HomeMy WebLinkAboutBozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan 2005BOZEMANBOZEMANBOZEMANBOZEMANBOZEMAN
CREEKCREEKCREEKCREEKCREEK
NEIGHBORHOODNEIGHBORHOODNEIGHBORHOODNEIGHBORHOODNEIGHBORHOOD
PLANPLANPLANPLANPLAN ADOPTED JANUARY 5, 2004
AMENDED APRIL 18, 2005
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
This certifies that the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan has been duly adopted by the
Bozeman City Commission by City of Bozeman Resolution No. 3647 dated January 5,
2004, as amended by City of Bozeman Resolution No. 3786 dated April 18, 2005.
Bozeman City Commission
Andrew Cetraro, Mayor
Steven Kirchhoff
Jeff Krauss
Lee Hietala
Marcia Youngman
Bozeman Planning Board
Harry Kirschenbaum, President
Sarah Alexander
Mark Evans
Mike Hope
Dave Jarrett
Jeff Krauss
Ed Musser
JP Pomnichowski
Dave Shepard
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Prepared for:
Bozeman City Commission
P.O. Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59771
Prepared by:
City of Bozeman
Department of Planning and Community Development
20 East Olive Street
P.O. Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59771
April 18, 2005
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Table of Contents
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES ii
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.0 Introduction 1-1
1.1 Neighborhood Plan Jurisdictional Area 1-2
1.2 Bozeman 2020 Community Plan 1-2
1.3 Work Program 1-7
1.4 Public Outreach and Participation 1-7
1.5 Organization of the Document 1-10
CHAPTER 2 – INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 2-1
2.0 Background Information 2-1
2.1 Existing Land Uses, Growth Policy Designations, and Zoning Classifications 2-2
2.2 Environmental Inventory 2-4
2.3 Community Impacts 2-10
CHAPTER 3 – GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 3-1
3.0 Natural, Historical, Archeological and Aesthetic Resources 3-1
3.1 Open Space 3-1
3.2 Infill Development 3-2
3.3 Connectivity 3-2
3.4 Commercial Development 3-2
3.5 Public Facilities and Services 3-3
CHAPTER 4 – LAND USE ALTERNATIVES 4-1
4.0 Overview 4-1
4.1 Alternative 1 – Conservation Alternative 4-3
4.2 Alternative 2 – Low Density Alternative 4-5
4.3 Alternative 3 – Medium Density Alternative 4-7
CHAPTER 5 – PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 5-1
5.0 Implementation Overview 5-1
5.1 Plan Element Overview 5-1
5.2 Implementation Strategies 5-2
APPENDIX A – WORK PROGRAM A-1
APPENDIX B – SOIL CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTIONS A-3
List of Figures Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page ii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 – VICINITY MAP
FIGURE 2 – EXISTING LAND USE
FIGURE 3 – BOZEMAN 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
FIGURE 4 – CITY OF BOZEMAN ZONING DISTRICTS
FIGURE 5 – FLOODPLAIN MAP
FIGURE 6 – WETLAND & RIPARIAN AREA MAP
FIGURE 7 – DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER
FIGURE 8 – SOILS MAP
FIGURE 9 – TOPOGRAPHY AND SLOPE
FIGURE 10 – WATER MAINS
FIGURE 11 – SEWER MAINS
FIGURE 12 – NORTHWESTERN ENERGY 50 KV TRANSMISSION LINE
FIGURE 13 – PARKS AND TRAILS
FIGURE 14 – ALTERNATIVE 1, CONSERVATION ALTERNATIVE
FIGURE 15 – ALTERNATIVE 2, LOW DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
FIGURE 16 – ALTERNATIVE 3, MEDIUM DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
FIGURE 17 – PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Introduction
Page 1-1
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In the Fall of 2002, the Bozeman City Commission directed the Bozeman Planning Board to prepare a
neighborhood plan for the area generally south of East Story Street, north of Kagy Boulevard, west of
South Church Street, and east of the Gallagator Linear Trail and South Rouse Avenue (please refer to
Figure 1). This area is approximately 106 acres in size, of which 61 acres are within the City of Bozeman
and 45 acres are in unincorporated Gallatin County. The City Commission directed the Planning Board
to prepare the neighborhood plan in response to development proposals within the study area. There
was significant opposition against development proposals by current area residents. The level of
concern by area residents regarding future development, combined with significant critical lands and
infrastructure issues in the study area, suggest that the preparation of a neighborhood plan was
appropriate. This document serves as a proactive plan to direct and shape growth and development in
the subject area, and is based on a wide array of variables including input from property owners and
residents within and adjacent to the study area, and the desire to protect critical lands and open spaces.
This document attempts to prevent the haphazard development of this area by protecting open spaces
and by encouraging well-planned infill development that is compatible with both the existing adjacent
neighborhoods and the overall growth pattern of the City. This plan is not intended to legally impact the
right of property owners to use their land.
A view of the study area from Kagy Boulevard
Introduction Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 1-2
1.1 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN JURISDICTIONAL AREA
As stated above, the study area includes land that is currently not within the City of Bozeman. It is
important to note that this plan, and any recommended implementation strategies, will apply only to
land within the City of Bozeman. This practice was established during the Bozeman 2020
Community Plan planning process; the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan plans for an area that
approximates the City’s 20-year sewer service boundary. There is nothing in state law that prevents a
city from planning for an area outside of the city. The Plan includes areas currently outside the City only
to inform owners of those properties of what they could expect if and when they ever decide to annex
to the City. This increases predictability for these property owners. In addition, if and when those
properties are proposed for annexation, one step of the development process – namely a Growth Policy
Amendment – would be unnecessary. The best the City can do is to plan for areas that might
reasonably be expected to annex to the City within the next 20 years. It is reasonable to expect that the
County lands within the study area might be annexed within the next 20 years.
1.2 BOZEMAN 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN
The Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, a growth policy for the City of Bozeman, was adopted by the City
Commission on October 22, 2001. The Bozeman 2020 Community Plan is a long-range plan that
guides the development and public policy decisions which shape Bozeman’s physical, environmental,
economic, and social character. The Bozeman 2020 Community Plan includes all of the elements
required by state statute, including:
· Community goals and objectives;
· Maps and text describing an inventory of the existing characteristics and features of the
community;
· Projected trends for the life of the policy;
· A description of policies, regulations, and other measures to be implemented in order to achieve
the goals and objectives;
· A strategy for the development, maintenance, and replacement of public infrastructure;
· A plan for implementing and updating the growth policy;
· A statement of how the governing bodies will coordinate and cooperate with other jurisdictions;
· A statement defining subdivision review criteria, and how the criteria will be applied; and
· A statement explaining how public hearings regarding proposed subdivisions will be conducted.
The 2020 Plan contains goals, objectives, and implementation policies for the following:
· Community quality;
· Housing;
· Land use;
· Economic development;
· Environmental quality and critical lands;
· Parks, recreation, pathways, and open space;
· Transportation; and
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Introduction
Page 1-3
· Public services and facilities.
1.2.1 State Statute
Section 76-1-601(3) of the Montana Code Annotated (MCA) states that:
A growth policy may (a) include one or more neighborhood plans…a neighborhood
plan must be consistent with the growth policy, and (b) establish minimum criteria
defining the jurisdictional area for a neighborhood plan.
1.2.2 Bozeman 2020 Community Plan – Neighborhood
and Subarea Plans
In response to the above provision of state statute, the
Bozeman 2020 Community Plan allows for and encourages
the preparation of neighborhood and subarea plans. These
plans are prepared for a portion of the entire community area
and must be in conformance with the overall growth policy of
the City. These smaller plans allow the investigation of more
detailed issues which would be burdensome to examine in a
community-wide planning process. Because of the difference
in scale between a Citywide growth policy and the
“neighborhood plans,” the smaller-scale plans will rely on the
basic background information prepared for the overall
community growth policy such as population projections and
the discussion of development trends. Therefore, it is
expected that the time and effort required to prepare a
neighborhood plan would be significantly less than for a
community-wide plan.
Neighborhood and subarea plans allow for a greater degree of citizen participation in planning efforts
which will directly influence their place of residence or work. The smaller scale of plans allows local land
owners, residents, and others most affected by the finer detail of the neighborhood plan a greater
autonomy than would be likely if the fine level details were determined as part of a community-wide
plan. The neighborhood or subarea plan will provide a context to evaluate development proposals and
the connections through them and to the surrounding community. The principal focus is expected to be
on a finer-grained land use pattern, parks and trail locations, and other land use concerns rather than on
substantial policy requirements. Neighborhood and subarea plans are similar in use to community-wide
growth policies in that they establish guidelines for the use of land. It is recognized that there are many
different specific development proposals which can comply with those guidelines.
Although the process and preparation will remain largely the same, two different terms are used in this
discussion - neighborhood plan and subarea plan. The chief distinction between the two terms is that
neighborhood plans refer to plans for relatively small areas which have largely been developed; over 50
percent built out as measured by the number or area of occupied developable parcels. Subarea plans
refer to plans applying to largely undeveloped land; less than 50 percent built out as measured by the
number or area of occupied developable parcels.
Since neighborhood plans apply to developed areas, there is less of an opportunity to alter an existing
land use pattern. Therefore, the creation of neighborhood plans is optional and provides a tool for
neighborhood cooperation to focus on improvements to primarily existing conditions. A subarea plan
Introduction Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 1-4
is intended for areas where there is still a significant opportunity to shape a desired land use pattern and
coordinate between existing and/or future developments. Areas of special concern for coordination are
parks, trails, roadways, and utilities. A neighborhood plan should extend over an area of at least 160
acres, while a minimum area of 640 acres is preferred for subarea plans.
The preparation of a specialized plan may be initiated by the City Commission or effected landowners.
By state law, the preparation of a growth policy is the responsibility of the Planning Board if the
governing body has requested it. Consequently, the development of a specialized plan must involve
representatives of the Planning Board. The preparation of the neighborhood and subarea plans
therefore becomes a means of increasing predictability during the development review process by
establishing in public documents the expectations for the area.
It is desired that mapping of natural features, such as streams, and other influences on development can
be performed during the plan preparation and may be shared between interested parties to reduce
duplication of effort and preparation of costly application materials. The same process of public
involvement and opportunities for participation, but at a less intensive level, must be followed for
specialized plans as for a community-wide growth policy. As with a community-wide growth policy, the
opportunity for participation does not compel participation, nor does someone’s choice to not
participate inhibit the eventual adoption of an otherwise acceptable plan.
In the case of any real or perceived conflict between the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan and a
neighborhood or subarea plan, the goals and other materials of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan
shall govern.
A neighborhood or subarea plan must contain the following elements:
· A map showing the reasonably simple boundaries of the specific plan, with an explanation as to
why those boundaries are appropriate. Maps should terminate at easily identifiable boundaries if
possible;
· A description of specific goals to be achieved by the neighborhood or subarea plan, if goals
specific to the area are developed;
· An inventory of existing conditions;
· A transportation network, including non-automotive elements, that conforms with adopted
facility plans, reinforces the goals and objectives of the 2020 plan, and connects the major
features of the area such as parks, commercial areas, and concentrations of housing;
· Locations of parks of adequate area to represent at least sixty percent of expected parklands to
be dedicated through development in the area. The parks shall be of a size and configuration
which supports organized recreational activities such as soccer or baseball, as well as passive
recreation; and
· Location of various land uses including commercial, public, school locations if known, and
residential activities.
After the preparation of the draft neighborhood or subarea plan, the Planning Board must conduct one
or more public hearings on the proposal. The Planning Board will then forward the proposed plan to
the City Commission for review. The City Commission must also hold one or more public hearings,
and if it believes the plan to be consistent with the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, may adopt the plan
by resolution. If sufficient flaws with the plan are found, the City Commission may return it to the
Planning Board for further work and review.
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Introduction
Page 1-5
Due the size of the study area (approximately 106 acres), and because the area would be characterized by
infill development rather than greenfield development, this plan is a neighborhood plan – the Bozeman
Creek Neighborhood Plan.
1.2.3 Applicable Bozeman 2020 Community Plan Goals and Objectives
The following goals and objectives of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan guided the preparation of the
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan:
Goal 1.6.1 Growth Management - Promote the unique history and character of Bozeman
by preserving, protecting, and enhancing the overall quality of life within the planning
area.
Objective 1. Ensure that growth is planned, directed, and developed in an orderly
manner that maintains Bozeman as a functional, pleasing, and social community.
Objective 6. Develop neighborhood plans for all appropriate areas of the City to reflect
the values of each neighborhood, with consideration for local conditions, history, and
neighborhood character.
Goal 4.9.1 Community Design - Create a community composed of neighborhoods
designed for human scale and compatibility in which services and amenities are
convenient, visually pleasing, and properly integrated and designed to encourage
walking, cycling, and mass transit use.
Objective 1. Give all citizens the opportunity to participate in shaping the future of their
neighborhoods.
Objective 4. Reinforce the development of functional and visually appealing
neighborhoods.
Objective 6. Develop infill within the existing area of the City rather than developing
land requiring expansion of the City’s area.
Goal 4.9.8 Historic Preservation - Protect historically and culturally significant resources
that contribute to community identity, history, and quality of life.
Goal 5.7.1 Housing - Promote an adequate supply of safe housing that is diverse in type,
density, and location, with a special emphasis on maintaining neighborhood character
and stability.
Objective 7. Support infill development and the preservation of existing affordable
housing and encourage the construction of additional affordable housing in new infill
developments.
Goal 6.6.1 Create a sense of place that varies throughout the City, efficiently provide
public and private basic services and facilities in close proximity to where people live
and work, and minimize sprawl.
Objective 4. Encourage citizen involvement and concern in their neighborhood and
community.
Objective 6. Support infill development which respects the context of the existing
development which surrounds it.
Introduction Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 1-6
Goal 6.6.4 Natural Environment and Aesthetics - Ensure adequate review of individual
and cumulative environmental and aesthetic effects of development to preserve the
viewsheds, natural functions, and beauty which are a fundamental element of
Bozeman’s character.
Objective 1. Protect important wildlife habitats, and natural areas which provide for
beneficial functions, such as floodplains.
Goal 8.14.1 Protect the health, safety, and welfare of Bozeman area residents, and protect
private and public property.
Objective 1. Discourage development in areas characterized by wetlands, hydric soils,
floodplain and flooding, high water table, seismic activity, steep slopes, faults, landslide
hazard, and fire-dependent natural areas.
Goal 8.14.2 Identify, protect, and enhance natural resources within the planning area,
and the important ecological functions these resources provide.
Objective 1. Retain and enhance the benefits wetlands provide such as groundwater and
stream recharge, fish and wildlife habitat, flood control, sediment control, erosion
control, and water quality.
Objective 2. Maintain and enhance floodplain capacity for conveying and storing
floodwaters.
Objective 3. Protect riparian corridors to provide wildlife habitat and movement areas,
and to buffer water bodies.
Goal 8.14.3 Ensure good environmental quality of water resources, air, and soils within
the planning area.
Objective 1. Protect, restore, and enhance wetlands in the planning area.
Objective 2. Protect, restore, and enhance riparian corridors to protect the chemical,
biological, and physical quality of water resources.
Goal 9.9 Parks & Recreation – Provide for accessible, desirable, and maintained public
parks, active and passive open spaces, trail systems, and recreational facilities for
residents of the community.
Objective 4. Acquire and/or preserve significant properties within the City and Planning
Area.
Goal 10.8.1 Transportation System - Maintain and enhance the functionality of the
transportation system.
Objective 4. Ensure that adequate interconnections are made throughout the
transportation system to ensure a variety of alternatives for trip routing.
Goal 10.8.2 Ensure that a variety of travel options exist which allow safe, logical, and
balanced transportation choices.
Objective 1. For the purposes of transportation and land use planning and development,
non-motorized travel options and networks shall be of equal importance and
consideration as motorized travel options. This balance shall ensure that a variety of
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Introduction
Page 1-7
travel opportunities are available which do not require the use of automobiles for all
local trips.
Objective 3. Reduce the impact of the automobile by supporting land use decisions that
can decrease trip length of automobile travel and encourage trip consolidation.
Goal 10.8.4 Pathways - Establish and maintain an integrated system of transportation
and recreational pathways, including bicycle and pedestrian trails, neighborhood parks,
green belts and open space.
Objective 1. Coordinate development of non-motorized transportation systems in
conjunction with motorized vehicular transportation systems.
Objective 2. Create and maintain an interconnected and convenient pedestrian and
bicycle network for commuting and recreation as discussed and described in the
transportation facility plan and in coordination with the design standards of the
transportation facility plan and the Parks, Open Space, and Trails Plan.
1.3 WORK PROGRAM
The work program for preparation of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, including tasks and a
time line, is attached as Appendix A.
1.4 PUBLIC OUTREACH AND PARTICIPATION
The Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan planning process has included several opportunities for public
participation and input. Specific events and activities include:
· Planning Charrette – January 18, 2003
A charrette is a public design workshop in which designers, property owners, developers, public
officials, environmentalists, citizens, and other persons or groups of people work in harmony to
achieve an agreeable project. The charrette provided area residents and property owners with an
opportunity to express their vision and goals for the study area early on in the planning process.
The charrette also provided an opportunity to graphically translate visions and goals into land
use maps. The charrette was especially helpful to City staff and the Planning Board because area
residents and property owners had study area-specific knowledge - regarding things like history
and the presence of unique features - they were able to share. The information collected at the
charrette was used to establish a vision, goals and objectives, and implementation strategies for
the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan. Collected information, especially the land use maps,
was used to prepare a land use map for the area. Forty-five people attended the charrette. The
results of the charrette were posted on the City’s web site.
· Open Space Preservation Questionnaire – March 6, 2003
The questionnaire was sent to all of the property owners within the study area. The intent of
questionnaire was to ascertain the level of interest property owners had in using their land for
open space and trails, and if interested in providing open space, what affirmative actions
property owners would be interested in taking to make open space preservation in the study area
a reality. The questionnaire was a joint project between the City of Bozeman and the Gallatin
Valley Land Trust (GVLT). Forty-two questionnaires were mailed and 30 were returned. The
results of the questionnaire were posted on the City’s web site.
Introduction Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 1-8
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Planning Charrette – January 18, 2003
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Introduction
Page 1-9
· Meetings with Individual Property Owners – March through November 2003
At the beginning of March 2003, postcards were sent to all property owners within the study
area inviting them to meet one-on-one with Planning staff. The purpose of the meeting was to
find out what the property owners envision for the future of their own property and for the
future of the study area. Individual, one-on-one meeting were held because some people are not
comfortable providing suggestions and insights in a group setting.
· Land Use Alternatives Meeting – April 30, 2003
The Planning Board held this meeting to present the goals and objectives that had been
endorsed by the Planning Board. The three land use alternatives being considered by the
Planning Board were also unveiled and discussed at this meeting. Attendees were asked to
complete a survey indicating which alternative they prefer. The large majority (75 percent)
favored Alternative #1 – Conservation Alternative. Forty-six people attended this meeting. The
results of the survey were posted on the City’s web site.
· Neighborhood Group Meeting – July 9, 2003
A neighborhood group for the neighborhood generally south of where the Gallagator Trail
intersection South Church Avenue, north of Kagy Boulevard, east of South Tracy Avenue and
west of South Church Avenue held an initial organization meeting. Planning Board members
attended this meeting to inform the group about the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan. The
neighborhood group, the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association, has had several meetings
since their initial organizing meeting and has been actively involved in the planning process.
· Planning Board, Public Meetings
The Planning Board selected a preferred land use alternative at their regularly scheduled meeting
on June 3, 2003. At that meeting, the Board allowed the public to provide comments. The
Neighborhood Plan has been on many Planning Board agendas as discussion items. These
meetings are always open to the public, and the Board almost always allows the public to
comment at these meetings.
· Planning Board, Public Hearing
The Planning Board held a public hearing on November 18, 2003. At that time, the Board voted
5-0 to recommend approval of the plan to the City Commission. Since initial adoption, the plan
has been amended once. The Planning Board held a public hearing regarding the amendments
on June 1, 2004 and voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the proposed amendments to the City
Commission.
· City Commission, Public Hearing
The City Commission held a public hearing on December 8, 2003 and voted 3-2 to adopt the
plan. The City Commission voted 5-0 to approve the resolution adopting the plan on January 5,
2004. As stated above, the plan has been amended once since it was initially adopted. The City
Commission held a public hearing to consider the proposed amendments on June 14, 2004 and
voted 3-2 to adopt the amendments as proposed. The City Commission voted 3-2 on April 18,
2005 to approve the resolution amending the plan.
Introduction Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 1-10
1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE DOCUMENT
The document is organized as follows:
· Chapter 1 – Introduction
· Chapter 2 – Inventory and Analysis
· Chapter 3 – Goals and Objectives
· Chapter 4 – Land Use Alternatives
· Chapter 5 – Implementation Plan
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Inventory and Analysis
Page 2-1
CHAPTER 2
Inventory and Analysis
2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
2.0.1 Housing Units
There are approximately 57 existing housing units within the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan study
area. This number is based on a windshield survey, a land use inventory, and the Department of
Revenue’s Montana Cadastral Mapping Project. Most of the housing units are single household
residential units; however the study does contain a few duplex and triplex units as well as the 18-unit
Dahlinger Court condominium complex.
2.0.2 Population
Based on the number of housing units in the study area, and the City’s average household size of 2.26,
the estimated current population of the study area is approximately 130 people.
2.0.3 Population and Dwelling Unit Density
The study area is 106.2 acres in size. This property can be can be broken down as follows:
· 0.55 acres (Dahlinger Court)
· 6.95 acres (Hugh Reid property)
· 2.98 acres (Boys and Girls Club)
· 2.25 acres (Martel Construction)
· 39.48 acres (100-year floodplain and/or watercourse setback)
· 0.87 acres (existing right-of-way for Ice Pond Road and Lincoln Street)
· 53.12 acres remaining
· TOTAL – 106.2 acres
Therefore, within the study area there is approximately 53.13 acres that could be available for infill
development, subject to restrictions such as zoning, access, the supply of potable water, and the
availability of sewage collection/disposal systems. The current net dwelling unit density is
approximately one dwelling unit per acre (57 existing units/53.13 acres).
2.0.4 Other Demographic Indicators
Data for the study area, for the following demographic indicators, was not available. Instead, the data
trends contained in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan for the City as a whole could also be applied to
the study area.
· Gender and age;
· School enrollment by decade;
· Educational attainment;
Inventory and Analysis Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 2-2
· Employment by industry; and
· Household income
2.1 EXISTING LAND USES, GROWTH POLICY DESIGNATIONS, AND ZONING
CLASSIFICATIONS
2.1.1 Existing Land Uses
Study Area. The existing land uses within the study area are primarily Single Household Residential
(please refer to Figure 2). The overall categories, however, also include Vacant land, Multiple
Household dwelling units, and Light Manufacturing. Single Household Residential is defined as a
building used for residential occupancy by one household. This category includes multiple residences
that share a common wall, as long as only one dwelling unit lies upon a single lot, such as townhomes.
Duplex/Triplex Household Residential is defined as a building, or a portion of a building, used for
occupancy by two or three households living independently of each other, with the units completely
separated by a common wall, floor, and/or ceiling and reside on one lot. This definition includes
apartments and condos. Multiple Household Residential is defined as a building, or portion thereof,
used for occupancy by four or more households living independently of each other, with the units
completely separated by a common wall, floor, and/or ceiling. Again, this definition includes
apartments and condominiums. Mixed Use is a combination of two or more categories. Light
Manufacturing is defined as fabrication of and/or assembly of goods from previously prepared
materials, to include storage, and mini warehousing. Vacant is defined as land that is currently
unoccupied; no buildings. Note that there is an existing Northwestern Energy substation located in the
middle of the study area along South Church Avenue. Northwestern Energy has received preliminary
approval for a conditional use permit from the Gallatin County Commission to expand the substation.
Property owned by Hugh Reid, located at the terminus of Ice Pond Road, is used for Light Manufacturing
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Inventory and Analysis
Page 2-3
The following list indicates approximate land area of each of the land use categories found within the
study area:
· Single Household Residential – 44.16 acres
· Duplex/Triplex Household Residential – 0.76 acres
· Multiple Household Residential – 1.47 acre
· Light Manufacturing – 13.22 acres
· Mixed Use – 9.9 acres
· Right-of-way (ROW) – 0.48 acre
· Vacant – 36.02 acres
· TOTAL – 106 acres
Adjacent Neighborhoods. The adjacent neighborhood to the west consists of a mix of Single
Household Residential, Duplex/Triplex Household Residential, and Multiple Household Residential.
Adjacent properties to the east consist of Single Household Residential and Multiple Household
Residential along South Church Avenue/Sourdough Road, as well as Public Facility/Park (Burke
Park/Peet’s Hill). The adjacent neighborhood to the north consists of a mix of Single Household
Residential, Duplex/Triplex Household Residential, and Multiple Household Residential. Finally, the
adjacent properties to the south consist of land designated as Vacant, Single Household Residential,
Golf Course (Valley View Golf Club), and Public Facility/Park (Hausser Park). Please refer to Figure 2.
2.1.2 Bozeman 2020 Community Plan Designations
Study Area. The Bozeman 2020 Community Plan designates the study area as being comprised of three
different land use categories: Suburban Residential, Residential, and Business Park (please refer to Figure
3). The area north of Kagy Boulevard and south of the existing City limits boundary is designated as
Suburban Residential. This category indicates locations generally outside of City limits but within the
Planning Area where the land development pattern has already been set by rural subdivisions.
Subdivisions in this area are generally characterized by lots two acres in size or less. It is probable that
portions of this area may be proposed for annexation within the next 20 years. Any further development
within this area should be clustered to preserve functional open space and allow for more advanced
sewage disposal than individual septic tanks. If development is proposed at overall densities in excess of
one dwelling per acre, and/or the development proposal lies within the City’s municipal water and sewer
service boundaries, annexation to the City should be completed prior to development.
The area north of the existing City limits is designated as Residential. This category designates places
where the primary activity is urban density living quarters. Other uses which complement residences are
also acceptable such as parks, low intensity home based occupations, fire stations, churches, and
schools. The residential designation also indicates that it is expected that development will occur within
municipal boundaries which may require annexation prior to development. The dwelling unit density
expected within this classification varies. It is expected that areas of higher density housing would likely
be located in proximity to commercial centers to facilitate the broadest range of feasible transportation
options for the greatest number of individuals and support businesses within commercial centers. Low
density areas should have an average minimum density of six units per net acre. Medium density areas
should have an average minimum density of twelve units per net acre. High density areas should have
an average minimum density of eighteen units per net acre. A variety of housing types should be
blended to achieve the desired density with large areas of a single type of housing being discouraged. In
Inventory and Analysis Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 2-4
limited instances the strong presence of constraints and natural features such as floodplains
may cause an area to be designated for development at a lower density than normally expected
within this classification.
The area to the west of the Ice Pond Road terminus is designated as Business Park. This classification
provides for areas typified by office uses and technology-oriented light industrial uses, although retail,
services, or industrial uses may also be included in an accessory or local service role.
Adjacent Neighborhoods. The adjacent neighborhoods to the west and north are designated
Residential in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. To the east, areas with residential development are
designated Residential and Burke Park/Peet’s Hill is designated as Parks, Open Space and Recreational
Lands. To the south, adjacent properties are designated as Parks, Open Space and Recreational Lands
(Valley View Golf Club) and Suburban Residential. Please refer to Figure 3.
2.1.3 Zoning Classifications
Study Area. The study area has a mix of City and County zoning designations (please refer to Figure 4).
The southern part of the study area is primarily zoned County R-S (Residential Suburban Country
Estates District). This district is comparable to the City designation of R-S (Residential Suburban).
Both districts have an average lot size of one acre unless approved through the planned unit
development (PUD) process. There is an area of R-2 (Residential Two-Household, Medium Density)
directly north of the existing City limits line. This area bisects the County R-S zone and the City R-S
zone. North of the Ice Pond Road homes there is another area of R-2. Finally, there is a small section
of R-4 (Residential, High Density) in the northern-most part of the study area.
Adjacent Neighborhoods. The adjacent neighborhood to the west has City zoning designations of R-
1 (Residential Single-Household, Low Density), R-2, R-3 (Residential, Medium Density), and R-4. The
adjacent neighborhood to the north has a City zoning designation of R-2. The properties to the east
have City zoning designations of R-S, R-1 and R-4. There is also some land with a County zoning
designation of R-S to the east of the study area. Finally, the land to the south has a County zoning
designation of R-S. Please refer to Figure 4.
2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY
The Bozeman/Creek Neighborhood Plan study area contains a variety of critical lands and
environmentally sensitive features. Any development proposals in this area would likely require the
preparation and submittal of detailed environmental impact information and analysis including the
delineation of 100-year floodplain and wetlands, depth to groundwater monitoring data, soils analysis,
topographical information, etc. Development applications would also likely have to contain proposals
to mitigate impacts on critical lands and environmentally sensitive features. A general description of the
critical lands and environmentally sensitive features in this area follows.
2.2.1 Floodplain
There is a fairly extensive floodplain associated with Bozeman/Sourdough Creek through the study area
(please refer to Figure 5). The City’s land development regulations currently require that the
watercourse setback be extended to the edge of any delineated 100-year floodplain for all newly created
lots and/or new site development. The presence of floodplain will make approximately 33 acres of the
study area largely undevelopable if developed in the City.
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Inventory and Analysis
Page 2-5
There is a significant floodplain associated with Bozeman Creek in the study area
If a property owner disputes the location of the 100-year floodplain as depicted on the FEMA National
Flood Insurance Program map, he/she is always welcome to have a licensed engineer or surveyor
prepare a topographical survey, based on the base flood elevations, for consideration by the City
Engineer. If a property owner disagrees with the floodplain map boundary based on the ground
elevations, they can apply for a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA.
While land within the 100-year floodplain may not be developable, it would be possible to use this land
to satisfy the open space requirement for a planned unit development. It may also be possible to receive
parkland dedication credit for the provision of a constructed trail and/or open space. Finally, the City’s
land development regulations allow the City Commission to waive parkland dedication requirements if a
“preliminary plat provides long-term protection of critical wildlife habitat; cultural, historical, or natural
resources; agricultural interests; or aesthetic values; and the area of the land proposed to be subdivided,
by virtue of providing long-term protection provided herein, is reduced by an amount equal to or
exceeding the area of the dedication otherwise required.”
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is jointly funding a detailed study of the
floodplain through the study area. Funding partners include the State, County, and City. The purpose
of the study is to examine and evaluate the flood hazard in developed areas, and areas likely to be
developed, and to determine flood elevations for those areas. Flood elevations will be used by the City
to carry out the floodplain management objectives of the National Flood Insurance Program. The field
work for this study began in the Fall of 2003.
2.2.2 Watercourses
Bozeman/Sourdough Creek is the only watercourse within the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
study area. The creek flows south to north approximately through the center of the study area (please
Inventory and Analysis Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 2-6
refer to Figure 5). The City’s land development regulations currently require at least a 75-foot
watercourse setback on both sides of the creek for all newly created lots and/or new site development.
The Bozeman/Sourdough Creek corridor provides a variety of benefits including flood control, urban
stormwater conveyance, recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and aesthetic values. The required 75-foot
watercourse setback would make approximately 6 additional acres of land, which lie beyond the 100-year
floodplain, largely undevelopable if developed in the City.
While the required 75-foot watercourse setback may not be developable, it would be possible to use this
land to satisfy the open space requirement for a planned unit development. It may also be possible to
receive parkland dedication credit for the provision of a constructed trail and/or open space. Finally,
the City’s land development regulations allow the City Commission to waive parkland dedication
requirements if a “preliminary plat provides long-term protection of critical wildlife habitat; cultural,
historical, or natural resources; agricultural interests; or aesthetic values; and the area of the land
proposed to be subdivided, by virtue of providing long-term protection provided herein, is reduced by
an amount equal to or exceeding the area of the dedication otherwise required.”
2.2.3 Wetlands
There are some wetlands within the study area that are associated with the Bozeman/Sourdough Creek
corridor (please refer to Figure 6). The City’s land development regulations require that the watercourse
setback include any adjacent wetlands and that the buffer width shall be extended by the width of the
wetland. This requirement would apply to all newly created lots and/or new site development. Because
the wetlands are largely co-located with delineated 100-year floodplain and/or the 75-foot watercourse
setback, the presence of wetlands would likely not result in any additional land being designated as
undevelopable above and beyond the land already rendered undevelopable by the presence of floodplain
and/or watercourse setback.
Bozeman Creek from Ice Pond Road
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Inventory and Analysis
Page 2-7
2.2.4 Depth to Groundwater
The depth to groundwater is as shallow as 0 to 2 feet along the section of creek in between the
extension of Garfield Street and Kagy Boulevard (please refer to Figure 7). The high water table in this
area will likely not impact development because this area is largely undevelopable due to the presence of
delineated 100-year floodplain and wetlands.
In addition, the depth to groundwater south of the extension of Carol Place and north of Kagy
Boulevard in the study area is as shallow as 0 to 3.5 feet (please refer to Figure 7). The high water table
in this area would likely not preclude development, but may result in special requirements such as
prohibitions on basements and/or the use of special construction methods and materials.
2.2.5 Soils
Soils classifications found within the study area, and in adjacent areas, are shown on Figure 8.
Descriptions of the various soil classifications depicted on Figure 8 are provided in Appendix B. The
soils within the study area include:
· Straw Loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes;
· Bandy-Riverwash-Bonebasin Complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes;
· Sudworth Silty Clam Loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes;
· Enbar-Nythar Loams, 0 to 4 percent slopes;
· Reedwest-Cabba-Bower-Comlex, 15 to 45 percent slopes; and
· Meagher-Shawmut-Bowery Complex, 15 to 45 percent slopes.
A description of the development limitations of each soil classification found within the study area is
provided below.
Use Definitions.
· Shallow excavations - Trenches or holes dug to a maximum depth of 5 or 6 feet for basements,
graves, utility lines, open ditches, and other purposes.
· Dwellings and small commercial buildings - Structures built on shallow foundations on
undisturbed soil. The load limit is the same as that for single-household dwellings no higher
than three stories.
· Local roads and streets – Facilities with an all-weather surface and carry automobile and light
truck traffic all year. They have a subgrade of cut or fill soil material; a base of gravel, crushed
rock, or stabilized soil material; and a flexible or rigid surface. Cuts and fills generally are limited
to less than 6 feet.
· Lawns and landscaping – These require soils on which turf and ornamental trees and shrubs can
be established and maintained.
Limitation Definitions.
· Slight - Slight limitations indicate that the soil properties and site features generally are favorable
for the indicated use and limitations are minor and easily overcome.
· Moderate - Moderate limitations indicate that the soil properties or site features are not
favorable for the indicated use and special planning, design, or maintenance is needed to
overcome or minimize the limitations.
Inventory and Analysis Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 2-8
· Severe – Severe limitations indicate that the soil properties or site features are so unfavorable or
so difficult to overcome that special design, significant increases in construction costs, and
possibly increased maintenance are required. Special feasibility studies may be required where the
soil limitations are severe.
Straw Loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes. For building/site development, limitations for shallow
excavations are slight. Limitations for dwellings with basements, dwellings without basements, and
small commercial buildings are moderate due to shrink-swell factors. Street and road limitations are
moderate due to shrink-swell, low strength, and frost action factors. Finally, limitations for landscaping
and lawns are slight.
Bandy-Riverwash-Bonebasin Complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes. For building/site development,
limitations for shallow excavations are severe with cut banks, caving, and wetness. Limitations for
dwellings with basements, dwellings without basements, and small commercial buildings are severe due
to flooding and wetness. Street and road limitations are severe due to flooding, wetness, and frost
action. Finally, limitations for landscaping and lawns are severe due to wetness.
Sudworth Silty Clay Loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes. For building/site development, limitations for
shallow excavations are severe due to cut banks and caving. Limitations for dwellings without
basements are slight. Limitations for dwellings with basements are moderate due to wetness.
Limitations for small commercial buildings are slight. Limitations for street and roads are moderate due
to frost action. Finally, limitations for landscaping and lawns are moderate due to large stones.
Enbar-Nythar Loams, 0 to 4 percent slopes. For building/site development, limitations for shallow
excavations are severe due to wetness. Limitations for dwellings without basements, dwellings with
basements, and small commercial buildings are severe due to flooding and wetness. Limitations for
streets and roads are severe due to wetness and frost action. Finally, limitations for lawns and
landscaping are severe due to wetness.
Reedwest-Cabba-Bower Complex, 15 to 45 percent slopes. For building/site development,
limitations for shallow excavations are severe due to slope. Limitations for dwellings without
basements, dwellings with basements, and small commercial buildings are severe due to slope.
Limitations for streets and roads are severe due to slope. Finally, limitations for lawns and landscaping
are severe due to slope.
Meagher-Shawmut-Bowery Complex, 15 to 45 percent slopes. For building/site development,
limitations for shallow excavations are severe due to slope. Limitations for dwellings without
basements, dwellings with basements, and small commercial buildings are severe due to slope.
Limitations for streets and roads are severe due to slope. Finally, limitations for lawns and landscaping
are severe due to slope.
2.2.6 Topography and Slope
There is some slope in the study area. The sloping areas are largely confined to the southeast corner of
the study area; just west of South Church Avenue and north of Kagy Boulevard (please refer to Figure
9). The City’s land development regulations currently state that “slopes of 25 percent or greater shall be
presumed unbuildable unless otherwise provided by the developer.” This would apply to developments
in the City.
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Inventory and Analysis
Page 2-9
There are also some unique rock outcroppings in this part of the study area. These rock outcroppings
could present some development challenges - especially with any improvements to South Church
Avenue.
Hillside in the study area
2.2.7 Wildlife Habitat and Fisheries
The reach of Bozeman Creek between Kagy Boulevard and Story Street is in relatively good condition,
providing good fish and aquatic habitat except where impacted by development. The stream sustains a
good population of rainbow trout, with brook trout and brown trout also present in good numbers.
The key to sustaining and improving this fishery is protecting and enhancing the riparian vegetation and
maintaining access for the stream to its floodplain. There have been a number of ponds built in the
floodplain and dikes built along this reach that negatively impact the stream.
In addition to restricted floodplain development, property owners should be encouraged to protect and
enhance healthy streamside vegetative buffers. Dense shrubby riparian vegetation shades the stream,
slows floodwaters, and stabilizes banks. The tendency to remove streamside vegetation to provide
better views of the stream is strong, but is not good for the health of the riparian environment. Riparian
vegetation provides some of the most critical wildlife and songbird habitat in the valley. Maintaining a
vegetative buffer also reduces erosion and protects structures.
The other major problem in the reach is poorly designed bridge crossings and culverts. Where bridges
are too narrow or low, they affect hydrology, cause flooding and erosion, and can be fish passage
barriers. Better watercourse crossings in the study area should be encouraged.
Inventory and Analysis Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 2-10
Based on interviews with area residents, the study area represents quality wildlife habitat within an
urbanizing area. Residents report sightings of deer, moose, bear, beaver, and fox, as well as other more
common urban wildlife such as ducks, raccoons, and birds.
2.3 COMMUNITY IMPACTS
2.3.1 Water Distribution
Municipal Water. With the exception of South Church Avenue, the majority of surrounding streets
have access to City water. Please refer to Figure 10 for the location and sizing of existing water mains.
The stub for the future extension of East Lincoln Street was installed at the time the South Rouse
Avenue water main was installed. In addition, a 14-inch diameter water main was installed in 1983 that
crosses the study area, within a water main easement that ranges in width from 30 to 36 feet, on the
property currently used by Martel Construction.
The City’s Water Facility Plan indicates that there is adequate pressure in the study area. However,
water main extensions may be required to supply any infill development with access to City water. The
sizing and location of water main extensions will depend largely on proposed development, and will be
determined through the development review process. Future main extensions will be subject to capacity
evaluation.
The cost of water main extensions averages $30 per linear foot for an 8-inch diameter main. The cost of
water services averages $15 per linear foot for a 4-inch diameter service.
Wells. Some of the property within the study area is currently within unincorporated Gallatin County
and utilizes wells for potable water. If this property was to be further developed, annexation to the City
and connection to the municipal water system would likely be necessary. Ultimately, it would be
desirable to have all residential and commercial structures in the study area connected to municipal
water supplies.
2.3.2 Sewage Collection and Disposal
Municipal Sewer. This area is part of what is designated as Drainage Zone 5 in the City’s 1998
Wastewater Facility Plan. The trunk sewer main that serves this drainage zone generally follows the
Rouse Avenue alignment. This trunk main has several areas that are at or over capacity according to the
computer model that was completed for the facility plan. During the Fall of 2003 and the Spring of
2004, the City reconstructed and upsized the sewer main from just north of Griffin Drive to the
manhole just north of Olive Street.
The area between Olive Street and Cleveland Street is currently served by an 8-inch diameter main. The
computer model shows that one stretch of this main is over capacity (102 percent) and another is very
near capacity (92 percent). The percentages represent the amount the existing flow constitutes when
compared to the main flowing completely full. The City typically does not like mains to be completely
full. In fact, the City has established a policy requiring that new mains be designed to flow no more
than 75 percent full. This provides for a safety factor to ensure that backups do not occur during
periods of high infiltration and inflow. There are several other sections of sewer main, between Olive
Street and Cleveland Street, which are currently near or exceed the 75 percent full standard.
This section of sewer main (between Olive Street and Cleveland Street) would need to be replaced to
accommodate any significant additional infill development in the study area. The facility plan calls for it
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Inventory and Analysis
Page 2-11
to be replaced with a 24-inch diameter trunk main to serve not only this area, but also future
development to the south. Based on cost estimates in the facility plan, it would cost approximately
$590,000 to replace this section of sewer main. The City’s Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) has the
design for this project scheduled for fiscal year 2008, but the construction is currently not scheduled.
The CIP is revisited every year, so as priorities change this project could move forward or backward on
the schedule. In the meantime, any developer proposing an infill project in the study area may be asked
to construct this improvement themselves. The developer may be eligible for paybacks and/or impact
fee credits.
The facility plan calls for the area between Cleveland Street and Kagy Boulevard to be served by a new
21-inch diameter trunk main. The plan estimates the cost of the section of main at $400,000. This main
will need to be aligned fairly close to Bozeman Creek, through the study area, to serve properties on the
east side of the creek. The main will need to be installed deep enough for 8-inch mains extended to the
east to be able to get under the creek with adequate cover. The grade generally climbs as you head west,
so the further away from the creek that the main is installed, the deeper it will become. This will result
in much higher installation costs for not only the trunk main, but also the 8-inch diameter mains to
serve local areas. The main could be installed within the 100-year floodplain. This would require the
installation of watertight lids, and an all-weather access road along the alignment. These would be
allowable uses under the City’s adopted floodplain regulations, and the all-weather access could double
as a trail. Ultimately, the City will have to obtain sewer main easements from all property owners whose
property would be crossed by this new trunk main. Sewer main easements are typically 30 feet in width.
With the exception of South Church Avenue, the majority of the streets surrounding the study area
contain City sewer. Please refer to Figure 11 for the location and size of existing sewer mains. The two
sewer main stubs for the future extension of East Garfield Street and East Lincoln Street were provided
at the time the South Rouse Avenue sewer main was installed.
In addition to increased capacity, sewer main extensions may be required to serve infill development
within the study area with access to City sewer. The sizing and location of sewer main extensions will
depend largely on proposed development, and will be determined through the development review
process. The cost of sewer main extensions averages $35 per linear foot for an 8-inch diameter main.
The cost of water services averages $15 per linear foot for a ¾-inch diameter service.
On-Site Septic. Some of the property within the study area is currently within unincorporated Gallatin
County, and there are many existing on-site septic systems. If this property was to be developed,
without annexation to the City, on-site septic systems may be necessary. If a Montana Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) approved public collection and treatment system, such as the City’s
municipal sewer system, is within 200 feet of the property to be developed, and the owner of the public
collection system approved the connection, then wastewater must be discharged to the public system
(17.36.9 ARM).
Upon receipt of a septic installation application, the Gallatin City-County Health Department will query
the applicant and contact the Bozeman Engineering Department to determine the proximity of a
suitable sewer connection. If a sewer connection is within 200 feet, the applicant would be asked to
connect to City services unless the applicant provides a letter from the City indicating that the City
cannot provide service at this time or prove economic hardship. The ARM states that a connection is
economically impractical if the cost of connection to the public system equals or exceeds three times the
cost of installation of an approvable septic system on the site. In either of these cases, the Health
Department would issue a septic permit for the site.
Inventory and Analysis Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 2-12
If the Health Department issues a septic permit, they require that the following minimum separation
distances be maintained:
Minimum Separation Distances in Feet
Sealed Componentsa and
Other Componentsb
Secondary Treatment
(Absorption System)
Wellsc 50 100
100-year floodplain No requirementa
100b
100d
Surface watere 50 100
Roadcuts, cliffs and banks 10i 25
Downgradient slopes in excess of 25 percent 10i 25
Property lines and easementsf 10 10
Water lines 10 10
High groundwater/limiting layer No requirements 4g, h
aSealed components include sewer lines, sewer mains, septic tanks, grease traps and dosing chambers/tanks.
bOther components include intermittent and recirculating sand filters, package plants and evapotranspiration systems.
cNo well of its zone of influence may be located within any mixing zone of an existing or proposed absorption/dispersal system.
dThis requirement may be waived if the property owners/authorized agent submits evidence that the average yearly highwater mark is 50 feet from
the septic and 100 feet from the absorption system, and the absorption system will be 4 feet above the 100-year flood elevation.
eThis distance shall be measured horizontally to the average yearly highwater mark.
fIf a variance is sought from this requirement, written permission must be obtained from the adjoining landowner(s). The 10-foot setback is
recommended from an easement line and/or right-of-way line (no system component may be located within an easement or right-of-way without the
holder’s written permission).
gThe distance separating high ground water, bedrock, or limiting layer from the absorption system shall be measured vertically from the bottom of the
absorption system trench or bed to the upper horizontal boundary of the high ground water, bedrock, or limiting layer.
hFor the protection of ground water, Environmental Health Services may increase this separation distance for soils having excessively fast percolation
rates (less than 5 minutes/inch).
In addition to the setbacks listed above, the Health Department also requires soil test pits (to catalogue
the soils and determine depth to any limiting layer such as groundwater), percolation tests and non-
degradation information. They also look at factors such as number of bedrooms (which relates to the
size of the system), slope of the property, well placement, floodplain delineations, etc.
The Health Department has septic permits for 21 systems within the study area. However, there are
likely more systems as the Department did not start keeping records until 1966.
2.3.3 Stormwater
There is existing stormsewer in the adjacent neighborhood to the west. However, any development
located in the study area would likely not tie into the stormsewer system and would therefore not impact
the existing stormsewer system. Instead, any development in the study area would like rely on on-site
detention or retention for stormwater management. Limited discharge to Bozeman Creek would likely
be allowed if properly permitted.
2.3.4 Transportation
The transportation facilities that would be most impacted by a change in land use in the study area
include South Church Avenue/Sourdough Road (South Church Avenue turns into Sourdough Road in
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Inventory and Analysis
Page 2-13
the 1900 block), South Willson Avenue and Kagy Boulevard. See Figure 12 for the existing street
network.
Ice Pond Road
Kagy Boulevard
Inventory and Analysis Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 2-14
South Church Avenue/Sourdough Road. In the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2001
Update, South Church Avenue/Sourdough Road is designated as an existing collector. In 1998, 2,200
to 2,900 vehicles traveled this corridor between East Main Street and Kagy Boulevard on a daily basis.
These numbers are expected to increase to 2,500 to 3,000 vehicles per day by 2010 and 3,300 to 3,900
vehicles per day by 2020. A pavement survey rated the pavement as “poor” adjacent to the study area.
The “poor” rating was assigned to facilities that showed heavy cracking, potholes, or rutting. The
intersection of Sourdough Road and Kagy Boulevard is expected to function at a LOS of “F” by 2020.
The Transportation Plan’s list of major recommended improvements includes upgrading South Church
Avenue to meet urban collector standards. The cost of upgrading South Church Avenue to a two-lane
urban collector is estimated at $5,742,000. The Transportation Plan identifies the Surface
Transportation Program – Urban (STPU), the Community Transportation Enhancement Program
(CTEP), and the City as possible funding sources. This project is currently not planned for design or
construction in the CIP.
The Transportation Plan also lists several recommended transportation system management (TSM)
improvements. These recommendations include improving the sight distances at the intersection of
Sourdough Road and Kagy Boulevard by removing vegetation, and intersection modifications and/or
traffic control installations at the same intersection.
South Willson Avenue. South Willson Avenue is designated as an existing Minor Arterial in the
Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2001 Update. In 1998, 7,400 to 12,000 vehicles traveled
this corridor between West Main Street and Kagy Boulevard on a daily basis. These numbers are
expected to decrease to 6,200 to 11,500 vehicles per day by 2010 and then increase to 8,100 to 13,700
vehicles per day by 2020.
A pavement study rated the pavement as “good” between Story Street and Cleveland Street and between
Grant Street and Kagy Boulevard, as “medium” between Main Street and Babcock Street and between
Cleveland Street and Grant Street, and as “poor” between Babcock Street and Koch Street. New streets
with little sign of age were rated as “good” and streets that had some cracking or other signs of aging,
but still provided a good driving surface, were given a “medium” rating.
Between Main Street and Babcock Street northbound traffic moves at a speed of less than 15 MPH,
while southbound traffic moves at a speed of 15 to 25 MPH. Between Olive Street and College Street
northbound traffic moves at a speed of 15 to 25 MPH while southbound traffic moves at a speed of 25
to 35 MPH. Finally, between College Street and Kagy Boulevard northbound traffic travels at a speed
of 25 to 35 MPH while southbound traffic moves at a speed of 15 to 25 MPH. Travel speed is defined
as the speed at which a vehicle travels between two points, and includes any delays that occur.
The running speed on South Willson Avenue is 25 to 35 MPH. Running speed is defined as the actual
vehicle speed while the vehicle is in motion. It does not include delay. Running speed is the travel
speed minus any vehicle delay.
Along South Willson Avenue, the intersections with Babcock Street, Olive Street, and Garfield Street are
identified as high accident locations. The signalized intersection of Babcock Street and South Willson
Avenue has a LOS of B in the morning and C in the evening. The signalized intersection of South
Willson Avenue and Kagy Boulevard has a LOS of C. By 2020, the intersection of South Willson
Avenue and College Street is expected to have a LOS of “F” and the intersection of South Willson
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Inventory and Analysis
Page 2-15
Avenue and Kagy Boulevard is expected to have a LOS of “D”. The section of South Willson Avenue
between Main Street and Garfield Street is expected to have a corridor capacity problem by 2020.
The Transportation Plan contains some recommended TSM improvements for South Willson Avenue.
The Plan recommends the removal of parking on the east side of the street, and the striping of two
northbound lanes, between Olive Street and Main Street. The Plan also recommends intersection
modifications and/or traffic control installations at the intersections with College Street and Garfield
Street.
Kagy Boulevard. In the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2001 Update, Kagy Boulevard is
designated as a principal arterial. In 1998, approximately 7,600 vehicles per day traveled the segment of
Kagy Boulevard between South Willson Avenue and Sourdough Road. This number is expected to
increase to 10,500 by 2010 and 14,300 by 2020. A pavement survey rated the pavement along this
section of road as “medium”. Both the travel speed and the running speed along this segment of Kagy
Boulevard was 25 to 35 MPH.
By 2020 the intersection of Kagy Boulevard and Sourdough Road is expected to have a LOS of “F” and
the intersection of Kagy Boulevard and South Willson Avenue is expected to have a LOS of “D”.
The Transportation Plan contains a TSM recommendation to improve the sight distances at the
intersection of Kagy Boulevard and Fairway Drive by removing the vegetation.
Local Streets. Some existing local streets would likely be impacted should development occur within
the study area. These streets would include: South Rouse Avenue, South Black Avenue, East Garfield
Street, East Lincoln Street, East Mason Street, Hoffman Street and Ice Pond Road. Because these
streets are locals, the Transportation Plan does not contain information for them.
Street Connectivity. Currently, there is demand for a street connecting South Rouse Avenue and
South Church Avenue through the study area. Possible connectors include Ice Pond Road, East
Garfield Street, and East Lincoln Street. If one new connector was installed, computer models estimate
that there would be approximately 660 daily westbound trips and 632 daily eastbound trips on the new
connecting street. If two new connectors were installed, the models estimate that there would be
approximately 572 daily westbound trips and 550 daily eastbound trips on the northernmost new
connecting street and approximately 391 daily westbound trips and 391 daily eastbound trips on the
southernmost new connecting street.
Most of the Ice Pond Road right-of-way is already in public ownership and the County has committed
to the installation of a new bridge over Bozeman Creek. The City already owns the right-of-way for the
extension of East Lincoln Street through to South Church Avenue. There currently is no public right-
of-way for the extension of East Garfield Street through to South Church Avenue. The Preferred
Alternative shows Ice Pond Road, East Garfield Street, and East Lincoln Street as possible future
connectors in case a connection is needed in the future. If the Preferred Alternative is successfully
implemented, the right-of-way for Lincoln Street could be used for a trail. In addition, a trail should be
installed connecting Ice Pond Road and South Rouse Avenue.
The land use pattern depicted in the Preferred Alternative, which features significant amounts of open
space, represents a desired future land use pattern. However, the plan also recognizes that property
owners have development rights based on current zoning, and these property owners will be allowed to
develop their land if they comply with applicable City and/or County land development regulations. If
Inventory and Analysis Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 2-16
new streets are required to serve development, the streets shall be arranged as shown on Alternative 3 –
Medium Density (see Figure 16).
2.3.5 Electric Transmission Infrastructure
NorthWestern Energy has a 50 KV transmission line that runs along the rear of the lots along South
Rouse in the study area, turning to the east at the Lincoln Street right-of-way (see Figure 12). This
transmission line terminates at a NorthWestern Energy substation located on South Church Avenue.
From the substation, the transmission line continues up Peet’s Hill/Burke Park to the hospital.
The NorthWestern Energy substation is located in the County and has received a conditional use permit
from the County to expand the substation. As part of this expansion project, NorthWestern Energy has
agreed to relocate a transmission line alignment across property owned by McRay and Delone Evans
and to abandon the related easement. This transmission line alignment will be relocated to the vicinity
of the Lincoln Street right-of-way.
2.3.6 Parks, Trails, Recreation, and Open Space
Parks. There are several parks in close proximity to the study area (see Figure 13). Christie Fields is
located to the west of the study site. It is 6.5 acres in size and is categorized as a “specialty park” as it
features baseball diamonds. Burke Park is located east of the study area. It is 40 acres in size and is
considered a “community park.” Burke Park features a trail system and urban open space. Finally,
Hausser Park is located south of the study area. It is a 1.8 acre “neighborhood park” that features urban
open space. Any residential subdivision or condominium development proposed within the study area
would require the provision of additional park land to meet the needs of residents of the new
development.
Trails. There are several trails in close proximity to the study area (see Figure 13). The Gallagator
Trails lies to the west of the study area and is adjacent to the study area at the north end. There is also
an extensive trail system in Burke Park. The Trail Map in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan identifies
the Bozeman Creek corridor through the study area as a desirable location for a future trail with
connections to Burke Park and the Gallagator Trail. Within the study area, the dedication of land for
trails or the provision of trail easements should be sought to establish this important trail corridor and
its connection to other nearby trail systems.
In their plan for the Burke Park Trail System, the Bozeman Recreation and Parks Advisory Board
indicates a desire to obtain at least three trail connections through the study area. These trails would
connect Burke Park to the Gallagator Trial at the north end of the study area, to Christie Fields Park in
the middle of the study area, and to the residential areas further to the south.
Recreation. The Gallagator Trail and the trail systems in Burke Park provide the greatest recreational
opportunity in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan area. In addition, Bozeman Creek itself
provides an important resource for recreational fishing access. Although the fishery is not well known
or heavily used, it is a great place for young anglers to learn the craft. The Montana Stream Access Law
allows people to wade in the stream between ordinary high water marks.
Open Space. The study site currently contains a significant amount of open space. In addition to the
riparian corridor, the west side of Bozeman Creek is also largely undeveloped. All of the land use
alternatives considered for this plan would have maintained the riparian corridor (approximately 40
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Inventory and Analysis
Page 2-17
acres) as open space. The 40 acres of riparian open space would be comprised of the 100-year
floodplain as well as watercourse setbacks.
The study area is adjacent to Burke Park/Peet’s Hill. This is a large area of urban open space that
features a trail system.
Trail on Peet’s Hill/Burke Park
2.3.7 Housing
As stated previously, there are approximately 57 existing dwelling units in the study area. Most of the
housing in the study area consists of low-density, single-household, detached units. There are a few
duplex and triplex units. The Dahlinger Condominiums consists of 18 condominium units.
2.3.8 Historical, Cultural, and Archeological Resources
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has documentation indicating that the potential for the
presence of archeological sites along Bozeman Creek within the study area is high. The location of these
sites is typically not mapped for public viewing in order to protect the sites. The City’s land
development regulations contain the following requirements regarding historic, cultural, paleontological,
and archeological sites:
1. Affected Areas. Describe and locate on a plat overlay or sketch map any known or possible
historic, paleontological, archeological, or cultural sites, structures, or objects which may be
affected by the proposed development.
2. Protective Measures. Describe any plans to protect such sites or properties.
3. Describe procedures to be followed if any historic, paleontological, archeological, cultural sites,
structures or object are found on site during site preparation and construction.
3. The developer shall discuss the impact of the proposed development on any historic features,
and the need for inventory, study and/or preservation with the State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO). The developer shall provide written documentation from SHPO that 1) verifies
Inventory and Analysis Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 2-18
that SHPO has reviewed the proposed plat or plan, 2) lists any SHPO recommendations, 3)
outlines any plans for inventory, study, and/or preservation, and 4) describes any mitigation
planned to overcome any adverse impacts.
4. Information on historical sites shall be prepared by a qualified professional, including persons
with a professional or educational background in history, architectural history, archeology, art
history, historic preservation, anthropology and cultural resource management.
2.3.9 Schools
There are no schools in the vicinity of the study area. The Bozeman School District #7 has an open
enrollment policy, and is statutorily required to educate any and all school-aged children in the district.
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Goals and Objectives
Page 3-1
CHAPTER 3
Goals and Objectives
3.0 NATURAL, HISTORICAL, ARCHEOLOGICAL AND AESTHETIC RESOURCES
3.0.1 Goal
Protect and enhance the natural, historical, archeological, and aesthetic resources of the Bozeman Creek
riparian corridor.
3.0.2 Relevant Bozeman 2020 Community Plan Goals
1.6.1, 4.9.8, 6.6.4, 8.14.1, 8.14.2, 8.14.3
3.0.3 Objectives
Objective 1. Protect the water quality of Bozeman Creek.
Objective 2. Preserve and enhance wildlife and fisheries habitat in the Bozeman Creek riparian
corridor.
Objective 3. Preserve any historical and/or archeological structures or sites in the study area.
Objective 4. Maintain the aesthetic values of the study area, including but not limited to viewsheds,
the natural beauty of the riparian area, and visual relief from built environments.
Objective 5. Discourage development in areas characterized by environmental constraints and/or
natural hazards, such as wetlands, floodplain areas, unsuitable soils and steep slopes.
Objective 6. Discourage creation of new septic or wells, and encourage existing development on
well/septic to hook up to City services.
3.1 OPEN SPACE
3.1.1 Goal
Preserve open space and the natural character of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan study area.
3.1.2 Relevant Bozeman 2020 Community Plan Goals
1.6.1, 6.6.4, 8.14.1, 8.14.2, 8.14.3
3.1.3 Objectives
Objective 1. Encourage cluster development in appropriate designated areas.
Objective 2. Require that residential development be of a scale, density, and mass that is compatible
with surrounding neighborhoods.
Objective 3. Require development to protect the natural resources and topography of the study area.
Objective 4. Protect viewsheds.
Goals and Objectives Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 3-2
3.2 INFILL DEVELOPMENT
3.2.1 Goal
Recognize the proximity of the study area to downtown Bozeman and the desirability of infill per the
2020 plan.
3.2.2 Relevant Bozeman 2020 Community Plan Goals
1.6.1, 4.9.1, 5.7.1, 6.6.1, 10.8.1
3.2.3 Objectives
Objective 1. Encourage urban density development where appropriate.
Objective 2. Encourage development of a variety of housing types to meet different community
needs.
3.3 CONNECTIVITY
3.3.1 Goal
Increase connectivity of Bozeman Creek corridor to surrounding neighborhoods, existing trail systems,
and downtown Bozeman.
3.3.2 Relevant Bozeman 2020 Community Plan Goals
1.6.1, 4.9.1, 10.8.1, 10.8.2, 10.8.4
3.3.3 Objectives
Objective 1. Promote public access to and enjoyment of Bozeman Creek corridor.
Objective 2. Develop public trails that provide transportation alternatives and recreational
opportunities.
Objective 3. Prioritize new public trail systems that connect with the existing trail systems including,
but not limited to, the Galligator and Peet's Hill trails.
Objective 4. Prioritize new public trails that connect with existing neighborhood parks such as
Christie Park, Burke Park, Bogert Park, and Lindley Park.
Objective 5. Establish new park land, preferably in larger tracts.
Objective 6. Promote educational and cultural uses of designated public open space areas (i.e. birding
areas, public gardens, etc.)
3.4 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
3.4.1 Goal
Allow for the establishment of appropriate commercial uses while remaining sensitive to the
environment as well as to existing and proposed neighborhoods.
3.4.2 Relevant Bozeman 2020 Community Plan Goals
1.6.1, 4.9.1, 6.6.1, 6.6.4
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Goals and Objectives
Page 3-3
3.4.3 Objectives
Objective 1. Provide adequate transportation networks for uses appropriate in the designated
Business Park area.
Objective 2. Require that commercial development be of a scale, density, and mass that is compatible
with surrounding neighborhoods.
Objective 3. Require that commercial development be designed to protect the natural resources and
topography of the study area.
3.5 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
3.5.1 Goal
Provide for public facilities and services which will accommodate future growth and development in the
study area.
3.5.2 Relevant Bozeman 2020 Community Plan Goals
1.6.1, 4.9.1, 6.6.1, 10.8.1, 10.8.2, 10.8.4
3.5.3 Objectives
Objective 1. Promote concurrent development of water, sewer, and street improvements.
Objective 2. Establish east-west transportation connections through the development of new streets.
Objective 3. Improve South Church for safer bike/pedestrian use while retaining rural character of
road.
Goals and Objectives Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 3-4
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Land Use Alternatives
Page 4-1
CHAPTER 4
Land Use Alternatives
4.0 OVERVIEW
Three land use alternatives were considered as part of the Bozeman Neighborhood Plan planning
process. These alternatives include:
· Alternative 1 – Conservation Alternative (Preferred Alternative)
· Alternative 2 – Low Density Alternative
· Alternative 3 – Medium Density Alternative
4.0.1 Land Uses
The land uses depicted on the three land use alternative maps represent a future land use pattern. These
designations do not necessarily represent a specific Bozeman 2020 Community Plan land use
designation or a specific zoning designation. Instead, these designations represent desirable future uses
of land within the study area. The designations will be used, through the implementation of the
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, to determine whether any amendments to the Bozeman 2020
Community Plan Future Land Use Map or the Bozeman Official Zoning Map are necessary.
The following land use designations were used in the three land use alternatives:
· Residential – Density 1 (4 units per acre)
· Residential – Density 2 (6 units per acre)
· Residential – Density 3 (8 units per acre)
· Business Park
· Community Center
· Industrial/Commercial
· Park
· Open Space
4.0.2 Land Use Designation Definitions
The land use designations in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan are defined as follows:
Residential. This category designates places where the primary activity is urban density living quarters.
Other uses which complement residences are also acceptable such as parks, low intensity home based
occupations, fire stations, churches, and schools. The residential designation also indicates that it is
expected that development will occur within municipal boundaries which may require annexation prior
to development. The dwelling unit density expected within this classification varies. It is expected that
areas of higher density housing would be likely to be located in proximity to commercial centers to
facilitate the broadest range of feasible transportation options for the greatest number of individuals and
support businesses within commercial centers. Low density areas should have an average minimum
Land Use Alternatives Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 4-2
density of six units per net acre. Medium density areas should have an average minimum density of
twelve units per net acre. High density areas should have an average minimum density of eighteen units
per net acre. A variety of housing types should be blended to achieve the desired density with large
areas of single type housing being discouraged. In limited instances the strong presence of constraints
and natural features such as floodplains may cause an area to be designated for development at a lower
density than normally expected within this classification.
All residential housing should be arranged with consideration given to the existing character of adjacent
development, any natural constraints such as steep slopes, and in a fashion which advances the overall
goals of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. The residential designation is intended to provide the
principal locations for additional housing within the Planning Area.
For the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, three different density classifications were used for
residential infill. Residential – Density 1 would result in approximately 4 dwelling units per acre,
Residential – Density 2 would result in approximately 6 dwelling units per acre, and Residential –
Density 3 would result in approximately 8 dwelling units per acre. This density is less than that
contemplated by the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. The 2020 Plan recommends minimum
residential densities within the City from 6 to 18 units per acre. The residential densities considered for
the study area were lower because the area is subject to a wide variety of development constraints,
including significant critical lands, access, and infrastructure issues.
Business Park. This classification provides for areas typified by office uses and technology-oriented
light industrial uses, although retail, services, or industrial uses may also be included in an accessory or
local service role.
Community Center. This classification describes areas used for not-for-profit cultural, educational,
recreational, religious, or social activities which are open to the public or a designated part of the public,
usually owned and operated by a public or nonprofit group or agency. Examples of community centers
are schools, churches, Boys and Girls Clubs, and similar uses. Community center does not include
fraternities, lodges, or similar uses.
Industrial/Commercial. Commercial activities represent the basic employment and services necessary
for a vibrant community. A broad range of functions including retail, education, professional and
personal services, offices, residences, and general service activities typify this designation. The density of
development is expected to be higher than currently seen in most commercial areas in Bozeman and
should include multi-story buildings. It is considered desirable to have residences on upper floors in
some circumstances.
Industrial provides areas for uses which support an urban environment such as manufacturing,
warehousing, and utility hubs. Although use in these areas can be intensive, these areas are part of the
larger community and should meet standards for landscaping and other site design issues and be
integrated with the larger community.
Park. Parks include all publicly owned park lands.
Open Space. Private or public land or water area devoid of buildings and other physical structures
except where accessory to the provision of recreation, including but not limited to benches, picnic tables
and interpretive signage.
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Land Use Alternatives
Page 4-3
4.0.2 Open Space
All three options would preserve a significant corridor of open space through the study area. This green
space would consist of the Bozeman Creek riparian area, the 100-year floodplain, wetlands, and the
required 75-foot watercourse setback.
4.1 ALTERNATIVE 1 – CONSERVATION ALTERNATIVE
Alternative 1 (please refer to Figure 14) is a conservation alternative for the study area and, with some
modifications, became the Preferred Alternative. This alternative features the preservation of open
space west of Bozeman Creek within the study area. This alternative would result in some limited
pockets of Residential Density 3 infill development north of the lots along Ice Pond Road and north of
Kagy Boulevard. It would also allow for Residential Density 1 infill development for the properties on
the north side of Ice Pond Road and east of Bozeman Creek. If efforts to preserve open space under
this alternative are not fully realized, regular land use regulations shall apply.
4.1.0 Acreage Allocation by Land Use
Build Out Designation Acres
Density 1 (4 units per acre) 18.06
Density 2 (6 units per acre) 0.00
Density 3 (8 units per acre) 5.79
Business Park 7.19
Community Center 2.98
Industrial 3.55
Open Space 28.94
Park 0.00
Right-of-way 0.22
100-year Floodplain/Watercourse setback 39.48
TOTAL 106.21
4.1.1 Plan Statistics
Alternative 1 – Conservation Alternative: Plan Statistics
Statistic Value Calculations and Notes
Additional dwelling units at full
build out
66 Calculations:
1. 18.06 acres of Density 1 multiplied by 4
units/acre = 72.24 dwelling units subtracted by
30 existing dwelling units = 42.24
2. 5.79 acres of Density 3 multiplied by 8 units/acre
= 46.32 dwelling units subtracted by 23 existing
dwelling units = 23.32
Land Use Alternatives Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 4-4
3. Total: 42.24 + 23.32 = 65.56
Note: No right-of-way (ROW) subtracted because no
new ROW needed for this infill development.
Total dwelling units at full build
out
123 Calculation:
57 existing dwelling units + 65.56 new dwelling units =
122.56
Additional population at full
build out
148 Calculation:
65.56 new dwelling units multiplied by 2.26 people per
household = 148.17
Total population at full build out 277 Calculation:
128.82 existing population + 148.17 additional
population = 276.99
Net dwelling unit density at full
build out
5.14 Calculation:
122.56 total dwelling units divided by 23.85 (net acres
available for residential development) = 5.14
4.1.2 Costs
The most significant cost associated with Alternative 1 would be purchasing the development rights for
the land to be protected and purchasing easements on land not protected. This amount would be based
on appraised value so the actual cost is unknown at this time. The land proposed for limited infill
development in Alternative 1 already has access to City water and sewer mains and streets. Therefore,
significant water, sewer, and street improvements would likely not be needed. Trail development and
trail parking lot development would result in some costs.
4.1.3 Benefits
Alternative 1 would eliminate expenditures by a developer to eliminate downstream sewer bottlenecks.
This would be a savings of $590,000. This alternative would also eliminate expenditures to provide
water, sewer, and street infrastructure in protected areas. These costs are as follows:
z $157/linear foot street;
z $35/linear foot 8-inch sewer main;
z $30/linear foot 8-inch water main;
z $20/4-inch sewer service; and
z $15/¾-inch water service.
With Alternative 1, connecting streets between South Rouse and South Church may not be needed,
depending upon development proposal inside and outside of the study area. If connecting streets were
determined to be needed, the installation costs would be approximately $157 per linear foot. Bridges
would also be needed which would cost approximately $129,000 for a pre-cast concrete bridge or
$153,000 for a steel bridge. However, Gallatin County will be paying to replace the bridge on Ice Pond
Road.
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Land Use Alternatives
Page 4-5
4.1.4 Other Considerations
Public access to protected open space would need to be provided because it would be critical for
community financial support. A trail system would need to be provided through the protected open
space to provide public access. The trail locations shown in Figure 14 are conceptual. The existing
Lincoln Street right-of-way could be used for a trail, with a parking lot off of Church Street, if done in a
manner that would not preclude the future use of the right-of-way for a street. Additional parking could
be provided near the end of the Garfield Street right-of-way.
4.2 ALTERNATIVE 2 – LOW DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
This alternative features low density infill throughout the study area while still protecting the Bozeman
Creek riparian corridor. Please refer to Figure 15. This alternative also features a formal City park just
south of the Boys and Girls Club property and west of Bozeman Creek.
4.2.0 Acreage Allocation by Land Use
Build Out Designation Acres
Density 1 (4 units per acre) 26.73
Density 2 (6 units per acre) 8.61
Density 3 (8 units per acre) 0.55
Business Park 7.19
Community Center 2.98
Industrial 3.55
Open Space 12.45
Park 3.80
Right-of-way 0.86
100-year Floodplain/Watercourse setback 39.48
TOTAL 106.21
4.2.1 Plan Statistics
Alternative 2 – Low Density Alternative: Plan Statistics
Statistic Value Calculations and Notes
Additional dwelling units at full
build out
94 Calculations:
1. 26.73 acres of Density 1 subtracted by 2.13 acres
new ROW multiplied by 4 units/acre = 98.40
dwelling units subtracted by 33 existing dwelling
units = 65.40
2. 8.61 acres of Density 2 subtracted by 0.81 acres
new ROW multiplied by 6 units/acre = 46.80
dwelling units subtracted by 5 existing dwelling
units = 41.80
Land Use Alternatives Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 4-6
3. 0.55 acres of Density 3 multiplied by 8
units/acre = 4.4 dwelling units subtracted by 18
existing dwelling units = -13.6
4. Total: 65.40 + 41.80 – 13.6 = 93.60
Total dwelling units at full build
out
151 Calculation:
57 existing dwelling units + 93.60 new dwelling units =
150.60
Additional population at full
build out
212 Calculation:
93.60 new dwelling units multiplied by 2.26 people per
household = 211.54
Total population at full build out 340 Calculation:
128.82 existing population + 211.54 additional
population = 340.36
Net dwelling unit density at full
build out
4.20 Calculation:
150.60 total dwelling units divided by 35.89 (net acres
available for residential development) = 4.20
4.2.2 Costs
If a developer did not want to wait for the City to pay for improvements to eliminate downstream sewer
bottlenecks, the developer would have to cover these costs. This would cost approximately $590,000.
Approximate costs to provide water, sewer, and street infrastructure in new development are as follows:
· $157/linear foot street;
· $35/linear foot 8-inch sewer main;
· $30/linear foot 8-inch water main;
· $20/4-inch sewer service; and
· $15/¾-inch water service.
The north-south portion of any new sewer constructed west of Bozeman Creek may need to be
constructed as a 21-inch main. The City’s sewer plan shows a future 21-inch trunk main extending
through the study area to service urbanizing areas south of Kagy Boulevard. The cost per linear foot of
a 21-inch main is $100; however the developer would likely be eligible for paybacks and/or impact fee
credits for oversizing.
This alternative would likely require the installation of at least one connecting street between South
Rouse and South Church. The installation of new streets costs approximately $157 per linear foot.
Bridges would also be needed which would cost approximately $129,000 for a pre-cast concrete bridge
or $153,000 for a steel bridge. However, Gallatin County will be paying to replace the bridge on Ice
Pond Road.
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Land Use Alternatives
Page 4-7
4.2.3 Other Considerations
In Figure 15, the location of the trail system is conceptual. The location of the new north-south street is
also conceptual because the actual alignment will depend on development proposals and critical lands.
The new north-south street would require a City standard right-of-way of 60 feet. The constructed
width (back of curb to back of curb) of the new north-south street could be less than a City standard of
31, 33 or 35 feet (as allowed for by the City’s development regulations) which would cost less than
$157.00/linear foot to build. Development in the study area could be required to do off-site parkland
dedication to the designated park for approximately 2.8 acres. (Calculation: 93.60 new dwelling units
multiplied by 0.03 acres per dwelling unit park land dedication requirement = 2.81 acres of park).
4.3 ALTERNATIVE 3 – MEDIUM DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
This alternative features medium density infill throughout the study area while still protecting the
Bozeman Creek riparian corridor. Please refer to Figure 16. As in Alternative 2, this alternative also
features a formal City park just south of the Boys and Girls Club property and west of Bozeman Creek.
4.3.0 Acreage Allocation by Land Use
Build Out Designation Acres
Density 1 (4 units per acre) 15.90
Density 2 (6 units per acre) 10.85
Density 3 (8 units per acre) 9.16
Business Park 7.19
Community Center 2.98
Industrial 3.55
Open Space 12.45
Park 3.80
Right-of-way 0.86
100-year Floodplain/Watercourse setback 39.48
TOTAL 106.21
4.3.1 Plan Statistics
Alternative 3 – Medium Density Alternative: Plan Statistics
Statistic Value Calculations and Notes
Additional dwelling units at full
build out
127 Calculations:
1. 15.90 acres of Density 1 multiplied by 4
units/acre = 63.60 dwelling units subtracted by
25 existing units = 38.60
Land Use Alternatives Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 4-8
2. 10.85 acres of Density 2 subtracted by 2.13 acres
of new right-of-way multiplied by 6 units/acre =
55.32 dwelling units subtracted by 8 existing
dwelling units = 44.32
3. 9.16 acres of Density 3 subtracted by 0.81 acres
of new right-of-way multiplied by 8 units/acre =
66.80 dwelling units subtracted by 23 existing
units = 43.80
4. Total: 38.60 + 44.32 + 43.80 = 126.72
Total dwelling units at full build
out
184 Calculation:
57 existing dwelling units + 126.72 new dwelling units =
183.72
Additional population at full
build out
287 Calculation:
126.72 new dwelling units multiplied by 2.26 people per
household = 286.39
Total population at full build out 415 Calculation:
128.82 existing population + 286.39 additional
population = 415.21
Net dwelling unit density at full
build out
5.12 Calculation:
183.72 dwelling units divided by 35.91 (net acres available
for residential development) = 5.12
4.3.2 Costs
If a developer did not want to wait for the City to pay for improvements to eliminate downstream sewer
bottlenecks, the developer would have to cover these costs. This would cost approximately $590,000.
Approximate costs to provide water, sewer, and street infrastructure in new development are as follows:
· $157/linear foot street;
· $35/linear foot 8-inch sewer main;
· $30/linear foot 8-inch water main;
· $20/4-inch sewer service; and
· $15/¾-inch water service.
The north-south portion of any new sewer constructed west of Bozeman Creek may need to be
constructed as a 21-inch main. The City’s sewer plan shows a future 21-inch trunk main extending
through the study area to service urbanizing areas south of Kagy Boulevard. The cost per linear foot of
a 21-inch main is $100; however the developer would likely be eligible for paybacks and/or impact fee
credits for oversizing.
This alternative would likely require the installation of at least two connecting streets between South
Rouse and South Church. The installation of new streets costs approximately $157 per linear foot.
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Land Use Alternatives
Page 4-9
Bridges would also be needed which would cost approximately $129,000 for a pre-cast concrete bridge
or $153,000 for a steel bridge. However, Gallatin County will be paying to replace the bridge on Ice
Pond Road.
4.3.3 Other Considerations
In Figure 15, the location of the trail system is conceptual. The location of the new north-south street is
also conceptual because the actual alignment will depend on development proposals and critical lands.
The new north-south street would require a City standard right-of-way of 60 feet. The constructed
width (back of curb to back of curb) of the new north-south street could be less than a City standard of
31, 33 or 35 feet (as allowed for in the City’s land development regulations) which would cost less than
$157.00/linear foot to build. Development in the study area could be required to do off-site parkland
dedication to the designated park for approximately 3.8 acres. (Calculation: 126.72 new dwelling units
multiplied by 0.03 acres per dwelling unit park land dedication requirement = 3.80 acres of park).
Land Use Alternatives Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 4-10
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Plan Implementation
Page 5-1
CHAPTER 5
Plan Implementation
5.0 IMPLEMENTATION OVERVIEW
The Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, as depicted in the Preferred Alternative (see Figure 17),
contains a vision for the future of the study area. The Preferred Alternative is similar to Alternative 1,
but shows Ice Pond Road, East Garfield Street, and East Lincoln Street as potential future connector
streets between South Rouse Avenue and South Church Avenue. The Preferred Alternative also shows
existing City and County zoning designations as of the date of this plan.
Like all visions, someone must undertake actions to implement the vision if change is to be realized.
Private individuals in the advancement of their own interests will initiate many of the required actions.
The construction of new homes and businesses, and the upkeep and reinvestment in existing areas of
the study area, will actually carry out many of the elements of the community vision on the ground.
The City of Bozeman may also undertake a variety of actions that will advance the goals and objectives
of this plan. The City has a variety of tools available that can help influence the future of the City and
guide public and private actions. However, the full realization of the vision of this plan will only be
achieved through years of diligent work by public/private partnerships.
5.1 PLAN ELEMENT OVERVIEW
5.1.1 Land Use
The land use pattern depicted in the preferred alternative, which features significant amounts of open
space, represents a desired future land use pattern. However, this plan is not intended to impact the right
to legally use land; the plan recognizes that property owners have development rights based on current
zoning, and these property owners will be allowed to develop their land if they comply with applicable
City and/or County land development regulations. If new streets are required to serve development, the
streets shall be arranged as shown on Alternative 3 – Medium Density (see Figure 16).
As the desired land uses depicted in Figure 17 are successfully put in place, the Bozeman 2020
Community Plan Future Land Use map and the Bozeman Official Zoning Map should be revised as
appropriate.
5.1.2 Parks and Trails
The Preferred Alternative does not contain a formal, developed park. Instead, the Preferred Alternative
contains a network of trails that would connect existing parks together, such as Burke Park and Christie
Fields. The final location of trails will depend largely on the availability of easements, critical lands,
proximity to homes and access. The all weather access road that will be required to provide access to
the future 21-inch truck main could double as a trail.
Plan Implementation Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 5-2
5.1.3 Open Space
The Preferred Alternative features a significant amount of open space. If the development rights in the
targeted open space protection areas are successfully secured, provisions for the maintenance and
management of the open space area will need to be made.
5.1.4 Transportation
The Preferred Alternative will not result in a large increase in vehicle traffic. However, South Church
Avenue/Sourdough Road should be improved to an urban collector standard as soon as funding as
available to provide a safe and functional roadway to serve the whole area. The Preferred Alternative
does not require the installation of any connecting streets between South Rouse Avenue and South
Church Avenue. However, the plan depicts the possibility that one or more connectors may be needed
in the future based on development in and around the study area. Streets that connect South Rouse
Avenue to South Church Avenue, at Ice Pond Road, East Garfield Street and East Lincoln Street, should
only be installed after South Church Avenue has been improved to a collector standard established in the
Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2001 Update, at a minimum in the vicinity of the intersections
themselves.
5.1.5 Water and Sewer Infrastructure
There is a serious sewer capacity situation in the study area. The Preferred Alternative provides an
alternative to development that would require significant and costly upgrades in the sewer system. A
long-term goal of connecting all homes and businesses in the study area to municipal water and sewer
systems should be pursued.
5.2 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
The goals and objectives of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan cover a wide range of issues.
Often an implementation policy taken to advance one goal may also apply to others. In order to
facilitate comparison and review of the policies, all of the implementation policies have been gathered
into this chapter. They are organized by number and by topic. In Chapter 3 the implementation
policies that will carry out each goal and objective have been identified and are listed and referenced by
the numbers shown below.
5.2.1 Managing Development
1. Encourage Gallatin County to adopt the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan as part of its
Bozeman Area Neighborhood Plan.
2. Encourage Gallatin County to adopt provisions in their Bozeman Area Zoning District Zoning
Ordinance that would implement the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan.
3. The City of Bozeman Planning Board and the City Commission will recognize the Preferred
Alternative when evaluating the neighborhood compatibility of development proposals per the
growth policy (Bozeman 2020 Community Plan).
4. Zoning
a. City of Bozeman and Gallatin County will strictly enforce current zoning designations
with the study area.
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Plan Implementation
Page 5-3
b. City of Bozeman will discourage and give low priority to any zoning emendations that
increase density where the Preferred Alternative plan indicates a preference for open
space, parkland, or trail easements.
5. Encourage new wetlands and/or other natural or naturally built features for the control and
management of stormwater runoff of any new development or construction in the area. To
promote this, the City should be willing to participate with regulatory incentives, money, and
engineering.
5.2.2 Creating Open Space and Trails
6. Donated Land
7. Donated Conservation Easements
8. Donated Trail Easements
9. PDR Program (Purchase of Development Rights)
a. Purchased trail easements
b. Purchased conservation easements
10. Fee Title Acquisition
a. City of Bozeman should work with the neighborhood to identify key parcels within the
study area that would be appropriate for Fee Title Acquisition in order to provide public
parkland, parking areas, rights-of-way, and public access points.
b. City of Bozeman should actively pursue the acquisition of trail easements and open
space through the development approval process.
c. City of Bozeman should set up a Parkland Dedication District within the Bozeman
Creek area for the transfer of parkland dedication from other developments.
d. Property Swaps
• City-initiated: City of Bozeman should identify and consider potential land swap
properties in order to establish City ownership of key parcels of land within the
study area to provide possible public parkland, parking areas, rights-of-way, and
public access points.
• County initiated
• Non-governmental
11. TDR Program (Transfer of Development Rights)
a. City of Bozeman should designate a City/County, multi-interest task force to formulate
and institute a TDR program for the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood, designating
Bozeman Creek as a sending site only.
b. City of Bozeman should identify viable receiving parcels within the city. (County is
presently studying TDR districts and identifying receiving parcels within its domain.)
c. City of Bozeman should pursue an inter-local agreement with Gallatin County regarding
its TDR program, designating the County-portion of Bozeman Creek as a sending site
only.
Plan Implementation Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 5-4
5.2.3 Generating Funding
12. Special Improvement Districts (SIDs)
a. City of Bozeman should consider a special improvement district in a to-be-determined
Bozeman Creek neighborhood area to help fund public improvements and access to
conservation area.
13. Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association (BCNA) should initiate a community-wide capital
campaign to raise contributions to assist with land and/or development rights acquisition, public
access infrastructure development, and natural resource protection.
14. BCNA should investigate and pursue possible outside funding sources/fund matching programs
such as:
a. Gallatin County Open Space Grants Program
b. Gallatin County Park Development Disbursement Funds
c. Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund
d. Mitigation Funds – Northwestern Energy, MT Department of Transportation, etc.
e. Wetland and Riparian Restoration Funds
f. Urban renewal or preservation funds (ref. City Grants Coordinator)
g. Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks
5.2.4 Building Public Awareness and Support
15. BCNA should organize and facilitate the cleanup of the Bozeman Creek riparian corridor and
coordinate with Bozeman Cleanup Day.
16. BCNA and the City Neighborhood Coordinator should work with local media sources to
generate positive publicity about the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan.
5.2.5 Ongoing Land Resource Conservation
17. Work with the Gallatin County Planning Department and the Environmental Health
Department to encourage connection to municipal water and wastewater systems.
18. Work with the Local Water Quality District to educate residents within and adjacent to the study
area about the proper use, storage, and disposal of household hazardous wastes and other home
and yard chemicals.
19. Educate residents within and adjacent to the study area regarding City and County animal
control ordinances and enforce as required. (BCNA and City Neighborhood Coordinator)
20. Work with Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks to enhance the fisheries and wildlife habitat within
the study area.
21. In order to maintain the natural drainage system with the study area, the City of Bozeman
should restrict the placement of fill, soil removal, vegetation removal, streambed disturbance,
etc.
22. Pursue possible outside funding sources/fund matching programs such as:
a. Mitigation Funds – Northwestern Energy, MT Department of Transportation, etc.
b. Wetland and Riparian Restoration
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Plan Implementation
Page 5-5
5.2.6 Ongoing Public Awareness/Appreciation
23. Work with local conservation groups and local schools to install educational signage regarding
wildlife, wildlife habitat, and control of domestic pets.
24. Construct and maintain parking lots and trailheads to provide public access to trails and public
open space areas.
25. Consider establishing designated park/picnic areas at key sites along trail corridor.
26. Install disabled-accessible trails, walkways, and fishing ramps where appropriate.
5.2.7 Long-term Infrastructure Support (City of Bozeman)
27. If the planned 21-inch sewer trunk is installed along Bozeman Creek, place it in a location that
minimizes negative impacts to riparian habitat and vegetation.
28. If the planned 21-inch sewer trunk is installed along Bozeman Creek, provide incentives for
property owners east of the creek to connect to the City wastewater system (for instance, no-
charge hookup or no sewer billing for some period of time).
29. City of Bozeman should aim to acquire the rights-of-way, and reconcile other impediments,
towards bringing South Church into compliance with safe and legal street standards.
30. Provide new streets/improve existing streets as and if needed in compliance with adopted facility
plans, zoning and subdivision regulations, and other City codes.
Plan Implementation Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page 5-6
Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.
Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St..evA esuoR.evA anatnoM.evA esuoR.e.evvA An aanmaetznooBM.ev.Ae vnAa ymeczaroTB.evA ycarTLincoln St..evA hcruhCLincoln St..evA hcruhCMason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.Pl.o
C
a
r
l
Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.Sour
dough Rd.
College St.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.
Harrison St.
Story St.
Harrison St.
Story St.
T r a c y A v e .e .A vy a cTr .rD keerC gnirpS.rD keerC gnir.prSD yawriaF.evA noslliW.rD yawriaF.evA noslliW.rl Deln
O 'C o n .rDl eln
'C o nO
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Vicinity Map.evA kcalBFigure
1.evA kcalBK
a
g
y
Blvd.
K
a
g
y
Blvd.
1 inch equals 700 feet
keerC namezoB1 inch equals 700 feetkeerC namezoBF ig g in s C r e e kkeeCrs inggFi
keeird C r-BwehttaMRAEIN LROTAGALLAGkeeC rd ir-BwehttaMRAENLIR OTBURKEAGALLAGBURKE
JOSEPHINE
CHRISTIE
JOSEPHINE
LANGOHR
GARDENS
CHRISTIE
LANGOHR
GARDENS
LANGOHRLANGOHR
Ice Pond Rd.Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Church Ave.Mason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.College St.
Harrison St.Harrison St.
Story St.Story St.
T r a c y A v e .
T r a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Fairway Dr.Willson Ave.Willson Ave.O 'C o n n ell Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Existing Land Use Figure
2Black Ave.Black Ave.K
a
g
y B
lvd.
K
a
g
y B
lvd.
Neighborhood Plan Boundary
Existing Land Uses
Administrative/Professional
Commercial Retail
Commercial/Auto
Church
Duplex/Triple-household Residential
Golf Course
Hotel/Motel
Light Manufacturing
Mobile Home/Mobile Park
Multi-household Residential
Mixed Use
Public Facility/Park
Restaurant/Bar
School/Educational Facility
Single-household Residential
Vacant
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
Ice Pond Rd.Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Church Ave.Mason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.College St.
Harrison St.Harrison St.
Story St.Story St.
T r a c y A v e .T r a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Fairway Dr.Willson Ave.Willson Ave.O 'C o n n ell Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Bozeman 2020 Community Plan
Future Land Use Designations
Figure
3Black Ave.Black Ave.K
a
g
y B
lvd.
K
a
g
y B
lvd.
Neighborhood Plan Boundary
Parcels
Master Plan Land Use Designation
Business Park
Community Commercial
Golf Course
Industrial
Neighborhood Commercial
Other Public Lands
Parks, Open Space and Recreational Lands
Public Institutions
Regional Commercial and Services
Residential
Future Urban
Suburban Residential
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
R-1R-1
R-1R-1
PLIPLIR-2R-2
R-SR-S
R-3R-3
R-1R-1
R-OR-O
R-1R-1
R-4R-4
R-4R-4
R-2R-2 R-3R-3
PLIPLI
R-3R-3
R-3R-3
B-1B-1
R-2R-2
BPBP
R-OR-O
R-4R-4
R-OR-O
R-4R-4
R-SR-S
Ice Pond Rd.Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Montana Ave.Tracy Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Church Ave.Mason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.College St.
Harrison St.Harrison St.
Story St.Story St.
T r a c y A v e .
T r a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Fairway Dr.Willson Ave.Willson Ave.O 'C o n n ell Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.City of Bozeman Zoning Districts Figure
4Black Ave.Black Ave.K
a
g
y B
lvd.
K
a
g
y B
lvd.
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
Neighborhood Plan Boundary
Parcels
City Zoning Districts
B-1 Neighborhood Business
BP Business Park
PLI Public Lands & Institutions
R-1 Residential Single-household Low Density
R-2 Residential Two-household Medium Density
R-3 Residential Medium Density
R-4 Residential High Density
R-O Residential Office
R-S Residential Suburban
Ice Pond Rd.Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Church Ave.Mason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.College St.
Harrison St.Harrison St.
Story St.Story St.
T r a c y A v e .T r a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Fairway Dr.Willson Ave.Willson Ave.O 'C o n nell Dr.O 'C o n nell Dr.Floodplain Map Figure
5Black Ave.Black Ave.K
a
g
y
Blvd.
K
a
g
y
Blvd.
Neighborhood Plan Boundary
Streams
100 Year Floodplain
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feetBozeman CreekBozeman Creek
Ice Pond Rd.Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Church Ave.Mason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.College St.
Harrison St.Harrison St.
Story St.Story St.
T r a c y A v e .T r a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Fairway Dr.Willson Ave.Willson Ave.O 'C o n nell Dr.O 'C o n nell Dr.Wetland & Riparian Area Map Figure
6Black Ave.Black Ave.K
a
g
y
Blvd.
K
a
g
y
Blvd.
Neighborhood Plan Boundary
Streams
Wetlands
Riparian Areas
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feetBozeman CreekBozeman Creek
Ice Pond Rd.Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Church Ave.Mason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.College St.
Harrison St.Harrison St.
Story St.Story St.
T r a c y A v e .T r a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Fairway Dr.Willson Ave.Willson Ave.O 'C o n nell Dr.O 'C o n nell Dr.Depth to Groundwater Figure
7Black Ave.Black Ave.K
a
g
y
Blvd.
K
a
g
y
Blvd.
Neighborhood Plan Boundary
Streams
Depth to Groundwater
0 to 6 Feet, Rare Flooding
1 1/2 to 3 Feet
3 to 6 Feet, Rare Flooding
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
Neighborhood Plan Boundary
Streets
Streams
Soils
Blackmore Silt Loam, 0-4% Slope
Blackmore Silt Loam, 4-8% Slope
Blackmore Silt Loam, 8-15% Slope
Sudworth Silty Clay Loam, 0-2% Slope
Enbar Loam, 0-4% Slope
Enbar-Nythar Loam, 0-4% Slope
Blossberg Loam, 0-2% Slope
Bandy-Riverwash-Bonebasin Complex, 0-2% Slope
Straw Loam, 0-4% Slope
Doughty Loam, 8-15% Slope
Cabba-Reedwest-Anceny Complex, 15-45% Slope
Meagher-Shawmut-Bowery Complex, 15-45% Slope
Reedwest-Cabba-Bower Complex, 15-45% Slope
Not Mapped
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.Willson Ave.Willson Ave.Soils Map Figure
8
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
Ice Pond Rd.Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Church Ave.Mason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Carol P
l
.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.Sour
dough Rd.
Ken
yo
n Dr.
Ken
yo
n Dr.
College St.College St.
Harrison St.Harrison St.
Story St.Story St.
T r a c y A v e .T r a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Fairway Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Black Ave.Black Ave.Kagy Blvd.Kagy Blvd.
ULUL
747E747E
350C350C
350D350D
605A605A
407A407A
547E547E
64B64B
350B350B
542A542A 509B509B
350B350B
752E752E
72D72D
512B512B
UL
350B
350C
350D
407A
509B
512B
542A
606A
64B
72D
747E
752E
947E
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.Willson Ave.Willson Ave.Topography and Slope Figure
9
Neighborhood Plan Boundary
Streets
Streams
20 Foot Contour Interval
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
Ice Pond Rd.Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Church Ave.Mason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Carol P
l
.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.Sour
dough Rd.
Ken
yon Dr.
Ken
yon Dr.
College St.College St.
Harrison St.Harrison St.
Story St.Story St.
Tr a c y A v e .Tr a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Fairway Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Black Ave.Black Ave.Kagy Blvd.Kagy Blvd.
24 inch24 inch6 inch6 inch18 inch18 inch14 inch14 inch
8 inch8 inch4 inch4 inch6 inch6 inch 6 inch6 inch8 inch8 inch
6 inch6 inch6 inch6 inch6 inch6 inch14 inch14 inch6 inch6 inch6 inch6 inch
Figure
10
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.
Water Mains
Neighborhood Plan Boundary
Water Mains
4 inch
6 inch
8 inch
14 inch
18 inch
24 inch
Parcels
Ice Pond Rd.Ice Pond Rd.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Church Ave.Mason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Carol Pl.Carol Pl.Sour
dough Rd.Sour
dough Rd.
Ken
yo
n Dr.
Ken
yo
n Dr.
College St.College St.
Harrison St.Harrison St.
Story St.Story St.Spring Creek Dr.Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Fairway Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Black Ave.Black Ave.Kagy Blvd.Kagy Blvd.
14 inch14 inch
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
14 inch14 inch
Figure
11
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.
Sewer Mains
Neighborhood Plan Boundary
Sewer Mains
6 inch
8 inch
10 inch
12 inch
Parcels
Ice Pond Rd.Ice Pond Rd.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Church Ave.Mason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Carol Pl.Carol Pl.Sour
dough Rd.Sour
dough Rd.
Ken
yo
n Dr.
Ken
yo
n Dr.
College St.College St.
Harrison St.Harrison St.
Story St.Story St.Spring Creek Dr.Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Fairway Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Black Ave.Black Ave.Kagy Blvd.Kagy Blvd.
6 inch
6 inch8 inch6 inch8 inch
6 inch8 inch8 inch
8 inch
8 inch8 inch8 inch6 inch
6 inch
8 inch
8
in
ch
10 inch8 inch12 inch 8 inch1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Mason St.
Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.
Harrison St.
T ra c y A v e .Fairway Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Northwestern Energy
50 KV Transmission Line
Figure
12Black Ave.K
a
g
y B
lvd.
Existing Transmission Line (planned to be upgraded to 50 KV)
Existing Transmission Line (planned to be vacated)
Proposed New Transmission Line (planned to be 50 KV)
NW Energy Property
Watercourse
Existing Roads
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feetWillson Ave.*Note: The location and future plans for the
Northwestern Energy transmission lines in this
area are approximate and based on available data.
Hoffman Dr.Hoffman Dr.Willson Ave.Willson Ave.Parks & Trails Figure
13
Neighborhood Plan Boundary
Trails
Streets
Streams
Parks
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
Ice Pond Rd.Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Church Ave.Mason St.Mason St.
Accola Dr.Accola Dr.
Carol P
l
.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.College St.
Harrison St.Harrison St.
Story St.Story St.
T r a c y A v e .T r a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Fairway Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Black Ave.Black Ave.Kagy Blvd.Kagy Blvd.GALLAGATOR LINEARGALLAGATOR LINEARBURKEBURKE
JOSEPHINEJOSEPHINE
CHRISTIECHRISTIE
LANGOHR
GARDENS
LANGOHR
GARDENS
LANGOHRLANGOHR
Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Mason St.
Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.
Harrison St.
Story St.
T r a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Willson Ave.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Alternative 1
Conservation Alternative
Figure
14Black Ave.K
a
g
y B
lvd.
Watercourses
Watercourse Setback
100 Year Floodplain
Roads
Existing
Proposed
Trails
Existing
Proposed
Potential Parking
Buildout
Density 1 (4 units/acre)
Density 2 (6 units/acre)
Density 3 (8 units/acre)
Business Park
Community Center
Industrial/Commercial
Open Space
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Mason St.
Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.
Harrison St.
T r a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Willson Ave.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Alternative 2
Low Density Alternative
Figure
15Black Ave.K
a
g
y
Blvd.
Watercourses
Watercourse Setback
100 Year Floodplain
Roads
Existing
Proposed
Trails
Existing
Proposed
Potential Parking
Buildout
Density 1 (4 units/acre)
Density 2 (6 units/acre)
Density 3 (8 units/acre)
Business Park
Community Center
Industrial/Commercial
Open Space
Park
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Tracy Ave.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Mason St.
Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.
Harrison St.
T r a c y A v e .Spring Creek Dr.Fairway Dr.Willson Ave.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Alternative 3
Medium Density Alternative
Figure
16Black Ave.K
a
g
y
Blvd.
Watercourses
Watercourse Setback
100 Year Floodplain
Roads
Existing
Proposed
Trails
Existing
Proposed
Potential Parking
Buildout
Density 1 (4 units/acre)
Density 2 (6 units/acre)
Density 3 (8 units/acre)
Business Park
Community Center
Industrial/Commercial
Open Space
Park
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feet
Ice Pond Rd.
Dickerson St.
Cleveland St.
Garfield St.Rouse Ave.Montana Ave.Bozeman Ave.Lincoln St.Church Ave.Mason St.
Accola Dr.
Hoffman Dr.
Carol P
l
.Sour
dough Rd.
Kenyon Dr.
College St.
Harrison St.
T ra c y A v e .Fairway Dr.O 'C o n n ell Dr.Preferred Alternative Figure
17Black Ave.K
a
g
y B
lvd.
Watercourses
Watercourse Setback
100 Year Floodplain
Roads
Existing Roads
Potential Future Roads
Trails
Existing Trails
Potential Future Trails
Potential Parking Area
Preferred Use
Density 1 (4 units/acre)
Density 2 (6 units/acre)
Density 3 (8 units/acre)
Business Park
Community Center
Industrial/Commercial
Preferred Open Space
1 inch equals 700 feet1 inch equals 700 feetWillson Ave.
Existing Zoning
Existing Structures
Accessory Structure
Single Housheold Residential
Duplex / Triplex
Multiple Household Residential
Industrial
*Note: structure information
is based on available data
and does not represent exact
location, use, or legality of
structures.
Existing Zoning & Structure Overlay
(as of effective date of plan)
Appendix A Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page A-1
APPENDIX A
Work Program
Appendix A Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page A-2
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Appendix B
Page A-3
A.0 SOIL DESCRIPTIONS
350B—Blackmore silt loam, 0 to 4 percent
slopes
Setting
Landform: Relict stream terraces
Slope: 0 to 4 percent
Elevation: 4,850 to 5,550 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 22 inches
Frost-free period: 80 to 95 days
Composition
Major Components
Blackmore and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor Components
Bowery loam: 0 to 5 percent
Brodyk silt loam: 0 to 2 percent
Slopes more than 4 percent: 0 to 3 percent
Major Component Description
Surface layer texture: Silt loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Loess
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 11.3 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
350C—Blackmore silt loam, 4 to 8 percent
slopes
Setting
Landform: Relict stream terraces
Slope: 4 to 8 percent
Elevation: 4,750 to 5,600 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 22 inches
Frost-free period: 80 to 95 days
Composition
Major Components
Blackmore and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor Components
Bowery loam: 0 to 4 percent
Doughty cobbly loam: 0 to 3 percent
Brodyk silt loam: 0 to 3 percent
Major Component Description
APPENDIX B
Soils Description and Information
Surface layer texture: Silt loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Loess
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 11.3 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
350D—Blackmore silt loam, 8 to 15 percent
slopes
Setting
Landform: Relict stream terraces
Slope: 8 to 15 percent
Elevation: 4,700 to 5,550 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 22 inches
Frost-free period: 80 to 95 days
Composition
Major Components
Blackmore and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor Components
Bowery loam: 0 to 5 percent
Doughty cobbly loam: 0 to 3 percent
Brodyk silt loam: 0 to 2 percent
Major Component Description
Surface layer texture: Silt loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Loess
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 11.3 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
Appendix B Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page A-4
307A—Sudworth silty clay loam, 0 to 2
percent slopes
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Elevation: 4,400 to 4,650 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Composition
Major Components
Sudworth and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor Components
Enbar loam: 0 to 5 percent
Nesda loam: 0 to 5 percent
Turner loam: 0 to 5 percent
Major Component Description
Surface layer texture: Silty clay loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Water table: Apparent
Available water capacity: Mainly 6.8 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Slope: 0 to 4 percent
Elevation: 4,400 to 6,000 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Composition
Major Components
Enbar and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor Components
Straw loam: 0 to 5 percent
Nythar loam: 0 to 10 percent
Major Component Description
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: Rare
Water table: Apparent
Available water capacity: Mainly 8.8 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
512B—Enbar-Nythar loams, 0 to 4 percent
slopes
Setting
Landform:
• Enbar—Flood plains
• Nythar—Flood plains
Slope:
• Enbar—0 to 4 percent
• Nythar—0 to 4 percent
Elevation: 4,300 to 6,100 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Composition
Major Components
Enbar and similar soils: 60 percent
Nythar and similar soils: 30 percent
Minor Components
Straw loam: 0 to 5 percent
Blossburg loam: 0 to 5 percent
Major Component Description
Enbar
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium
Native plant cover type: Forest land
Flooding: Rare
Water table: Apparent
Available water capacity: Mainly 8.8 inches
Nythar
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Very poorly drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: Rare
Water table: Apparent
Available water capacity: Mainly 9.7 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Forest Land” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
542A—Blossberg loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Elevation: 4,200 to 5,550 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Appendix B
Page A-5
Composition
Major Components
Blossberg and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor Components
Meadowcreek loam: 0 to 5 percent
Bonebasin loam: 0 to 10 percent
Major Component Description
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Water table: Apparent
Available water capacity: Mainly 5.2 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
606A—Bandy-Riverwash-Bonebasin
complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Setting
Landform:
• Bandy—Flood plains
• Riverwash—Flood plains
• Bonebasin—Flood plains
Slope:
• Bandy—0 to 2 percent
• Bonebasin—0 to 2 percent
Elevation: 4,200 to 5,800 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Composition
Major Components
Bandy and similar soils: 50 percent
Riverwash: 25 percent
Bonebasin and similar soils: 10 percent
Minor Components
Water: 0 to 5 percent
Blossburg loam: 0 to 5 percent
Nesda cobbly loam: 0 to 5 percent
Major Component Description
Bandy
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium
Native plant cover type: Forest land
Flooding: Occasional
Water table: Apparent
Available water capacity: Mainly 3.1 inches
Riverwash
Definition: Unstable areas of sandy, gravelly or cobbly
sediments, frequently flooded, and support little or no
vegetation.
Dominant parent material: Alluvium
Flooding: Frequent
Bonebasin
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Very poorly drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: Occasional
Water table: Apparent
Available water capacity: Mainly 6.0 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Forest Land” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
64B—Straw loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Slope: 0 to 4 percent
Elevation: 4,350 to 6,150 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Composition
Major Components
Straw and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor Components
Enbar loam: 0 to 5 percent
Sudworth loam: 0 to 3 percent
Straw clay loam: 0 to 2 percent
Major Component Description
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 10.6 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
72D—Doughty loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes
Setting
Landform: Relict stream terraces and alluvial fans
Slope: 8 to 15 percent
Elevation: 4,850 to 5,300 feet
Appendix B Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
Page A-6
Mean annual precipitation: 18 to 22 inches
Frost-free period: 80 to 95 days
Composition
Major Components
Doughty and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor Components
Doughty cobbly loam: 0 to 5 percent
Anceny cobbly loam: 0 to 3 percent
Slopes more than 15 percent: 0 to 2 percent
Major Component Description
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 5.8 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
747E—Cabba-Reedwest-Anceney complex,
15 to 45 percent slopes
Setting
Landform:
• Cabba—Escarpments
• Reedwest—Escarpments
• Anceney—Escarpments
Slope:
• Cabba—25 to 45 percent
• Reedwest—15 to 35 percent
• Anceney—15 to 45 percent
Elevation: 4,500 to 6,100 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Composition
Major Components
Cabba and similar soils: 35 percent
Reedwest and similar soils: 30 percent
Anceney and similar soils: 25 percent
Minor Components
Bowery loam: 0 to 5 percent
Rock outcrop: 0 to 2 percent
Slopes more than 45 percent: 0 to 3 percent
Major Component Description
Cabba
Surface layer texture: Cobbly loam
Depth class: Shallow (10 to 20 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Semiconsolidated, loamy
sedimentary beds
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 2.7 inches
Reedwest
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Moderately deep (20 to 40 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Semiconsolidated, loamy
sedimentary beds
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 4.3 inches
Anceney
Surface layer texture: Cobbly loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium or colluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 5.0 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
752E—Meagher-Shawmut-Bowery
complex, 15 to 45 percent slopes
Setting
Landform:
• Meagher—Escarpments
• Shawmut—Escarpments
• Bowery—Escarpments
Slope:
• Meagher—15 to 35 percent
• Shawmut—15 to 45 percent
• Bowery—15 to 35 percent
Elevation: 4,600 to 6,150 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Composition
Major Components
Meagher and similar soils: 45 percent
Shawmut and similar soils: 35 percent
Bowery and similar soils: 10 percent
Minor Components
Shawmut stony loam: 0 to 5 percent
Slopes more than 45 percent: 0 to 5 percent
Major Component Description
Meagher
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium or colluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 6.4 inches
Shawmut
Surface layer texture: Cobbly loam
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan Appendix B
Page A-7
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium or colluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 4.0 inches
Bowery
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium or colluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 11.2 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections
947E—Reedwest-Cabba-Bowery complex,
15 to 45 percent slopes
Setting
Landform:
• Reedwest—Escarpments
• Cabba—Escarpments
• Bowery—Escarpments
Slope:
• Reedwest—15 to 35 percent
• Cabba—15 to 45 percent
• Bowery—15 to 45 percent
Elevation: 4,550 to 6,050 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Composition
Major Components
Reedwest and similar soils: 40 percent
Cabba and similar soils: 35 percent
Bowery and similar soils: 15 percent
Minor Components
Rock outcrop: 0 to 2 percent
Anceny cobbly loam: 0 to 8 percent
Major Component Description
Reedwest
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Moderately deep (20 to 40 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Semiconsolidated, loamy
sedimentary beds
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 4.3 inches
Cabba
Surface layer texture: Cobbly clay loam
Depth class: Shallow (10 to 20 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Semiconsolidated, loamy
sedimentary beds
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 2.6 inches
Bowery
Surface layer texture: Loam
Depth class: Very deep (more than 60 inches)
Drainage class: Well drained
Dominant parent material: Alluvium or colluvium
Native plant cover type: Rangeland
Flooding: None
Available water capacity: Mainly 11.2 inches
Management
Major uses:
• “Range” section
• “Agronomy” section
• “Recreation” section
• “Wildlife Habitat” section
• “Engineering” and “Soil Properties” sections