed in the application and adopted herein. Specific relaxations are: a) Authorized uses. Request to include Light Manufacturing and Manufacturing Moderate in addition to the base zoning designation uses (B-2). b) Building height. Allow an increase of building height from the base B-2 height, implementing the Regional Commercial Future land Use designation from 75 or 90’ to 120’ for a roof pith less than 3:12 and 135’ for a roof pitch greater than 3:12. c) Parking. Eliminate minimum parking requirements for the district. d) Non-residential signage. Allow up to 400 square feet of signage per building. e) Blank wall treatment. Increase blank wall threshold from an area 10’ by 15’ to 24’ by 30’. Is in accordance with the growth policy currently in effect, including the future land use map; and Response: Criterion met. There are no identified conflicts with the current growth policy or future lane map. Please refer to the Criteria A in Section 5 for more discussion. Identifies one or more of the base zoning districts listed in article 3 of this chapter, as the reference base district for each portion of the PDZ; and Response: Criterion met. Applicant requested a base zone of B-2, Community Business District. Mitigates known adverse impacts on surrounding properties to the extent practicable consistent with 38.100.050 and 38.100.070. Response: Criterion met. No adverse impacts on surrounding properties to the extent practicable with available information have been identified. The analysis above considers potential impacts of the PDZ and found impacts will be mitigated with the adopted city standards, processes, and proposed conditions of approval. Section 38.100.050.A, BMC states that adopted standards are minimum requirements adopted for the promotion of the health, safety and general welfare of the community. In some instances, the public interest will be best served when such minimums are exceeded. The proposed PDZ requires a development that exceeds minimum standards and offsets 91 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 34 of 38 impacts of the relaxations by furthering the efforts of other adopted goal and polices of the city. The suggested conditions of approval are reasonable to ensure ongoing performance of the proposed development. These conditions align with the responsibility of persons undertaking the subdivision, development, or use of land who have the duty of complying with reasonable conditions for design, dedication, improvement, and restrictive use of the land so as to conform to the physical and economic development of the city, and to the safety and general welfare of the future lot owners and of the community at large. SECTION 8 – GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS A General Development Plan was submitted with the Planned Development Zone application, see Map 5, Section 1 of this report. The preliminary development plan shows the general development pattern for the property. In reviewing the development plan, it must not be contrary to any adopted local or State standard not listed as a relaxation in association with the PDZ. The property has an approved Master Site Plan (Application 17027). See also Modification 22107. The Plan arranged the street network and general development areas on the site. The approved MSP is in conformance with adopted standards and is partially built out. The PDZ does not grant the right to begin construction, additional review is required. Additional review may include subdivision and/or site plan review. In this case, site plan review will be required which will ensure future development or redevelopment will meet minimum standards and the sustainability/conservation requirements as part of the PDZ. The site is partially developed as shown on location maps in Section 1. Three site plan applications have been reviewed, approved, and the building constructed including: Advance Research Lab Site Plan. Application 18-225 Industry Bozeman Site Plan. Application 21-304 Aurora Technologies Site Plan. Application 22-114 If the PDZ, including both the Zone Map Amendment and general development plan is approved by the Commission, a final general development plan will be submitted and reviewed pursuant to section 38.430.080.G, BMC. The Commission has delegated the authority for review of the final development plan the Director of Community Development. An application is required for this final step [External application PDF link]. In conclusion, staff finds the preliminary general development plan meets all applicable standards for granting approval, contingent on the contingencies for the ZMA and suggested conditions of approval. 92 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 35 of 38 PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE AMENDMENT AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A PROPOSED CHANGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. The City will accept written protests from property owners against the proposal described in this report until the close of the public hearing before the City Commission. Pursuant to 76-2-305, MCA, a protest may only be submitted by the owner(s) of real property within the area affected by the proposal or by owner(s) of real property that lie within 150 feet of an area affected by the proposal. The protest must be in writing and must be signed by all owners of the real property. In addition, a sufficient protest must: (i) contain a description of the action protested sufficient to identify the action against which the protest is lodged; and (ii) contain a statement of the protestor's qualifications (including listing all owners of the property and the physical address), to protest the action against which the protest is lodged, including ownership of property affected by the action. Signers are encouraged to print their names after their signatures. A person may in writing withdraw a previously filed protest at any time prior to final action by the City Commission. Protests must be delivered to the Bozeman City Clerk, 121 North Rouse Ave., PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230. APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT Notice was published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on January 20 and 27, 2024. The notice was posted on site and notices mailed by the applicant as required by 38.220 and the required confirmation provided to the Planning Office. Notice was provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to any public hearing. The City Commission hearing is scheduled for February 27, 2024. No public comment has been received on this application as of the production of this report, APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING Adopted Growth Policy Designation: The property is designated as “Regional Commercial and Services” in the Bozeman Community Plan. This classification is described as: 93 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 36 of 38 Regionally significant developments in this land use category may be developed with physically large and economically prominent facilities requiring substantial infrastructure and location near significant transportation facilities. Due to the scale of these developments, location, and transition between lower density uses is important. Residential space should be located above the first floor to maintain land availability for necessary services. Development within this category needs well- integrated utilities, transportation, and open space networks that encourage pedestrian activity and provide ready-access within and adjacent to development. Large community scale areas in this land use category are generally 75 acres or larger and are activity centers for several surrounding square miles. These are intended to service the overall community as well as adjacent neighborhoods and are typically distributed by a one-to two-mile separation. Proposed Zoning Designation and Land Uses: The applicant has requested zoning of B-2, Community business district in association with the Planned Development Zone application. The intent of the B-2 community business district is to provide for a broad range of mutually supportive retail and service functions located in clustered areas bordered on one or more sides by limited access arterial streets. Multi-household dwellings, townhouses, and apartments are allowed as a secondary use due to their complementary nature and ability to enhance the walkability of these districts. Design standards emphasizing pedestrian-oriented design are important elements of this district. Use of this zone is appropriate for arterial corridors, commercial nodes, and/or areas served by transit. Table 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 shows the correlation between future land use map designations and implementing zoning districts. (see below for the Table) 94 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 37 of 38 95 Staff Report for the MSU Innovation Campus Planned Development Zone Page 38 of 38 APPENDIX D - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF Owner: MSU Innovation Campus, 222 East Main Steet, Bozeman, MT 59715 Applicant: A&E Design, 515 W Aspen Street, Suite 200A, Bozeman, MT 59715 Representative: A&E Design, 515 W Aspen Street, Suite 200A, Bozeman, MT 59715 Report By: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner FISCAL EFFECTS No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this Planned Development Zone. ATTACHMENTS The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=280722&dbid=0&repo=BOZEMAN 96 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 February 26, 2024, Community Development Board Meetings. MEETING DATE:February 5, 2024 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 items are presently scheduled for the February 5, 2024, Community Development Board meeting. 1. Presentation by consultant, TischlerBise, on impact fee study update work to date and preliminary findings - Considered in role as Impact Fee Advisory Committee. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:None. FISCAL EFFECTS:None. Report compiled on: February 1, 2024 97