HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-08-25 - Community Development Board - Agendas & Packet MaterialsA. Call to Order - 6:00 pm
B. Disclosures
C. Changes to the Agenda
D. Public Service Announcements
E. Approval of Minutes
E.1 Approval of Minutes(Sagstetter)
F. Consent Items
F.1 Parklands Amended Subdivision Preliminary Plat application to subdivide one parcel zoned
R-4 into a major subdivision for residential use. The proposed subdivision includes 8
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
CDB AGENDA
Monday, September 8, 2025
General information about the Community Development Board is available in our Laserfiche
repository.
If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda please send an email to
comments@bozeman.net or by visiting the Public Comment Page prior to 12:00pm on the day of the
meeting. At the direction of the City Commission, anonymous public comments are not distributed to
the Board or staff.
Public comments will also be accepted in-person and through video conference during the appropriate
agenda items.
As always, the meeting will be streamed through the Commission's video page and available in the
City on cable channel 190.
For more information please contact Chris Saunders, csaunders@bozeman.net
This meeting will be held both in-person and also using an online video conferencing system. You
can join this meeting:
Via Video Conference:
Click the Register link, enter the required information, and click submit.
Click Join Now to enter the meeting.
Via Phone: This is for listening only if you cannot watch the stream, channel 190, or attend in-
person
United States Toll
+1 346 248 7799
Access code: 954 6079 2484
1
buildable lots on a total of 1.201 acres. The project is proposed to be completed in one
phase. Generally located west of Village Downtown Boulevard, east of Audubon Way, and
south of Audubon Way. Â Application 25273 (Quasi-Judicial)(Minnich)
G. Special Presentations
H. Action Items
H.1 Presentation of Population Projections and Housing Needs as part of the Bozeman
Community Plan technical update for compliance with the Montana Land Use Planning
Act.(Saunders)
H.2 A text amendment to Replace Division 38.610 (Wetland Regulations) Section 38.410.100
(Watercourse Setback) and Section 38.220.130 (Submittal Materials for Regulated Activities
in Wetlands), and amend Section 38.700.190 U Definitions, and Section 38.700.220 W
Definitions within Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, Application
23309(Ross/Saunders)
I. Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and Jurisdiction of the Board
J. FYI/Discussions
J.1 Upcoming Items for the Sept 15th, 2025, Community Development Board
Meeting(Saunders)
J.2 Bozeman Community Plan Annual Implementation Report (Saunders)
K. Adjournment
Receive information and ask questions regarding these issues. No final decision or recommendation is
required with this item.
Having reviewed and considered the staff report, draft ordinance, public comment, and all information
presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23309 and move to
recommend approval of the proposed wetland and watercourse amendments.
This is the time to comment on any non-agenda matter falling within the scope of the Community
Development Board. There will also be time in conjunction with each agenda item for public
comment relating to that item but you may only speak once per topic.
Please note, the Community Development Board cannot take action on any item which does not
appear on the agenda. All persons addressing the Community Development Board shall speak in a
civil and courteous manner and members of the audience shall be respectful of others. Please
state your name, and state whether you are a resident of the city or a property owner within the
city in an audible tone of voice for the record and limit your comments to three minutes.
General public comments to the Board can be found in their Laserfiche repository folder.
Information only, no action required.
This board generally meets the first and third Monday of the month from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm.
City Board meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires
assistance, please contact our ADA Coordinator, David Arnado, at 406.582.3232.
2
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Community Development Board
FROM:Sam Sagstetter
SUBJECT:Approval of Minutes
MEETING DATE:September 8, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative
RECOMMENDATION:Approve.
STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver
information to the community and our partners.
BACKGROUND:None.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None.
ALTERNATIVES:Approve with corrections.
FISCAL EFFECTS:None.
Attachments:
081125 CDB Minutes.pdf
Report compiled on: August 13, 2025
3
Bozeman Community Development Meeting Minutes, 8/11/2025
Page 1 of 3
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
MINUTES
AUGUST 11, 2025
General information about the Community Development Board is available in our Laserfiche repository.
Present: Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Hap Happel, Nicole Olmstead, Jason Delmue
Absent: Chris Egnatz, Mark Egge
Excused: None
A) 00:07:48 Call to Order - 6:00 pm
B) 00:08:25 Disclosures
C) 00:08:32 Changes to the Agenda
D) 00:08:43 Approval of Minutes
D.1 Approval of Minutes
072125 CDB Minutes.pdf
00:09:10 Motion to approve
Ben Lloyd: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
00:09:28 Vote on the Motion to approve The Motion carried 5 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic
Ben Lloyd
Hap Happel
Nicole Olmstead
Jason Delmue
4
Bozeman Community Development Meeting Minutes, 8/11/2025
Page 2 of 3
Disapprove:
None
E) 00:09:31 Action Items
Tom Rogers Presents to Board
E.1 00:54:42 Annexation and Zone Map Amendment Requesting Annexation and the
Establishment of an Initial Zoning Designation of R-1 on 0.903 Acres, the 1727 Kenyon
Drive Annexation, Application 25051
25051 1727 Kenyon Drive ANNEX - ZMA CDB SR.pdf
00:54:47 Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials,
public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report
for application 25051 and move to recommend approval of the 1727 Kenyon Drive Zone Map
Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing.
Jason Delmue: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
01:03:52 Vote on the Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application
materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the
staff report for application 25051 and move to recommend approval of the 1727 Kenyon Drive Zone Map
Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. The Motion carried 4 -
1.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic
Ben Lloyd
Hap Happel
Jason Delmue
Disapprove:
Nicole Olmstead
00:22:24 Board asks questions on Action Item presentation
00:35:42 Applicant Rob Evans speaks to the Board
00:41:05 Brad Benny Provides public comment
00:44:45 Hal Stanley provides public comment
00:48:34 Ed Wheeler provides public comment
00:51:30 Additional questions to Tom Rogers
5
Bozeman Community Development Meeting Minutes, 8/11/2025
Page 3 of 3
E.2 01:04:05 Continued Discussion of Unified Development Code Update Focusing on
Environmental Consideration in Development Review
CDB August 11 2025 Natural Environment - 8-7-2025.pdf
01:04:13 Tom Rogers presents to the Board
02:42:48 Marcia Kaveny provides public comment
02:47:09 Kathryn Barry provides public comment
02:50:34 Daniel Carty provides public comment
02:53:47 Board discusses presentation and consideration of public comment
F) 03:28:17 Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and
Jurisdiction of the Board
G) FYI/Discussions
G.1 03:28:47 Upcoming Items for the Aug 18, 2025, Community Development Board
Meeting
H) 03:31:27 Adjournment
This board generally meets the first and third Monday of the month from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm.
6
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Community Development Board
FROM:Bailey Minnich, Development Review Planner
Brian Krueger, Development Review Manager
Erin George, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:Parklands Amended Subdivision Preliminary Plat application to subdivide
one parcel zoned R-4 into a major subdivision for residential use. The
proposed subdivision includes 8 buildable lots on a total of 1.201 acres. The
project is proposed to be completed in one phase.
Generally located west of Village Downtown Boulevard, east of Audubon
Way, and south of Audubon Way. Application 25273 (Quasi-Judicial)
MEETING DATE:September 8, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Quasi-Judicial
RECOMMENDATION:Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment,
and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in
the staff report for application 25273 and move for the Community
Development Board in its capacity as the Planning Board to recommend
approval of the subdivision with conditions and subject to all applicable code
provisions.
STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning,
ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban
approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density,
connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods.
BACKGROUND:
The Department of Community Development received a Preliminary Plat
Application on May 23, 2025, requesting to subdivide 1.201 acres to create 8
buildable lots. The subject property is zoned R-4 (Residential High Density
District).
On July 16, 2025, the Development Review Committee (DRC) found the
application sufficient for continued review and recommends the conditions
and code provisions identified in this report. The subdivider requested
waivers with this application as it is a further subdivision of property
7
previously reviewed as a major subdivision. The requested waivers were
approved by the Development Review Committee (DRC) on June 11, 2025
and included BMC 38.220.060.A.1 Surface Water, BMC 38.220.060.A.2
Floodplain, BMC 38.220.060.A.3 Groundwater, BMC 38.220.060.A.4 Geology,
BMC 38.220.060.A.5 Vegetation, BMC 38.220.060.A.6 Wildlife, BMC
38.220.060.A.7 Agriculture, BMC 38.220.060.A.8 Agricultural water user
facilities, BMC 38.220.060.A.9 Water and Sewer, BMC 38.220.060.A.10
Stormwater, BMC 38.220.060.A.11 Streets, BMC 38.220.060.A.12 Utilities,
BMC 38.220.060.A.13 Land use, BMC 38.220.060.A.14 Parks and recreation
facilities, BMC 38.220.060.A.15 Neighborhood Center, BMC 38.220.060.A.16
Lighting Plan, BMC 38.220.060.A.17 Miscellaneous, and BMC
38.220.060.A.18 Affordable Housing. Please see the staff report for analysis
of the review criteria.
This subdivision meets the criteria for review under 76-3-616 Montana Code
Annotated (MCA) - Exemption for Certain Subdivisions. This statute exempts
this subdivision from the public hearing requirement. Per BMC 38.240.100
the final decision for this preliminary plat must be made within 60 working
days from sufficiency, or by October 8, 2025. The City Commission meeting
regarding this subdivision is scheduled for September 9, 2025.
Materials in the submittal relevant to the Planning Board’s duties include:
[External Link]
Application Documents [External Link]
Application Drawings [External Link]
The application documents folder will contain the infrastructure reports
including water, sewer, stormwater, and traffic impacts, as well as
documentation to demonstrate compliance with Chapter 38 including
compliance with adopted standards required in BMC 38.220.060.
The application drawings folder will contain the full plat set sheet, and the
application documents folder will contain the project narrative,
supplemental application materials, water and sewer design report, and
stormwater design report.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None
ALTERNATIVES:As recommended by the board
FISCAL EFFECTS:Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time, but will include increased
property tax revenues from new development, along with increased costs to
deliver municipal services to the property. Impact fees will be collected at
the time of building permit issuance for individual buildings along with City
sewer and water connection fees.
Attachments:
8
25273 Parklands Amended PP_CDB Staff Report_Final.pdf
Report compiled on: August 12, 2025
9
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 1 of 20
25273 Parklands Amended Subdivision Preliminary Plat
Public Meeting/Hearing Dates:
Planning Board meeting will be held Monday, August 18, 2025, at 6:00 pm.
City Commission meeting will be held Tuesday, September 9, 2025, at 6:00 pm.
Project Description: A preliminary plat requesting to subdivide one parcel zoned R-4 into a
major subdivision for residential uses. The proposed subdivision includes 8 buildable
lots on a total of 1.201 acres. The project is proposed to be completed in one phase.
Village Downtown Boulevard and Audubon Way are currently constructed, and no new
street connections are required or proposed with the subdivision. Residential lots 2
through 8 are proposed to contain two dwelling units to comply with the minimum
required density of the R-4 zoning, while Lot 1 will have the option of either a single-
household dwelling or a two-household dwelling unit.
Project Location: Lot 1 of Block 1 of Parklands at Village Downtown Subdivision, per Plat J-
700A in Section 8, Township 2 South, Range 6 East, Principal Meridian, City of
Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. Addresses TBD, west of Village Downtown
Boulevard, east of Audubon Way, and south of Audubon Way.
Staff Finding: The application conforms to standards and is sufficient for approval with
conditions and code provisions.
Recommended Planning Board Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application
materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 25273 and move for the Community
Development Board in its capacity as the Planning Board to recommend approval of the
subdivision with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions.
Recommended City Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application
materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 25273 and move to approve the subdivision
with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions.
Report Date: August 12, 2025
Staff Contact: Bailey Minnich, Development Review Planner
Simon Lindley, Project Engineer
Agenda Item Type: Consent (Quasi-judicial)
10
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 2 of 20
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is based on the application materials submitted and public comment received to date.
The application materials are available in the City’s Laserfiche archive and may be accessed
through the Community Development viewer.
Unresolved Issues.
There are no unresolved issues with this application.
Project Summary
The Department of Community Development received a Preliminary Plat Application on May
23, 2025, requesting to subdivide 1.201 acres to create 8 buildable lots. The subject property is
zoned R-4 (Residential High Density District).
Proposed land uses for the subdivision are primarily residential in the form of single-household
dwellings and two-household dwellings on individual lots. Residential lots 2 through 8 are
proposed to contain two dwelling units to comply with the minimum required density of the R-4
zoning, while lot 1 will have the option of either a single-household dwelling or two dwelling
units. Development of lots within the subdivision will be subject to Bozeman Municipal Code
(BMC) provisions at the time of development for R-4 Zoning.
The site is surrounded by existing local streets with Village Downtown Boulevard located to the
west, and Audubon Way to the south and east. No additional street extensions are proposed or
required with the subdivision application. Additionally, all water, sewer and stormwater
infrastructure was already installed with the original subdivision.
The subdivision is proposed to be completed in one phase and developed with uses permitted
under sketch plan review. Therefore, the application does not qualify for concurrent
construction. All subdivision improvements must be installed prior to the issuance of a building
permit for any lot within a subdivision.
On July 16, 2025, the Development Review Committee (DRC) found the application sufficient
for continued review and recommends the conditions and code provisions identified in this
report.
The subdivider requested waivers with this application. The requested waivers were approved
by the Development Review Committee (DRC) on June 11, 2025 and included BMC
38.220.060.A.1 Surface Water, BMC 38.220.060.A.2 Floodplain, BMC 38.220.060.A.3
Groundwater, BMC 38.220.060.A.4 Geology, BMC 38.220.060.A.5 Vegetation, BMC
38.220.060.A.6 Wildlife, BMC 38.220.060.A.7 Agriculture, BMC 38.220.060.A.8 Agricultural
water user facilities, BMC 38.220.060.A.9 Water and Sewer, BMC 38.220.060.A.10
Stormwater, BMC 38.220.060.A.11 Streets, BMC 38.220.060.A.12 Utilities, BMC
38.220.060.A.13 Land use, BMC 38.220.060.A.14 Parks and recreation facilities, BMC
38.220.060.A.15 Neighborhood Center, BMC 38.220.060.A.16 Lighting Plan, BMC
11
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 3 of 20
38.220.060.A.17 Miscellaneous, and BMC 38.220.060.A.18 Affordable Housing. The City has
received no written public comment on the application as of the writing of this report.
The final decision for this preliminary plat must be made by October 8, 2025, or 60 working
days from the sufficiency date per BMC 38.240.100 and MCA 76-3-616 for exempt
subdivisions.
Alternatives
1. Approve the application with the recommended conditions;
2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended conditions;
3. Deny the application based on the Commission’s findings of non-compliance with the
applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or
4. Continue the public meeting on the application, with specific direction to staff or the
subdivider to supply additional information or to address specific items.
12
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 4 of 20
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 2
Unresolved Issues. .............................................................................................................. 2
Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2
Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 3
SECTION 1 – MAP SERIES .......................................................................................................... 5
SECTION 2 – REQUESTED VARIANCES ................................................................................. 8
SECTION 3 – RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ............................................ 8
SECTION 4 – CODE REQUIREMENTS ...................................................................................... 9
SECTION 5 – RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ............................................ 10
SECTION 6 – STAFF ANALYSIS and findings ......................................................................... 10
Applicable Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 38.240.150.B, BMC. .......................... 10
Documentation of compliance with adopted standards 38.220.060 ................................. 14
APPENDIX A – PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY..................................... 17
APPENDIX B – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................... 19
APPENDIX C – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ......................................................... 19
APPENDIX D – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ................................. 19
FISCAL EFFECTS ....................................................................................................................... 20
ATTACHMENTS ......................................................................................................................... 20
13
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 5 of 20
SECTION 1 – MAP SERIES
Exhibit 1 – Zoning
14
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 6 of 20
Exhibit 2 – Future Land Use Map
15
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 7 of 20
Exhibit 3 – Preliminary Plat
16
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 8 of 20
SECTION 2 – REQUESTED VARIANCES
No variances are requested with this application.
SECTION 3 – RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this
report. These conditions are specific to this project.
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1. The plat shall conform to all requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code and the
Uniform Standards for Monumentations, Certificates of Survey, and Final Subdivision
Plats (24.183.1101 ARM, 24.183.1104 ARM, 24.183.1107 ARM) and must be
accompanied by all required documents, including certification from the City Engineer
that as-built drawings for public improvements were received, a platting certificate, and
all required and corrected certificates. The Final Plat application must include one (1)
signed reproducible copy on a 3 mil or heavier stable base polyester film (or equivalent).
The Gallatin County Clerk & Recorders office has elected to continue the existing
medium requirements of 1 mylar with a 1 binding margin on one side for both plats and
COSs. The Clerk and Recorder will file the new Conditions of Approval sheet as the last
same sized mylar sheet in the plat set.
2. The applicant must add the following notes to the conditions of approval sheet of the plat
related to the presence of high groundwater on the property:
a. Ownership of all common open space lots, areas and trails, and responsibility of
maintenance thereof and for city assessments levied on the common open space
lands are that of the property owners association. Maintenance responsibility
includes, in addition to the common open space and trails, all vegetative ground
cover, boulevard trees and irrigation systems in the public right-of-way boulevard
strips along all external perimeter development streets and as adjacent to public
parks, greenway corridors or other common open space areas.
b. The property owners' association must be responsible for the maintenance of
stormwater infrastructure located within the common open spaces. All areas
within the subdivision that are designated herein as common open space including
trails are for the use and enjoyment by residents of the development and the
general public.
c. The property owners association shall be responsible for levying annual
assessments to provide for the maintenance, repair, and upkeep of all common
open space lots, areas and trails.
d. The City of Bozeman shall be responsible for the maintenance of boulevard trees
along Village Downtown Boulevard.
e. No crawl spaces will be permitted with future development of the site, unless a
professional engineer registered in the State of Montana certifies that the lowest
17
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 9 of 20
point of any proposed structure is located above the seasonal
high groundwater level and provide supporting groundwater data prior to the
release of building permit. In addition, sump pumps are not allowed to be
connected to the sanitary sewer system.
f. Sump pumps are also not allowed to be connected to the drainage system unless
capacity is designed into the drainage system to accept the pumped water. Water
from sump pumps may not be discharged onto streets, such as into the curb and
gutters where they may create a safety hazard for pedestrians and vehicles.
SECTION 4 – CODE REQUIREMENTS
1. Sec. 38.100.080 – Compliance with regulations required. The applicant is advised that
unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of
approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful
requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law.
2. Sec. 38.220.070.A.3 – Noxious Weeds. Prior to final plat approval, a memorandum of
understanding must be entered into by the weed control district and the developer. The
memorandum of understanding must be signed by the district and the developer prior to
final plat approval, and a copy of the signed document must be submitted to the
community development department with the application for final plat approval.
3. Sec. 38.220.300, 310, and 320. Property Owners’ Association. Final Property Owners’
Association (POA) documents, including covenants, must be provided with the final plat
prior to being finalized and recorded. The POA documents must include the requirements
of BMC 38.220.300, 310, and 320, where applicable. Additionally, based on the provided
documents, revise and add the following.
a. The property owners' association must be responsible for the maintenance of
stormwater infrastructure located within the common open spaces. All areas
within the subdivision that are designated herein as common open space including
trails are for the use and enjoyment by residents of the development and the
general public.
b. The property owners’ association shall be responsible for levying annual
assessments to provide for the maintenance, repair, and upkeep of all common
open space lots, areas, and trails.
4. Sec. 38.240.410 through 38.240.540 – Plat Certificates. The language contained in the
certificates on the final plat must follow the language in the corresponding certificates in
this code section.
5. Sec. 38.270.090 – Development or Maintenance of Common Areas and Facilities by
Developer and Property Owners’ Association. The subdivision’s stormwater
maintenance plan must clearly state the following condition. "The property owners
association (Insert Final Property Owners Association Name as recorded in the CC&Rs)
shall be responsible for the maintenance of all stormwater management facilities located
outside of the public right-of-way." The approved stormwater plan must be incorporated
into the property owners’ association documents and a copy of the documents
18
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 10 of 20
demonstrating the inclusion of the stormwater maintenance plan must be provided prior
to final plat approval.
6. Sec. 38.410.060. - Easements. All Easements indicated below must be provided on city
standard easements templates. Drafts must be prepared for review and approval by the
city. Signed hard copies of the easements must be submitted to the City prior final plat
approval. The applicant may contact the review engineer to receive standard templates.
a. The final plat must provide all necessary utility easements, and they must be
described, dimensioned and shown on each subdivision block of the final plat in
their true and correct location.
b. The applicant must submit for review and approval all easements which designate
space for public or private utilities that are not in the designated pubic right of
way. All such easements applicable to the spatial orientation of utilities on the
plat, which are not in public right of way, must be reviewed, approved, executed
by applicable owners and the City Commission, and filed with the County Clerk
and Recorder's office prior to final plat approval.
7. Sec. 38.410.130.D.3 - Water Adequacy. The city will determine the estimated increase
in annual municipal water demand attributable to the development. The applicant must
offset the estimated increase in annual municipal water demand attributable to the
development through one or more of the following means: 3. Payment to the city of cash-
in-lieu of water rights for that portion of the estimated annual municipal water demand
attributable to the development that is not offset under subsections D.1 and D.2. The
applicant has indicated they intend to pay cash-in-lieu of water to satisfy the code. The
CILWR fee determination will occur with the final plat applicant and must be paid prior
to approval of the final plat.
SECTION 5 – RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS
The Development Review Committee (DRC) determined the application was sufficient for
continued review and recommended approval with conditions on July 16, 2025.
Planning Board meeting will be held Monday, August 18, 2025 at 6:00 pm.
City Commission meeting will be held Tuesday, September 9, 2025 at 6:00 pm
SECTION 6 – STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials,
municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the
review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis in this
report is a summary of the completed review.
Applicable Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 38.240.150.B, BMC.
In considering applications for subdivision approval under this title, the advisory boards and City
Commission shall consider the following:
19
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 11 of 20
1) Compliance with the survey requirements of Part 4 of the Montana Subdivision and
Platting Act
The preliminary plat was prepared in accordance with the surveying and monumentation
requirements of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act by a Professional Engineer registered
in the State of Montana. As noted in the code requirements, the final plat must comply with State
statute, Administrative Rules of Montana, and the Bozeman Municipal Code.
2) Compliance with the local subdivision regulations provided for in Part 5 of the Montana
Subdivision and Platting Act
The final plat must comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman
Municipal Code. The subdivider is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions not
specifically listed as a condition of approval, do not, in any way, create a waiver or other
relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or State law. Sections 3
and 4 of this report identify conditions and code provisions necessary to meet all municipal
standards. The listed code requirements address necessary documentation and compliance with
standards. Therefore, upon satisfaction of all conditions and code corrections, the subdivision
will comply with the subdivision regulations.
3) Compliance with the local subdivision review procedures provided for in Part 6 of the
Montana Subdivision and Platting Act
The Bozeman Planning Board public meeting and City Commission public meetings were
properly noticed in accordance with the Bozeman Municipal Code. Based on the
recommendation of the Development Review Committee (DRC) and other applicable review
agencies, as well as any public testimony received on the matter, the City Commission will make
the final decision on the subdivider’s request. Review of this subdivision was conducted under
the terms of 76-3-616 MCA as authorized in 38.240.100.
The Department of Community Development received a preliminary plat application on May 23,
2025. The DRC reviewed the preliminary plat application and determined the application was
adequate for continued review July 16, 2025 and recommended conditions of approval and code
corrections for the staff report.
The applicant posted public notice on the subject property on July 24, 2025. The applicant sent
public notice to all landowners of record within 200-feet of the subject property via first class
mail, on July 24, 2025. No public comments have been received on this application as of the
writing of this report.
On August 12, 2025, a major subdivision staff report was completed and forwarded with a
recommendation of conditional approval for consideration to the Planning Board.
20
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 12 of 20
4) Compliance with Chapter 38, BMC and other relevant regulations
Community Development staff and the DRC reviewed the preliminary plat against all applicable
regulations and the application complies with the BMC and all other relevant regulations with
conditions and code corrections. This report includes Conditions of Approval and required code
provisions as recommended by the DRC for consideration by the City Commission to complete
the application processing for final plat approval. All municipal water and sewer facilities will
conform to the regulations outlined by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality and
the requirements of the Design Standards and Specifications Policy (DSSP) and the City of
Bozeman Modifications to Montana Public Works Standard Specifications.
Water/sewer – The subdivision will not significantly burden city's water and sewer
infrastructure with the recommended conditions of approval and code provisions. Water and
sewer will be provided by connections to the City’s water system and existing sanitary sewer
collection system. The water and sewer mains and services to each of the proposed 8 lots were
constructed during the original subdivision in 2020 and exist within the Audubon Way and Front
Street rights-of-way. Appendix A contains the water and sewer design report for the original
Parklands Subdivision, stamped by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Montana. The
report was reviewed by the Engineering Division for compliance with state and local Public
Works Standard Specifications, the City’s design standards, the City of Bozeman Water Facility
Plan, and the City of Bozeman Fire Service Line Standard and found to meet with code
provisions the City’s review requirements during the previous subdivision approval. No
additional improvements are required with the current subdivision application. Code provision 7
requires the applicant offset estimated water demand prior to final plat approval per subsection D
of BMC 38.410.130. Per this section, the application may either transfer water rights into city
ownership that are appurtenant to the land being developed or as acceptable to the city, provide
payment of cash-in-lieu of water rights at a rate established by the most recent City Commission
resolution, or a combination of both. The applicant is proposing to provide cash-in-lieu of water
rights to comply with the requirements of BMC 38.410.130.D. Code provision 7 requires the
developer to pay the required cash-in-lieu of water rights fee with the final plat application.
Easements - The final plat must provide and depict all necessary utilities and required utility
easements. Code provision 6 requires that all easements, existing and proposed, must be accurately
depicted and addressed on the final plat and in the final plat application. Public utilities will be
located within dedicated street rights-of-way. The applicant must submit for review and approval
all easements, which designate space for public or private utilities that are not in the designated
public right of way. All easements must be provided using the City’s standard language. Ten-foot
utility easements are depicted on the preliminary plat along Audubon Way and are proposed to be
granted with the final plat in accordance with standards. Copies of additional existing easements
are required to be provided with the final plat application.
Parks – Supplemental information regarding Parks and Recreation facilities was waived during
the pre-application process. The proposed amended plat does not increase the overall net
21
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 13 of 20
residential density of the underlying subdivision. Previous parkland dedication provides
sufficient parkland for the newly proposed lots. No additional parkland dedication is required
per BMC 38.420.020.2.B.5. A pedestrian trail was constructed during the initial subdivision
along the southeastern boundary of the subdivision along the old railway berm. The Parklands
Subdivision constructed a 10-feet wide asphalt trail that connects the Village Downtown
Boulevard along the Front Street right of way, through the 60-feet wide Linear Park to a 6-feet
wide gravel trail that runs within the easement adjacent to the Parklands Subdivision. This
creates a trail network that completely surrounds the entire subdivision.
Stormwater – Stormwater within the subdivision will be conveyed by surface gutter flow to
curb inlets and then underground through storm drain piping to an existing stormwater detention
pond located in the existing Common Open Space A. All stormwater infrastructure was installed
during the original Parklands Subdivision in 2020 and the design accounted for the future
development of these 8 lots. Appendix B contains the stormwater design report for the original
Parklands Subdivision. Code provision 5 details the required development or maintenance of
common areas and facilities to be maintained by the property owners’ association and requires
the property owners’ association to maintain all stormwater facilities outside of the public right-
of-way, with the incorporation of a maintenance plan into the association documents prior to
final plat approval. This will ensure the proper maintenance of necessary stormwater
infrastructure as the subdivision is developed and occupied.
Agricultural water user facility – The proposed subdivision is a redevelopment of an existing
subdivision lot from The Parklands Subdivision. No agricultural water user facilities are located
within the subdivision boundaries. Supplemental information regarding agricultural users was
waived during the pre-application process.
Police/Fire – The City of Bozeman’s Police and Fire emergency response area includes this
subject property. The subdivision does not impact the City’s ability to provide emergency
services to the subject property. The necessary addresses will be provided to enable 911 response
to individual parcels prior to recording of the final plat. Fire protection standards require
installation of fire hydrants at designated spacing to ensure adequate protection.
5) The provision of easements to and within the subdivision for the location and installation
of any necessary utilities
The final plat will provide and depict all necessary utilities and required utility easements. Code
requirement 6 requires that all easements, existing and proposed, must be accurately depicted
and addressed on the final plat and in the final plat application. Public utilities are generally
located within dedicated street and alley rights-of-way.
22
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 14 of 20
6) The provision of legal and physical access to each parcel within the subdivision and the
notation of that access on the applicable plat and any instrument transferring the parcel
The final plat will provide legal and physical access to each parcel within the subdivision. All of
the proposed lots will have frontage on public streets and an improved alley as allowed in BMC
38.400.090.
Documentation of compliance with adopted standards 38.220.060
The Development Review Committee (DRC) completed a subdivision pre-application plan
review on June 11, 2025 and no variances were requested. Waivers to the following code
sections were granted during pre-application review and included BMC 38.220.060.A.1 Surface
Water, BMC 38.220.060.A.2 Floodplain, BMC 38.220.060.A.3 Groundwater, BMC
38.220.060.A.4 Geology, BMC 38.220.060.A.5 Vegetation, BMC 38.220.060.A.6 Wildlife,
BMC 38.220.060.A.7 Agriculture, BMC 38.220.060.A.8 Agricultural water user facilities, BMC
38.220.060.A.9 Water and Sewer, BMC 38.220.060.A.10 Stormwater, BMC 38.220.060.A.11
Streets, BMC 38.220.060.A.12 Utilities, BMC 38.220.060.A.13 Land use, BMC
38.220.060.A.14 Parks and recreation facilities, BMC 38.220.060.A.15 Neighborhood Center,
BMC 38.220.060.A.16 Lighting Plan, BMC 38.220.060.A.17 Miscellaneous, and BMC
38.220.060.A.18 Affordable Housing
Staff offers the following summary comments on the documents required with Article
38.220.060, BMC.
38.220.060.A.1 – Surface water
The subject property does not contain any surface water. Supplemental information regarding
surface water was waived during the pre-application process.
38.220.060.A.2 - Floodplains
The subject property is not located within the 100-year floodplain. The property is depicted on
the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) panel 30031C0817E with an effective date of April 21,
2021. All issues related to the floodplain were addressed with the pervious subdivision.
Supplemental information regarding floodplains was waived during the pre-application process.
38.220.060.A.3 - Groundwater
All issues related to groundwater monitoring were addressed during the previous subdivision
approval. Supplemental information relating to groundwater was waived during the pre-
application process. As a condition of approval for this current subdivision the Engineering
Department will require the developer must add a note on the final plat stating no crawl spaces
will be permitted with future development of the site unless a professional engineer registered in
the State of Montana certifies that the lower point of any proposed structure is located above the
seasonal high groundwater level and provides supporting groundwater data prior to the release of
a building permit. Additionally, sump pumps are not allowed to be connected to the sanitary
23
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 15 of 20
sewer system or the drainage system and may not be discharged onto streets where they may
create a safety hazard for pedestrians and vehicles.
38.220.060.A.4 - Geology, Soils and Slopes
This subdivision will not significantly impact the geology, soils, or slopes. No significant
geological features or slopes exist on the site. Supplemental information relating to geology,
soils, or slopes was waived during the pre-application process.
38.220.060.A.5 - Vegetation
This subdivision will not significantly impact vegetation. No critical plant communities
identified on site. The current application is for the creation of 8 lots within an existing lot
previously platted through the subdivision process. Supplemental information related to
vegetation on the subject property was waived during the pre-application process.
38.220.060.A.6 - Wildlife
This subdivision will not significantly impact wildlife. There are no known critical habitats on
the property, or observed or mapped threatened or endangered species. The property is bound by
existing city streets and future residential developments to the north, south, east, and west. The
current application is for the creation of 8 lots within an existing lot previously platted through
the subdivision process. Supplemental information related to wildlife on the subject property
was waived during the pre-application process.
38.220.060.A.7 - Agriculture
This subdivision will not impact agriculture. The current application is for the creation of 8 lots
within an existing lot previously platted through the subdivision process. Supplemental
information related to agriculture was waived during the pre-application process
38.220.060.A.8 - Agricultural Water User Facilities
See discussion above under primary review criteria.
38.220.060.A.9 - Water and Sewer
The subdivision will not significantly impact city water and sewer infrastructure. Water and
sewer improvements will be designed to meet City of Bozeman Standards and State Department
of Environmental Quality Standards and Regulations. Also see discussion above under primary
review criteria.
38.220.060.A.10 - Stormwater Management
The subdivision will not significantly impact stormwater infrastructure. See discussion above
under primary review criteria.
24
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 16 of 20
38.220.060.A.11 - Streets, Roads and Alleys
The subdivision will not significantly impact the City’s street infrastructure. All public rights-of-
way to serve the subdivision were dedicated with the underlying Parklands Subdivision final plat
in 2020. Village Downtown Boulevard is considered a local street and includes an 80-foot-wide
right-of-way. Audubon Way is considered an alley and includes a 30-foot wide right-of-way
which serves the proposed 8 new lots and the existing 9 lots from Block 2 of The Parklands
Subdivision. Audubon Way is privately maintained by the Property Owners Association. No
new access is proposed to the current subdivision, and no modifications to existing streets are
proposed.
The applicant requested a waiver to the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) requirement. The
Engineering Department evaluated and approved the waiver request. A previous TIS was
prepared for the Village Downtown in 2003. The current subdivision calculations provided by
the applicant indicate the proposed project will generate 238 weekday trips which are well below
the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) guidance.
38.220.060.A.12 – Non-Municipal Utilities
The applicant received confirmation of service connections from non-municipal utilities during
the previous Parklands Subdivision in 2021. Northwestern Energy confirmed the existing
utilities in the area can supply the proposed 8-lot subdivision.
38.220.060.A.13 - Land Use
Proposed land uses for the subdivision are primarily residential in the form of single-household
dwellings and two-household dwellings on individual lots. Residential lots 2 through 8 are
proposed to contain two dwelling units to comply with the minimum required density of the R-4
zoning, while lot 1 will have the option of either a single-household dwelling or two dwelling
units. Development of lots within the subdivision will be subject to Bozeman Municipal Code
(BMC) provisions at the time of development for R-4 Zoning. Supplemental information
regarding Land Use was waived during the pre-application process.
38.220.060.A.14 - Parks and Recreation Facilities
The Parks Department reviewed the subdivision proposal. The proposed amended plat does not
increase the overall net residential density of the underlying subdivision. Previous parkland
dedication provides sufficient parkland for the newly proposed lots. No additional parkland
dedication is required per BMC 38.420.020.2.B.5. Supplemental information regarding Parks
and Recreation facilities was waived during the pre-application process. See the previous
discussion under Parks in the primary review criteria.
25
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 17 of 20
38.220.060.A.15 - Neighborhood Center Plan
To provide a neighborhood focal point, all residential subdivisions that are ten net acres in size
or greater must have a neighborhood center. The proposed subdivision is 1.201 net acres and,
therefore, is exempt from the requirement of a neighborhood center.
38.220.060.A.16 - Lighting Plan
No additional subdivision or street lighting is required or proposed with this application.
Supplemental information for a required lighting plan was waived during the pre-application
process.
38.220.060.A.17 - Miscellaneous
The proposed subdivision is not located within 200 feet of any public land access or within a
delineated Wildland Urban Interface area. No health or safety hazards on-site or off-site will be
created with this development.
38.220.060.A.19 - Affordable Housing
This application does not rely on incentives authorized in 38.380. Therefore, no analysis is
required.
APPENDIX A – PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY
Zoning Designation and Land Uses:
The subject property is zoned R-4, Residential High Density District. The intent of the R-4
residential high density district is to provide for high-density residential development through a
variety of housing types within the city with associated service functions. This purpose is
accomplished by:
1. Providing for minimum lot sizes in developed areas consistent with the established
development patterns while providing greater flexibility for clustering lots and mixing
housing types in newly developed areas.
2. Providing for a variety of compatible housing types, including single and multi-
household dwellings to serve the varying needs of the community's residents.
3. Allowing office use as a secondary use, measured by percentage of total building area.
Use of this zone is appropriate for areas adjacent to mixed-use districts, commercial districts,
and/or served by transit to accommodate a higher density of residents in close proximity to jobs
and services.
The proposed subdivision is appropriate for this zone because the development will provide
primarily residential single and multi-household dwellings on individual lots within an
established developed area. The site is surrounded by existing City streets and municipal
services, including water and sewer, sidewalks, and pedestrian trails.
26
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 18 of 20
Adopted Growth Policy Designation:
Table 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 shows the correlation between future land use
map designations and implementing zoning districts. (See below for the Table)
The subject property is designated as Urban Neighborhood. This category primarily includes
urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single
type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross
density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes.
27
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 19 of 20
Complementary uses such as parks, home-based occupations, fire stations, churches, schools,
and some neighborhood-serving commerce provide activity centers for community gathering and
services. The Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur
within municipal boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development. Applying a
zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density
residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity to
commercial mixed-use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities
without requiring the use of a car.
This proposed subdivision is well suited to implement the Urban Neighborhood designation by
providing residential development in the form of multiple dwelling units on the majority of the
lots and either a single detached household or multiple dwelling units on Lot 1. Density and
individual uses will be evaluated at the time of development against the R-4 zoning
requirements.
The proposed subdivision meets the following Bozeman Community Plan 2020 goals:
N-1 Support well-planned, walkable neighborhoods.
N-1.5 Encourage neighborhood focal point development with functions, activities, and facilities
that can be sustained over time. Maintain standards for placement of community focal points and
services with new development.
N-1.9 Ensure multimodal connections between adjacent developments.
N-1.10 Increase connectivity between parks and neighborhoods through continued trail and
sidewalk development. Prioritize closing gaps within the network.
APPENDIX B – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Background and Description
A preliminary plat application by the applicant, Caddis Engineering and Land Surveying, 226
Timberline Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718, representing owners Delaney Indreland Living Trust
and The Village Investment Group Inc., 101 E Main Street, Suite D, Bozeman, MT 59715.
APPENDIX C – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Notice was provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to the City Commission public
meeting per BMC 38.220.420. The City scheduled a public notice for this application on July 16
16, 2025. The applicant posted a public notice on the subject property on July 24, 2025. The
City sent a public notice to physically adjacent landowners of record within 200 feet of the
subject property via first-class mail on July 24, 2025. No comments have been received on the
proposed subdivision at the time of this report.
APPENDIX D – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Owner: Delaney Indreland Living Trust, c/o Michael Delaney and The Village Investment
Group Inc., 101 E Main Street, Suite D, Bozeman, MT 59715
28
25273 Staff Report for Parklands Amended Subdivision Page 20 of 20
Applicant: Caddis Engineering and Land Surveying, 226 Timberline Drive, Bozeman, MT
59718
Representative: Caddis Engineering and Land Surveying, 226 Timberline Drive, Bozeman, MT
59718
Report By: Bailey Minnich, Development Review Planner
FISCAL EFFECTS
Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time, but will include increased property tax revenues
from new development, along with increased costs to deliver municipal services to the property.
Impact fees will be collected at the time of building permit issuance for individual buildings
along with City sewer and water connection fees.
ATTACHMENTS
The full application and file of record can be viewed digitally at the Community Development
Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715, as well as digitally at
https://www.bozeman.net/departments/community-development/planning/project-information-
portal, select the “Project Documents Folder” link and navigate to application 25273.
Project documents are available at this direct link to the public Laserfiche archive for application
25273.
The following documents and drawings are available in the online public archive:
• Parklands Amended Subdivision Preliminary Plat
• Plat Narrative
• Additional Preliminary Plat Supplements
29
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Community Development Board
FROM:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Erin George, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:Presentation of Population Projections and Housing Needs as part of the
Bozeman Community Plan technical update for compliance with the
Montana Land Use Planning Act.
MEETING DATE:September 8, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Plan/Report/Study
RECOMMENDATION:Receive information and ask questions regarding these issues. No final
decision or recommendation is required with this item.
STRATEGIC PLAN:4.1 Informed Conversation on Growth: Continue developing an in-depth
understanding of how Bozeman is growing and changing and proactively
address change in a balanced and coordinated manner.
BACKGROUND:In 2023, the Montana Legislature adopted the Montana Land Use Planning
Act (MLUPA). The Act replaces the enabling legislation that allows Bozeman
to adopt zoning and subdivision regulations and conduct long range land use
planning. The new legislation requires the City to complete the update to its
land use plan and implementing documents by May 17, 2026. The land use
plan must be completed first. The City has created a website for the project
which is available through the Engage Bozeman [External Link] platform .
Elements of MLUPA require the City to look at population trends and what
housing may be needed to address future housing needs. The City
contracted with Economic Planning Systems (EPS) to prepare an analysis of
several alternative population, employment, and housing need forecasts.
EPS has worked with City departments for a number of years and provided
information in support of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 growth
policy.
The future is inherently uncertain. Therefore, there are multiple projections
looking at different possible outcomes. There is no guarantee than any of
the projected outcomes will occur due to many factors outside of the City's
control. The projections look out to 2045. The analysis looks not only at the
city limits of Bozeman but also the greater Gallatin County area. There is an
increasing interrelationship between the municipalities and other developed
areas outside of the City.
30
Staff will present information from the projections, mapping analysis of
various issues, and identify other needed information and how it will be
made available to the public.
This information was presented at public information sessions on August
25th and August 27th and to the City Commission on August 26th.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified at this time.
ALTERNATIVES:As identified.
FISCAL EFFECTS:Funds for the projection and mapping work has been budgeted.
Attachments:
Bozeman MT Pop and Housing Forecast_8-14-25.pdf
Report compiled on: August 28, 2025
31
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
DRAFT REPORT
Prepared for: Prepared by:
City of Bozeman Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
August 14, 2025
EPS #253073
32
Table of Contents
1. Introduction and Summary of Findings 1
Summary of Findings .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Forecast Methodology ........................................................................................................................................................... 4
2. Demographic Trends 14
Population ................................................................................................................................................................................ 14
Households .............................................................................................................................................................................. 16
Housing Units ......................................................................................................................................................................... 18
Household Size Factors ...................................................................................................................................................... 27
3. Employment Trends 30
Employment ............................................................................................................................................................................ 30
Industry Trends ..................................................................................................................................................................... 32
Industry Trends by Location ............................................................................................................................................. 39
4. Market Trends 40
Multi-Household Market Trends .................................................................................................................................... 40
Office Trends .......................................................................................................................................................................... 43
5. Baseline 20-Year Forecast 45
Employment Forecast ......................................................................................................................................................... 45
Population Forecast ............................................................................................................................................................. 46
Housing Demand Forecast ................................................................................................................................................ 49
6. Amenity Driven 20-Year Forecast 51
Employment Forecast ......................................................................................................................................................... 51
Population Forecast ............................................................................................................................................................. 52
Housing Demand Forecast ................................................................................................................................................ 54
7. Constrained City 20-Year Forecast 57
Employment Forecast ......................................................................................................................................................... 57
Population Forecast ............................................................................................................................................................. 58
Housing Demand Forecast ................................................................................................................................................ 61
33
List of Tables
Table 1. Gallatin County Forecasts, Summary Table ...................................................................................................... 2
Table 2. City of Bozeman Forecasts, Summary Table ..................................................................................................... 3
Table 3. Total Employees Living and Working in Gallatin County, 2025-2045 .................................................... 8
Table 4. Tri-County Population Trends, 2010-2023 ................................................................................................... 14
Table 5. Gallatin County Subareas Population Trends, 2010-2023 ...................................................................... 15
Table 6. Comparison Cities in Population, 2010-2023 ............................................................................................... 15
Table 7. Tri-County Household Trends, 2010-2023 ................................................................................................... 16
Table 8. Gallatin County Subareas Household Trends, 2010-2023 ...................................................................... 17
Table 9. Comparison Cities in Households, 2010-2023 ............................................................................................. 17
Table 10. Tri-County Housing Unit Trends, 2010-2023 ............................................................................................... 18
Table 11. Gallatin County Subareas Housing Unit Trends, 2010-2023 .................................................................. 19
Table 12. Comparison Cities in Housing Units, 2010-2023 ........................................................................................ 19
Table 13. Tri-County Total Vacant Units, 2010-2023 ................................................................................................... 20
Table 14. Gallatin County Subareas Vacant Unit Trends, 2010-2023 .................................................................... 22
Table 15. Tri-County Population to Housing Unit Ratio, 2010-2023 ...................................................................... 29
Table 16. Gallatin County Subareas Population to Housing Unit Ratio, 2010-2023 ......................................... 29
Table 17. Tri-County Total Covered Employment Trends, 2010-2024 .................................................................. 30
Table 18. Gallatin County Subareas Total Covered Employment Trends, 2010-2024 ..................................... 31
Table 19. Comparison Cites in Total Employment, 2010-2024 ................................................................................. 31
Table 20. Gallatin County Employment by NAICS, 2010-2024 ................................................................................. 32
Table 21. Gallatin County Wages by NAICS, 2010-2024 ............................................................................................. 34
Table 22. Bozeman Employment by NAICS, 2010-2024 .............................................................................................. 35
Table 23. Bozeman Wages by NAICS, 2010-2024 .......................................................................................................... 37
Table 24. Percent of Gallatin County Employees by NAICS in Bozeman, 2010-2024 ...................................... 39
Table 25. Multi-Household Inventory (Units), 2010-2025 Q2 ................................................................................... 40
Table 26. Office Inventory (Sq. Ft.), 2010-2025 Q2 ....................................................................................................... 43
Table 27. Baseline Employment Forecast 2025-2045 .................................................................................................. 45
Table 28. Baseline Population Forecast 2025-2045 ..................................................................................................... 46
Table 29. Baseline Service Population Forecast 2025-2045 ...................................................................................... 47
Table 30. Baseline Population Forecast, Subareas 2025-2045 ................................................................................. 48
34
Table 31. Baseline Housing Demand Forecast, Gallatin County ............................................................................... 49
Table 32. Baseline Housing Demand Forecast, The Triangle Area 2025-2045 .................................................. 50
Table 33. Amenity-Driven Employment Forecast, 2025-2045 .................................................................................. 51
Table 34. Amenity-Driven Population Forecast, 2025-2045 ..................................................................................... 52
Table 35. Amenity-Driven Service Population Forecast 2025-2045 ....................................................................... 52
Table 36. Amenity-Driven Population Forecast, Subareas, 2025-2045 ................................................................ 53
Table 37. Amenity-Driven Housing Unit Demand Forecast, 2025-2045 ............................................................... 54
Table 38. Amenity-Driven Housing Unit Demand Forecast, The Triangle Area, 2025-2045 ......................... 56
Table 39. Constrained City Employment Forecast 2025-2045 ................................................................................. 57
Table 40. Constrained City Population Forecast 2025-2045 .................................................................................... 58
Table 41. Constrained City Service Population Forecast 2025-2045 ..................................................................... 58
Table 42. Forecasted Change in Population Growth Capture, 2025-2045 ........................................................... 59
Table 43. Constrained City Population Forecast, Subareas 2025-2045 ................................................................ 60
Table 44. Share of County Population by Subarea, 2025-2045 ................................................................................ 60
Table 45. Constrained City Housing Unit Demand Forecast 2025-2045 .............................................................. 61
Table 46. Constrained City Housing Unit Demand Forecast, The Triangle Area 2025-2045 ........................ 62
Table 47. City of Belgrade Forecasts, Summary Table ..................................................................................................... 2
Table 48. Four Corners CDP Forecasts, Summary Table ................................................................................................ 3
35
List of Figures
Figure 1. Regional Map ................................................................................................................................................................ 4
Figure 2. Gallatin County Subareas Map .............................................................................................................................. 5
Figure 3. Gallatin County Employment Forecast Summary, 2010-2045 .................................................................. 7
Figure 4. Gallatin County Population Forecast Summary, 2010-2045 ..................................................................... 9
Figure 5. Gallatin County Total Housing Units Forecast Summary, 2010-2045 ................................................ 10
Figure 6. Bozeman Total Jobs Forecast Summary, 2010-2045 ................................................................................. 11
Figure 7. Bozeman Total Population Forecast Summary, 2010-2045 .................................................................... 12
Figure 8. Bozeman Total Housing Units Forecast Summary, 2010-2045 ............................................................. 13
Figure 9. Tri-County Vacant Unit Types, 2010 to 2023 ............................................................................................... 21
Figure 10. Gallatin County Subareas Vacant by Type, 2010 to 2023 ........................................................................ 23
Figure 11. Tri-County Vacancy Rates, 2010-2023 ........................................................................................................... 24
Figure 12. Gallatin County Subareas Vacancy Rates, 2010-2023 .............................................................................. 25
Figure 13. Comparison Cities Vacancy Rates, 2010-2023 ............................................................................................ 26
Figure 14. Tri-County Household Size Trends, 2000-2023 .......................................................................................... 27
Figure 15. Gallatin County Subareas Household Size Trends, 2000-2023 ............................................................. 28
Figure 16. Gallatin County Change in Employment by NAICS, 2010-2024 ............................................................ 33
Figure 17. Bozeman Change in Employment by NAICS, 2010-2024 ......................................................................... 36
Figure 18. Top 5 Employment Industries in Gallatin County, 2024 ........................................................................... 38
Figure 19. Bozeman Multi-Household Average Rent per Unit, 2010-2025 Q2 .................................................... 41
Figure 20. Gallatin County Multi-Household Vacancy Rate and Deliveries (Units), 2010-2025 Q2............ 42
Figure 21. Office Gross Rent per Sq. Ft., 2010-2025 Q2 ................................................................................................ 43
Figure 22. Office Vacancy Rates, 2010-2025 Q2 ............................................................................................................. 44
Figure 23. Office Remote Worker Trends 2010-2023 ................................................................................................... 44
36
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1 Introduction and Summary of Findings
1. Introduction and Summary of Findings
The City of Bozeman hired Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) to prepare a
population and housing forecast for the City of Bozeman and surrounding Gallatin
County. The 20-year forecast scenarios use population, housing, and employment
data to generate a projection. Three scenarios were developed to show a range of
future possibilities in Bozeman and Gallatin County over the next twenty years.
These scenarios include a Baseline scenario based on historic growth trends, an
Amenity-Driven scenario based on potential demographic changes in Gallatin
County, and a Constrained City scenario that assumes that changes in land use
policy or infrastructure limits reduce the amount of growth the City can
accommodate. The purpose of these scenarios is to show how population and
housing demand are affected by complex market conditions.
Summary of Findings
Based on the three forecast scenarios conducted, there is a range of results. These
findings are summarized below.
1. If current growth trends continue, Gallatin County will gain 64,000 residents, and
Bozeman will gain 28,800 residents from 2025 to 2045.
In the Baseline scenario, Gallatin County is forecast to have 194,000 residents
by 2045. Bozeman is forecast to have 87,400 residents, representing nearly
half of Gallatin County’s total population. The forecasts are based on the
relationships between job growth, labor force demand, and the resulting
housing demand. This analysis shows the relationship between job growth and
the housing supply needed to support the labor force needed to maintain
economic growth.
2. If Gallatin County were to develop with more second homes and have more part-
time residents over the next twenty years, it will gain 27,400 housing units with
4,900 units being second homes.
In the Amenity Driven scenario, Gallatin County is forecast to have a total of
87,000 housing units by 2045. 11,400 units, or approximately 13.1 percent, are
forecast to be either vacant homes or second homes. This results in a forecast
population of 181,500 residents in 2045, with 81,800 residents in Bozeman.
High housing costs may slow population growth in the City but may not slow
housing demand due to the external factors of additional part-time residents
and remote workers.
37
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 2 Introduction and Summary of Findings
3. If Bozeman were to become constrained in its development potential due to cost
and land availability, it would only gain 19,600 residents from 2025 to 2045.
In the Constrained City scenario, Bozeman’s forecast 2045 population is
78,300 residents, with growth slowing to approximately 500 new residents per
year by the forecast sunset year. The reduction of growth in the City implies
that other areas would need to “make up” for some of this to keep up with labor
force demand. Many areas of Gallatin County, including in some municipalities,
lack adequate infrastructure to accommodate significant growth.
4. By 2045, Gallatin County is forecast to have 135,000 jobs, 181,500 to 194,000
residents, and demand for 83,200 to 88,900 housing units between all three
scenarios.
As shown in the summary table below (Table 1), Gallatin County is forecast to
add 44,500 jobs, 51,500 to 64,000 residents, and have demand for an
additional 23,600 to 29,300 housing units between 2025 and 2045.
Table 1. Gallatin County Forecasts, Summary Table
Gallatin County 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Jobs
Baseline 90,500 101,300 114,100 125,300 135,000 44,500 2,225 2.0%
Amenity Driven 90,500 101,300 114,100 125,300 135,000 44,500 2,225 2.0%
City Constrained 90,500 101,300 114,100 125,300 135,000 44,500 2,225 2.0%
Population
Baseline 130,000 145,500 163,800 180,000 194,000 64,000 3,200 2.0%
Amenity Driven 130,000 143,200 158,700 171,300 181,500 51,500 2,575 1.7%
City Constrained 130,000 143,200 158,700 171,300 181,500 51,500 2,575 1.7%
Total Housing Unit Demand
Baseline 59,600 66,700 75,200 82,500 88,900 29,300 1,465 2.0%
Amenity Driven 59,600 66,400 74,400 81,200 87,000 27,400 1,370 1.9%
City Constrained 59,600 65,700 72,700 78,600 83,200 23,600 1,180 1.7%
Occupied Housing Units
Baseline 54,200 60,600 68,300 75,000 80,800 26,600 1,330 2.0%
Amenity Driven 54,200 59,700 66,100 71,400 75,600 21,400 1,070 1.7%
City Constrained 54,200 59,700 66,100 71,400 75,600 21,400 1,070 1.7%
Vacant and Second Homes
Baseline 5,400 6,100 6,900 7,500 8,100 2,700 135 2.0%
Amenity Driven 5,400 6,700 8,300 9,800 11,400 6,000 300 3.8%
City Constrained 5,400 6,000 6,600 7,200 7,600 2,200 110 1.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
38
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3 Introduction and Summary of Findings
5. By 2045, Bozeman is forecast to have 79,300 jobs, 78,300 to 87,400 residents,
and demand for 38,300 to 42,700 housing units between all three scenarios.
As shown in the summary table below (Table 2), Bozeman is forecast to add
26,100 jobs, 19,600 to 28,800 residents, and have demand for an additional
9,700 to 14,100 housing units between 2025 and 2045.
Table 2. City of Bozeman Forecasts, Summary Table
Bozeman 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Jobs
Baseline 53,200 59,500 67,000 73,600 79,300 26,100 1,305 2.0%
Amenity Driven 53,200 59,500 67,000 73,600 79,300 26,100 1,305 2.0%
City Constrained 53,200 59,500 67,000 73,600 79,300 26,100 1,305 2.0%
Population
Baseline 58,600 65,500 73,800 81,100 87,400 28,800 1,440 2.0%
Amenity Driven 58,600 64,500 71,500 77,200 81,800 23,200 1,160 1.7%
City Constrained 58,700 64,800 71,000 75,400 78,300 19,600 980 1.5%
Total Housing Unit Demand
Baseline 28,600 32,000 36,000 39,600 42,700 14,100 705 2.0%
Amenity Driven 28,600 32,000 35,700 39,200 42,000 13,400 670 1.9%
City Constrained 28,600 31,700 34,600 36,700 38,300 9,700 485 1.5%
Occupied Housing Units
Baseline 26,800 29,900 33,700 37,000 39,900 13,100 655 2.0%
Amenity Driven 26,800 29,500 32,600 35,300 37,400 10,600 530 1.7%
City Constrained 26,800 29,600 32,400 34,400 35,800 9,000 450 1.5%
Vacant and Second Homes
Baseline 1,800 2,100 2,300 2,600 2,800 1,000 50 2.2%
Amenity Driven 1,800 2,500 3,100 3,900 4,600 2,800 140 4.8%
City Constrained 1,800 2,100 2,200 2,300 2,500 700 35 1.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Forecast 2025-2045 Change
39
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4 Introduction and Summary of Findings
Forecast Methodology
To frame the forecasts, demographic and market trends were collected for the “Tri-
County” region, defined as Gallatin County, Broadwater County, and Park County
(Figure 1). Broadwater County and Park County are more sparsely populated than
Gallatin County but have had increased housing pressure in recent years due to
growth in Gallatin County. This issue is emphasized even more when the number of
second homes within Broadwater County and Park County is considered because it
limits the available housing supply to everyday residents. Data from the Tri-County
region is used throughout this analysis to inform the forecast model scenarios.
Figure 1. Regional Map
40
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 5 Introduction and Summary of Findings
Of particular relevance to the forecast scenarios are the recent demographic and
market trends within Gallatin County. To show the recent changes in different
geographies within Gallatin County, EPS selected six different geographies—
Bozeman, Belgrade, Three Forks, Manhattan, Four Corners CDP (Census-
Designated Place), and Big Sky CDP (Figure 2). The analysis of these individual
subareas is then used to inform the forecast scenario inputs.
Figure 2. Gallatin County Subareas Map
41
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 6 Introduction and Summary of Findings
Once the recent demographic and market data was analyzed, three different
forecast scenarios were developed—a baseline scenario, an amenity-driven
scenario, and a constrained city scenario. Each scenario is described in detail
below.
Baseline Scenario
The Baseline Scenario forecasts the number of employees living and working in
Gallatin County. The forecast relies on U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) covered employment data
(wage and salary jobs), which is escalated using a year-over-year growth rate that
starts at 3.0 percent and tapers to 1.5 percent by the end of the forecast period.
Each year covered employment is adjusted up to account for for sole proprietors
using a constant factor to derive a total jobs figure. Using the total jobs subtotal,
multiple job holders and in-commuters are subtracted using constant factors for
each. The number of employees living and working in Gallatin County is used to
estimate population through a constant employment to population ratio. From
there, County wide housing unit demand is forecasted by applying a constant
population per housing unit factor. At each stage of the forecast, totals for
population and housing unit demand are ascribed to each subarea using the 2024
share of the County total.
Amenity-Driven Scenario
The rationale for this scenario is that rising housing costs, and the growing appeal
of this region to part-time residents, second homeowners, and remote workers
contributes to rising housing costs and reductions in homes available for full-time
residents. As a result, commuting from lower cost areas needs to increase to meet
the labor force demand.
The Amenity-Driven scenario follows the same methodology as the baseline with
adjustments made to the in-commuters and part-time residences factor. Here,
these factors are escalated over the course of the forecast period for both Gallatin
County and the Triangle Subareas, where applicable. For Gallatin County, the in-
commuters factor increases from 6.0 percent to 12.0 percent and the part-time
residence factor increased from 5.0 percent to 10.0 percent. For the subareas, the
part-time residence factor is increased by four times the base year rate by the end
of the forecast period. Belgrade has its rate imputed.
Constrained City Scenario
The methodology for the Constrained City scenario differs from the previous two.
This scenario assumes that Bozeman is no longer capturing as much growth for the
region due to several factors such as cost and land capacity. If Bozeman has less
growth, the regional demand for housing must go elsewhere.
42
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 7 Introduction and Summary of Findings
Here, the County employment and County population forecasts are unchanged
from the Amenity-Driven scenario. However, the allocation of population to each
subarea is done using the share of County growth for the period 2000 to 2024
rather than a base year static percentage. Over the forecast period, Bozeman’s
growth capture of County population is reduced from 49.7 percent to 25.0 percent.
As a result, the surrounding communities increase in population and housing unit
demand.
Forecast Summary
Gallatin County
The results of the forecast scenarios varied depending on the scenario and type of
forecast. For Gallatin County jobs, all three scenarios have the same forecast, with
total jobs increasing from 87,815 jobs in 2024 to 135,000 jobs in 2045 (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Gallatin County Employment Forecast Summary, 2010-2045
From this total jobs forecast, the total employees living and working in Gallatin
County is then generated. It results in different totals for two of the three
scenarios, as shown in Table 3. This is due to a slow increase in the in-commuter
rate for both the Amenity-Driven and Constrained City scenarios, resulting in a
lower total amount of employees living and working in Gallatin County. In the
43
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 8 Introduction and Summary of Findings
Baseline scenario, 38,400 employees are added from 2025 to 2045. In the
Amenity-Driven and Constrained City scenarios, 30,900 employees are added
from 2025 to 2045.
Table 3. Total Employees Living and Working in Gallatin County, 2025-2045
Based on the total employees living and working in Gallatin County, a population
forecast is derived from a population to employee factor. In the Baseline scenario,
this results in the total population increasing by 67,016 residents, from 126,984 in
2024 to 194,000 in 2045 (Figure 4). For the Amenity-Driven and Constrained City
scenarios, total population increases by 54,516 residents from 2024 to 2045.
Gallatin County 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Employees Living & Working in G.C.
Baseline 78,000 87,300 98,300 108,000 116,400 38,400 1,920 2.0%
Amenity Driven 78,000 85,900 95,200 102,800 108,900 30,900 1,545 1.7%
City Constrained 78,000 85,900 95,200 102,800 108,900 30,900 1,545 1.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\253073-Bozeman MT Population and Housing Forecast\Models\[253073- Employment and Housing Demand 8-13-25.xlsx]T - Live Work Emp
Forecast 2025-2045 Change
44
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9 Introduction and Summary of Findings
Figure 4. Gallatin County Population Forecast Summary, 2010-2045
45
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 10 Introduction and Summary of Findings
From the forecast population, the total housing units needed to support that
population is calculated using average household size, market vacancy rate, and a
part-time residence adjustment. The Baseline scenario uses historic factors, the
Amenity Driven scenario uses a slightly higher market vacancy rate and a gradually
increasing part-time residence factor, and the Constrained City scenario uses a
slighlty higher market vacancy rate but keeps the part-time residence factor the
same as in the Baseline Scenario. This results in three different ranges of
forecasted housing demand from 2024 to 2045, with 31,500 units needed in the
Baseline scenario, 29,600 units needed in the Amenity Driven scenario, and 25,800
units needed in the Constrained City scenario (Figure 5).
Figure 5. Gallatin County Total Housing Units Forecast Summary, 2010-2045
City of Bozeman
The results for the City of Bozeman follow the same methodology previously
described, with Bozeman receiving total jobs in all three scenarios based on its
current share of total jobs. From 2024 to 2045, Bozeman is forecast to add 27,720
jobs, increasing from 51,580 jobs in 2024 to 79,300 jobs in 2045 (Figure 6).
46
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 11 Introduction and Summary of Findings
Figure 6. Bozeman Total Jobs Forecast Summary, 2010-2045
The total amount of employees living and working in Gallatin County is
apportioned to Bozeman based on each scenario. In the Amenity-Driven and
Constrained City scenarios, this results in a lower forecasted population growth
from 2025 to 2045 compared to the Baseline scenario. In the Amenity Driven
scenario, this is due to the increased number of second homes, whereas in the
Constrained City scenario it is due to Bozeman taking on a smaller share of the
population growth within Gallatin County (Figure 7). The result of each scenario is
as follows:
• Baseline Scenario – the population is forecast to increase by 29,506
residents from 2024 to 2045, increasing from 57,894 residents to 87,400
residents.
• Amenity Driven Scenario – the population is forecast to increase by 23,906
residents from 2024 to 2045, increasing from 57,894 residents to 81,800
residents.
47
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 12 Introduction and Summary of Findings
• Constrained City Scenario – the population is forecast to increase by
20,406 residents from 2024 to 2045, increasing from 57,894 residents to
78,300 residents.
Figure 7. Bozeman Total Population Forecast Summary, 2010-2045
The Constrained City scenario has the lowest total population growth forecast and
the lowest housing unit demand forecast within the City of Bozeman. For the
Constrained City scenario, this total demand is 10,700 housing units (Figure 8).
The Amenity Driven scenario is forecast to have demand for 14,400 housing units
from 2024 to 2045. In the Baseline scenario, this total demand is 15,100 housing
units.
48
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 13 Introduction and Summary of Findings
Figure 8. Bozeman Total Housing Units Forecast Summary, 2010-2045
49
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 14 Demographic Trends
2. Demographic Trends
This chapter provides an analysis of the recent population, household, and housing
unit trends in Gallatin County, Park County, and Broadwater County. This analysis
also includes an in-depth analysis of Gallatin County and its subareas (i.e.,
Bozeman, Belgrade, Four Corners, etc.).
Population
Both the Tri-County region (Gallatin, Broadwater, and Park counties) and portions
of Gallatin County have seen rapid growth over the last ten to fifteen years. To
better understand where growth has occurred, population growth is analyzed
below for both the region and for subareas within Gallatin County.
Regional Trends
The Tri-County region had a total population of 146,988 in 2023. Gallatin County
was by far the largest with 122,194 residents in 2023 (Table 4). Between 2010 and
2023 the region added 36,277 residents per year and grew at an average annual
rate of 2.3 percent. Most of the growth was concentrated in Gallatin County, which
captured 90.2 percent of regional population growth from 2010 to 2023.
Table 4. Tri-County Population Trends, 2010-2023
Gallatin County Subareas
Within Gallatin County, a total of 32,681 residents were added from 2010 to 2023
(Table 5). Over half of this growth (54.3 percent) was in the City of Bozeman, which
gained 17,762 residents. This results in an average annual growth rate of 3.0
percent. Two subareas, Belgrade and Four Corners, had a higher average annual
growth rate than Bozeman during this period. Their average annual growth rates
were 3.4 percent and 4.5 percent, respectively.
Growth
Population 2010 2020 2023 Change Ann. # Ann. %Capture
Tri-County
Gallatin County 89,513 118,960 122,194 32,681 2,514 2.4% 90.2%
Park County 15,636 17,191 17,484 1,848 80 0.5% 5.1%
Broadwater County 5,612 6,774 7,310 1,698 74 2.2% 4.7%
Total 110,761 142,925 146,988 36,227 1,575 2.3% 100.0%
Source: US Census ACS 5 - Year Estimates and Decennial Census
2010-2023
50
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 15 Demographic Trends
Table 5. Gallatin County Subareas Population Trends, 2010-2023
Comparison Cities
When compared to some other cities in the Western United States, Bozeman’s
average annual population growth rate is second to that of Meridian (a suburb of
Boise, Idaho). Bozeman’s average annual growth rate from 2010 to 2023 was 3.0
percent (Table 6). During the same period, Meridian’s was 4.0 percent. Out of the
peer communities in Montana, Bozeman gained the most residents during this
period (17,762 residents), closely followed by Billings (14,151 residents).
Table 6. Comparison Cities in Population, 2010-2023
Growth
Population 2010 2020 2023 Change Ann. # Ann. %Capture
Gallatin County
Belgrade 7,389 10,460 11,425 4,036 310 3.4% 12.3%
Bozeman 37,280 53,293 55,042 17,762 1,366 3.0% 54.3%
Four Corners CDP 3,146 5,901 5,562 2,416 186 4.5% 7.4%
Manhattan 1,520 2,086 2,149 629 48 2.7% 1.9%
Three Forks 1,869 1,989 2,034 165 13 0.7% 0.5%
Unincorporated 38,309 45,231 45,982 7,673 590 1.4% 23.5%
Total 89,513 118,960 122,194 32,681 2,514 2.4% 100.0%
Source: US Census ACS 5 - Year Estimates and Decennial Census
2010-2023
Description 2010 2015 2020 2023 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Total Population
Bozeman, MT 37,280 40,319 53,293 55,042 17,762 1,366 3.0%
Missoula, MT 66,788 69,190 73,489 75,600 8,812 678 1.0%
Kalispell, MT 19,927 21,142 24,558 26,830 6,903 531 2.3%
Billings, MT 104,170 108,134 117,116 118,321 14,151 1,089 1.0%
Boise, ID 205,671 214,196 235,684 235,701 30,030 2,310 1.1%
Meridian, ID 75,092 84,018 117,635 124,865 49,773 3,829 4.0%
Fort Collins, CO 143,986 153,292 169,810 169,705 25,719 1,978 1.3%
Boulder, CO 97,385 103,919 108,250 106,274 8,889 684 0.7%
Bend, OR 76,639 81,780 99,178 101,472 24,833 1,910 2.2%
Source: U.S. Census Decennial Census; U.S. Census ACS 5-year estimates; Economic & Planning Systems
2010-2023
51
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 16 Demographic Trends
Households
Household trends both within the region and within Gallatin County are similar to
the population trends from 2010 to 2023. While minimal, some of the differences
are related to differing household sizes between geographies.
Regional Trends
The Tri-County Region gained a total of 14,969 households from 2010 to 2023
(Table 7). One notable difference from the population trends is that Park County
captured 6.3 percent of the total household growth from 2010 to 2023, compared
to 5.1 percent of the total population growth during the same period (Table 4). This
suggests Park County’s new households are smaller in household size.
Table 7. Tri-County Household Trends, 2010-2023
Gallatin County Subareas
Gallatin County gained a total of 13,481 households from 2010 to 2023 (Table 8).
54.6 percent of the households gained during this period were in Bozeman (7,356
households). Compared to population trends, Four Corners CDP had a larger share
of population growth (7.4 percent) compared to household growth (6.0 percent)
from 2010 to 2023, suggesting that the new households were larger in household
size.
Growth
Households 2010 2020 2023 Change Ann. # Ann. %Capture
Tri-County
Gallatin County 36,550 47,117 50,031 13,481 1,037 2.4% 90.1%
Park County 7,310 7,997 8,257 947 73 0.9% 6.3%
Broadwater County 2,347 2,795 2,888 541 42 1.6% 3.6%
Total 46,207 57,909 61,176 14,969 1,151 2.2% 100.0%
Source: US Census ACS 5 - Year Estimates and Decennial Census
2010-2023
52
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 17 Demographic Trends
Table 8. Gallatin County Subareas Household Trends, 2010-2023
Comparison Cities
Compared to some peer cities in the Western United States, Bozeman had the
second highest average annual household growth rate from 2010 to 2023, which
was 3.0 percent (Table 9). The peer city with the highest average annual growth
rate during this period was Meridian, with a rate of 4.6 percent. Some peer
communities that were close in average annual growth rate include Bend (2.4
percent rate) and Kalispell (2.0 percent rate).
Table 9. Comparison Cities in Households, 2010-2023
Growth
Households 2010 2020 2023 Change Ann. # Ann. %Capture
Gallatin County
Belgrade 2,965 4,102 4,727 1,762 136 3.7% 13.1%
Bozeman 15,775 21,735 23,131 7,356 566 3.0% 54.6%
Four Corners CDP 1,228 2,196 2,038 810 62 4.0% 6.0%
Manhattan 622 803 894 272 21 2.8% 2.0%
Three Forks 758 822 879 121 9 1.1% 0.9%
Unincorporated 15,202 17,459 18,362 3,160 243 1.5% 23.4%
Total 36,550 47,117 50,031 13,481 1,037 2.4% 100.0%
Source: US Census ACS 5 - Year Estimates and Decennial Census
2010-2023
Description 2010 2015 2020 2023 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Total Households
Bozeman, MT 15,775 16,573 21,735 23,131 7,356 566 3.0%
Missoula, MT 29,081 29,860 32,816 33,958 4,877 375 1.2%
Kalispell, MT 8,638 8,608 10,297 11,108 2,470 190 2.0%
Billings, MT 43,945 44,092 49,441 50,340 6,395 492 1.1%
Boise, ID 85,704 86,916 97,456 99,616 13,912 1,070 1.2%
Meridian, ID 25,302 29,499 41,230 45,486 20,184 1,553 4.6%
Fort Collins, CO 57,829 58,918 67,731 70,782 12,953 996 1.6%
Boulder, CO 41,302 42,165 43,565 43,825 2,523 194 0.5%
Bend, OR 31,790 33,396 40,969 43,278 11,488 884 2.4%
Source: U.S. Census Decennial Census; U.S. Census ACS 5-year estimates; Economic & Planning Systems
2010-2023
53
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 18 Demographic Trends
Housing Units
While housing unit trends mostly mirror that of household and population, it is
important to understand a community’s current housing stock. To accommodate
the robust growth that the region has seen, housing units have also spiked in recent
years.
Regional Trends
Within the Tri-County Region, Gallatin County has accounted for 91.7 percent of
the total housing unit growth from 2010 to 2023 (Table 10)—a total of 15,141
housing units. Broadwater County increased its housing unit supply by nearly one-
third, increasing its total units from 2,175 in 2010 to 3,164 in 2023. Meanwhile,
Park County had minimal growth, only gaining a total of 382 housing units from
2010 to 2023.
Table 10. Tri-County Housing Unit Trends, 2010-2023
Gallatin County Subareas
Consistent with population and household trends, Bozeman captured 53.4 percent
of the total housing unit growth from 2010 to 2023 (Table 11). This is followed by
Unincorporated Gallatin County, which gained a total of 3,894 housing units,
accounting for 25.7 percent of the total growth. The area with the highest average
annual growth rate during this period was Four Corners CDP, which had an
average annual growth rate of 4.7 percent.
Growth
Housing Units 2010 2020 2023 Change Ann. # Ann. %Capture
Tri-County
Gallatin County 40,448 51,011 55,589 15,141 1,165 2.5% 91.7%
Park County 9,215 9,657 9,597 382 29 0.3% 2.3%
Broadwater County 2,175 2,740 3,164 989 76 2.9% 6.0%
Total 51,838 63,408 68,350 16,512 1,270 2.1% 100.0%
Source: US Census ACS 5 - Year Estimates and Decennial Census
2010-2023
54
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 19 Demographic Trends
Table 11. Gallatin County Subareas Housing Unit Trends, 2010-2023
Comparison Cities
From 2010 to 2023, Bozeman gained 7,382 housing units, which is higher than all
peer Montana communities (Table 12). This results in an average annual growth
rate of 2.7 percent, which is second to Meridian (4.4 percent) for being the highest
rate during this period. The City with the smallest average annual growth rate in
housing units from 2010 to 2023 was Boulder, which had a rate of 0.5 percent and
only gained a total of 3,196 housing units.
Table 12. Comparison Cities in Housing Units, 2010-2023
Growth
Housing Units 2010 2020 2023 Change Ann. # Ann. %Capture
Gallatin County
Belgrade 3,154 3,640 4,858 1,704 131 3.4% 11.3%
Bozeman 16,761 22,057 24,846 8,085 622 3.1% 53.4%
Four Corners CDP 1,211 1,957 2,197 986 76 4.7% 6.5%
Manhattan 574 806 909 335 26 3.6% 2.2%
Three Forks 758 898 895 137 11 1.3% 0.9%
Unincorporated 17,990 21,653 21,884 3,894 300 1.5% 25.7%
Total 40,448 51,011 55,589 15,141 1,165 2.5% 100.0%
Source: US Census ACS 5 - Year Estimates and Decennial Census
2010-2023
Description 2010 2015 2020 2023 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Total Housing Units
Bozeman, MT 17,464 18,293 23,535 24,846 7,382 568 2.7%
Missoula, MT 30,682 31,668 34,747 36,310 5,628 433 1.3%
Kalispell, MT 9,379 9,406 10,894 11,650 2,271 175 1.7%
Billings, MT 46,317 47,044 52,643 53,537 7,220 555 1.1%
Boise, ID 92,700 92,167 102,295 104,833 12,133 933 1.0%
Meridian, ID 26,674 30,222 43,627 46,672 19,998 1,538 4.4%
Fort Collins, CO 60,503 61,139 71,625 73,332 12,829 987 1.5%
Boulder, CO 43,479 44,578 46,289 46,675 3,196 246 0.5%
Bend, OR 36,110 36,579 44,449 46,712 10,602 816 2.0%
Source: U.S. Census Decennial Census; U.S. Census ACS 5-year estimates; Economic & Planning Systems
Z \Sh d\P j t \DEN\253073 B MT P l ti d H i F t\D t \[253073 C C it 7 28 25 l ]T HU
2010-2023
55
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 20 Demographic Trends
Vacant and Part-Time Resident Housing Units
Regional Trends
Total vacant units in the Tri-County Region have stayed around the same amount
since 2010, suggesting that new inventory, when built, is filled. One noteworthy
trend is that Gallatin County had an increase of 863 vacant units from 2010 to
2023, with the majority (722 units) being attributed to part-time residents (Table
13). Meanwhile, Park County saw a reduction of 892 vacant units during the same
period, suggesting there may be increasing outward pressure from Gallatin County
primary residents on Park County.
Table 13. Tri-County Total Vacant Units, 2010-2023
While the total number of vacant units in Gallatin County has increased, their total
share of housing units has decreased by 1.6 percentage points, from 11.6 percent
in 2010 to 10.0 percent in 2023 (Figure 9). Part-time vacant units accounted for
5.2 percentage points of this rate in 2023, compared to 5.4 percentage points in
2010. Park County and Broadwater County have seen more significant decreases
in their total vacancy rate from 2010 to 2023, decreasing from 24.2 percent to
14.0 percent and 13.7 percent to 8.7 percent, respectively. Part-time vacancies
make up a larger share of vacancies in both Park and Broadwater Counties,
suggesting a larger presence of second homes.
Growth
Vacant Units 2010 2020 2023 Change Ann. # Ann. %Capture
Tri-County
Gallatin County 4,695 5,724 5,558 863 66 1.3% 77.5%
Park County 2,232 1,696 1,340 -892 -69 -3.8% 18.7%
Broadwater County 297 304 276 -21 -2 -0.6%3.8%
Total 7,224 7,724 7,174 -50 -4 -0.1% 100.0%
Source: US Census ACS 5 - Year Estimates and Decennial Census
2010-2023
56
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 21 Demographic Trends
Figure 9. Tri-County Vacant Unit Types, 2010 to 2023
Gallatin County Subareas
Within Gallatin County, the majority of vacant units gained (609 total units) from
2010 to 2023 have been in unincorporated Gallatin County (Table 14). This
aacounts for 70.6 percent of the total vacant units gained during this period. This is
followed by Bozeman, which gained 377 vacant units from 2010 to 2023. With the
exception of Four Corners, the surrounding geograhies saw a decrease in vacant
units, suggesting a tightening of the housing market surrounding Bozeman.
57
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 22 Demographic Trends
Table 14. Gallatin County Subareas Vacant Unit Trends, 2010-2023
Within Gallatin County, both Bozeman and Four Corners have seen part-time
vacancies account for a larger portion of vacant units from 2010 to 2023. In 2010
8.0 percent of housing units were vacant. Of total housing units, 0.8 percent were
part-time vacant (Figure 10). In 2023, part-time vacancies increased to 1.9 percent
of total housing stock. In Four Corners, this change is more pronounced. Part-time
vacancies increased by 3.0 percentage points from 0.9 percent in 2010 to 3.9
percent in 2023.
Meanwhile, both Belgrade and all other areas within Gallatin County have seen
their share of part-time vacancies decrease. In 2023, Belgrade had a part-time
vacancy rate of 0 percent. The part-time vacancy rate in all other communities
within Gallatin County decreased by 3.2 percentage points, from 13.4 percent in
2010 to 10.2 percent in 2023.
Growth
Vacant Units 2010 2020 2023 Change Ann. # Ann. %Capture
Gallatin County
Belgrade 226 89 131 -95 -7 -4.1% -11.0%
Big Sky CDP 1,661 2,450 2,025 364 28 1.5% 42.2%
Bozeman 1,338 1,600 1,715 377 29 1.9% 43.7%
Four Corners CDP 105 117 159 54 4 3.2% 6.3%
Manhattan 55 25 15 -40 -3 -9.5% -4.6%
Three Forks 58 64 16 -42 -3 -9.4% -4.9%
Unincorporated 1,252 1,379 1,497 245 19 1.4%28.4%
Total 4,695 5,724 5,558 863 66 1.3% 100.0%
Source: US Census ACS 5 - Year Estimates and Decennial Census
2010-2023
58
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 23 Demographic Trends
Figure 10. Gallatin County Subareas Vacant by Type, 2010 to 2023
Vacancy Rate Trends
Regional Trends
The overall vacancy rates in the Tri-County region have declined substantially from
2010 to 2023, suggesting a tightening of the housing market. Park County had the
largest decrease, dropping from a vacancy rate of 24.2 percent in 2010 to 14.0
percent in 2023 (Figure 11). Broadwater County’s vacancy rate dropped from 13.7
percent to 8.7 percent over the same period. In Gallatin County, the vacancy rate
dropped by 1.6 percentage points from 11.6 percent in 2010 to 10.0 percent in
2023.
59
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 24 Demographic Trends
Figure 11. Tri-County Vacancy Rates, 2010-2023
Gallatin County Subareas
Within Gallatin County, Bozeman, Belgrade, and Four Corners CDP have all seen a
decrease in their vacancy rates from 2010 to 2023. Bozeman’s overall vacancy rate
decreased by 1.1 percentage points from 2010 to 2023, decreasing from 8.0
percent in 2010 to 6.9 percent in 2023 (Figure 12). Currently, Belgrade has an
extremely low vacancy rate of 2.7 percent—it has remained at or below 5 percent
since 2019. Four Corners CDP has seen its rate drop by 1.5 percentage points,
decreasing from 8.7 percent in 2010 to 7.2 percent in 2023. The remainder of
Gallatin County has not seen much change in vacancy.
60
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 25 Demographic Trends
Figure 12. Gallatin County Subareas Vacancy Rates, 2010-2023
Comparison Cities
When looking at peer cities across the Western United States, 2023 vacancy rates
range from 2.5 percent (Meridian) to 7.4 percent (Bend) (Figure 13). Bozeman falls
on the higher end of this range, with a vacancy rate of 6.9 percent in 2023. While
on the higher end currently, Bozeman’s vacancy rate has dropped 2.8 percentage
points since 2010, when it had a vacancy rate of 9.7 percent. In addition, the
average vacancy rate for all peer cities in 2023 was 5.4 percent, down from 7.0
percent in 2010.
61
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 26 Demographic Trends
Figure 13. Comparison Cities Vacancy Rates, 2010-2023
62
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 27 Demographic Trends
Household Size Factors
Regional Trends
Within the Tri-County area, household sizes have remained relatively similar from
2000 to 2023. Park County had the largest drop in household size from 2000 to
2023, decreasing from 2.27 persons per household to 2.08 persons per household
(Figure 14). Gallatin County’s household size also decreased from 2000 to 2023,
going from 2.46 persons per household to 2.35 persons per household. Meanwhile,
Broadwater County saw a slight increase in household size from 2000 to 2023,
going from 2.48 persons per household to 2.51 persons per household.
Figure 14. Tri-County Household Size Trends, 2000-2023
Gallatin County Subareas
Within Gallatin County, the average household size has decreased from 2.47
persons per household in 2000 to 2.40 persons per household in 2023 (Figure 15).
During this period, Belgrade had the largest decrease, decreasing from 2.67
persons per household to 2.41 persons per household. The only community to see
an increase in household size during this period was Four Corners CDP, which
increased its average household size from 2.29 persons per household in 2000 to
2.73 persons per household in 2023.
63
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 28 Demographic Trends
Figure 15. Gallatin County Subareas Household Size Trends, 2000-2023
64
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 29 Demographic Trends
Population to Housing Unit Ratio
Population to Housing Ratio is a factor that is used in the forecasts to help
determine housing unit demand. It is calculated by dividing the total population by
total housing units.
Regional Trends
Within the Tri-County region, the average population to housing unit ratio in 2023
was 2.15 persons per housing unit (Table 15). The lowest was Park County, with
1.82 persons per housing unit, followed by Gallatin County (2.20 persons per
housing unit) and Broadwater County (2.31 persons per housing unit).
Table 15. Tri-County Population to Housing Unit Ratio, 2010-2023
Gallatin County Subareas
Within Gallatin County, Manhattan and Three Forks have both seen large
decreases in their population to housing unit ratio from 2010 to 2023. Manhattan’s
ratio decreased from 2.65 persons per housing unit to 2.36 persons per housing
unit and Three Forks’ ratio decreased from 2.47 persons per housing unit to 2.27
persons per housing unit (Table 16).
Table 16. Gallatin County Subareas Population to Housing Unit Ratio, 2010-2023
Pop. to Housing Units 2010 2020 2023
Tri-County
Gallatin County 2.21 2.33 2.20
Park County 1.70 1.78 1.82
Broadwater County 2.58 2.47 2.31
Total 2.14 2.25 2.15
Source: US Census ACS 5 - Year Estimates and Decennial Census
Pop. to Housing Units 2010 2020 2023
Gallatin County
Belgrade 2.34 2.87 2.35
Bozeman 2.22 2.42 2.22
Four Corners CDP 2.60 3.02 2.53
Manhattan 2.65 2.59 2.36
Three Forks 2.47 2.21 2.27
Unincorporated 2.13 2.09 2.10
Total 2.21 2.33 2.20
Source: US Census ACS 5 - Year Estimates and Decennial Census
65
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 30 Employment Trends
3. Employment Trends
This chapter provides an analysis of the employment trends in Gallatin County,
Park County, and Broadwater County. In addition to the Tri-County region this
chapter covers trends of Gallatin County and its subareas.
Employment
The Tri-County region and the Gallatin County Subareas have experienced rapid
employment growth since 2010. Much of the growth has been concentrated in
Gallatin County and Bozeman.
Regional Trends
The Tri-County region had 81,877 covered employees in 2024 (a “covered
employee” is an employee whose job is subject to state and federal unemployment
insurance laws and thus “covered” by the QCEW survey). In 2024, Gallatin County
accounted for 89.0 percent of the region’s jobs. Since 2010, the region added
32,900 jobs growing at an annual rate of 3.7 percent. 93.3 percent of total
employment growth came from Gallatin County during this period (Table 17).
Employment growth outpaced population growth over the past fifteen years. The
compound annual growth rate for employment, 3.7 percent, was 1.5 percentage
points higher than population and household growth. The effect of this is a tighter
labor market with low unemployment and high wage growth.
Table 17. Tri-County Total Covered Employment Trends, 2010-2024
Gallatin County Subareas
Gallatin County added 30,696 employees between 2010 and 2024 (Table 18).
Bozeman accounted for 53.6 percent of the growth, adding 16,446 jobs. Four
Corners CDP and Manhattan grew the fastest, with compound annual growth rates
of 5.9 percent and 6.2 percent, respectively.
Growth
Covered Employment 2010 2020 2024 Change Ann. # Ann. %Capture
Tri-County
Gallatin County 42,483 59,024 73,179 30,696 2,193 4.0% 93.3%
Park County 5,172 5,798 7,208 2,036 145 2.4% 6.2%
Broadwater County 1,322 1,336 1,490 168 12 0.9% 0.5%
Total 48,977 66,158 81,877 32,900 2,350 3.7% 100.0%
Source: Jobs EQ, BLS QCEW
2010-2024
66
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 31 Employment Trends
Table 18. Gallatin County Subareas Total Covered Employment Trends, 2010-2024
Comparison Cities
When compared to other cities in the Western United States, Bozeman had strong
employment growth from 2010 to 2023. Bozeman added a total of 16,446
employees, which equates to an average annual growth rate of 3.5 percent (Table
19). This employment data includes those that are self-employed (i.e., covered
employees and self-employed workers). This rate is second to that of Meridian,
which had an average annual growth rate of 5.2 percent. Other communities that
had similar growth in employment include Bend, with an average annual growth
rate of 3.0 percent, and Fort Collins, with an average annual growth rate of 2.0
percent.
Table 19. Comparison Cites in Total Employment, 2010-2024
Growth
Covered Employment 2010 2020 2024 Change Ann. # Ann. %Capture
Gallatin County
Belgrade 2,712 3,477 4,455 1,743 125 3.6% 5.7%
Bozeman 26,538 35,746 42,983 16,446 1,175 3.5% 53.6%
Four Corners CDP 2,023 3,704 4,449 2,426 173 5.8% 7.9%
Manhattan 339 622 790 451 32 6.2% 1.5%
Three Forks 402 471 620 218 16 3.1% 0.7%
Unincorporated 10,470 15,004 19,882 9,412 672 4.7% 30.7%
Total 42,483 59,024 73,179 30,696 2,193 4.0% 100.0%
Source: Jobs EQ, BLS QCEW
2010-2024
Description 2010 2015 2020 2024 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Total Employees
Bozeman, MT 28,839 34,105 38,162 45,538 16,699 1,193 3.3%
Missoula, MT 48,592 51,843 52,663 57,900 9,308 665 1.3%
Kalispell, MT 20,315 19,702 20,961 23,594 3,279 234 1.1%
Billings, MT 67,724 69,472 68,719 75,518 7,794 557 0.8%
Boise, ID 152,414 160,187 176,425 195,194 42,780 3,056 1.8%
Meridian, ID 31,291 40,379 52,998 63,732 32,441 2,317 5.2%
Fort Collins, CO 78,189 88,937 94,107 102,996 24,807 1,772 2.0%
Boulder, CO 88,070 94,053 98,055 101,355 13,285 949 1.0%
Bend, OR 43,490 52,627 58,344 65,607 22,117 1,580 3.0%
Source: JobsEQ; Economic & Planning Systems
2010-2024
67
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 32 Employment Trends
Industry Trends
In 2024, the Accommodation and Food Services and Retail Trade industries were
the two largest employers in the County (Table 22). The Construction and
Administrative Servicies industries accounted for 15 percent of County jobs.
Table 20. Gallatin County Employment by NAICS, 2010-2024
Employment 2010 2020 2024 Change Ann. # Ann. %
Gallatin County
Unclassified 1 14 169 167 12 40.7%
Admin. and Waste Services 1,209 2,268 2,916 1,707 122 6.5%
Construction 3,402 6,485 8,080 4,678 334 6.4%
Management 141 233 324 183 13 6.1%
Accomm./Food Services 5,322 6,912 11,474 6,152 439 5.6%
Ag./Forestry/Fishing 483 699 929 446 32 4.8%
Other (ex. Public Admin.)1,471 2,322 2,821 1,350 96 4.8%
Health Care 4,098 6,076 7,681 3,583 256 4.6%
Arts/Rec.1,250 1,468 2,321 1,071 76 4.5%
Prof./Tech Services 3,098 4,831 5,516 2,419 173 4.2%
Real Estate 856 1,196 1,508 652 47 4.1%
Wholesale Trade 1,348 1,822 2,334 986 70 4.0%
Manufacturing 2,243 3,599 3,579 1,336 95 3.4%
Finance 1,312 1,639 1,943 631 45 2.8%
Retail Trade 6,547 8,189 9,402 2,854 204 2.6%
Utilities 117 149 161 43 3 2.3%
Transport./Warehousing 1,146 1,532 1,561 415 30 2.2%
Information 559 698 703 144 10 1.7%
Education 5,942 6,836 7,417 1,475 105 1.6%
Public Admin.1,736 1,867 2,127 392 28 1.5%
Mining 202 188 213 11 1 0.4%
Total 42,483 59,024 73,179 30,696 2,193 4.0%
Source: Jobs EQ; Economic & Planning Systems
2010-2024
68
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 33 Employment Trends
Between 2010 and 2024, Gallatin County added 30,696 jobs corresponding to an
annual growth rate of 4.0 percent. The Construction and Administration Support
Services industries grew the fastest, at an annual rate of 6.5 percent and 6.4
percent respectively (excluding unclassified). Over the same period, the
Accomodation and Food Services and Construction industries added the most jobs,
growing by 6,152 and 4,678 jobs, respectively (Figure 16). Together, these two
industries accounted for 35.3 percent of job growth. Industries that had the least
growth from 2010 to 2024 include Mining (11 new employees), Utilites (43 new
employees), and Information (144 new employees).
Figure 16. Gallatin County Change in Employment by NAICS, 2010-2024
69
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 34 Employment Trends
The average annual wage in Gallatin County was $63,922 in 2024, up from
$33,762 in 2010 (Table 21). Between 2010 and 2024, average wages grew at an
average annual rate of 4.7 percent. The highest earning industries were
Professional Services, Finance, Information, and Utilities. The Accommodation and
Food Services and Information industries grew the fastest (excluding Unclassified),
with average annual wages increasing by an average annual rate of 7.3 percent and
6.8 percent, respectively.
Table 21. Gallatin County Wages by NAICS, 2010-2024
Wages 2010 2020 2024 Change Ann. # Ann. %
Gallatin County
Unclassified $20,213 $58,230 $85,354 $65,141 $4,653 10.8%
Accomm./Food Services $15,184 $24,985 $40,800 $25,616 $1,830 7.3%
Information $39,954 $79,388 $100,649 $60,694 $4,335 6.8%
Admin. and Waste Services $25,954 $38,015 $57,786 $31,832 $2,274 5.9%
Real Estate $31,094 $55,601 $67,768 $36,674 $2,620 5.7%
Prof./Tech Services $54,283 $83,691 $113,449 $59,166 $4,226 5.4%
Wholesale Trade $42,934 $67,790 $88,323 $45,389 $3,242 5.3%
Retail Trade $22,748 $37,609 $46,781 $24,033 $1,717 5.3%
Construction $37,175 $58,096 $76,017 $38,842 $2,774 5.2%
Other (ex. Public Admin.)$25,453 $38,270 $51,208 $25,756 $1,840 5.1%
Finance $56,295 $90,255 $108,156 $51,861 $3,704 4.8%
Ag./Forestry/Fishing $24,638 $39,335 $46,806 $22,168 $1,583 4.7%
Transport./Warehousing $31,884 $45,692 $57,948 $26,064 $1,862 4.4%
Manufacturing $37,321 $52,421 $67,137 $29,817 $2,130 4.3%
Public Admin.$45,388 $61,186 $80,273 $34,886 $2,492 4.2%
Health Care $38,274 $55,587 $63,242 $24,968 $1,783 3.7%
Management $50,089 $74,969 $81,559 $31,470 $2,248 3.5%
Mining $60,046 $85,960 $96,727 $36,681 $2,620 3.5%
Education $35,514 $48,507 $56,344 $20,831 $1,488 3.4%
Arts/Rec.$23,727 $30,778 $34,723 $10,997 $785 2.8%
Utilities $70,117 $91,516 $97,677 $27,560 $1,969 2.4%
Total $33,762 $50,849 $63,922 $30,160 $2,154 4.7%
Source: Jobs EQ; Economic & Planning Systems
2010-2024
70
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 35 Employment Trends
In 2024, Tourism related industries comprise the top industries in Bozeman (Table
22). The Accommodation and Food Services industry had 7,191 employees in 2024,
followed by Health Care (6,388 employees), and Retail Trade (6,148 employees).
Education is a significant employer in Bozeman with a total of 5,570 employees in
2024, a large share of which is due to Montana State University. In total, Bozeman
had 42,893 employees in 2024.
Table 22. Bozeman Employment by NAICS, 2010-2024
Employment 2010 2020 2024 Change Ann. # Ann. %
Bozeman
Unclassified 1 6 77 76 5 39.2%
Accomm./Food Services 3,035 4,321 7,191 4,156 297 6.4%
Management 132 222 294 162 12 5.9%
Construction 1,272 2,235 2,817 1,545 110 5.8%
Admin. and Waste Services 570 1,009 1,190 620 44 5.4%
Prof./Tech Services 1,803 2,968 3,397 1,594 114 4.6%
Other (ex. Public Admin.)967 1,458 1,793 826 59 4.5%
Health Care 3,489 5,176 6,388 2,900 207 4.4%
Arts/Rec.502 841 877 376 27 4.1%
Mining 16 6 27 12 1 4.1%
Wholesale Trade 618 795 944 326 23 3.1%
Manufacturing 961 1,543 1,434 473 34 2.9%
Ag./Forestry/Fishing 67 47 100 33 2 2.9%
Finance 969 1,182 1,416 446 32 2.7%
Real Estate 435 552 595 160 11 2.3%
Utilities 77 98 101 24 2 2.0%
Retail Trade 4,826 5,585 6,148 1,322 94 1.7%
Education 4,486 5,121 5,570 1,084 77 1.6%
Public Admin.1,389 1,403 1,638 249 18 1.2%
Transport./Warehousing 514 631 570 56 4 0.7%
Information 411 545 417 6 0 0.1%
Total 26,538 35,746 42,983 16,446 1,175 3.5%
Source: Jobs EQ; Economic & Planning Systems
2010-2024
71
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 36 Employment Trends
Between 2010 and 2024 Bozeman added 16,446 jobs, growing at an average
annual rate of 3.5 percent. One of the fastest growing industries in Bozeman was
Professional and Technical Services, which added 1,594 jobs and grew at an
average annual rate of 4.6 percent. By annual percentage growth, it was the fifth
fastest growing industry (excluding unclassified). Bozeman’s expanding
professional services sector reflects the transition from a retail and
accommodations-based economy to a service-oriented one. Over the same period,
the Accommodation and Food Services and Health Care industries added the most
jobs, growing by 4,156 and 2,900 jobs, respectively (Figure 17). Together, these
two industries accounted for 42.9 percent of job growth.
Figure 17. Bozeman Change in Employment by NAICS, 2010-2024
72
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 37 Employment Trends
The average annual wage in Bozeman was $64,102 in 2024, up from $34,200 in
2010, representing a 4.6 percent average annual increase (Table 23). The
Professional Services, Finance, Utilities, and Information industries paid the
highest wages in 2024, with each averaging over $100,000. The Accommodation
and Food Services and Information sectors experienced the highest average annual
wage growth, increasing by 7.3 percent and 6.8 percent, respectively.
Table 23. Bozeman Wages by NAICS, 2010-2024
Wages 2010 2020 2024 Change Ann. # Ann. %
Bozeman
Unclassified $20,237 $58,255 $85,354 $65,117 $4,651 10.8%
Accomm./Food Services $15,104 $24,880 $40,695 $25,591 $1,828 7.3%
Information $40,082 $79,668 $100,825 $60,743 $4,339 6.8%
Real Estate $31,264 $55,845 $69,650 $38,386 $2,742 5.9%
Admin. and Waste Services $25,992 $37,900 $57,683 $31,691 $2,264 5.9%
Prof./Tech Services $54,369 $83,848 $113,790 $59,421 $4,244 5.4%
Retail Trade $22,730 $37,617 $46,769 $24,038 $1,717 5.3%
Wholesale Trade $42,963 $67,781 $88,210 $45,247 $3,232 5.3%
Construction $37,287 $58,022 $75,937 $38,650 $2,761 5.2%
Other (ex. Public Admin.)$25,448 $38,453 $51,439 $25,991 $1,857 5.2%
Finance $56,269 $90,247 $108,180 $51,911 $3,708 4.8%
Ag./Forestry/Fishing $24,249 $37,159 $45,837 $21,588 $1,542 4.7%
Transport./Warehousing $30,194 $42,937 $54,453 $24,259 $1,733 4.3%
Manufacturing $37,305 $52,463 $66,981 $29,677 $2,120 4.3%
Public Admin.$44,321 $60,099 $78,665 $34,344 $2,453 4.2%
Health Care $38,389 $55,723 $63,357 $24,969 $1,783 3.6%
Mining $60,212 $85,233 $98,378 $38,166 $2,726 3.6%
Management $50,089 $74,969 $81,555 $31,466 $2,248 3.5%
Education $36,330 $49,872 $57,383 $21,052 $1,504 3.3%
Arts/Rec.$23,942 $30,559 $34,768 $10,825 $773 2.7%
Utilities $76,453 $99,466 $103,853 $27,400 $1,957 2.2%
Total $34,200 $51,113 $64,102 $29,902 $2,136 4.6%
Source: Jobs EQ; Economic & Planning Systems
2010-2024
73
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 38 Employment Trends
The top five industries by employment in Gallatin County and Bozeman’s total
share of such industries is shown in Figure 18. The Accommodations and Food
services and Retail Trade industries are relatively evenly split between the City
and County. The Construction industry is concentrated in the County; of the 8,080
employees in Construction, 65.1 percent (5,264) are in the County. Jobs in the
Health Care and Education industries are clustered in the City. For those
industries, 83.2 percent and 75.1 percent of County-wide jobs are located in
Bozeman.
Figure 18. Top 5 Employment Industries in Gallatin County, 2024
Impact of AI
The impact of artificial intelligence on Bozeman’s economy is hard to quantify,
however, some industries may be more exposed to the effects of AI than others.
The Information industry, which includes subsectors such as Software Publishers
and Data Processing Services, may be at risk due to advances in AI. In addition, the
Professional Services industry, one of Bozeman’s fastest growing sectors, may also
be disproportionately exposed. The Professional Services industry includes
subsectors such as Legal Services, Accounting Services, and Computer Services.
74
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 39 Employment Trends
Industry Trends by Location
In 2010, 62.5 percent of Gallatin County employees worked within Bozeman city
limits (Table 24). In 2024, 58.7 percent worked within city limits, a 3.7 percentage
point decrease. The annual job growth rate for Gallatin County has outpaced
growth in Bozeman by 0.5 percentage points since 2010, thus a decreasing share of
county jobs are within the city. Of the 21 2-digit NAICS industries, 18 lost a portion
of total employment share to the County. The Information and Real Estate
industries have seen the largest share of employment lost to the County, with a
decrease of14.1 percentage points and 11.4 percentage points in the City,
respectively. Only the Accommodation and Food Services, Mining, and
Professional Services industries became more concentrated in Bozeman from
2010 to 2024.
Table 24. Percent of Gallatin County Employees by NAICS in Bozeman, 2010-2024
Employment 2010 2020 2024 Change
% of Employees in Bozeman
Accomm./Food Services 57.0% 62.5% 62.7% 5.6%
Mining 7.8% 3.4% 12.8% 5.1%
Prof./Tech Services 58.2% 61.4% 61.6% 3.4%
Education 75.5% 74.9% 75.1% -0.4%
Finance 73.9% 72.1% 72.8% -1.0%
Health Care 85.1% 85.2% 83.2% -2.0%
Other (ex. Public Admin.)65.7% 62.8% 63.5% -2.2%
Arts/Rec.40.1% 57.3% 37.8% -2.3%
Utilities 65.3% 65.6% 62.8% -2.5%
Construction 37.4% 34.5% 34.9% -2.5%
Management 93.5% 95.3% 90.9% -2.6%
Manufacturing 42.8% 42.9% 40.1% -2.8%
Public Admin.80.0% 75.2% 77.0% -3.0%
Ag./Forestry/Fishing 13.9% 6.7% 10.7% -3.2%
Wholesale Trade 45.8% 43.7% 40.4% -5.4%
Admin. and Waste Services 47.2% 44.5% 40.8% -6.4%
Unclassified 53.3% 46.2% 45.8% -7.5%
Transport./Warehousing 44.8% 41.2% 36.5% -8.3%
Retail Trade 73.7% 68.2% 65.4% -8.3%
Real Estate 50.8% 46.2% 39.5% -11.4%
Information 73.5% 78.0% 59.4% -14.1%
Total 62.5% 60.6% 58.7%-3.7%
Source: Jobs EQ; Economic & Planning Systems
2010-2024Bozeman
75
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 40 Market Trends
4. Market Trends
This chapter describes the recent market trends for Multi-Household and office
product types in Gallatin County. This includes an analysis of inventory, rental
rates, and vacancy.
Multi-Household Market Trends
Gallatin County had 11,805 and Bozeman had 9,796 Multi-Household housing
units as of Q2 2025 (Table 25). Since 2010, the County added 6,627 Multi-
Household units corresponding to a 5.6 percent annual average growth rate.
Meanwhile, the City added 5,900 Multi-Household units, which equates to a 6.3
percent annual average growth rate. As of Q2 2025, 83.0 percent of units are in
Bozeman, 7.8 percentage points higher than 2010.
Table 25. Multi-Household Inventory (Units), 2010-2025 Q2
2010 2015 2020 2025
Description 2010 2015 2020 2025 Q2 Change Ann. # Ann. %
Inventory (Units)
Bozeman 3,896 4,386 5,833 9,796 5,900 393 6.3%
Gallatin County 5,178 5,681 7,168 11,805 6,627 442 5.6%
Bozeman % of G.C.75.2% 77.2% 81.4% 83.0%
Source: CoStar; Economic & Planning Systems
2010-2025 Q2
76
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 41 Market Trends
In Bozeman, the average Multi-Household effective rent is $2,150 per month as of
Q2 2025. Effective rent is representative of the average rent paid over the term by
a tenant adjusted downward for concessions paid for by the landlord (e.g., free
month rent, moving expenses, etc.). Average effective rent per unit peaked in 2022
and has since declined (Figure 19).
In recent years, the gap between average effective rent per unit and average asking
rent per unit has widened. In Q2 2025, the gap between average effective rent per
unit and average asking rent per unit was $44. In 2022, when rental rates peaked,
the gap was $17. Overall, decreasing rental rates could be tied to several market
factors including deliveries, growth trends, and regional market conditions.
Figure 19. Bozeman Multi-Household Average Rent per Unit, 2010-2025 Q2
77
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 42 Market Trends
Bozeman added 1,324 Multi-Household units in 2024, the last full year with data
(Figure 20). That marked a third straight year of increasing unit deliveries,
beginning in 2022. Vacancy rates trend positively with unit deliveries as units are
often vacant for some time after delivery. As a result, the Multi-Household vacancy
rate has increased year-over-year with delivered units. Based on CoStar data, the
vacancy rate was 20.0 percent as of Q2 2025.
Figure 20. Gallatin County Multi-Household Vacancy Rate and Deliveries (Units), 2010-2025 Q2
78
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 43 Market Trends
Office Trends
Bozeman had 3.9 million square feet of office space compared to 4.3 million square
feet in Gallatin County as of Q2 2025 (Table 26). Since 2010, Bozeman has added
1.2 million compared to 1.3 million square feet in the County. Bozeman and
Gallatin County have increased their inventory at an annual average rate of 2.4
percent during this period.
Table 26. Office Inventory (Sq. Ft.), 2010-2025 Q2
In 2025 Q2, gross rent was $35.18 per square foot in the City and $34.43 per
square foot in Gallatin County (Figure 21). Rental rates have been growing
consistently since 2010, increasing by approximately $23 per square foot, or
approximately a 191.7 percent increase between 2010 and 2024.
Figure 21. Office Gross Rent per Sq. Ft., 2010-2025 Q2
In Q2 2025, Bozeman’s office vacancy rate was 4.8 percent and the County’s was
6.6 percent (Figure 22). Both current vacancy rates are the highest in the last
fifteen years. In addition, the gap between the current vacancy rate in Bozeman
and Gallatin County is the highest in the last fifteen years. This gap is 1.8
percentage points.
2010 2010 2020 2025
Description 2010 2015 2020 2025 Q2 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Inventory (Sq. Ft.)
Bozeman 2,694,597 2,810,740 3,643,722 3,865,720 1,171,123 78,075 2.4%
Gallatin County 2,985,746 3,181,264 4,047,793 4,269,791 1,284,045 85,603 2.4%
Bozeman % of Gallatin County 90.2% 88.4% 90.0% 90.5%
Source: CoStar; Economic & Planning Systems
Z \Sh d\P j t \DEN\233073 B MT 2025Q2 M k t U d t \D t \[233073 C i l R l E t t 6 23 2025 l ]T Offi S
2010-2025 Q2
79
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 44 Market Trends
Figure 22. Office Vacancy Rates, 2010-2025 Q2
Remote Workers
Remote work peaked in 2020 and 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic altering
work patterns (Figure 23). Since then, the share of workers working remotely has
decreased, however it remains above pre-pandemic levels. As of 2023, 14.9
percent of Gallatin County workers work remotely. Four Corners CDP has the
highest rate of remote work with 17.3 percent of remote workers. This is followed
by Bozeman at 15.0 percent, and Manhattan at 14.5 percent. Communities such as
Belgrade and Three Forks have marginally lower rates (9.4 percent and 9.1
percent, respectively).
Figure 23. Office Remote Worker Trends 2010-2023
80
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 45 Baseline 20-Year Forecast
5. Baseline 20-Year Forecast
This chapter outlines a baseline 20-year forecast for employment, population, and
housing demand within Gallatin County. The projection uses employment growth
as a basis to determine population growth and housing demand.
Employment Forecast
The baseline employment forecast is constructed by projecting covered jobs (wage
and salary jobs “covered” by unemployment insurance) with a year-over-year
growth rate of 3.0 percent that tapers down to 1.5 percent over a twenty-year
period (Table 27). QCEW covered jobs excludes sole proprietors and includes
multiple job holders. To account for this, a constant 20.0 percent proprietor factor,
based on Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) data, is added to the number of
covered employees resulting in total jobs. Multiple job holders and in-commuters
are estimated with constant 8.3 percent and 6.0 percent factors derived from
Census data. The multiple job holder and in-commuter counts are subtracted from
total jobs to get the number of employees living and working in Gallatin County.
As shown, the model projects the number of employees living and working in
Gallatin County to increase by 38,400 workers between 2025 and 2045, or an
average of 1,920 per year. This total employment increase represents 49.2 percent
of the total estimated employees in 2025.
Table 27. Baseline Employment Forecast 2025-2045
2024 Base Year
Gallatin County Factor Estimate 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Growth Rate 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.5%
Total Covered Jobs 73,200 75,400 84,400 95,100 104,400 112,500 37,100 1,855 2.0%
Plus Proprietors 20.0%14,600 15,100 16,900 19,000 20,900 22,500 7,400 370 2.0%
Total Jobs 87,800 90,500 101,300 114,100 125,300 135,000 44,500 2,225 2.0%
Less Multiple Job Holders 8.3%-7,300 -7,500 -8,400 -9,500 -10,400 -11,200 -3,700 -185 2.0%
Total Employees 80,500 83,000 92,900 104,600 114,900 123,800 40,800 2,040 2.0%
Less In-Commuters 6.0%-5,300 -5,000 -5,600 -6,300 -6,900 -7,400 -2,400 -120 2.0%
Employees Living/Working in G.C.75,200 78,000 87,300 98,300 108,000 116,400 38,400 1,920 2.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
81
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 46 Baseline 20-Year Forecast
Population Forecast
The population forecast connects employment growth to population growth using
an employment to population ratio constructed by EPS (Table 28). Typically, the
employment to population ratio is expressed as the ratio of total employment to
the population over the age of sixteen. The employment to population ratio uses
the total population as the denominator, thus the factor ratio is lower than the
Census or BLS estimate but allows employment to be converted into total
population as the labor force participation rate only includes people in the labor
force 16 and older.
Over the twenty-year forecast period, Gallatin County is expected to add 64,000
residents, or 3,200 residents per year. This total population increase represents
49.2 percent of the total estimated population in 2025.
Table 28. Baseline Population Forecast 2025-2045
Base Year
Gallatin County Factor 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Total Employees 75,200 78,000 87,300 98,300 108,000 116,400 38,400 1,920 2.0%
Employment to Population Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60
Total Population 125,300 130,000 145,500 163,800 180,000 194,000 64,000 3,200 2.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
82
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 47 Baseline 20-Year Forecast
Service Population
Service population represents the total residential population plus the total daily
in-commuters into Gallatin County. In Gallatin County, 6.0 percent of the total
employees in-commute from outside of Gallatin County (Table 29). In 2024, this
represents 2,300 people, resulting in an estimated service population of 132,300
people. By 2045, Gallatin County is forecast to have a service population of
197,500 people, with a total of 3,500 in-commuters. This information can be useful
to emergency response services and other services that serve residents and non-
residents.
Table 29. Baseline Service Population Forecast 2025-2045
Base Year
Gallatin County 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Total Population 125,300 130,000 145,500 163,800 180,000 194,000 64,000 3,200 2.0%
Total Employees 75,200 78,000 87,300 98,300 108,000 116,400 38,400 1,920 2.0%
In-Commuters 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%
In-Commuters Weight 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0%
In-Commuters Impact 2,300 2,300 2,600 2,900 3,200 3,500 1,200 60 2.1%
Total Service Population 127,600 132,300 148,100 166,700 183,200 197,500 65,200 3,260 2.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
83
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 48 Baseline 20-Year Forecast
Population by Subareas
The 2024 share of Gallatin County population by area was used to allocate
population to the relevant subareas. This was held constant throughout the
baseline model. Over the forecast period, Bozeman, which accounted for 45.0
percent of County population in 2024, is forecasted to grow to 87,400 residents by
2045 (Table 30). A total of 28,800 residents are forecast to move into the city
during this period. This is followed by Unincorporated Gallatin County, which is
forecast to gain 22,800 residents, and Belgrade, which is forecast to gain 5,900
residents during the forecast period.
Table 30. Baseline Population Forecast, Subareas 2025-2045
Base Year
Areas 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
% of County
Belgrade 9.3% 9.3% 9.3% 9.3% 9.3% 9.3%
Big Sky CDP 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0%
Bozeman 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0%
Four Corners CDP 4.6% 4.6% 4.6% 4.6% 4.6% 4.6%
Manhattan 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8%
Three Forks 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7%
Uninc./Remainder 35.7%35.7%35.7%35.7%35.7%35.7%
Total (Gallatin County)100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Population
Belgrade 11,700 12,200 13,600 15,300 16,800 18,100 5,900 295 2.0%
Big Sky CDP 2,400 2,500 2,800 3,200 3,500 3,800 1,300 65 2.1%
Bozeman 56,400 58,600 65,500 73,800 81,100 87,400 28,800 1,440 2.0%
Four Corners CDP 5,700 5,900 6,600 7,500 8,200 8,800 2,900 145 2.0%
Manhattan 2,200 2,300 2,600 2,900 3,200 3,400 1,100 55 2.0%
Three Forks 2,100 2,200 2,400 2,700 3,000 3,200 1,000 50 1.9%
Uninc./Remainder 44,700 46,400 51,900 58,400 64,200 69,200 22,800 1,140 2.0%
Total (Gallatin County)125,300 130,000 145,500 163,800 180,000 194,000 64,000 3,200 2.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
84
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 49 Baseline 20-Year Forecast
Housing Demand Forecast
The housing demand forecast connects population growth to housing demand.
Using a constant household size factor of 2.40 people per household the number of
occupied housing units is estimated (Table 31). Further adjustments are made for
market vacancies and second homes using constant factors for each. When added
to occupied housing units, the resulting sum is an estimate for total housing unit
demand.
Gallatin County
Housing unit demand in the baseline model is projected to increase consistently
with employment and population growth. In Gallatin County, there is expected to
be demand for 29,300 housing units from 2025 to 2045. Of the total units for
2045, 4.4 percent, or 3,900 units, are vacant, and 4.8 percent, or 4,200 units, are
part-time residences. The remainder (80,800 units) are forecast to be occupied
permanently.
Table 31. Baseline Housing Demand Forecast, Gallatin County
Triangle Area
The housing unit demand forecast for the Triangle area follows the same
methodology as Gallatin County. The model factors are adjusted to reflect the
unique demographic and market conditions in each of the Triangle subareas (Table
32). By the forecast sunset year, Bozeman is expected to have additional demand
for 13,100 occupied housing units, which represents 79.4 percent of the occupied
housing demand over the twenty-year forecast period. From 2025 to 2045,
Belgrade is forecast to have demand for an additional 2,400 housing units, bringing
its demand from 5,100 in 2025 to 7,500 units in 2045. Meanwhile, Four Corners
CDP has the lowest housing demand with a total of 1,000 new housing units in
demand over the twenty-year period.
Base Year
Gallatin County 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Average HH Size 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40
Market Vacancy 4.8%4.8% 4.8% 4.8% 4.8% 4.8%
Part-Time Residence Adjustment 5.2%5.2% 5.2% 5.2% 5.2% 5.2%
Gallatin County Population 125,300 130,000 145,500 163,800 180,000 194,000 64,000 3,200 2.0%
Average HH Size 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40
Occupied Housing Units 52,200 54,200 60,600 68,300 75,000 80,800 26,600 1,330 2.0%
Market Vacancy 2,500 2,600 2,900 3,300 3,600 3,900 1,300 65 2.0%
Part-Time Residence Adjustment 2,700 2,800 3,200 3,600 3,900 4,200 1,400 70 2.0%
Total Housing Unit Demand 57,400 59,600 66,700 75,200 82,500 88,900 29,300 1,465 2.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z \Sh d\P j t \DEN\253073 B MT P l ti d H i F t\M d l \[253073 E l t d H i D d 8 13 25 l ]T G ll ti HU F t
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
85
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 50 Baseline 20-Year Forecast
Table 32. Baseline Housing Demand Forecast, The Triangle Area 2025-2045
Base Year
Areas 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Average Household Size
Belgrade 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41
Bozeman 2.19 2.19 2.19 2.19 2.19 2.19
Four Corners CDP 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73
Market Vacancy
Belgrade 2.70% 2.70% 2.70% 2.70% 2.70% 2.70%
Bozeman 5.02% 5.02% 5.02% 5.02% 5.02% 5.02%
Four Corners CDP 3.32% 3.32% 3.32% 3.32% 3.32% 3.32%
Second Homes
Belgrade 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Bozeman 1.88% 1.88% 1.88% 1.88% 1.88% 1.88%
Four Corners CDP 3.91% 3.91% 3.91% 3.91% 3.91% 3.91%
Population
Belgrade 11,700 12,200 13,600 15,300 16,800 18,100 5,900 295 2.0%
Bozeman 56,400 58,600 65,500 73,800 81,100 87,400 28,800 1,440 2.0%
Four Corners CDP 5,700 5,900 6,600 7,500 8,200 8,800 2,900 145 2.0%
Triangle Area 73,800 76,700 85,700 96,600 106,100 114,300 37,600 1,880 2.0%
Occupied Housing Units
Belgrade 4,900 5,100 5,600 6,300 7,000 7,500 2,400 120 1.9%
Bozeman 25,800 26,800 29,900 33,700 37,000 39,900 13,100 655 2.0%
Four Corners CDP 2,100 2,200 2,400 2,700 3,000 3,200 1,000 50 1.9%
Triangle Area 32,800 34,100 37,900 42,700 47,000 50,600 16,500 825 2.0%
Vacancy Adjustment
Belgrade 100 100 200 200 200 200 100 5 3.5%
Bozeman 1,300 1,300 1,500 1,700 1,900 2,000 700 35 2.2%
Four Corners CDP 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 0 0.0%
Triangle Area 1,500 1,500 1,800 2,000 2,200 2,300 800 40 2.2%
Second Home Adjustment
Belgrade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---
Bozeman 500 500 600 600 700 800 300 15 2.4%
Four Corners CDP 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 0 0.0%
Triangle Area 600 600 700 700 800 900 300 15 2.0%
Total Housing Unit Demand
Belgrade 5,000 5,200 5,800 6,500 7,200 7,700 2,500 125 2.0%
Bozeman 27,600 28,600 32,000 36,000 39,600 42,700 14,100 705 2.0%
Four Corners CDP 2,300 2,400 2,600 2,900 3,200 3,400 1,000 50 1.8%
Triangle Area 34,900 36,200 40,400 45,400 50,000 53,800 17,600 880 2.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
86
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 51 Amenity Driven 20-Year Forecast
6. Amenity Driven 20-Year Forecast
This chapter outlines the Amenity-Driven forecast for housing demand. In this
scenario, the share of part-time residences, or second homes, is increased from five
percent to ten percent over the 20-year period. In addition, the in-commuter factor
is increased from six percent to twelve percent over the twenty-year period.
Employment Forecast
The employment forecast for the Amenity-Driven model is constructed in a
comparable manner to the Baseline forecast (Table 33). Covered employment is
factored into total jobs using the same constant sole proprietor factor. The multiple
job holders’ factor is equivalent to the Baseline forecast and is also held constant
throughout the forecast period. The commuting factor is adjusted to reflect a
scenario where in-commuting increases from six percent to twelve percent over
the twenty-year period.
As shown below, the model projects the number of employees living and working in
Gallatin County to increase by 30,900 workers between 2025 and 2045, or an
average of 1,545 per year. This is an increase of 39.6 percent of total employees
living and working in Gallatin County.
Table 33. Amenity-Driven Employment Forecast, 2025-2045
2024 Base Year
Gallatin County Factor Estimate 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Growth Rate 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.5%
In-Commuters 6.0% 7.5% 9.0% 10.5% 12.0%
Total Covered Jobs 73,200 75,400 84,400 95,100 104,400 112,500 37,100 1,855 2.0%
Plus Proprietors 20.0%14,600 15,100 16,900 19,000 20,900 22,500 7,400 370 2.0%
Total Jobs 87,800 90,500 101,300 114,100 125,300 135,000 44,500 2,225 2.0%
Less Multiple Job Holders 8.3%-7,300 -7,500 -8,400 -9,500 -10,400 -11,200 -3,700 -185 2.0%
Total Employees 80,500 83,000 92,900 104,600 114,900 123,800 40,800 2,040 2.0%
Less In-Commuters -5,300 -5,000 -7,000 -9,400 -12,100 -14,900 -9,900 -495 5.6%
Tot. Employees Living/Working in GC 75,200 78,000 85,900 95,200 102,800 108,900 30,900 1,545 1.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Forecast 2025-2045 Change
87
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 52 Amenity Driven 20-Year Forecast
Population Forecast
The population forecast connects employment growth to population growth using
an employment to population ratio constructed by EPS (Table 34). Over the
twenty-year forecast period, Gallatin County is expected to add 51,500 residents,
or 2,575 residents per year. This total population growth represents 39.6 percent
of the 2025 estimated population. Compared to the Baseline Scenario, Gallatin
County is forecast to grow by 12,500 fewer residents due to less people living and
working in Gallatin County, based on increased in-commuting employees over the
twenty-year period.
Table 34. Amenity-Driven Population Forecast, 2025-2045
Service Population
Service population represents the total residential population plus the total daily
in-commuters into Gallatin County. Currently, 6.0 percent of the total employees
in-commute from outside of Gallatin County (Table 35). This represents 2,300
people, resulting in an estimated service population of 132,300 people. By 2045,
the in-commuter rate doubled to 12.0 percent resulting in a forecast service
population of 188,000 people, with a total of 6,500 in-commuters. The total
number of in-commuters is nearly doubled compared to the Baseline forecast due
to an increase in the in-commuting factor. In the Baseline scenario, a total of 3,500
in-commuters are forecasted by 2045. In this scenario, 6,500 in-commuters are
forecasted by 2045.
Table 35. Amenity-Driven Service Population Forecast 2025-2045
Base Year
Gallatin County Factor 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Total Employees 75,200 78,000 85,900 95,200 102,800 108,900 30,900 1,545 1.7%
Employment to Population Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60
Total Population 125,300 130,000 143,200 158,700 171,300 181,500 51,500 2,575 1.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
Base Year
Gallatin County 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Total Population 125,300 130,000 143,200 158,700 171,300 181,500 51,500 2,575 1.7%
Total Employees 75,200 78,000 85,900 95,200 102,800 108,900 30,900 1,545 1.7%
In-Commuters 6.0% 6.0% 7.5% 9.0% 10.5% 12.0%
In-Commuters Weight 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0%
In-Commuters Impact 2,300 2,300 3,200 4,300 5,400 6,500 4,200 210 5.3%
Total Service Population 127,600 132,300 146,400 163,000 176,700 188,000 55,700 2,785 1.8%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
88
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 53 Amenity Driven 20-Year Forecast
Population by Subareas
The 2024 share of Gallatin County population by area was used to allocate
population to the relevant subareas. This was held constant throughout the
Amenity-Driven model. Over the forecast period, Bozeman, which accounted for
45.0 percent of County population in 2024, is forecasted to grow to 81,800
residents by 2045 (Table 36). A total of 23,200 residents are forecast to move into
the city during this period. This is followed by Unincorporated Gallatin County,
which is forecast to gain 18,400 residents, and Belgrade, which is forecast to gain
4,800 residents during the forecast period.
Compared to the Baseline scenario, Gallatin County is forecast to add 12,500
fewer residents. Bozeman, which added 28,800 residents in the baseline model,
projects to add 23,200 residents, a difference of 5,600 residents. The increase in
the County commuting factor from 6.0 percent to 12.0 percent drives population
growth out of Gallatin County and its subareas.
Table 36. Amenity-Driven Population Forecast, Subareas, 2025-2045
Base Year
Areas 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Belgrade 9.3% 9.3% 9.3% 9.3% 9.3% 9.3%
Big Sky CDP 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0%
Bozeman 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0%
Four Corners CDP 4.6% 4.6% 4.6% 4.6% 4.6% 4.6%
Manhattan 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8%
Three Forks 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7%
Uninc./Remainder 35.7% 35.7% 35.7% 35.7% 35.7% 35.7%
Total (Gallatin County)100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Belgrade 11,700 12,200 13,400 14,800 16,000 17,000 4,800 240 1.7%
Big Sky CDP 2,400 2,500 2,800 3,100 3,300 3,500 1,000 50 1.7%
Bozeman 56,400 58,600 64,500 71,500 77,200 81,800 23,200 1,160 1.7%
Four Corners CDP 5,700 5,900 6,500 7,200 7,800 8,300 2,400 120 1.7%
Manhattan 2,200 2,300 2,500 2,800 3,000 3,200 900 45 1.7%
Three Forks 2,100 2,200 2,400 2,600 2,900 3,000 800 40 1.6%
Uninc./Remainder 44,700 46,400 51,100 56,600 61,100 64,800 18,400 920 1.7%
Total (Gallatin County)125,300 130,000 143,200 158,700 171,300 181,500 51,500 2,575 1.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
89
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 54 Amenity Driven 20-Year Forecast
Housing Demand Forecast
The housing demand forecast connects population growth to housing unit demand.
Using a constant household size factor of 2.40 people per household the number of
occupied housing units is estimated (Table 37). Further adjustments are made for
market vacancies using a constant factor. The part-time residence adjustment is
adjusted to reflect a scenario where the part-time residence rate increases from
five percent to ten percent over the forecast period. When added to occupied
housing units, the resulting sum is an estimate for total housing unit demand.
Gallatin County
In Gallatin County, there is expected to be demand for 27,400 housing units from
2025 to 2045, bringing the total demand to 87,000 units (Table 37). Of this, 4.4
percent, or 3,800 units, are vacant, and 8.7 percent, or 7,600 units, are part-time
residences. The remainder, 75,600 units, are forecast to be occupied permanently.
Compared to the Baseline model, the higher part-time residence rate results in
demand for 3,400 additional part-time residences. Additionally, the increase in in-
commuting employees results in demand for 5,200 fewer occupied housing units
and 2,400 fewer total housing units.
Table 37. Amenity-Driven Housing Unit Demand Forecast, 2025-2045
Triangle Area
The housing unit demand forecast for the Triangle area follows the same
methodology as Gallatin County. The model factors are adjusted to reflect the
unique demographic and market conditions in each of the Triangle subareas (Table
38). For the Amenity-Driven forecast, the part-time residence factor is gradually
increased over the twenty-year period based on geography. This is done to
represent an increase in second homes within this scenario. For Belgrade, the part-
time residence factor is estimated as the census estimate for part-time residences
was zero percent in 2023.
Base Year
Gallatin County 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Average HH Size 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40
Market Vacancy 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%
Part-Time Residence Adjustment 5.0% 5.0% 6.3% 7.5% 8.8% 10.0%
Gallatin County Population 125,300 130,000 143,200 158,700 171,300 181,500 51,500 2,575 1.7%
Average HH Size 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40
Occupied Housing Units 52,200 54,200 59,700 66,100 71,400 75,600 21,400 1,070 1.7%
Market Vacancy 2,600 2,700 3,000 3,300 3,600 3,800 1,100 55 1.7%
Part-Time Residence Adjustment 2,600 2,700 3,700 5,000 6,200 7,600 4,900 245 5.3%
Total Housing Unit Demand 57,400 59,600 66,400 74,400 81,200 87,000 27,400 1,370 1.9%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
90
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 55 Amenity Driven 20-Year Forecast
By the forecast sunset year, Bozeman is expected to have additional demand for
10,600 occupied housing units, which represents 79.1 percent of the change in
total housing demand over the twenty-year forecast period. From 2025 to 2045,
Belgrade is forecast to have demand for an additional 2,000 occupied housing
units, bringing its demand from 5,100 units in 2025 to 7,100 units in 2045.
Meanwhile, Four Corners CDP has the lowest occupied housing unit demand with
a total of 800 new occupied housing units in demand over the twenty-year period.
Each subarea that comprises the Triangle Area is expected to lose housing unit
demand and gain part-time residence demand compared to the baseline forecast.
Occupied housing unit demand falls by 3,100 units and part-time residence
demand increases by 2,800 units. Total housing unit demand is relatively
unchanged, falling by 400 units as losses in occupied housing unit demand are
made up for by a rise in demand for second homes.
91
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 56 Amenity Driven 20-Year Forecast
Table 38. Amenity-Driven Housing Unit Demand Forecast, The Triangle Area, 2025-2045
Base Year
Areas 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Average Household Size
Belgrade 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41
Bozeman 2.19 2.19 2.19 2.19 2.19 2.19
Four Corners CDP 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73
Market Vacancy
Belgrade 2.70% 2.70% 2.70% 2.70% 2.70% 2.70%
Bozeman 5.02% 5.02% 5.02% 5.02% 5.02% 5.02%
Four Corners CDP 3.32% 3.32% 3.32% 3.32% 3.32% 3.32%
Second Homes
Belgrade 0.00% 0.00% 1.79% 3.57% 5.36% 7.14%
Bozeman 1.88% 1.88% 3.23% 4.57% 5.92% 7.27%
Four Corners CDP 3.91% 3.91% 6.71% 9.51% 12.30% 15.10%
Population
Belgrade 11,700 12,200 13,400 14,800 16,000 17,000 4,800 240 1.7%
Bozeman 56,400 58,600 64,500 71,500 77,200 81,800 23,200 1,160 1.7%
Four Corners CDP 5,700 5,900 6,500 7,200 7,800 8,300 2,400 120 1.7%
Triangle Area 73,800 76,700 84,400 93,500 101,000 107,100 30,400 1,520 1.7%
Occupied Housing Units
Belgrade 4,900 5,100 5,600 6,100 6,600 7,100 2,000 100 1.7%
Bozeman 25,800 26,800 29,500 32,600 35,300 37,400 10,600 530 1.7%
Four Corners CDP 2,100 2,200 2,400 2,600 2,900 3,000 800 40 1.6%
Triangle Area 32,800 34,100 37,500 41,300 44,800 47,500 13,400 670 1.7%
Vacancy Adjustment
Belgrade 100 100 200 200 200 200 100 5 3.5%
Bozeman 1,300 1,300 1,500 1,600 1,800 1,900 600 30 1.9%
Four Corners CDP 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 0 0.0%
Triangle Area 1,500 1,500 1,800 1,900 2,100 2,200 700 35 1.9%
Part-Time Residence Adjustment
Belgrade 0 0 100 200 400 500 500 25 ---
Bozeman 500 500 1,000 1,500 2,100 2,700 2,200 110 8.8%
Four Corners CDP 100 100 200 200 400 500 400 20 8.4%
Triangle Area 600 600 1,300 1,900 2,900 3,700 3,100 155 9.5%
Total Housing Unit Demand
Belgrade 5,000 5,200 5,900 6,500 7,200 7,800 2,600 130 2.0%
Bozeman 27,600 28,600 32,000 35,700 39,200 42,000 13,400 670 1.9%
Four Corners CDP 2,300 2,400 2,700 2,900 3,400 3,600 1,200 60 2.0%
Triangle Area 34,900 36,200 40,600 45,100 49,800 53,400 17,200 860 2.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 Change
92
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 57 Constrained City 20-Year Forecast
7. Constrained City 20-Year Forecast
This chapter outlines the Constrained City forecast. In this scenario, Bozeman
captures a decreasing share of Gallatin County population. Starting at 50 percent
growth capture and tapering down to 26 percent by 2045. In addition, the Gallatin
County in-commuter factor is increased from six percent to twelve percent over
the twenty-year period. As a result, Bozeman’s share of County population
decreases while the other Gallatin County subareas see accelerated population
growth.
Employment Forecast
The employment forecast for the Constrained City model is constructed the same
as the Amenity-Driven forecast (Table 39). Covered employment is factored into
total jobs using the same sole proprietor factor. The multiple job holders’ factor is
equivalent to the baseline forecast and is held constant throughout the forecast
period. The commuting factor is adjusted to reflect a scenario where in-commuting
increases from six percent to twelve percent over the twenty-year period.
As shown below, the model projects the number of employees living and working in
Gallatin County to increase by 30,900 workers between 2025 and 2045, or an
average of 1,545 per year. From 2025 to 2045, this is an increase of 39.6 percent of
total employees living and working in Gallatin County.
Table 39. Constrained City Employment Forecast 2025-2045
2024 Base Year
Gallatin County Factor Estimate 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Growth Rate 3.0%3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.5%
In-Commuters 6.0% 7.5% 9.0% 10.5% 12.0%
Total Covered Jobs 73,200 75,400 84,400 95,100 104,400 112,500 37,100 1,855 2.0%
Plus Proprietors 20.0%14,600 15,100 16,900 19,000 20,900 22,500 7,400 370 2.0%
Total Jobs 87,800 90,500 101,300 114,100 125,300 135,000 44,500 2,225 2.0%
Less Multiple Job Holders 8.3%-7,300 -7,500 -8,400 -9,500 -10,400 -11,200 -3,700 -185 2.0%
Total Employees 80,500 83,000 92,900 104,600 114,900 123,800 40,800 2,040 2.0%
Less In-Commuters 6.0%-5,300 -5,000 -7,000 -9,400 -12,100 -14,900 -9,900 -495 5.6%
Tot. Employees Living/Working in GC 75,200 78,000 85,900 95,200 102,800 108,900 30,900 1,545 1.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Forecast 2025-2045 Change
93
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 58 Constrained City 20-Year Forecast
Population Forecast
The population forecast connects employment growth to population growth using
an employment to population ratio constructed by EPS (Table 40).Over the
twenty-year forecast period, Gallatin County is expected to add 51,500 residents,
or 2,575 residents per year. This growth rate represents 39.6 percent of the 2025
estimated population. The methodology for the constrained city population
forecast is unchanged from the Amenity-Driven forecast. Compared to the
Baseline Forecast, the increase in the commuting factor results in 12,500 fewer
jobs added over the forecast period.
Table 40. Constrained City Population Forecast 2025-2045
Service Population
Service population represents the total residential population plus the total daily
in-commuters into Gallatin County. In Gallatin County, 6.0 percent of the total
employees in-commute from outside of Gallatin County (Table 41). In 2024, this
represents 2,300 people, resulting in an estimated service population of 127,600
people. By 2045, the in-commuter adjustment is doubled to 12.0 percent resulting
in a forecast service population of 188,000 people, with a total of 6,500 in-
commuters. Compared to the Baseline scenario, the increased in-commuting factor
results in a service population decrease of 9,500 over the forecast period.
Table 41. Constrained City Service Population Forecast 2025-2045
Base Year
Gallatin County Factor 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Total Employees 75,200 78,000 85,900 95,200 102,800 108,900 30,900 1,545 1.7%
Employment to Population Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60
Total Population 125,300 130,000 143,200 158,700 171,300 181,500 51,500 2,575 1.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
Base Year
Gallatin County 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Total Population 125,300 130,000 143,200 158,700 171,300 181,500 51,500 2,575 1.7%
Total Employees 75,200 78,000 85,900 95,200 102,800 108,900 30,900 1,545 1.7%
In-Commuters 6.0% 6.0% 7.5% 9.0% 10.5% 12.0%
In-Commuters Weight 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0%
In-Commuters Impact 2,300 2,300 3,200 4,300 5,400 6,500 4,200 210 5.3%
Total Service Population 127,600 132,300 146,400 163,000 176,700 188,000 55,700 2,785 1.8%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
94
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 59 Constrained City 20-Year Forecast
Population Growth by Subareas
The Constrained City scenario forecasts population growth by subarea using a
different methodology than the Baseline and Amenity-Driven scenarios. The first
two forecast scenarios use the static 2024 ratio of subarea population to county
population to allocate growth to each subarea. In the constrained city, population
growth is allocated to each subarea using the share of Gallatin County population
growth between 2000 and 2024 (Table 42). The yearly County population growth
is assigned to each subarea by multiplying the growth capture estimate by the year
over year change in forecasted population growth. Over the twenty-year forecast
period Bozeman’s share of County growth is reduced from 49.7 percent to 26.2
percent. Simultaneously, the other subareas have increased growth capture such
that each year’s forecasted growth capture continues to sum to 100.0 percent.
Table 42. Forecasted Change in Population Growth Capture, 2025-2045
2000-2024 Growth
Gallatin County Subareas Capture Estimate 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Belgrade 9.3% 10.4% 11.6% 12.8% 14.0% 15.2%
Big Sky CDP 2.0% 2.2% 3.1% 4.0% 4.9% 5.9%
Bozeman 45.0% 49.7% 43.8% 38.0% 32.1% 26.2%
Four Corners CDP 4.6% 7.0% 7.9% 8.8% 9.7% 10.6%
Manhattan 1.8% 1.4% 2.3% 3.2% 4.0% 4.9%
Three Forks 1.7% 0.6% 1.4% 2.3% 3.2% 4.1%
Uninc./Remainder 35.7% 28.8% 29.9% 31.0% 32.0% 33.1%
Total (Gallatin County)100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Belgrade 0.24%488 347 345 251 334 -154 -8 -1.9%
Big Sky CDP 0.19%101 93 109 89 129 28 1 1.2%
Bozeman -1.18%2,338 1,315 1,025 577 576 -1,762 -88 -6.8%
Four Corners CDP 0.18%330 238 238 175 234 -96 -5 -1.7%
Manhattan 0.18%65 68 85 73 108 43 2 2.6%
Three Forks 0.18%26 43 63 58 91 65 3 6.5%
Uninc./Remainder 0.22%1,352 896 836 577 729 -623 -31 -3.0%
G.C. YoY Population Change 4,700 3,000 2,700 1,800 2,200 -2,500 -125 -3.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Share of Forecast Change 2025-2045
95
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 60 Constrained City 20-Year Forecast
The growth is then added to the base year population estimate and each
subsequent year in the forecast (Table 43) . Over the forecast period, Bozeman is
forecasted to grow to 78,300 residents by 2045. A total of 19,600 residents are
forecast to move into the city during this period. This is followed by
Unincorporated Gallatin County, which is forecast to gain 15,800 residents, and
Belgrade, which is forecast to gain 6,700 residents during the forecast period.
Compared to the Baseline scenario, Bozeman is forecast to gain 9,200 less
residents, while the other subareas are forecast to gain 2,700 less residents, largely
due to the increased in-commuting factor. Despite gaining fewer residents over the
forecast period, the annual average growth rate for the subareas are all above that
of Bozeman, ranging from 3.0 percent to 1.5 percent average annual growth.
Table 43. Constrained City Population Forecast, Subareas 2025-2045
As a result of Bozeman’s declining share of County-wide population growth
capture, by 2045 the City is expected to make up 43.1 percent of Gallatin County,
2.1 percentage points less than at the start of the forecast period (Table 44). The
other subareas are forecast to proportionally increase their share of County
population.
Table 44. Share of County Population by Subarea, 2025-2045
2000-2024 Growth
Gallatin County Subareas Capture Estimate 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Belgrade 11,700 12,200 13,700 15,600 17,400 18,900 6,700 335 2.2%
Big Sky CDP 2,400 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 2,000 100 3.0%
Bozeman 56,400 58,700 64,800 71,000 75,400 78,300 19,600 980 1.5%
Four Corners CDP 5,700 6,000 7,000 8,400 9,600 10,600 4,600 230 2.9%
Manhattan 2,200 2,300 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 1,700 85 2.8%
Three Forks 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,600 3,100 3,600 1,500 75 2.7%
Uninc./Remainder 44,700 46,100 49,900 54,600 58,600 61,900 15,800 790 1.5%
Total (Gallatin County)125,200 129,900 143,000 158,700 171,600 181,800 51,900 2,595 1.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Forecast 2025-2045
2024 Base Year Growth
Gallatin County Subareas Capture Estimate 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Belgrade 9.3% 9.4% 9.6% 9.8% 10.1% 10.4%
Big Sky CDP 1.9% 1.9% 2.1% 2.2% 2.3% 2.5%
Bozeman 45.0% 45.2% 45.3% 44.7% 43.9% 43.1%
Four Corners CDP 4.6% 4.6% 4.9% 5.3% 5.6% 5.8%
Manhattan 1.8% 1.8% 1.7% 1.9% 2.0% 2.2%
Three Forks 1.7% 1.6% 1.5% 1.6% 1.8% 2.0%
Uninc./Remainder 35.7% 35.5% 34.9% 34.4% 34.1% 34.0%
Total (Gallatin County)100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Share of Forecast Pop
96
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 61 Constrained City 20-Year Forecast
Housing Demand Forecast
The housing demand forecast connects population growth to housing demand.
Using a constant household size factor of 2.40 people per household, the number
of occupied housing units is estimated (Table 45). No adjustments are made to the
market vacancy and part-time residence rates, which are held constant throughout
the forecast period.
Gallatin County
In Gallatin County, there is expected to be demand for an additional 22,800
housing units from 2025 to 2045, bringing the total demand to 83,200 (Table 45).
Of this, 4.7 percent, or 3,800 units, are vacant, and 4.7 percent, or 3,800 units, are
part-time residences. The remainder, 75,600 units, are forecast to be occupied
permanently. Compared to the Baseline model, the increase in the in-commuter
rate results in demand for 5,700 fewer total housing units and 5,200 fewer
occupied housing units. Further adjustments are made for market vacancies and
part-time residences using a constant factor.
Table 45. Constrained City Housing Unit Demand Forecast 2025-2045
Triangle Area
The housing unit demand forecast for the Triangle area follows the same
methodology as Gallatin County. The model factors are adjusted to reflect the
unique demographic and market conditions in each of the Triangle subareas (Table
46). By the forecast sunset year, Bozeman is expected to have additional demand
for 9,000 occupied housing units, which represents 67.1 percent of the total
occupied housing demand in the Triangle Area—a rate that is much lower than the
first two scenarios.
From 2025 to 2045, Belgrade is forecast to have demand for an additional 2,700
occupied housing units. Meanwhile, Four Corners CDP has the lowest occupied
housing demand with a total of 1,700 occupied housing units in demand over the
twenty-year period. Compared to the Baseline scenario, total housing unit demand
Base Year
Gallatin County 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Average HH Size 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40
Market Vacancy 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%
Part-Time Residence Adjustment 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%
Gallatin County Population 125,300 130,000 143,200 158,700 171,300 181,500 51,500 2,575 1.7%
Occupied Housing Units 52,200 54,200 59,700 66,100 71,400 75,600 21,400 1,070 1.7%
Market Vacancy 2,600 2,700 3,000 3,300 3,600 3,800 1,100 55 1.7%
Part-Time Residence Adjustment 2,600 2,700 3,000 3,300 3,600 3,800 1,100 55 1.7%
Total Housing Unit Demand 57,400 59,600 65,700 72,700 78,600 83,200 23,600 1,180 1.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
97
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 62 Constrained City 20-Year Forecast
is forecast to decrease by 3,300 total units and 3,100 occupied units as growth in
Belgrade and Four Corners CDP accelerates. The forecast for additional housing
needs in Bozeman under the Constrained City scenario shows 4,100 fewer
occupied units and 4,400 fewer units than in the Baseline scenario.
Table 46. Constrained City Housing Unit Demand Forecast, The Triangle Area 2025-2045
Base Year
Areas 2024 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Average Household Size
Belgrade 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41
Bozeman 2.19 2.19 2.19 2.19 2.19 2.19
Four Corners CDP 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73
Market Vacancy
Belgrade 2.70% 2.70% 2.70% 2.70% 2.70% 2.70%
Bozeman 5.02% 5.02% 5.02% 5.02% 5.02% 5.02%
Four Corners CDP 3.32% 3.32% 3.32% 3.32% 3.32% 3.32%
Second Homes
Belgrade 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Bozeman 1.88% 1.88% 1.88% 1.88% 1.88% 1.88%
Four Corners CDP 3.91% 3.91% 3.91% 3.91% 3.91% 3.91%
Population
Belgrade 11,700 12,200 13,700 15,600 17,400 18,900 6,700 335 2.2%
Bozeman 56,400 58,700 64,800 71,000 75,400 78,300 19,600 980 1.5%
Four Corners CDP 5,700 6,000 7,000 8,400 9,600 10,600 4,600 230 2.9%
Triangle Area 73,800 76,900 85,500 95,000 102,400 107,800 30,900 1,545 1.7%
Occupied Housing Units
Belgrade 4,900 5,100 5,700 6,500 7,200 7,800 2,700 135 2.1%
Bozeman 25,800 26,800 29,600 32,400 34,400 35,800 9,000 450 1.5%
Four Corners CDP 2,100 2,200 2,600 3,100 3,500 3,900 1,700 85 2.9%
Triangle Area 32,800 34,100 37,900 42,000 45,100 47,500 13,400 670 1.7%
Vacancy Adjustment
Belgrade 100 100 200 200 200 200 100 5 3.5%
Bozeman 1,300 1,300 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 500 25 1.6%
Four Corners CDP 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 0 0.0%
Triangle Area 1,500 1,500 1,800 1,900 2,000 2,100 600 30 1.7%
Part-Time Residence Adjustment
Belgrade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---
Bozeman 500 500 600 600 600 700 200 10 1.7%
Four Corners CDP 100 100 100 100 100 200 100 5 3.5%
Triangle Area 600 600 700 700 700 900 300 15 2.0%
Total Housing Unit Demand
Belgrade 5,000 5,200 5,900 6,700 7,400 8,000 2,800 140 2.2%
Bozeman 27,600 28,600 31,700 34,600 36,700 38,300 9,700 485 1.5%
Four Corners CDP 2,300 2,400 2,800 3,300 3,700 4,200 1,800 90 2.8%
Triangle Area 34,900 36,200 40,400 44,600 47,800 50,500 14,300 715 1.7%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
98
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1 Constrained City 20-Year Forecast
Appendix
99
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 2 Constrained City 20-Year Forecast
Table 47. City of Belgrade Forecasts, Summary Table
Belgrade 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Jobs
Baseline 5,500 6,200 6,900 7,600 8,200 2,700 135 2.0%
Amenity Driven 5,500 6,200 6,900 7,600 8,200 2,700 135 2.0%
City Constrained 5,500 6,200 6,900 7,600 8,200 2,700 135 2.0%
Population
Baseline 12,200 13,600 15,300 16,800 18,100 5,900 295 2.0%
Amenity Driven 12,200 13,400 14,800 16,000 17,000 4,800 240 1.7%
City Constrained 12,200 13,700 15,600 17,400 18,900 6,700 335 2.2%
Total Housing Unit Demand
Baseline 5,200 5,800 6,500 7,200 7,700 2,500 125 2.0%
Amenity Driven 5,200 5,900 6,500 7,200 7,800 2,600 130 2.0%
City Constrained 5,200 5,900 6,700 7,400 8,000 2,800 140 2.2%
Occupied Housing Units
Baseline 5,100 5,600 6,300 7,000 7,500 2,400 120 1.9%
Amenity Driven 5,100 5,600 6,100 6,600 7,100 2,000 100 1.7%
City Constrained 5,100 5,700 6,500 7,200 7,800 2,700 135 2.1%
Vacant and Second Homes
Baseline 100 200 200 200 200 100 5 3.5%
Amenity Driven 100 300 400 600 700 600 30 10.2%
City Constrained 100 200 200 200 200 100 5 3.5%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Forecast 2025-2045 Change
100
2025-2045 BOZEMAN POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3 Constrained City 20-Year Forecast
Table 48. Four Corners CDP Forecasts, Summary Table
Four Corners 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Total Ann. # Ann. %
Jobs
Baseline 5,500 6,200 6,900 7,600 8,200 2,700 135 2.0%
Amenity Driven 5,500 6,200 6,900 7,600 8,200 2,700 135 2.0%
City Constrained 5,500 6,200 6,900 7,600 8,200 2,700 135 2.0%
Population
Baseline 5,900 6,600 7,500 8,200 8,800 2,900 145 2.0%
Amenity Driven 5,900 6,500 7,200 7,800 8,300 2,400 120 1.7%
City Constrained 6,000 7,000 8,400 9,600 10,600 4,600 230 2.9%
Total Housing Unit Demand
Baseline 2,400 2,600 2,900 3,200 3,400 1,000 50 1.8%
Amenity Driven 2,400 2,700 2,900 3,400 3,600 1,200 60 2.0%
City Constrained 2,400 2,800 3,300 3,700 4,200 1,800 90 2.8%
Occupied Housing Units
Baseline 2,200 2,400 2,700 3,000 3,200 1,000 50 1.9%
Amenity Driven 2,200 2,400 2,600 2,900 3,000 800 40 1.6%
City Constrained 2,200 2,600 3,100 3,500 3,900 1,700 85 2.9%
Vacant and Second Homes
Baseline 200 200 200 200 200 0 0 0.0%
Amenity Driven 200 300 300 500 600 400 20 5.6%
City Constrained 200 200 200 200 300 100 5 2.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2025-2045 ChangeForecast
101
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Community Development Board
FROM:Nick Ross, Director of Transportation and Engineering
Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Erin George, Community Development Director
Greg Sullivan, City Attorney
SUBJECT:A text amendment to Replace Division 38.610 (Wetland Regulations) Section
38.410.100 (Watercourse Setback) and Section 38.220.130 (Submittal
Materials for Regulated Activities in Wetlands), and amend Section
38.700.190 U Definitions, and Section 38.700.220 W Definitions within
Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, Application 23309
MEETING DATE:September 8, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative
RECOMMENDATION:Having reviewed and considered the staff report, draft ordinance, public
comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 23309 and move to recommend
approval of the proposed wetland and watercourse amendments.
STRATEGIC PLAN:6.6 Habitat: Work with partner organizations to identify at-risk,
environmentally sensitive parcels contribute to water quality, wildlife
corridors, and wildlife habitat.
BACKGROUND:Identification of wetlands and mitigation of impacts to wetlands that occur
during land development is subject to both federal and location regulation.
Federal Regulation pursuant to the Clean Water Act is enforced by the
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the Environmental
Protection Agency. Local regulation occurs per the City’s Unified
Development Code (UDC), Division 38.610 titled Wetland Regulations. Other
sections also interact with 38.610.
The City Commission directed an update to the local regulations be
prepared. An explanation of the reasoning and history of the project is
presented in the attached staff report.
The City wetlands code and USACE regulations have a general strategy that is
summarized by the following priorities: 1) avoid wetlands impacts, 2) where
wetlands impacts cannot be avoided, minimize wetlands impacts, and 3)
when wetlands impacts are incurred, mitigate the impacts. The City first
adopted local regulations to protect wetlands in 2003 by Ordinance 1604.
Local regulations have been in effect continuously since their initial
102
adoption. The local regulations are supplementary to federal regulations in
that historically, the City’s regulations have also regulated wetlands covered
by the Clean Water Act. But there are key differences between the historical
federal regulatory scheme and the City’s regulations.
Bozeman’s regulations for wetlands are also coordinated with our
requirements for protecting watercourses. If a wetland is located within the
required setback for a watercourse, then the setback is expanded to include
the wetland area. It should also be noted that the City’s regulations exclude
artificially created wetlands related to irrigation and stormwater facilities.
These facilities require periodic maintenance, which is likely to conflict with
wetland protection requirements.
This project replaces Division 38.610.020 (Wetland Regulations) and Section
38.410.100 (Watercourse setback) within Chapter 38 of the Bozeman
Municipal Code and amends Section 38.220.130 (Submittal materials for
regulated activities in wetlands and watercourses). The standards and
procedures restrict certain construction and land alterations, require
issuance of permits for construction and land alterations, and set necessary
administrative procedures integrated with the City’s zoning development
review procedures.
These regulations apply to any regulated activity that may impact wetlands
and/or watercourses as defined in 38.700, known prior to or discovered
through the development review process, and verified through a site-specific
wetlands or watercourse boundary determination.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None
ALTERNATIVES:1. Recommend adoption of proposed text
2. Recommend denial of the proposed text based on findings of non-
compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report;
3. Recommend modifications to the text within the ordinance.
FISCAL EFFECTS:No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds
will be changed by this Amendment.
Attachments:
Sept 8 2025 CDB Wetlands Watercourse Replacement Staff
Report.pdf
Ordinance 2025-xxx Aug 28, 2025.pdf
Report compiled on: August 28, 2025
103
Page 1 of 13 23309 Staff Report for the Replacement of the Wetland and Watercourse
Regulations
Public Hearing Dates: Community Development – Sept 8, 2025, continued from August 18, 2025
City Commission – September 9, 2025
Project Description: Replace Division 38.610 (Wetland Regulations) and Section
38.220.130 (Submittal Materials for Regulated Activities in Wetlands), and amend
Section 38.700.190 U Definitions, and Section 38.700.220 W Definitions within
Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code.
Project Location: Revision to the text is applicable City-wide.
Recommendation: Meets applicable criteria.
Recommended Community Development Board Motion: Having reviewed and considered
the staff report, draft ordinance, public comment, and all information presented, I
hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 23309 and move
to recommend adoption.
Recommended City Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report,
draft ordinance, public comment, recommendation from the Community Development
Board, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff
report for application 23309 and move to provisionally adopt the ordinance.
Report: August 27, 2025
Staff Contact: Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Nick Ross, Director of Transportation and Engineering
Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is based on the application materials submitted and public comment received to
date.
Unresolved Issues
None
Project Summary
The City of Bozeman first adopted local regulations to protect wetlands in 2003 by Ordinance
1604 [External Link, PDF]. Local regulations have been in effect continuously since initial
adoption. Mitigation of impacts to wetlands that occurs during land development is subject to
both federal and local regulation. Federal regulation pursuant to the Clean Water Act is
enforced by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Local regulation occurs
per the City’s Unified Development Code (UCD) Division 38.610, titled Wetlands
Regulations. Prior to the United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in Sackett v. 104
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 3 of 14
Environmental Protection Agency, 142 S. Ct. 1322 (2023), the USACE (and the EPA)
regulated wetlands using a broad definition that included many wetlands within the City.
The recent Sackett decision significantly narrows federal regulations of wetlands. Historically,
for most wetlands impacted by land development, the City had concurrent jurisdiction with
the federal agencies and deferred to the federal agencies for decisions on mitigation. After
Sackett, federal jurisdiction is more limited resulting in the City’s jurisdiction being the sole
authority to regulate a greater proportion of wetlands within the City. Since the recent Sackett
decision, the City continues to regulate impacts to wetlands, which federal agencies can no
longer regulate.
In response to the recent Sackett decision and the future of federal regulation of wetlands, the
City believes it must consider any new federal rule and guidance to understand how the City
could move forward regulating based solely on the UDC requirements. This includes
regulation of wetlands that were but are no longer regulated federally and how the City will
integrate its mitigation requirements (including a bank) into the ongoing federal wetland bank
program.
The City’s watercourse protection standards coordinate with wetland protection standards. The
draft improves coordination between the two different sections and materials submitted with
applications.
This project replaces Division 38.610 (Wetland Regulations) and Section 38.410.100
(Watercourse setback) within Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code and amends
Section 38.220.130 [External Link] (Submittal materials for regulated activities in wetlands
and watercourses) to reflect these changes. Definitions related to wetlands are also being
amended or created in Division 38.700.
Strategic Plan
1.2 Public Agencies Collaboration
Foster successful collaboration with other public agencies and build on these successes.
e) Enhance our relationship with State and Federal Agencies.
3.1 Public Safety
Support high quality public safety programs, emergency preparedness, facilities, and leadership.
6.5 Parks, Trails & Open Space
Support the maintenance and expansion of an interconnected system of parks, trails and open spaces.
6.6 Habitat
Work with partner organizations to identify at-risk, environmentally sensitive parcels contribute
to water quality, wildlife corridors, and wildlife habitat.
7.3 Best Practices, Creativity, & Foresight
c) Improve Departmental Collaboration – Identify opportunities to improve collaboration
between City departments and create subgroups on communications, community interactions,
long-range planning, and other matters of common concern. 105
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 4 of 14
Community Development Board
The Community Development Board, in its role as the Zoning Commission, previously
reviewed the draft ordinance on November 6, 2023. The Board recommended approval of
the ordinance to the City Commission. The City Commission at their December 5, 2023
meeting reviewed the ordinance and considered public comment. The Commission voted to
send the ordinance back to staff for additional process, including content edits, expanded
scope, and additional public outreach. This additional process is now complete, and the
Community Development Board, in its role as the Zoning Commission, was scheduled to
hold a public hearing on August 18, 2025, to review the revised ordinance. Due to a lack of
quorum the meeting was continued to September 8th.
The advisory board is charged with making recommendations regarding regulations that
will affect zoning. Wetland and watercourse protection are zoning requirements. As of the
writing of this report no public comments have been received on the revised draft. All
project related public comments [External Link] are archived and available for public
review.
Due to the timing of the continued Community Development Board meeting, the staff will
report the outcome of the meeting to the City Commission at the Sept 9th public hearing.
Sustainability Board
The Sustainability Board considered the recommended proposed language on August 13th. The
Board recommended approval. The recording [external link] of the meeting is available on the
City’s website.
City Commission
The City Commission at their December 5, 2023, meeting reviewed the ordinance and
considered public comment. The Commission voted to send the ordinance back to staff for
additional process, including content edits, expanded scope, and additional public outreach.
This additional process is now complete, and the Commission is scheduled to hold a public
hearing on the draft ordinance on September 9, 2025, at their regularly scheduled meeting.
City Commission Alternatives
1. Adoption of the recommended ordinance;
2. Denial of the ordinance based on findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria
contained within the staff report; or
3. Open and continue the public hearing on the application, with specific direction to staff to
supply additional information or to address specific items.
106
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 5 of 14
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... 1
Unresolved Issues ........................................................................................................................... 1
Project Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1
Strategic Plan .................................................................................................................................. 3
Community Development Board .................................................................................................... 4
City Commission ............................................................................................................................ 4
City Commission Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 4
SECTION 1 – RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS .................................................... 6
SECTION 2 – TEXT AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ..................................... 6
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria .................................................................................... 6
A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. .................................................................................... 6
B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers. ................................................................................ 7
C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. ....................................................... 8
D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public
requirements.................................................................................................................................... 8
E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. ........................................................................ 8
F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. ....................................... 9
G. Promotion of compatible urban growth. .................................................................................... 9
H. Character of the district. ............................................................................................................ 9
I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. ........................................................................................ 9
J. Conserving the value of buildings. ........................................................................................... 10
K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. ..................... 10
PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ...................................................................... 10
APPENDIX A – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND .......................... 11
APPENDIX B – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ................................................................ 14
APPENDIX C – APPLICANT INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF .................................... 14
FISCAL EFFECTS .............................................................................................................................. 15
ATTACHMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 15
107
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 6 of 14
SECTION 1 – RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS
Having considered the criteria established for a text amendment, staff recommends approval
as proposed.
The Community Development Board is scheduled to hold a public hearing on this
amendment on August 18, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. A recommendation will be forwarded to the
Commission on the text amendment.
The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the text amendment on September 9,
2025, at 6:00 p.m.
SECTION 2 – TEXT AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
In considering applications for approval under this title, the advisory boards and City
Commission must consider the following criteria. As an amendment is a legislative action, the
Commission has broad latitude to determine a policy direction. The burden of proof that the
application should be approved lies with the applicant.
In considering the following criteria, the analysis must show that the amendment accomplishes
zoning criteria A-D. Zoning criteria E-K must be considered and may be found to be
affirmative, neutral, or negative. A favorable decision on the proposed application must find
that the application meets all of the criteria A-D and that the positive outcomes of the
amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K. In addition, the application must be
evaluated against subdivision criteria 1-17. A favorable decision on the proposed application
must find that the positive outcomes of the amendment outweigh the negative outcomes
for criteria 1-17C.
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria
A. Be in accordance with a growth policy.
Criterion Met. The Bozeman Community Plan (BCP) 2020, Chapter 5, p. 73, in the section
titled Review Criteria for Zoning Amendments and Their Application, discusses how the
various criteria in 76-2-304 MCA are applied locally. Application of the criteria varies
depending on whether an amendment is for the zoning map or for the text of Chapter 38, BMC.
“In a text amendment, policy statements weigh heavily as the standards being created or
revised implement the growth policy’s aspirations and intent. The City must balance many
issues in approving urban development.”
The proposed amendment does not change the zoning map. Therefore, it is not necessary to
analyze compliance with the future land use map.
The basic planning precepts on page 20 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 include, “The
health and well-being of the public is an essential focus and influences and is influenced in
turn by urban design and land development.” Also, “The City intends to create a healthy, safe,
108
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 7 of 14
resilient, and sustainable community by incorporating a holistic approach to the design,
construction, and operation of buildings, neighborhoods, and the City as a whole.” The
proposed amendments provide for public health, safety, and welfare of the community by
providing clear standards and administrative processes for development around regulated
wetland areas and by providing consistent language, clear definitions, and references
throughout the Bozeman Municipal Code.
Under Theme 4, A City Influenced by Our Natural Environment, Parks, and Open Lands, there
are several relevant goals and objectives that will be met through the collaborative approach
to developing these amendments to the Wetland Regulations.
Goal EPO-202 - Work with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to keep wetlands, mitigation
within the Gallatin Valley rather than locating to other watersheds.
Staff has repeatedly consulted with the Corp of Engineers in preparing the updated
regulations. Coordination is enhanced by using the same standards for delineation and
documentation of wetlands and wetland functions.
EPO-2.3 - Identify, prioritize, and preserve key wildlife habitat and corridors.
The application materials submittal requirements ensure that resources are identified following
best professional practice. The standards for watercourse and wetland protection act to protect
habitat consistent with the other purposes and priorities of the Unified Development Code.
EPO 4.2 - Update floodplain and other regulations that protect the environment.
The proposed amendments to the wetland and watercourse r egulations meet this
objective by ensuring identification of resources and establishing standards to avoid and
minimize impacts of development.
RC-2.1 Prohibit development in environmentally-sensitive or hazard-prone areas.
The proposed regulations emphasize avoidance of wetlands as a first priority and require
physical separation from wetlands and watercourses. This separation limits impact on the
resource.
No conflicts with the growth policy have been identified. The criterion is met.
B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers.
Criterion Met. The proposed regulations are specifically intended, designed, and include
provisions to ensure they can be carried out to manage development within regulated identified
wetland areas. Wetlands can present significant constraints to development which typically
form in areas characterized by poor drainage conditions that are ill-suited for most types of
development. Development in these areas often involves extra expense resulting from
considerations for site drainage, flood protection and facility maintenance. The intent of these
regulations is to protect public and private facilities and structures from damage, and to
minimize public and private development and maintenance costs. This is accomplished by
prioritizing avoidance of wetlands. Compliance with the proposed and other existing
standards such as building permits, access, and stormwater control standards mutually support
this criterion. The wetland regulations partner with other watercourse protection, 38.410.100
[External link] and floodplain standards, 38.600 [External link] in the Unified Development 109
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 8 of 14
Code to limit construction in these areas.
C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare.
Criterion Met. The proposed regulations provide standards and procedures that regulate
development in wetland and watercourse areas to protect public health and safety, safeguard
water quality, and provide for wildlife habitat. Additionally, the preservation of wetlands and
watercourses offers opportunities for open space, education and research, and historical, cultural and
archaeological resources. The intent of these regulations is to encourage the avoidance of
regulated activities within the regulated areas and to require best management practices in
regulated areas. As noted in Criterion B, further development and redevelopment must be in
accordance with the new natural resource standards as well as modern building, access,
stormwater, pedestrian circulation, ingress and egress to the site, and full connection to the
greater transportation network for users, ensuring the promotion of public health, safety and
general welfare.
Minimizing impacts to wetlands and watercourses supports and maintains their functions to
lessen flooding, improve groundwater infiltration, lessen surface water pollutants, and
thereby improve public health and safety.
D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other
public requirements.
Criterion Met. The regulations provide submittal requirements and standards that apply to any
regulated activity that may impact wetlands as defined in 38.700 known prior to or
discovered through the development review process and verified through a site-specific
wetlands and watercourse boundary determination. If wetlands or watercourses are found on
the subject site, the proposal is subject to these regulations. As mentioned in Criterion C,
wetlands typically form in areas characterized by poor drainage conditions which are ill-
suited for most types of development. Wetlands are characterized by hydric soils that are
unstable for most types of development. The proposed regulations reduce the likelihood of
damage to public facilities, such as streets, and private facilities. This process of identifying,
verifying, and mitigating wetland sites ensures appropriate setbacks from identified wetlands
and watercourses and the protection of existing infrastructure, including water, sewer,
transportation, and roadways, to ensure they are minimally affected by these regulated areas.
Where it is necessary for infrastructure to cross watercourses or wetlands, the standards
provide direction on how to lessen impacts. Prioritization for methods of mitigation of
impacts helps ensure that allowance of needed infrastructure has the least amount of resource
impact.
E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air.
Criterion Met. The regulations make provision for adequate light and air by limiting certain
types of development in and around wetland areas and watercourses. These limitations
provide the opportunity for open space and natural areas that can be utilized for a number
of ecological functions. Additional standards for light and air such as required open spaces,
parkland and setbacks are also included in Chapter 38.
110
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 9 of 14
F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems.
Criterion Met. The effect on long range transportation systems (motorized and non-motorized)
should be minimal. Existing roads that will need to be extended to accommodate proposed
developments will follow the same guidelines as other development. In some instances where
a linear path for roadways or pathways is not possible due to existing wetlands and
watercourses or, where construction is unavoidable, such as utility or street crossings, the
proposed regulations provide processes and standards to minimize impacts and lessen the
likelihood of damage or injury. The process of determining the wetland boundary is similar to
requirements for watercourse setbacks, where the developer must mitigate the impacts of the
development on or near a watercourse which are often alongside existing wetland areas.
Additionally, the process can help guide the design phase of a project early on when
determining the location of roads, pedestrian paths and open space based on results of the
wetland or watercourse boundary determination.
G. Promotion of compatible urban growth.
Criterion Met. The proposed amendments provide for land uses and permitting processes that
ensure development in regulated wetland areas is compatible with natural conditions as those
conditions fluctuate from time to time. The regulations also provide standards for development
that will prevent construction in areas not suitable for development, thereby creating a safer,
more suitable environment, and creating building and site standards that are compatible with
the natural environment. The regulations will create consistency of standards and processes
that would be applicable to any parcel with wetlands or watercourses throughout the City.
H. Character of the district.
Criterion Met. The draft regulations do not modify the standards that are unique to individual
zoning districts. The wetland and watercourse regulations are equally applicable in all zoning
districts. The regulations are specifically designed to address characteristics of land within
and surrounding wetland areas within the City. Parcels with wetland areas and watercourses
are unique. Providing specific regulations to protect them and mitigate during construction
maintains the character of the site and ensures their preservation. Wetlands and watercourses
provide important values, both aesthetic and functional, that enhance the quality of life of
community residents. Protecting wetland areas ensures their preservation for future
generations
I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses.
Criterion Met. The regulations specifically address and limit the development of new buildings
in identified wetland areas and watercourses through a site-specific wetland and watercourse
boundary determination when applicable. Preservation of wetlands and watercourses is
significant when considering they provide several important ecological functions, including
aquifer recharge, water storage, regional stream hydrology (discharge and recharge), flood
control and storage, sediment control, nutrient removal from urban or non-point source
runoff, and erosion control. Preservation of existing wetland functions is less costly, faster,
and more efficient than replicating those functions elsewhere. Therefore, the preference of
the city is to first avoid wetland impacts with the prioritized mitigation preferences 111
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 10 of 14
following.
J. Conserving the value of buildings.
Criterion Met. Wetlands and watercourses are a unique and distinct ecosystem that perform
many important ecological functions. Wetlands and watercourses are aquatic environments
that are covered by freshwater, saltwater, or a mix. They can provide flood control, clean
water, storm protection, sediment control, and vital habitat. The regulations may apply
independently or may apply to development that may impact wetlands and watercourses. It is
the intent and purpose of these regulations to protect, preserve, and enhance wetlands and
watercourses to provide a number of vital functions (see Criterion C & H).
Further, the regulations act to proactively conserve the value of buildings by preventing
building construction in and too close to wetland areas and watercourses where soils are
typically unstable and not appropriate for construction (see Criterion D).
K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area.
Criterion Met. The regulations provide standards and steps in determining the status of a
wetland and/or watercourse, the setback requirement, and any mitigating factors with
proposed development. This will allow for uses that are appropriate and functional within
existing wetland areas and watercourses. The proposed amendments seek to regulate
development around wetland areas and watercourses that will limit impacts to these
resources aiding in public health, safety, and general welfare.
PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS
IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE
OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE AMENDMENT
AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A
PROPOSED CHANGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT
BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION.
The City will accept written protests from property owners against the proposal
referred to in this notice until the close of the public hearing before the City
Commission. Pursuant to 76-2-305, MCA, a protest may only be submitted by the owner(s)
of real property within the area affected by the proposal or by owner(s) of real property
that lie within 150 feet of an area affected by the proposal. The protest must be in writing
and must be signed by all owners of the real property. In addition, a sufficient protest must:
(i) contain a description of the action protested sufficient to identify the action against
which the protest is lodged (including the application number, 23309); and (ii) contain a
statement of the protestor's qualifications (including listing all owners of the property and
the physical address), to protest the action against which the protest is lodged, including
ownership of property affected by the action. Signers are encouraged to print their names
after their signatures. A person may in writing withdraw a previously filed protest at any
time prior to final action by the City Commission. Protests must be delivered to the
Bozeman City Clerk, 121 North Rouse Ave., PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230.
Written comments may be directed to: City of Bozeman Department of Community
Development, ATTN: City Clerk, PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230, or emailed
to comments@bozeman.net. Data on this application are available at 112
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 11 of 14
https://www.bozeman.net/government/planning/using-the-planning-map. Select
‘Project Documents’ and navigate to application 23309. The full application may be
reviewed in the City of Bozeman Department of Community Development, Alfred M.
Stiff Professional Building, 20 East Olive Street, 582-2260. Please reference
Application 23309 in any correspondence.
For those who require accommodations for disabilities, please contact the ADA
Coordinator David Arnado, at 582-3232 (voice).
APPENDIX A – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND
BACKGROUND
Mitigation of impacts to wetlands that occurs during land development is subject to both
federal and location regulation. Federal Regulation pursuant to the Clean Water Act is enforced
by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the Environmental Protection
Agency. Local regulation occurs per the City’s Unified Development Code (UDC), Division
38.610 titled Wetland Regulations. Prior to the United States Supreme Court’s recent decision
in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, 142 S.Ct. 1322 (2023), the federal agencies
regulated wetlands using a broad definition that included many wetlands within the City.
Federal agencies regulated wetlands that were not only immediately adjacent to traditionally
navigable waters, but also wetlands that had a continuous surface connection to such water or
had a significant nexus to interstate or traditional navigable waters. This “significant nexus”
required federal agencies to analyze a number of factors. A significant nexus exists, under
federal guidance, when “wetlands, either alone or in combination with similarly situated lands
in the region, significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of those
waters.” The result is that the federal agencies regulated millions of acres of wetlands
nationwide that were not immediately adjacent to or indistinguishable from traditionally
navigable waters.
That all changed with the Sackett decision. The majority of the Court determined “that the
Clean Water Act (CWA) extends to those wetlands with a continuous surface connection to
bodies that are ‘waters of the United States’ in their own right so that they are
‘indistinguishable’ from those waters.” The result is that many wetlands that were formerly
regulated by the federal agencies are no longer under federal jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court remanded this decision back to the 9th Circuit of Appeals. Additional
litigation will most likely be necessary to finally resolve the specific issue in the case. In the
meantime, EPA and USACE implemented an interim rule to address the Supreme Court
decision. The City’s regulation of wetlands addresses wetlands historically regulated by the
federal agencies resulting in concurrent (but not identical) regulations. The Sackett decision
significantly narrows federal regulation of wetlands resulting in the City’s regulatory program
now being the sole regulatory authority for a greater number of wetlands within the City.
In response to the recent Sackett decision and the future of federal regulation of wetlands, the
City believes it must consider any new federal rule and guidance to understand how the City
could move forward regulating based solely on the UDC requirements. This includes
regulation of wetlands that were but are no longer regulated federally and how the City will
integrate its mitigation requirements (including a bank) into the ongoing federal wetland bank 113
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 12 of 14
program.
The City Commission conducted a work session on July 25, 2023, (Meeting Video-Action
Item K.1.) [External Video Link], regarding the proposed Wetland Protection Mitigation
procedures. The purpose of the work session was to provide the Commission with information
related to:
i. The current approach of the City to its wetlands regulatory program under the UDC;
ii. Provide information on the Sackett decision and the issues resulting from the decision;
iii. Provide information on future approaches to local regulation of wetlands.
Specific topics discussed in detail at the work session are available in the July 25, 2023 City
Commission Memorandum [External Link, PDF]. City Commission provided specific
guidance on mitigation measures for wetland areas which were discussed at two follow-up
meetings open to the general public on October 5th, 2023.
On October 5th, 2023, City staff presented updates to the proposed Wetland Regulations
including policy guidance from the City Commission, followed by Q & A sessions that were
open to the general public at two different meetings. There was a virtual meeting at noon on
Zoom followed by an in-person meeting at the Bozeman Public Library at 6:00 p.m. The noon
session included an overview of current wetland regulations and the role of the Army Corps of
Engineers. City goals were discussed in regard to wetland mitigation measures within the
existing watershed including discussions on local wetland bank options. Policy guidance from
the July 23rd City Commission meeting was discussed followed by a Q and A session with
people who attended the online meeting. Several people asked about the inline edits and
recommendations from the Gallatin Watershed Council to the proposed Wetland Regulations
in the UDC. There were requests for clarification and the City’s response to these edits and
recommendations. People felt they should be carefully considered since the recommendations
and suggestion came from experts in the field. The comments were primarily focused on
clarifying and defining terms in the existing codes with a goal to minimize and avoid impacts
to wetlands before the city resorts to mitigation and that local mitigation was a priority over
mitigating outside the City’s watershed. One person asked about the process for smaller,
individual wetland areas or ponds not connected to a stream and options for cash in lieu. A
follow up question asked about the option of submitting a wetland application prior to a site
plan application, Additional questions included progress with wetland revisions to date.
Meeting Video to the online Zoom meeting [External Link, meeting video].
On the same day at 6:00 p.m. staff presented this information at another meeting in the
Bozeman Public Library. Discussions revolved around the proposed amendments to the
wetland regulations, application processing for proposals with wetland areas, progress on local
options for wetland mitigation, and policy guidance from the City Commission. People had
questions about how the City will regulate wetlands normally covered by the ACOE and the
method of determining the amount of credits for wetland mitigation. Additional discussion
focused on wetland delineation and who decides who has jurisdiction and the overall
permitting process. There were concerns about the size of the wetland bank and the process of
mitigating using wetland bank credits. There were additional concerns about delineating
wetland setbacks and holding people accountable to their limits. People were wanting to fully
understanding who has jurisdiction, and understand steps outlined in the regulations to 114
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 13 of 14
determine the best course of action based on the proposal. Additional information can be found
on the Minutes to the 6:00 p.m., meeting [External Link, PDF].
The City wetlands code and USACE regulations have a general strategy that is summarized by
the following priorities: 1) avoid wetlands impacts, 2) where wetlands impacts cannot be
avoided, minimize wetlands impacts, and 3) when wetlands impacts are incurred, mitigate the
impacts. Where the impacts of land development to wetlands are unavoidable, mitigation of
such impacts regulated by federal agencies may occur in locations distant from the City,
including the Upper Missouri Wetland Bank located in Twin Bridges, Montana. Currently, a
local wetlands bank is under development by the Sacajawea Audubon Society (SAS) in the
vicinity of Haggerty Lane and East Main Street intersection. If this bank qualifies as a wetland
bank for purposes of federal regulation, landowners seeking to mitigate wetland impacts that
fall within the jurisdiction of federal agencies may be able to access the SAS bank, once
established. The SAS bank may also be available to the City to provide mitigation for wetlands
now regulated only by the City.
The City Commission at their December 5, 2023, meeting reviewed the ordinance and
considered public comment. The Commission voted to send the ordinance back to staff for
additional process, including content edits, expanded scope, and additional public outreach.
As part of additional public outreach, the City held an open house to gather public input on
March 27th, 2025, at the Bozeman Public Safety Center.
The draft ordinance now under consideration was released to the public on the Engage
Bozeman Wetlands Update project page on July 31, 2025. Copies were also made available
at the Reference Desk in the Bozeman Public Library and the Department of Community
Development. The City provided public notice on the draft and the upcoming public hearings
before the Community Development Board acting as the Zoning Commission and the City
Commission on the City’s website and with the publication of a legal advertisement in the
Bozeman Daily Chronicle published on four Saturdays: July 26, August 9, August 16, and
August 30, 2025. Public comment will close during the City Commission public hearing on
September 9, 2025.
The City first adopted local regulations to protect wetlands in 2003 by Ordinance 1604. Local
regulations have been in effect continuously since their initial adoption. The local
regulations are supplementary to federal regulations in that historically, the City’s regulations
have also regulated wetlands covered by the Clean Water Act. But there are key differences
between the historical federal regulatory scheme and the City’s regulations. A key
difference is that the City’s regulations apply to wetlands as small as 400 sq. ft. and to
isolated wetlands not connected to waters of the United States. This is more restrictive than
federal regulations; in practice, however, the City has typically defaulted to USACE
regulation as a measure of compliance with the more restrictive local wetland code.
Bozeman’s regulations for wetlands are also coordinated with our requirements for protecting
watercourses. If a wetland is located within the required setback for a watercourse, then the
setback is expanded to include the wetland area. It should also be noted, the City’s
regulations exclude artificially created wetlands related to irrigation and stormwater
facilities. These facilities require periodic maintenance, which is likely to conflict with
wetland protection requirements. 115
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 14 of 14
This project replaces Division 38.610.020 (Wetland Regulations) and Section 38.410.100
(Watercourse setback) within Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code and amends the
submittal requirements in Section 38.220.130 [External Link, PDF] (Submittal materials for
regulated activities in wetlands and watercourses) to reflect the change in federal regulation
of wetlands resulting from the recent Sackett decision and per the expanded scope request of
the City Commission. The project establishes a new section for Wetland and Watercourse
Regulations within the Unified Development Code, in compliance with the requirements of
the Clean Water Act and the Unified Development Code. The standards and procedures
restrict certain construction and land alterations, require issuance of permits for construction
and land alterations, and set necessary administrative procedures integrated with the City’s
zoning development review procedures.
These regulations apply to any regulated activity that may impact wetlands and/or
watercourses as defined in 38.700, known prior to or discovered through the development
review process, and verified through a site-specific wetlands or watercourse boundary
determination. These wetland regulations pertain to wetlands with a direct hydrologic
connection to “waters of the U.S.” (those wetlands that connect to a federally regulated
stream or river directly or via a series or watercourse, wetlands, or ditches), and also to
isolated wetlands with no direct connection to a water of the U.S. and exhibit positive
wetland indicators for all three wetland parameters defined in the most current version of
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual of the U.S., applicable to the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Omaha District.
This amendment is to the City’s zoning regulations regarding wetlands and watercourses. This
zoning regulation also addresses related purposes of environmental protection, public safety,
and other subdivision criteria. Subdivision review must demonstrate zoning compliance.
APPENDIX B – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Notice for text amendments must meet the standards of 38.220.410 & 420. Notice was
published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle as required and contained all required elements.
Notice was provided at least 15 business days before the Zoning Commission and Planning
Board public hearing, and not more than 45 days prior to the City Commission public
hearing. Copies of the draft text were made available at the Bozeman Public Library, the
Community Development Department, and through the City’s Engage Bozeman website. The
City exceeded the required notice provision. Hearing dates are on the first page of this report.
As of the writing of this report no public comments have been received on the revised draft. All
project related public comments [External Link] are archived and available for public review.
APPENDIX C – APPLICANT INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Owner/Applicant: City of Bozeman, PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771 116
Staff Report for the Replacement of Wetland Regulations, Application 23309Page 15 of 14
Representative: Department of Community Development, City of Bozeman, PO Box 1230,
Bozeman, MT 59771
Report By: Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager, Community Development
Department
FISCAL EFFECTS
No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed
by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment.
ATTACHMENTS
Digital access to the full application (23309) and file of record is available at the Community
Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715.
The Draft Wetland and Watercourse Regulations can be found on engage.bozeman.net/wetlands
117
Version February 2023
Ord 2156
Page 1 of 24
ORDINANCE 2025-xxx
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA TO REPEAL AND REPLACE SECTION 38.220.130 (SUBMITTAL
MATERIALS FOR REGULATED ACTIVITIES IN WETLANDS), SECTION 38.410.100
(WATERCOURSES), AND DIVISION 38.610 (WETLANDS) IN THEIR ENTIRETY AND
WOULD AT THE SAME TIME REPLACE IT WITH A NEW SET OF STANDARDS AND
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, SECTIONS 38.700.190 (U DEFINITIONS) AND
38.700.120 (W DEFINITIONS) OF THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE WILL BE
AMENDED, APPLICATION 23309.
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman (the “City”) has adopted land development and use
standards to protect public health, safety and welfare and otherwise execute the applicable
purposes of state law; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Bozeman City Charter, the City of Bozeman has adopted and
is hereby relying upon its self-government powers recognizing pursuant to Montana law such self-
government powers must be liberally construed in favor of such power; and
WHEREAS, after proper notice, the City Commission held a public meeting on July 25,
2023 to receive information on wetlands and changing federal regulations and to give direction on
preparation of proposed amendments to the City’s wetland regulations; and
WHEREAS, after proper notice, the Community Development Board in their capacity as
Bozeman Zoning Commission held a public hearing on November 6, 2023, to receive and review
all written and oral testimony on the proposed amendments; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Board in their capacity as Bozeman Zoning
Commission recommended to the Bozeman City Commission that Ordinance 2156, be approved
as proposed; and
118
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 2 of 24
WHEREAS, after proper notice, the City Commission held its public hearing on
December 4, 2023, to receive and review all written and oral testimony on proposed Ordinance
2156; and
WHEREAS, after consideration the City Commission requested further revisions to the
draft text; and
WHEREAS, after revisions were made public notice was published and the draft
amendments made available for public review in multiple locations including electronic methods;
and
WHEREAS, after proper public notice the Community Development Board in their
capacity as the Zoning Commission, held a public hearing on September 8, 2025, to receive public
comment and consider the criteria for zoning amendments; and after completing their review
recommended [complete with recommendation once finished]; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission conducted a public hearing on September 9th to receive
public comment; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission has reviewed and considered the applicable
amendment criteria established in Montana Code Annotated § 76-2-304, and found that the
proposed amendments comply with the criteria; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA:
Section 1
Legislative Findings
The City Commission hereby makes the following findings in support of adoption of this
Ordinance:
1. The City has adopted land development and use standards to protect public health, safety and
welfare and otherwise execute the purposes of Montana Code Annotated §§ 76-1-102, 76-2-
304, 76-3-102, and 76-3-501.
2. The City adopted regulations and standards to protect and mitigate impacts to wetlands and
watercourses in 2003. The City’s regulations have concurrent jurisdiction with other
regulatory agencies.
119
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 3 of 24
3. The City adopted a growth policy, the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (BCP 2020), by
Resolution 5133 to establish policies for development of the community.
4. The BCP 2020, Theme 4 and Theme 7 encourage protection of the natural environment.
5. The US Supreme Court issued a decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency,
142 S. Ct. 1322 (2023), which significantly altered the scope of authority of the United States
Army Corps of Engineers (and the United States Environmental Protection Agency) in
regulating wetlands.
6. The reduction in scope of authority of the United States Army Corps of Engineers places the
City’s regulations as the primary regulatory protection for many wetlands in Bozeman’s
regulatory jurisdiction.
7. A staff report analyzing the required criteria for an amendment to the City’s regulations for
zoning review, including the amendment’s accordance with the BCP 2020, and has found
that the required criteria of Montana Code Annotated § 76-1-304 are satisfied.
8. The necessary public hearings were advertised as required in state law and municipal code
and all persons have had opportunity to review the applicable materials and provide
comment.
9. The Community Development Board acting in its capacity as the municipal Zoning
Commission considered the application materials, staff analysis and report, all submitted
public comment, and all other relevant information and recommended approval.
10. The City Commission considered the application materials, staff analysis and report,
recommendation of the Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the
municipal Zoning Commission and Planning Board, all submitted public comment, and all
other relevant information.
11. The City Commission determines that, as set forth in the staff report and incorporating the
staff findings as part of the decision, the required criteria for approval of this Ordinance are
satisfied.
12. The City Commission determines that this Ordinance provides a proper balance of interests,
rights, and responsibilities of all parties affected by this Ordinance and is necessary to protect
public health, safety, and the general welfare.
Section 2
That Section 38.220.130 Submittal materials for regulated activities in wetlands, Bozeman
Municipal Code shall be repealed in its entirety and replaced as follows:
120
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 4 of 24
Sec. 38.220.130. Submittal materials for review of activities in or adjacent to wetlands and
watercourses.
A. An applicant for a permit under this chapter on a site where wetlands and/or watercourses
may be present or adjacent to the subject property must submit a wetlands and watercourses
delineation report including the following information:
1. If wetlands or watercourses are not present on or adjacent to the subject property, a
letter signed by a qualified wetlands professional must be submitted to the city
certifying there are no wetlands or watercourses within the subject property or adjacent
to the property and describing the methods used to determine that wetlands or
watercourses do not exist on or adjacent to the property.
2. If a wetland or watercourse is present or adjacent to the property, a wetland and
watercourse delineation report must be submitted to the city. When required to
determine the wetland or watercourse location and function, the delineation report
must consider land outside the boundary of the property proposed for development.
a. The wetland and watercourse delineation report must include the following which
must have been developed within five (5) years of the date of the submission of
the report:
(1) Wetland and watercourse descriptions;
(2) An Approved Jurisdictional Determination provided by the USACE;
(3) A functional assessment of the wetland, made in compliance with an
assessment tool currently accepted by USACE and/or the State of Montana.;
(4) All data collected must support accurate confirmation of the three positive
wetland indicators as included in the definition of wetland at 38.700.210;
(5) Wetland and watercourse acreages as determined by a licensed surveyor (the
review authority may approve the use of other survey grade GPS methods);
(6) Maps that depict property boundaries, watercourse centerlines, ordinary
high-water marks delineated in accordance with the procedures specified in
the current version of the Ordinary High Water Mark Field Delineation
Manual for Rivers and Streams sanctioned by the USACE Omaha District,
watercourse setbacks, delineated wetland boundaries and buffers, and
wetland acreages;
(7) Wetland data on forms established by the USACE;
(8) A determination of watercourse status issued by the Gallatin County
Conservation District; and
(9) A narrative description of how the applicant will first avoid and if avoidance is
not possible, minimize and mitigate impacts to wetlands and watercourses.
121
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 5 of 24
3. If development activities are proposed in or adjacent to watercourses or wetlands the
following additional information is required in the wetlands and watercourse
delineation report:
a. A site plan consisting of an accurate scaled drawing which shows: the boundaries
of the subject property; delineated wetland and watercourse boundaries; wetland
buffer boundaries; watercourse setbacks; and all existing and proposed structures,
roads, trails, and easements. The site plan must provide a table of existing wetland
jurisdictional status, acreage and respective functional classes for each wetland,
previously required wetland buffers and acreage for each wetland, and linear feet
of all watercourses. In addition, all direct impacts to wetlands, watercourses,
setbacks, and buffers must be depicted and summarized in a table on the site plan.
The summary table must include: the wetland/watercourse identification number;
labeling of the corresponding wetland buffer or watercourse setback with its width
and acreage; the acreage of the subject property and of each wetland, watercourse,
and wetland buffer or watercourse setback; notation of the wetland jurisdictional
status; proposed impacts within all wetland buffers and watercourses setbacks;
and, proposed mitigation methods and acreages.
b. All indirect impacts must be summarized in a narrative section of the application.
c. Application materials for all applicable permits identified in 38.220.020.
d. A wetland review checklist with each element confirmed as complete.
4. Mitigation Report. If in review of the required submittal materials the review authority
determines adverse impacts to wetlands or watercourses will occur, the following
information must be submitted to the city in the form of a mitigation report:
a. The mitigation report must:
(1) Identify proposed mitigation consistent with the priorities listed in
38.610.100 and the rationale for the applicant’s preferred mitigation.
(2) Include the following: the name and contact information of the applicant; the
name, qualifications, and contact information for the primary author of the
mitigation report; a description of the mitigation proposal; a summary of the
direct and indirect impacts; identification of all local, state, and federal
wetland or watercourse-related permits required for the proposed mitigation;
and a vicinity map for the project.
(3) An assessment of existing conditions in the area of the proposed mitigation
including vegetation community structure and composition, existing
hydroperiod, existing soil conditions, and existing wetland functions.
(4) An assessment of the potential changes in wetland hydroperiod for the
proposed project.
122
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 6 of 24
(5) A description of the proposed mitigation actions for wetlands, watercourses,
setbacks, and buffer areas and how the design has been modified to first
avoid, and if avoidance is not possible then minimize or reduce impacts to
the wetland hydroperiod. Provide specifications for all proposed
compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts to wetlands and their
buffers and to watercourses and their setbacks. Include a map and table with
all proposed mitigation areas and their required buffers.
(6) Field data that documents the existing conditions of the proposed mitigation
sites.
(7) An analysis of the anticipated post development hydrologic and soil
conditions on the project site hydrologic and soil conditions of the mitigation
wetlands based on the proposed mitigation (e.g., data that demonstrate
hydrologic conditions (e.g. piezometer data, staff/crest gage data, hydrologic
modeling, visual observations; data that demonstrate soil conditions (e.g.,
data from hand-dug or mechanical soil pits or boring results). The applicant
may not rely on NRCS soil survey data for establishing existing conditions.
(8) A planting plan and schedule by proposed community type and hydrologic
regime, size and type of plant material to be installed, spacing of plants,
typical clustering patterns, total number of each species by community type,
timing of installation, nutrient requirements, watering schedule, weed
control, and, where appropriate, measures to protect plants from damage.
(9) A mitigation monitoring plan must include a period of not less than five
years and establish the entity responsible for long-term operations,
maintenance, and monitoring and the methods the applicant will use to
ensure the mitigation meets the objectives established by the plan.
(10) Wetland mitigation performance criteria for mitigation wetlands and buffers
(measurable standards reflective of expected development goals established
for each year after the mitigation site is established, e.g., "At the end of five
years there will be an 80 percent survival of the planted shrubs and trees").
(11) Contingency plans which clearly define courses of action or corrective
measures if performance criteria are not met including strategies for adaptive
management and change in mitigation option and the entity responsible for
implementing any required contingency plans.
b. The mitigation report must include scaled plan sheet(s) for the mitigation plan.
The scaled plan sheet(s) must contain, at a minimum:
(1) The surveyed edges of existing wetlands and buffers; the proposed location
and acreage of wetlands and buffer impacts; and the location of proposed
wetland and buffer mitigation areas.
123
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 7 of 24
(2) Surveyed topography at half-foot contour intervals in the area of the
proposed mitigation if any grading activity is proposed in the proposed
mitigation area.
(3) Provide an existing and proposed mitigation design cross section for the
wetland and/or buffer proposed mitigation areas.
c. A description of ongoing management practices that will protect and maintain the
any nonimpacted wetland areas and the proposed mitigation wetland, watercourse,
and buffer areas.
B. If agricultural water user facilities are present then the development application must
include application materials required pursuant to 38.220.060, 38.360.280, and 38.410.060.
C. An as-built plan of the affected area within six months of completion.
Section 3
That Section 38.410.100, Watercourse Setback, Bozeman Municipal Code shall be repealed in its
entirety and replaced as follows:
Sec. 38.410.100. Watercourse setback.
A. The purpose of this section is to protect watercourses and the land adjacent to ensure bank
stabilization; sediment, nutrient and pollution removal; provision of habitat and shade; and
flood control.
B. Where a parcel proposed for development contains a watercourse, the development is
prohibited from placing structures (such as buildings, parking lots, or other impervious
surfaces), an addition to an existing structure, any fill material (other than that required for
exempt uses), other similar improvements within required watercourse setbacks.
C. The development may integrate the watercourse and watercourse setbacks with required
parklands and open space subject to division 38.420.
D. The requirements of this section may not be less restrictive than the requirements of the city
floodplain regulations or any other applicable regulation of this chapter.
1. The watercourse setbacks must be measured from the ordinary high-water mark as
defined in 38.700.090 and as depicted on Figure 38.410.100-1. When no ordinary high-
water mark is discernible, the watercourse setback must be measured from the top of
the watercourse bank.
2. The following apply to all developments.
a. Setbacks. The following setback requirements must be met:
(1) East Gallatin River. A minimum 100-foot setback must be provided along
both sides of the East Gallatin River.
124
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 8 of 24
(2) Sourdough/Bozeman Creek and Bridger Creek. A minimum 75-foot setback
must be provided along both sides of Sourdough/Bozeman and Bridger
Creeks.
(3) Other watercourses. A minimum 50-foot setback must be provided along
both sides of all other watercourses.
(4) All watercourse setbacks must be extended as necessary to address the
following additional requirements;
(a) The setback must extend to the delineated boundary of the regulated
flood hazard area pursuant to 38.600.130.B where the regulated flood
hazard boundary is larger than the setbacks established in this
subsection D.2.a (see Figure 38.410.100-2);
(b) The setback must incorporate a minimum 50-foot wetland setback from
the delineated boundary of any wetlands adjacent to the watercourse. A
larger setback may be established per 38.610. A wetland is adjacent to a
watercourse when some or all of the wetland lies within the required
watercourse setback. Figure 38.410.100-3.
b. The relocation of a watercourse, if approved by the review authority, is not
subject to the restrictions of subsection D.2.a.
c. Allowed encroachments. The watercourse setback is divided into two zones. Zone
1 consists of the 60 percent of the setback closest to the watercourse, and Zone 2
consists of the 40 percent of the setback furthest from the watercourse. The
following describes exceptions for development in Zone 1 and Zone 2:
(1) On-site stormwater treatment facilities may be located in Zone 2.
(2) Trails and trail-related improvements may be placed within the watercourse
setback subject to the following:
(a) Trails, and trail-related improvements such as benches and trail signage,
may be placed in Zone 2;
(b) Limited, non-looping developed spur trails to the edge of the
watercourse may cross all zones. Benches and limited
informational/interpretive signage may be placed in Zone 1 at the
terminus of spur trails;
(c) Due to topography, avoidance of wetlands, or geographical constraints,
portions of non-spur trails may be placed in Zone 1. Trail construction
within Zone 1, inclusive of watercourse crossings and spur trails may
not exceed the length of 300 percent of the width of the applicable
watercourse setback per 500 lineal feet of watercourse;
(d) All trails must be constructed to minimize bank instability,
sedimentation, nutrient and pollution runoff. Trails must be aligned to
minimize damage to plant and wildlife habitat; and
125
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 9 of 24
(e) Trails crossing the watercourse and trail-related bridge structures may
be located within all zones provided that the appropriate local, state and
federal permits are obtained.
(3) Streets, active transportation pathways, utility lines, or similar public
construction may be permitted within all zones for the purpose of crossing a
watercourse, compliance with an adopted city plan, or protecting public
health and safety. The following practices must be observed:
(a) Crossings must be minimized to the greatest extent feasible while still
complying with other applicable standards of this code;
(b) Crossings with direct angles (90 degrees) must be used to the greatest
extent feasible instead of oblique crossing angles;
(c) Construction must be capable of withstanding 100-year flood events;
and
(d) A bank stabilization plan for all watercourse crossings must be prepared
and approved by the review authority prior to site preparation and
installation of the improvement.
(4) Outlets from stormwater treatment facilities may pass through all zones,
provided that all required permits are obtained. Stormwater facilities must be
designed to prevent the discharge of untreated stormwater directly into a
watercourse.
(5) Ongoing control of noxious weeds by the property owner is required and
activities required within limits outlined in any approved noxious weed
control plan may occur in all zones.
d. Setback planting. To ensure watercourse setback function, a setback planting plan
must be prepared by a qualified landscape professional and must be reviewed and
approved by the review authority prior to the commencement of development or
site preparation. The plan must include a schedule, and plantings must be depicted
on the plan as follows:
(1) Zone 1: Zone 1 must be (re)vegetated with new or existing native materials
suited for a riparian area based on the following. One hundred percent of the
disturbed areas of Zone 1 must be planted with a ground cover of native
riparian trees, sedges, forbs, and grasses suited for the area. In addition, a
minimum of one shrub for every ten linear feet and one tree for every 30
linear feet of the watercourse must be planted along each side of the
watercourse. Grouping or clumping of trees and shrubs as appropriate in a
riparian area is encouraged. Species that are appropriate to the soil
hydrologic conditions are required. Tree and shrub species selected must be
suitable for the climate and for planting in a riparian area with an emphasis
126
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 10 of 24
on native species. Incorporation of existing healthy vegetation of types
required in this section within the setback planting plan is encouraged.
(2) Zone 2: Disturbed areas of Zone 2 must be revegetated with new or existing
native grasses suited for the area. plantings in this area must be maintained in
a natural state consistent with the approved setback planting plan and
managed for good plant health.
(3) The property owner is responsible for maintenance of the watercourse
setback landscaping. If it can be demonstrated that irrigation is present for
the trees and shrubs, and fencing is provided for the trees and shrubs, the
number of required trees may be reduced to one tree for every 60 linear feet
and one shrub for every 20 linear feet of the watercourse along each side of
the watercourse.
(4) Planting materials are exempt from the size requirements of 38.550.050.F.
(5) To prevent soil erosion and the invasion of noxious weeds, the watercourse
setbacks must be covered with existing vegetation or must be seeded with
native grasses as soon as seasonally feasible.
(6) Use of native grasses, forbs, sedges, trees, and other herbaceous plants in
areas of disturbance (e.g., bridges, culverts, utilities installation, trails) within
the watercourse setback is required.
e. If irrigation is to be installed in the setback, an irrigation plan must be provided
pursuant to 38.220.100 and the irrigation system, but not the plantings, must
comply with requirements outlined in the most recent version of the City of
Bozeman Landscape and Irrigation Performance and Design Standards Manual.
f. Except as otherwise allowed in subsections D.2.c and D.2.d of this section,
disturbance of soils and existing vegetation is prohibited in the setback.
g. Nothing in this section prohibits an owner of affected property from:
(3) Combining two or more lots to assemble a larger and more usable lot;
(4) Petitioning the state department of fish, wildlife and parks and the county
conservation district to reclassify the watercourse as exclusively an irrigation
water user facility; or
(5) After receipt of required permits, and prior approval by the review authority,
relocating the watercourse and associated setbacks and requirements.
E. An applicant may request relief from the provisions of this division by:
1. Applying for a variance to dimensional standards of the watercourse setbacks as
allowed by and subject to the requirements of division 38.250;
2. When applicable, seeking a deviation to dimensional standards of the watercourse
setback as allowed by and subject to the requirements of division 38.430;
127
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 11 of 24
3. A departure from the watercourse setback may be approved by the review authority
when the review authority has made the following findings:
a. The applicant has demonstrated by sufficient evidence the site cannot be
developed in compliance with the setback standards;
b. The property received preliminary plat approval or other final approval to
develop prior to July 10, 2002;
c. Application of the applicable watercourse setback and other applicable
setbacks causes an existing parcel to have its buildable area reduced to 25%
or less of the total lot area. Notwithstanding the above, the review authority
may grant a departure greater than 25% from the applicable watercourse
setback if the review authority determines other criteria of this subsection E.3
are met and the encroachment on the watercourse setback will not adversely
affect sediment, nutrient and pollution removal or the provision of habitat and
shade or flood control and will not have an adverse effect upon the
stabilization of the watercourse bank; and
d. The departure may not reduce a setback to less than:
(1) 100-foot setback adjacent to or within the regulated flood hazard area of
the East Gallatin River.
(2) 35-foot setback adjacent to or within any regulated flood hazard area of
any other watercourse.
(3) A portion of the required setback, immediately adjacent to the ordinary
high-water mark, must be left in a natural vegetative state or be subject
to a setback planting plan as follows:
(a) East Gallatin River—60 feet.
(b) Other watercourses—21 feet.
4. Miscellaneous.
a. The watercourse setback must be depicted on all preliminary plats and plans. A
note identifying presence of watercourse and setbacks must be provided on final
plats and plans and include notice that setback standards are subject to change
prior to future development within the subdivision.
b. This section does not apply to uses, activities, and structures which existed on or
before July 10, 2002, including agricultural uses, agricultural water user facilities,
lands controlled in the conservation reserve program. Any agricultural uses,
activities, or structures established after July 10, 2002 must comply with these
regulations.
128
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 12 of 24
FIGURE 38.410.100 - 1. WATERCOURSE MINIMUM NUMERIC SETBACKS
FIGURE 38.410.100 - 2. WATERCOURSE SETBACKS WITH A REGULATORY FLOOD HAZARD
AREA
129
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 13 of 24
FIGURE 38.410.100 - 3. WATERCOURSE SETBACKS WITH ADJACENT WETLANDS
Section 4
That Division 38.610, Wetland Regulations, Bozeman Municipal Code shall be repealed in its
entirety and replaced as follows:
DIVISION 38.610, WETLAND REGULATIONS
Sec. 38.610.010. Title and applicability/Jurisdiction.
A. This division may be cited as the “wetlands regulations”.
B. These wetland regulations apply to land which exhibit positive wetland indicators for all
three wetland parameters defined in 38.700.210.
C. These wetland regulations apply to applications for development that may impact wetlands,
and these regulations also apply to actions that modify or impact a wetland on land not
associated with the development proposal.
D. The city has concurrent jurisdiction over federally jurisdictional wetlands, defined as
wetlands that are regulated by a federal agency.
E. The regulations in this division do not require mitigation of wetlands created by agricultural
water user facilities or wetlands created by stormwater facilities.
F. The obligation to comply with issued approvals and maintain approved mitigation runs with
the land.
G. This division 38.610 does not repeal, abrogate, supersede, or impair any existing restriction
imposed by federal or state law. This division may impose more stringent requirements than
federal or state law. If this division imposes greater or more stringent requirements than a
privately imposed deed restriction or agreement, the provisions of this division control.
130
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 14 of 24
Sec. 38.610.020. Intent and purpose.
A. Wetlands perform important public health, safety, and welfare functions. The intent and
purpose of this division 38.610 is to protect, preserve and enhance wetlands to provide:
1. Aquifer recharge;
2. Water storage;
3. Regional stream hydrology (discharge and recharge);
4. Flood control and storage;
5. Sediment control (filter for sediments and nutrients);
6. Nutrient removal from urban and non-point source runoff;
7. Habitat for fish, wildlife and plants (including those that are endangered or threatened);
and
8. Erosion control.
B. Wetlands provide important values that enhance the quality of life of community residents
and benefit the public welfare of the community. It is the intent of this division 38.610 to
protect, preserve and enhance wetlands to provide:
1. Recreation;
2. Open space;
3. Aesthetic considerations;
4. Education and research;
5. Historical, cultural and archaeological resources; and
6. Reduce public costs related to wastewater discharge permit compliance and water
quality enhancements and protections.
C. Wetlands can present significant constraints to development. It is the intent of these
regulations to protect public and private facilities and structures from damage, minimize
risk to public and private development, and reduce maintenance costs.
D. This division requires an applicant to first avoid impacts to wetlands and if avoidance is not
feasible to minimize impacts and mitigate impacts. Minimization of regulated activities
within regulated areas may be achieved by integration of regulated areas with required
parklands and open space. This division recognizes that impacts to regulated areas may
occur to advance other adopted policies and goals of the city.
E. Nothing in this division 38.610 may be construed to prevent irrigators from diverting water
pursuant to water rights or owners of such rights from exercising those rights including
maintenance of agricultural water conveyance facilities.
F. Nothing in this division 38.610 may be construed to prevent compliance with applicable
state or federal statutes and regulations.
131
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 15 of 24
G. The purpose of this division is to balance the benefits of land development, such as housing
and job creation, with the benefits wetlands provide to the community.
Sec. 38.610.030. Application of wetland regulations.
A. These regulations apply to any regulated activity as described in 38.610.050 which may
impact wetlands and which impacts are known prior to, or discovered through the
development review process, and which are verified through a site-specific wetland
boundary delineation. When any regulated activity is proposed, a wetlands boundary
delineation must be conducted. If the wetlands delineation indicates wetlands are not
present on or adjacent to the property, the review authority may determine these regulations
do not apply. If wetlands exist on the property, the proposed development is subject to these
wetland regulations and the provisions of this division 38.610 will be applied in addition to
any other applicable regulations of this code. If site conditions exist that indicate wetlands
could potentially be present on the property, the review authority may require the following
be provided with the submittal of an application for development:
1. A wetlands boundary delineation pursuant to 38.220.130 and 38.610.040 must be
prepared by a qualified wetland professional in accordance with the most current
version of the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual of the U.S. applicable to the
USACE Omaha District and Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Western Mountains.
2. A qualified wetland professional is an individual with a minimum of a bachelor's
degree in a water resource related field, five years' experience in a wetland related
field, and/or a professional wetland scientist certification.
3. If wetlands do not exist on the subject property, a letter from a qualified wetland
professional must be submitted certifying the same.
B. Wetlands which are not within the jurisdiction of a federal agency, and which are less than
400 square feet are exempt from this division 38.610 unless the wetland provides habitat for
the following species as confirmed by a state or federal agency:
1. Habitat for plant, animal or other wildlife species listed as threatened or endangered
under federal law;
2. Habitat for plant, animal or other wildlife species listed as a species of concern, species
of potential concern, or species on review as determined by the state; or
3. A portion of a mosaic of wetland areas interspersed with upland areas and other habitat
types with interconnected ecological functions.
C. Any development for which the watercourse setback requirements of 38.410.100 are
provided and do not result in any wetland impact is considered to have addressed the
132
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 16 of 24
requirements of this division 38.610. Notwithstanding the above, the permitting regulations
of this division for activities identified in 38.610.050 apply.
D. Applicants must avoid impacts to regulated wetlands. If the applicant demonstrates impacts
to wetlands cannot be avoided, the review authority may approve development that impacts
wetlands if such impacts are minimized, and appropriate mitigation is provided.
Sec. 38.610.040. Wetlands boundary and jurisdictional determinations.
A. The USACE is the only entity that may issue an Approved Jurisdictional Determination.
B. The review authority may rely on the wetland delineation and the Approved Jurisdictional
Determination submitted with the application.
1. If the Approved Jurisdictional Determination indicates federal jurisdiction over the
wetlands exists, and impacts to the wetlands are proposed, the applicant must submit a
copy of the applicant’s Clean Water Act Section 404 permit application to the city
concurrent with the application for development under this chapter.
2. If the Approved Jurisdictional Determination indicates federal jurisdiction over the
wetlands does not exist, and impacts to the wetlands are proposed, the applicant must
comply with the regulations of this chapter and obtain approval from the review
authority for any impacts and the required mitigation. The city will determine the extent
of and means of mitigation subject to 38.610.100.
3. Regardless of jurisdictional status, the city will review the submitted material under
local jurisdiction for any regulated activities in a wetland. All development is subject to
the review process of division 38.230.
4. If federal jurisdiction is later determined to exist, the applicant must comply with any
requirements of USACE.
5. Approval by the city to impact wetlands in no way implies a determination by the city of
USACE jurisdiction or federal regulations.
6. A wetland delineation and boundary determination are valid for five years from the
original report date.
Sec. 38.610.050. Regulated activities.
A. The activities listed in this section are prohibited within a wetland, regardless of federal or
city jurisdictional status unless the proposed activity is approved by the entity having
jurisdiction.
B. Any activity which reduces the size of a wetland or reduces the degree to which a wetland
performs any function identified in the wetland delineation report is subject to the
requirements of this division 38.610. Such activities include but are not limited to:
133
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 17 of 24
1. Placement of any material, including any soil, sand, gravel, mineral, aggregate, organic
material, or water;
2. Construction, installation, or placement of any obstruction, or the erection of a
building, trail, boardwalk, or other structure;
3. Removal, excavation, or dredging of solid material of any kind, including any soil,
sand, gravel, mineral, aggregate, or organic material;
4. Removal of any existing vegetation or any activity which will cause any loss of
vegetation;
5. Alteration of the surface water level or ground water table by any means, including
draining, ditching, trenching, impounding, or pumping; and
6. Disturbance of existing surface drainage characteristics, sedimentation patterns, flow
patterns, or flood retention characteristics by any means, including grading and
alteration of existing topography.
Sec 38.610.060. Activities allowed without a permit.
A. Except for wetlands under federal jurisdiction, the activities listed in this section are
permissible without prior approval by the review authority, if such activity does not reduce
the size of a wetland or does not significantly reduce the degree to which a wetland
performs any function. Notwithstanding the above, such activity must comply with any
other applicable local, state, or federal law. Activities permissible without a city
development approval may include:
1. Maintenance of an existing and lawful public or private road, structure or facility,
including but not limited to drainage or stormwater facilities, water conveyance
structures, dams, fences, trails, or any facility used to provide transportation, electric,
gas, water, telephone, telecommunications or other services provided that these
activities do not materially change or enlarge any road, structure or facility;
2. Maintenance of an existing farm or stock pond, an agricultural water user facility,
agricultural fence, or drainage system;
3. Weed control consistent with a Noxious Weed Management and Revegetation Plan
approved by the county weed control district or other maintenance activities to remove
or control state identified noxious weeds;
4. Continuation of existing agricultural practices such as the cultivation and harvesting of
hay or pasturing of livestock, or a change of agricultural practices which has no greater
impact on wetland function;
5. Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, and other wildlife;
6. Outdoor recreational activities, such as fishing, bird watching, hiking, floating, and
swimming which do not harm or disturb the wetland;
134
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 18 of 24
7. The harvesting of wild crops;
8. Education and scientific research;
9. Minor improvements and landscape maintenance outside a wetland but within a
previously approved watercourse setback or wetland buffer, including but not limited
to the pruning of trees, mowing of grass, and removal of dead vegetation and debris;
and
10. Activities in a wetland previously approved pursuant a wetland permit or city
development approval, including but not limited to removal of debris and maintenance
of vegetation and wildlife habitat.
B. If federal jurisdiction exists, the applicant must comply with all requirements of the USACE
or any other state or federal agency having jurisdiction.
Sec. 38.610.070. Application requirements and procedures for activities in wetland areas.
A. All proposals for regulated activities in wetlands areas must be reviewed by the review
authority. The applicant must prepare a functional assessment for all wetlands using an
assessment tool currently accepted by the Omaha District of the USACE or the State of
Montana. If wetland impacts are proposed in association with a development permit,
application must follow the review process for the development permit.
B. If a regulated activity is proposed for a regulated wetland area, but the regulated activity is
not proposed in conjunction with a land development proposal, the applicant must submit a
sketch plan application for decision by the review authority.
C. The applicant is prohibited from taking or engaging in a regulated activity that impacts a
wetland until authorized to do so by the review authority.
D. The applicable information required in division 38.220 must be submitted for all regulated
activities proposed for regulated wetland areas.
Sec. 38.610.080. Review standards/Minimum Wetland Buffer.
A. The review authority may approve an application under this division 38.610 after having
considered the applicant’s documentation of:
1. The functions and values described in 38.610.030 and as determined by a USACE
accepted method of functional assessment of the wetland that may be affected by the
proposed regulated activity;
2. The extent and permanence of adverse effects of the regulated activity on the wetland
and any associated watercourse;
3. Any proposed mitigation; and
4. The applicant’s demonstration:
a. that any unavoidable adverse impacts on the wetland have been minimized; and
135
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 19 of 24
b. the activity will result in minimal impairment to any wetland function, including
the following:
1. Plant, animal or other wildlife species listed as threatened or endangered
under federal law; or
2. Plant, animal or other wildlife species listed as a species of concern, species
of potential concern, or species by the state.
B. Minimum Wetland Buffer. All development must provide a minimum wetland buffer of
ten feet from the edge of the delineated wetland wherein any disturbance to the wetland
buffer including construction activities is prohibited. The review authority may require a
larger wetland buffer based on the wetland delineation report.
Sec. 38.610.090. Wetland approval conditions.
The review authority may require mitigation as provided for in 38.610.100 and impose
conditions of approval for proposed regulated activities that are necessary to mitigate impacts to
wetlands, or which are necessary to mitigate infringement upon wetlands and wetland buffers, or
negative indirect or direct effects on the functionality of wetlands and wetland buffers.
Conditions of approval may include but are not limited to, the following:
A. Notwithstanding the minimum wetland buffer, requiring a wetland buffer of a size
appropriate for the proposed activity and the regulated wetland as determined by the review
authority;
B. Requiring structures be appropriately supported and elevated or otherwise protected against
hazards;
C. Modifying proposals for waste disposal, stormwater, or water supply facilities;
D. Requiring protective covenants between the landowner and the city regarding the future
development, use, and subdivision of lands, including but not limited to the preservation of
undeveloped areas as open space and restrictions on vegetation removal;
E. Requiring a protective covenant between the landowner and the city stating the measures
that will be taken to protect all water resources, mitigation, and buffer areas;
F. Requiring erosion control and stormwater best management practices (BMPs);
G. Clustering structures or development;
H. Restricting fill, deposit of soil, and other activities which may be detrimental to a wetland;
I. Modifying the project design to ensure a reliable source and flow of water to the regulated
wetland;
J. Requiring or restricting maintenance of a regulated wetland area for the purpose of
maintaining wetland functions;
K. Requiring a mitigation monitoring report to be submitted to the review authority (the period
and frequency of the reporting will be determined on a case-by-case basis); and
136
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 20 of 24
L. Requiring that all reasonable effort be made to limit indirect impacts to vegetation and
hydrological connectivity in the site design.
Sec. 38.610.100. Wetland mitigation.
A. Adverse wetland impacts must be mitigated regardless of wetland jurisdictional status in the
following order of priority except as may be required or authorized by the USACE for
wetlands within USACE jurisdiction:
1. Impacts must be mitigated on-site where feasible to do so. Using an approved wetland
functional assessment methodology, the replacement function and value of the on-site
mitigation wetland must meet or exceed the functions and values of the impacted
wetland. If conditions are not suitable for establishing on-site mitigation, the review
authority may authorize an alternative mitigation as described in subsections A.2-6.
On-site mitigation must be conducted in accordance with methods and standards
established by the USACE. Factors the review authority may consider in determining
feasibility of on-site mitigation include but are not limited to: available area; the
availability and reliability of water to serve the mitigation site; soil and vegetation
types; wetland size and functional class; existing and future land use; compliance with
adopted land use plans; and the city’s current and future planned transportation
network.
2. If mitigation is not suitable on-site, impacts must be mitigated through the purchase of
wetland mitigation credits from a wetland bank authorized by the USACE and which is
located within the East Gallatin River watershed.
3. If an authorized wetland bank is not available in the East Gallatin watershed, impacts
must be mitigated through the purchase of wetland mitigation credits from a wetland
bank authorized by USACE and which is located within the Gallatin River watershed;
4. If a wetland bank is not available within the Gallatin River watershed, the developer
must provide a proportional payment to an in-lieu fee wetland mitigation provider
authorized by the USACE to develop wetland mitigation projects within the Gallatin
River watershed; and
5. If a wetland in-lieu fee provider authorized by the USACE is not available within the
Gallatin River watersheds, the developer must obtain wetland mitigation credits from
the geographically nearest wetland bank authorized by the USACE.
B. The city commission may, pursuant to Resolution, establish standards that:
1. Require a decrease in the compensatory value of mitigation bank credits as distance to
the bank increases from the location of wetland adversely impacted; and
2. Ensure the amount of mitigation credits or acreage of wetland mitigation required are
reasonably related to the area and functional class of the impacted wetland.
137
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 21 of 24
Sec. 38.610.110. Administrative procedures authorized.
A. The city manager or designee may adopt and amend administrative procedures to
implement this division. The administrative procedures include, but are not limited to, the
following items:
1. Guidelines necessary to conduct an analysis of alternatives to the proposed action
related to the prioritization of mitigation as provided for in 38.610.100;
2. Coordination with stormwater management practices;
3. Coordination with USACE to avoid duplication of wetland mitigation bank credits;
4. Procedures for provision of payment to USACE authorized in-lieu-fee provider for
wetland impacts or mitigation;
5. Requirements for wetlands delineation and wetland Jurisdictional Determination
reports;
6. Procedures for certification of wetland delineation and opinion of wetlands
jurisdictional status reports;
7. Guidelines related to the content of a required monitoring report;
8. Procedures to implement 38.610.100 including procedures related to timing of
mitigation prior to construction of construction of improvements;
9. Requirements for wetland mitigation plans including ensuring long-term protections
for off-site mitigation such as an easement or protective covenant that cannot be
removed without consent of the city;
10. Fees for wetland review and mitigation prioritization; and
11. Guidelines for local in-lieu-fee program
Section 5
That Section 38.700.190. - U definitions, Bozeman Municipal Code shall be amended as follows
to add:
USACE. When referred to in this chapter, USACE means the United States Army Corps of
Engineers.
Section 6
That Section 38.700.210. - W definitions, Bozeman Municipal Code shall be amended as follows:
Watercourse Setback. A fixed distance applied from the ordinary high-water mark.
Wetland.
A. Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a
138
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 22 of 24
prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions, and meet the
established criteria briefly described below:
1. Vegetation. A prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation. Hydrophytic species, due to
morphological, physiological, and/or reproductive adaptation, have the ability to grow,
effectively compete, reproduce, and/or persist in anaerobic soil conditions.;
2. Soils. A hydric soil is a soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or
ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the
upper part.; and
3. Hydrology. The area is inundated either permanently or periodically, or the soil is
saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season of the prevalent
vegetation at a duration sufficient to induce anaerobic and reducing conditions.
Wetland Buffer. Except for the minimum buffer established by this chapter, a variable distance
applied from the edge of a delineated wetland and determined by the review authority based on
an analysis of the resource and expected adjacent activities as necessary to protect the wetland
from adverse impacts to its function and value.
Section 7
Repealer.
All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances of
the City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force
and effect.
Section 8
Savings Provision.
This ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were
incurred or proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this ordinance. All other
provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this Ordinance shall remain in full
force and effect.
Section 9
Severability.
That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this
ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect
the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so
139
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 23 of 24
decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman
Municipal Code as a whole.
Section 10
Codification.
This Ordinance shall be codified as indicated in Section 2 – 6.
Section 11
Effective Date.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption.
PROVISIONALLY ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman,
Montana, on first reading at a regular session held on the _____ day of ________________, 2025.
____________________________________
TERENCE CUNNINGHAM
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
MIKE MAAS
City Clerk
140
Ordinance No. 2025‐xxx, Replacement of Division 38.610 Wetlands and Section 38.410.100
Ord 2156
Page 24 of 24
FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the
City of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ___ of
____________________, 2025. The effective date of this ordinance is ______________, 2025.
_________________________________
TERENCE CUNNINGHAM
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
MIKE MAAS
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
GREG SULLIVAN
City Attorney
141
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Community Development Board
FROM:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Erin George, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:Upcoming Items for the Sept 15th, 2025, Community Development Board
Meeting
MEETING DATE:September 8, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION:Information only, no action required.
STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning,
ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban
approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density,
connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods.
BACKGROUND:The following items are presently scheduled for review at the Sept 15, 2025,
Community Development Board meeting:
1. Report on public engagement and progress outline for Montana Land Use
Planning Act implementation of the Bozeman Community Plan technical
compliance update, application 23333 [external link]. Considered in the role
of the Planning Commission.
2. Hidden Creek Preliminary Plat, application 24533 [external link],
considered in role as the Planning Board.
3. SRX II Preliminary Plat, application 24112 [external link], considered in
role as the Planning Board.
4. Unified Development Code update continued discussion, application
21381 [external link] considered in role as the Planning Commission.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None.
ALTERNATIVES:None.
FISCAL EFFECTS:No budgeted funds are expended with this item.
142
Report compiled on: September 3, 2025
143
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Community Development Board
FROM:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Erin George, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:Bozeman Community Plan Annual Implementation Report
MEETING DATE:September 8, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Plan/Report/Study
RECOMMENDATION:Receive information
STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning,
ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban
approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density,
connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods.
BACKGROUND:The Bozeman Community Plan sets out the community's vision for future
development. Chapter 2 identifies themes, goals, and objectives to improve
and maintain the community. Chapter 4, Implementation, identifies a short
list of actions to be taken to begin implementation of objectives, establishes
a series of metrics to be tracked, and requires an annual report on actions
taken to implement the plan.
Attached is this year's annual report. It identifies, by objective, actions taken
and the status of actions that are currently underway. Report covers the
period from July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025.
The City has also created a dashboard [External link] to track status of the
metrics established in Chapter 4.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None.
ALTERNATIVES:None.
FISCAL EFFECTS:None.
Attachments:
2025 Annual Report.pdf
Report compiled on: September 3, 2025
144
Page 1 of 26
BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN 2020 ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORT
July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2025
The Bozeman City Commission adopted the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 on November 17, 2020. The
plan includes many policies to guide public and private actions. Chapter 4 addresses implementation of
the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. To observe and monitor plan effectiveness, the plan calls for an
annual report on actions taken to implement the plan. This report fills that requirement and covers
actions taken between July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2025.
The plan horizon is 20 years. The plan will be reviewed five years after adoption and updated as needed.
Implementation of the plan occurs through a wide variety of City and partner organization actions. Plan
implementation may be a one‐time action or on‐going work. This report covers two elements of the
plan.
1) Short‐term action list ‐ A group of actions drawn from the objectives of the plan (pasted below for
reference). Each item advances a range of objects and represent items the Planning Board (now the
Community Development Board) considered important priorities. Responses to the action items are
presented in the detailed descriptions of implementation actions for each objective, starting on
page 2.
2) Goals & Objectives ‐ An item‐by‐item response for each objective. If no specific action is listed then
no individual action has been taken on that item so far, or actions taken were not provided to
Community Development.
Italics with purple font color in the Implementation Actions column indicate work that occurred
during the reporting period of July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2025
3) Plan metrics ‐ Targets for each indicator are measured over time ranges of one to three years. The
City has established an online dashboard to track and report on progress for these indicators.
SECTION 1. SHORT‐TERM ACTION LIST
The Bozeman Community Plan 2020 identifies many actions and objectives to address the listed goals.
Many actions are ongoing. Some are specific shorter‐term actions to implement this Plan. The following
list is not listed in any order of priority and is drawn from those shorter‐term actions listed in Chapter 2.
For details on implementation of each short‐term action see the referenced objectives in Section 2 of
this report.
145
Page 2 of 26
1. Review potential upzoning to implement objectives N‐1.1, N‐1.2, and N‐1.4.
2. Evaluate zoning map changes needed to implement objectives N‐1.3, N‐2.1, N‐2.2, and N‐3.9
consistent with factors identified in Chapter 5, Zoning Amendment Review.
3. Evaluate design standards as identified in objectives N‐1.7 and N‐2.4. Buildings are to be capable of
serving an initial residential purpose and be readily converted to commercial uses when adequate
market support for commercial services exists.
4. Evaluate revisions to maximum building height limits in multi‐household, commercial, industrial, and
mixed‐use zoning districts to account for revised building methods, building code changes, and the
effect of incremental changes on meeting goals of this plan as noted in objective DCD‐2.4.
5. Update land development standards to implement the Integrated Water Resources Plan as
identified in objective EPO‐3.5.
6. Identify missing links in the multimodal system, prioritize those most beneficial to complete, and
pursue funding for completion of those links as noted in objectives M‐1.4, M‐1.9, and M‐1.11.
7. Evaluate parking requirements and methods of providing parking as part of the overall
transportation system for and between districts as noted in objective M‐1.12.
8. Revise current intersection level of service design standards to multimodal level of service or traffic
stress for people walking, biking, and using transit as identified in objective M‐1.3.
9. Prepare for establishment of a Metropolitan Planning Organization, anticipated to be required after
the completion of the 2020 US Census and noted in objective RC‐1.6.
10. Establish standard practices for sharing development application information and exchanging
comments between the City and County as identified in objective RC‐3.5.
11. Revise the zoning map to harmonize with the future land use map as noted in objectives N‐1.3, N‐
2.1, N‐2.2, EE‐1.6, and RC‐4.4.
12. Update the UDC to reflect density increases or minimums within key districts as noted in objectives
DCD‐1.4, EPO‐1.6, and RC‐4.4.
13. Retain firm that specializes in form‐based development codes to evaluate the City's UDC, especially
with regard to completing the transition to a form‐based code and simplification so that it can be
understood by the general public and consistently applied by planning staff.
14. Work with partner organizations to implement EPO‐1.5 to identify and reduce impacts on
environmentally sensitive areas.
146
Page 3 of 26
SECTION 2. PLAN THEMES, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES
THEME 1: A RESILIENT CITY | GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS
Our City desires to be forward thinking, collaborative, and deliberate in planning and execution of plans
and policies to enable our community to successfully ride the waves of change.
Goal R‐1: Continue to strengthen and develop resilience
as a community.
Implementation Actions
R‐1.1. Be reflective: use past experience to inform future
decisions.
Experience in existing code and plan
usage does and will inform amendments
to improve processes and standards.
R‐1.2. Be resourceful: recognize alternative ways to use
resources.
R‐1.3. Be inclusive: prioritize broad consultation to
create a sense of shared ownership in decision making.
The Engage Bozeman community input
tool was created and is in use for the
ongoing UDC update, wetland regulation
update, and many other projects. The
UDC update expanded public outreach to
Spanish language materials and input
brochure techniques not previously used.
https://engage.bozeman.net/udc
R‐1.4. Be integrated: bring together a range of distinct
systems and institutions.
UDC update is underway and cross
issue/department coordination is part of
that, e.g., climate action plan and water
conservation plan implementation
coordination.
R‐1.5. Be robust: well‐conceived, constructed, and
managed systems.
The PRAT plan was adopted fall 2023 and
updated park and related system
priorities. The City adopted the 2023
Water Conservation and Efficiency Plan.
The wastewater collection plan update
was approved by Resolution 5664 on Dec
17, 2024. The Storm Water Facilities Plan
was approved by Resolution on May 6,
2025.
R‐1.6. Be redundant: spare capacity purposefully created
to accommodate disruption.
Annual CIP and utility maintenance
provides robust infrastructure that can
service a wide range of development
alternatives and short‐term disruption
responses.
147
Page 4 of 26
R‐1.7. Be flexible: willingness and ability to adopt
alternative strategies in response to changing
circumstances.
Analysis of water conservation options –
City Commission work session completed
Feb. 15, 2022. Code amendments were
developed for public review and
approved by the Commission in April
2024.
Goal R‐2: Pursue community decisions in a manner that
supports resilience.
Implementation Actions
R‐2.1. Co‐Benefits: Provide solutions that address
problems across multiple sectors, creating maximum
benefit.
UDC update is underway and cross issue
coordination is part of that, e.g. climate
action plan and water conservation plan
implementation coordination as well as
growth policy.
R‐2.2. High Risk and Vulnerability: Ensure that strategies
directly address the reduction of risk to human well‐
being, physical infrastructure, and natural systems.
Adopted Ordinance 2057 in March 2021
to update floodplain regulations to best
practices.
R‐2.3. Economic Benefit‐Cost: Make good financial
investments that have the potential for economic
benefit to the investor and the broader community both
through direct and indirect returns.
Annual capital improvement program
coordinates funding sources and
construction to create best value
outcomes in conjunction with community
priorities and plans such as supporting
compact development and
redevelopment.
R‐2.4. Social Equity: Provide solutions that are inclusive
with consideration to populations that are often most
fragile and vulnerable to sudden impacts.
PRAT plat update and UDC update
project used new outreach tools to reach
to multiple languages and user groups
less frequently engaged in planning
processes locally. Adopted new
incentives based affordable housing
program to conform to state law
changes. Adopted planned development
zone supporting affordable housing and
sustainable project design.
R‐2.5. Technical Soundness: Identify solutions that
reflect best practices that have been tested and proven
to work in similar local or regional contexts.
UDC update is underway and
incorporates local and regional lessons
and best practices. 2024 Water
conservation amendments are based on
best practice learning from around the
west.
148
Page 5 of 26
R‐2.6. Innovation: Advance new approaches and
techniques that will encourage continual improvement
and advancement of best practices.
UDC update is underway and cross issue
coordination is part of that work.
R‐2.7. Adaptive Capacity: Include flexible and adaptable
measures that consider future unknowns of changing
climate, economic, and social conditions.
Annual CIP and utility maintenance
provides robust infrastructure that can
service a wide range of development
alternatives. UDC update is underway
and includes additional latitude and
authority for on‐site and shared power
generation. City is researching updates to
wetland regulations to account for
changed federal regulations and local
needs.
R‐2.8. Harmonize with Existing Activity: Expand,
enhance, or leverage work being done to build on
existing efforts.
Water Conservation and Efficiency Plan
adopted in 2023. Water conservation
code amendments in review spring 2024
build on over a decade of water
conservation planning work. Engineering
design standards were updated in 2024
and are being integrated with the UDC
update.
R‐2.9. Long‐Term and Lasting Impact: Create long‐term
gains to the community with solutions that are replicable
and sustainable, creating benefit for present and future
generations.
Analysis of water conservation options –
City Commission work session completed
Feb. 15, 2022. Code amendments were
developed for public review and
approved by the Commission in April
2024. The update to the Integrated
Water Resources Plan began in 2025,
data on this project is available at
engage.bozeman.net.
THEME 2: A CITY OF UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOODS | GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS
Our City desires to be diverse, healthy, and inclusive, defined by our vibrant neighborhoods, quality
housing, walkability, excellent schools, numerous parks and trails, and thriving areas of commerce.
Goal N‐1: Support well‐planned, walkable
neighborhoods.
Implementation Actions
N‐1.1. Promote housing diversity, including missing
middle housing.
Incentives for affordable housing
including missing middle housing
adopted in Oct. 2022 with Ordinances
2105 and 2011. Ongoing UDC update is
evaluating district and standard changes
149
Page 6 of 26
for consideration in 2025. City updated
incentives for affordable housing in
38.340 in February 20205.
N‐1.2. Increase required minimum densities in
residential districts.
UDC update is underway and
reevaluation of minimum densities is part
of that work.
N‐1.3. Revise the zoning map to lessen areas exclusively
zoned for single‐type housing.
UDC update includes consolidation of
districts that will implement this task.
N‐1.4. Promote development of accessory dwelling units
(ADUs)
Ord. 2011 created 38.320.070 which
includes additional flexibility for creating
ADUs. Ord. 2091 authorized ground level
ADUs and removed ADU parking
requirements.
N‐1.5. Encourage neighborhood focal point development
with functions, activities, and facilities that can be
sustained over time. Maintain standards for placement
of community focal points and services within new
development.
Many neighborhood focal points are
parks. The PRAT plan which considers
best features and functions for parks was
updated and adopted in Fall 2023.
N‐1.6. Encourage urban agriculture as part of focal point
development, in close proximity to schools, and near
dense or multi‐unit housing.
UDC update draft includes urban
agriculture uses and standards for
evaluation.
N‐1.7. Review and where appropriate, revise block and
lot design standards, including orientation for solar
power generation throughout city neighborhoods.
Lot and block standards were reviewed in
2022 as part of evaluating potential edits
to the UDC.
N‐1.8. Install, replace, and maintain missing or damaged
sidewalks, trails, and shared use paths.
City has pursued grants for funding and
completed missing path sections along N.
19th Avenue. A gap analysis for the
ped/bike network began in May 2024.
City is pursuing federal funding for
installation of facilities.
N‐1.9. Ensure multimodal connections between adjacent
developments
a) 38.520.040 and other code sections
require connections. This code is applied
with all appropriate development.
b) Engineering staff and the TDM
Coordinator routinely review
development applications for best
practices as well as standards and code
adopted by the City.
c) The city integrates these facilities with
all road rebuild or expansion projects.
150
Page 7 of 26
N‐1.10. Increase connectivity between parks and
neighborhoods through continued trail and sidewalk
development. Prioritize closing gaps within the network.
This issue is included in the scope of the
Parks, Recreation, and Active
Transportation Plan [PRAT] (adopted in
Sept 2023) with a focus on establishing
an understanding of priority routes to
parks and open space amenities and
facilities in addition to identifying missing
connections and creating a
comprehensive wayfinding plan.
N‐1.11. Enable a gradual and predictable increase in
density in developed areas over time.
Ord. 2011 adopted in Oct 2022 provides
additional flexibility for small infill
development that creates additional
homes. After due public process 21 Zone
Map Amendments were approved
increasing allowed intensity of
development on previously zoned
property. One was completed during the
reporting period. Revisions to the UDC
are opening opportunities by increasing
allowed scope of allowed development in
districts and combining residential
districts.
N‐1.12. Encourage major employers to provide
employee housing within walking/biking distance of
place of employment.
The Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) plan has a provision
to focus on programmatic and
educational outreach and engagement to
reach out to workplaces to encourage
them to support staff using active modes
and alternative work environments (e.g.,
work from home), in turn making
employment and housing more flexible.
Goal N‐2: Pursue simultaneous emergence of
commercial nodes and residential development
through diverse mechanisms in appropriate locations.
Implementation Actions
N‐2.1. Ensure the zoning map identifies locations for
neighborhood and community commercial nodes early
in the development process.
Correspondence between the future land
use map and the zoning map provide this
surety.
N‐2.2. Revise the zoning map to support higher intensity
residential districts near schools, services, and
transportation.
Two applications for zone map
amendments increasing allowed intensity
at 1920 W Babcock and 1519 Alder Court
151
Page 8 of 26
was approved during this reporting
period.
N‐2.3. Investigate and encourage development of
commerce concurrent with, or soon after, residential
development. Actions, staff, and budgetary resources
relating to neighborhood commercial development
should be given a high priority.
The UDC update is considering expanding
options for where in residential districts
services and retail may be constructed.
N‐2.4. Evaluate design standards. Encourage
development in appropriate districts of buildings that
are capable of serving an initial residential purpose and
be readily converted to commercial uses when adequate
market support for commercial services exists.
UDC update includes review of design
standards.
N‐2.6. Ensure that new development includes
opportunities for urban agriculture, including rooftop
and home gardens, community gardens, or urban farms.
Included with ongoing UDC update and
replacement
Goal N‐3: Promote a diverse supply of quality housing
units.
Implementation Actions
N‐3.1. Establish standards for provisions of diversity of
housing types in a given area.
N‐3.2. Review zoning districts to assess the range of
housing types in each district.
Included for public review and comment
with UDC update and replacement.
N‐3.3. Encourage distribution of affordable housing units
throughout the City with priority given to locations near
commercial, recreational, and transit assets.
Zoning map decisions have expanded
locations where LIHTC can practically be
constructed to all community quadrants.
Adopted affordable housing incentives in
38.380.030 are available anywhere in the
community. Several Low‐Income Housing
Tax Credit projects have been completed
or are under construction and more are in
the design, review, and permitting phase.
Sites are in all quadrants of the
community.
N‐3.4. Require development of affordable housing
through coordination of funding for affordable housing
and infrastructure.
City coordinated $5M grant funding
support to construct a sewer lift station
in exchange for a land dedication for
affordable housing. Extension of N 15th
Avenue with city funding to required lot
frontage for a LIHTC 155 home project,
and to meet transportation connectivity
152
Page 9 of 26
requirements for a senior living and a 2nd
LIHTC project totaling 232 homes.
N‐3.5. Strongly discourage private covenants that restrict
housing diversity or are contrary to City land
development policies or climate action plan goals.
City Commission identified creation of
sample covenants as a priority for the
2022‐2023 work period. A work session
was held on November 15, 2022. Final
draft model covenants were presented to
commission on November 21, 2023.
N‐3.6. Include adequate residentially designated areas
for anticipated future housing in the future land use
map.
The future land use map provides the
necessary area shown as needed in
Appendix D of the growth policy.
N‐3.7. Support compact neighborhoods, small lot sizes,
and small floor plans, especially through mechanisms
such as density bonuses.
Included for public review and comment
with UDC update and replacement.
N‐3.8. Promote the development of "Missing Middle"
housing (side by side or stacked duplex, triplex, live‐
work, cottage housing, group living,
rowhouses/townhouses, etc.) as one of the most critical
components of affordable housing.
Additional flexibility in location and
design are Included for public review and
comment with UDC update and
replacement. Updates to 38.340 revised
incentives for “missing middle” types of
housing.
N‐3.9. Ensure an adequate supply of appropriately
designated land to accommodate Low Income Housing
Tax Credit development in qualifying census tracts.
Zoning is in place. Qualifying census tract
designation is outside of the City’s
control. Revisions happened with release
with the 2020 Census information.
Goal N‐4: Continue to encourage Bozeman’s sense of
place.
Implementation Actions
N‐4.1. Continue to recognize and honor the unique
history, neighborhoods, neighborhood character, and
buildings that contribute to Bozeman’s sense of place
through programs and policy led by both City and
community efforts.
Updates to the historic preservation
program are underway. A consultant has
been selected to assist and the first phase
of the project concluded in spring of
2025. Phase 2 is now underway which
examines code revisions and updates to
the existing design guidelines.
N‐4.2. Incorporate features, in both public and private
projects, to provide organization, structure, and
landmarks as Bozeman grows.
N‐4.3. Revise Design Guidelines within the Conservation
Overlay District to distinguish Downtown from the
residential neighborhoods, to encourage neighborhoods
Phase 2 of the Landmark project is now
underway which examines code revisions
and updates to the existing design
guidelines.
153
Page 10 of 26
and neighborhoods near transition areas, both north and
south of Downtown.
N‐4.4. Ensure an adequate supply of off‐leash facilities to
meet the demand of Bozeman dog owners.
This issue is included in the scope of the
Parks, Recreation, and Active
Transportation Plan [PRAT] (adopted in
Sept 2023).
THEME 3: A CITY BOLSTERED BY DOWNTOWN AND COMPLEMENTARY DISTRICTS | GOALS,
OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS
Our City is bolstered by our Downtown, Midtown, University and other commercial districts and
neighborhood centers that are characterized by higher densities and intensities of use.
Goal DCD‐1: Support urban development within the
City.
Implementation Actions
DCD‐1.1. Evaluate alternatives for more intensive
development in proximity to high visibility corners,
services, and parks.
Evaluation of building height transitions
and impact mitigation is part of overall
UDC update.
DCD‐1.2. Remove regulatory barriers to infill. Ord. 2011 adopted in Oct 2022 provides
additional flexibility for small infill
development that creates additional
homes. Definition of infill was adopted as
part of Ord. 2011. After due public
process 18 Zone Map Amendments were
approved increasing allowed intensity of
development on previously zoned
property. The City updated its annexation
policy to simplify process in spring 2025,
Resolution 2025‐07. 15 of 27 annexations
since plan adoption have wholly or
partially closed existing “holes” in the
City.
DCD‐1.3. Work with state regulatory agencies and the
legislature to remove disincentives in state law and
regulations to municipal development.
Staff engages with state rule making and
agencies to identify disincentives and
advocate for changes to support
equitable application of the laws. This is
an ongoing activity.
DCD‐1.4. Update the Unified Development Code (UDC)
to reflect density increases or minimums within key
districts.
Minimum density requirement changes
were directed by City Commission during
work session. Included for public review
and comment with UDC update and
replacement.
154
Page 11 of 26
DCD‐1.5. Identify underutilized sites, vacant, and
undeveloped sites for possible development or
redevelopment, including evaluating possible
development incentives.
The City’s annual land use inventory is
available online and can be cross
connected to zoning to identify possible
sites. The update to the Bozeman
Community Plan now underway is
identifying locations where
redevelopment may be appropriate.
DCD‐1.6. Investigate expansion of existing or creation of
new urban renewal areas to encourage redevelopment
of key properties.
The Pole Yard District was created in
December 2020.
DCD‐1.7. Coordinate infrastructure construction,
maintenance, and upgrades to support infill
development, reduce costs, and minimize disruption to
the public.
This is part of daily work activities across
multiple departments. Annual Capital
Improvement Program (CIP)
development formalizes these
evaluations.
DCD‐1.8. Collaborate with the Montana State University
School of Architecture and the Sustainable Foods and
Bioenergy Systems department to develop educational
materials and opportunities for local architects,
community planners, and citizens on how to do quality
urban design for infill and greenfield sites.
DCD‐1.9. Promote mixed‐use developments with access
to parks, open space, and transit options.
Update of standards for planned unit
development (Ord 2104) includes
method to remove property from
existing PUD and use current zoning
which is more favorable so such projects.
City has approved upzonings and initial
zonings for REMU and other districts that
support mixed use development. The
PRAT Plan (adopted fall 2023) address
access to parks, open space, and the
provision for transit options. In addition,
the plan will explore the “level of
comfort” associated with accessing these
spaces throughout the community.
DCD‐1.10. Support University efforts to attract
development near campus.
Reviewed and approved MSUIC PDZ
spring 2024.
DCD‐1.11. Pursue annexations consistent with the future
land use map and adopted facility plans for development
at urban intensity.
Privately initiated annexations consistent
with this goal are encouraged.
City is not initiating annexations
currently. The City has approved all
155
Page 12 of 26
requested annexations during the
reporting period. 27 annexations
encompassing approximately 680 acres
have been finalized since adoption of the
Bozeman Community Plan.
DCD‐1.12. Prioritize the acquisition and/or preservation
of open space that supports community values,
addresses gaps in functionality and needs, and does not
impede development of the community.
Resolution 5353 authorized purchase of
12 acres to expand Burke Park. City
completed purchase of the southern end
of Burke Park in early spring 2022. The
PRAT plan was completed in fall 2023
and includes park design and recreation
guidelines and policies to align with
relevant Climate Plan priorities.
DCD‐1.13. Pursue acquisition and development of
diverse water sources and resources.
This is on‐going work for the Engineering
division. Planning and testing for a well
field on the southwest side of town is an
active project.
Goal DCD‐2: Encourage growth throughout the City,
while enhancing the pattern of community
development oriented on centers of employment and
activity. Support an increase in development intensity
within developed areas.
Implementation Actions
DCD‐2.1. Coordinate infrastructure development, land
use development, and other City actions and priorities
through community planning.
This is part of daily work activities across
multiple departments. CIP development
formalizes these evaluations.
DCD‐2.2. Support higher density development along
main corridors and at high visibility street corners to
accommodate population growth and support
businesses.
Projects advancing this objective and
consistent with adopted standards have
been approved as their review was
completed.
DCD‐2.3. Review and update minimum development
intensity requirements in residential and non‐residential
zoning districts.
City Commission directed increase at
work session on districts during UDC
update. Work is ongoing.
DCD‐2.4. Evaluate revisions to maximum building height
limits in all zoning districts to account for contemporary
building methods and building code changes.
Ordinance 2070 amending residential
building heights took effect in July 2021.
UDC update considers changes to how
heights are measured and proposes
increased heights in some commercial
districts, review continues.
DCD‐2.5. Identify and zone appropriate locations for
neighborhood‐scale commercial development.
Locations are identified in the future land
use map in the growth policy. Zoning
156
Page 13 of 26
occurs with new annexations or
requested by landowner.
DCD‐2.6. Evaluate and pursue joint mitigation of
development impacts across multiple developments.
Urban Renewal Districts established to
provide infrastructure create a tool to
share impact mitigation. MSUIC PDZ
approved to coordinate mitigation from
multiple building projects within the
boundary of the MSUIC PDZ.
DCD‐2.7. Encourage the location of higher density
housing and public transit routes in proximity to one
another.
The city coordinates with Streamline
during service plan updates. No new
routes were created during the reporting
period.
DCD‐2.8. Revise the zoning ordinance, reducing the
number of zoning districts to be more consistent with
the designated land use classifications, to simplify the
development process, and support affordability
objectives of the plan.
Adopted new planned development zone
and affordable housing incentives. UDC
update is further evaluating district
consolidation.
DCD‐2.9. Evaluate increasing the number of stories
allowed in centers of employment and activity while also
directing height transitions down to adjacent
neighborhoods.
Change to height allowances in
commercial zones and transition
standards is ongoing as part of the UDC
update.
Goal DCD‐3: Ensure multimodal connectivity within the
City.
Implementation Actions
DCD‐3.1. Expand multimodal accessibility between
districts and throughout the City as a means of
promoting personal and environmental health, as well as
reducing automobile dependency.
The Park Recreation and Active
Transportation plan adopted in fall 2023
evaluates locations and design standards
for multimodal travel ways.
DCD‐3.2. Identify missing links in the multimodal system,
prioritize those most beneficial to complete, and pursue
funding for completion of those links.
Opportunities will be investigated, where
applicable, during plan review and in the
CIP development process, on an ongoing
basis.
The Park Recreation and Active
Transportation plan adopted in fall 2023
partially address these missing links. The
City obtained federal funding for closing
gaps in the N 19th Ave pathway and along
Valley Center. The Engineering division is
undertaking a ped/bike gap analysis
project in spring 2024 which completed
during this reporting period.
157
Page 14 of 26
DCD‐3.3. Identify major existing and future destinations
for biking and walking to aid in prioritization of route
planning and completion.
The Park Recreation and Active
Transportation plan adopted in fall 2023
identifies priority routes and
destinations.
DCD‐3.4. Support implementation of the Bozeman
Transportation Master Plan strategies.
Chapter 5 of the Transportation Master
Plan supports walk, bike, car share,
linked trips, and mixed‐use policies to
reduce travel demand. The PRAT plan,
and UDC standards allow for or actively
support these policies. The UDC update
now in public review updates intersection
level of service standards and traffic
study requirements. The zoning districts
support mixed‐uses.
DCD‐3.5. Encourage increased development intensity in
commercial centers and near major employers.
Tax increment districts support
redevelopment within their boundaries.
The UDC update now in public review
revises commercial building heights and
parking that support this objective.
DCD‐3.6. Evaluate parking requirements and methods of
providing parking as part of the overall transportation
system for and between districts.
City Commission directed consolidation
of non‐residential parking requirements
at Feb 2023 UDC work session. The City
Commission considered active parking
management in the Downtown area. The
UDC update now in public review revised
parking requirements. The state adopted
legislation that limits city ability to
require parking, the UDC draft has been
updated in response.
Goal DCD‐4: Implement a regulatory environment that
supports the Community Plan goals.
Implementation Actions
DCD‐4.1. Ensure that the Planning Department is
supported with the resources required to effectively
implement this plan, to dedicate staff to long range and
regional planning efforts, and to process development
applications expeditiously.
DCD‐4.2. Continuously invite and give due consideration
to the input of design and development professionals in
the improvement of the city's project evaluation
processes and development code.
The City meets with design professionals
in a regular monthly meeting and has
also sought their input during the UDC
update.
158
Page 15 of 26
DCD‐4.3. Complete the transition to a form‐based code
and simplification so that it can be understood by the
general public and consistently applied by planning staff.
Code Studio is contracted to support the
UDC update and has completed several
public outreach efforts to gather
information and draft a more user
friendly code. The UDC update now in
public review simplifies language used,
rearranges document flow for clarity,
adds graphics, and makes the standards
easier to understand. Additional form
based elements are included.
DCD‐4.4. Differentiate between development and
redevelopment. Allow relaxations of code provisions for
developed parcels to allow redevelopment to the full
potential of their zoning district.
Ordinance 2011 adopted a definition of
infill. The UDC update includes several
revisions to simplify redevelopment.
THEME 4: A CITY INFLUENCED BY OUR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, PARKS, AND OPEN LANDS | GOALS,
OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS
Our City is home to an outdoor‐conscious population that honors and protects our natural environment
and our well‐managed open space and parks system.
Goal EPO‐1: Prioritize strategic acquisition of parks to
provide a variety of recreational opportunities
throughout the City.
Implementation Actions
EPO‐1.1. Coordinate the location of existing and future
parks to create opportunities for linear parks to connect
larger parks. Prioritize quality locations and features in
parks over quantity of parks.
Final locations for trails are set during
development review with easements as
needed. The PRAT Plan adopted in fall
2023 provides guidance for priority
routes and development standards.
EPO‐1.2. Collaborate with partner agencies and
organizations to establish sustainable funding sources
for ongoing acquisition, construction, and operations of
City parks, trails, gardens, and open space.
EPO‐1.3. Incorporate unique and inclusive recreational
and artistic elements into parks.
This is an operational issue addressed
with plans for individual parks.
EPO‐1.4. Research and implement multi‐use features
within parks to promote increased use and visitation.
Wherever possible, parks are connected to multi‐modal
transportation options and accessible for people with
disabilities.
This is an operational issue addressed
with plans for individual parks.
159
Page 16 of 26
EPO‐1.5. Work with partner organizations to identify and
reduce impacts on at‐risk, environmentally sensitive
areas that contribute to water quality, wildlife corridors,
or wildlife habitat, specifically wildlife habitat as we
continue outward growth.
a) Sensitive lands protection plan was
completed and accepted by the City
Commission in December 2023.
b) Community Development funded
creation of an updated streams and
ditches GIS layer that will help with early
identification of protected waters. Data
has been collected and is being mapped
in collaboration with MSU and other City
departments. .
EPO‐1.6. Upon completion of an update to the City’s
park master plan, review standards of the UDC for
adequacy and update, as needed, to coordinate with
development review standards and practices.
The PRAT Plan was adopted in fall 2023.
Standards update will follow completion
of the plan.
Goal EPO‐2: Work to ensure that development is
responsive to natural features.
Implementation Actions
EPO‐2.1. Where appropriate, activate connections to
waterways by creating locations, adjacent trails, and
amenities encouraging people to access them.
This is an operational issue addressed
with plans for individual parks.
EPO‐2.2. Work with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to
keep wetlands mitigation within the Gallatin Valley
rather than locating to other watersheds.
The Engineering division has been tasked
with investigating this option. Recent US
supreme court decision has changed
scope of Corps authority over wetlands.
Draft amendments to municipal code
were prepared and Commission will hear
them on Sept 9, 2025.
EPO‐2.3. Identify, prioritize, and preserve key wildlife
habitat and corridors.
Sensitive lands protection plan was
completed and accepted by the City
Commission in December 2023.
Goal EPO‐3: Address climate change in the City’s plans
and operations.
Implementation Actions
EPO‐3.1. Support development of maintenance
standards including sidewalk clearing, sidewalk surfaces,
bike lanes, and procedures for consistent
implementation.
The Transportation and Engineering
division piloted an alternating side snow
plowing approach to improve snow
management which will also affect
corner crossings.
EPO‐3.2. Ensure complete streets and identify long‐term
resources for the maintenance of year‐round bike and
Appropriate complete street elements
were included as part of the UDC update
(ongoing) and in the update to the
160
Page 17 of 26
multi‐use paths to improve utilization and reduce annual
per capita vehicle miles traveled.
Engineering Design Standards completed
in winter of 2024.
EPO‐3.3. Support water conservation, use of native
plants in landscaping, and development of water reuse
systems.
Code amendments were developed by
the Water Conservation division and
adopted by the City Commission in May
2024 which advance this objective.
EPO‐3.4. Review and update landscape and open space
standards for public and private open spaces to reduce
water use. Likewise, review and update standards for
reuse systems.
Code amendments were developed by
the Water Conservation division and
adopted by the City Commission in May
2024.
EPO‐3.5. Update land development standards to
implement the Integrated Water Resources Plan.
Code amendments were developed by
the Water Conservation division and
adopted by the City Commission in May
2024.
EPO‐3.6. Review and revise stormwater standards to
address changing storm profiles.
Stormwater standards are being
addressed in the Engineering Design
Standards update now underway.
Stormwater post‐construction facilities
maintenance is being addressed in the
Stormwater Facilities Plan adopted in
May 2025.
EPO‐3.7. Review and update development regulations to
implement facility and service plans when those plans
are updated.
This is an ongoing effort as each plan is
updated. An update to the sewer facility
plan is presently underway. The PRAT
plan was adopted last fall. Amendments
as needed will follow completion.
EPO‐3.8. In coordination with the Sustainability Division,
provide public education on energy conservation and
diversified power generation alternatives.
UDC update includes amendments to
facilitate shared solar and other
alternatives. Education on these
alternatives has occurred during the UDC
update.
EPO‐3.9. Integrate climate change considerations into
development standards.
Stormwater standards are being
addressed in the Engineering Design
Standards update now underway.
Stormwater post‐construction facilities
maintenance is being addressed in the
Stormwater Facilities Plan adopted in
May 2025.
161
Page 18 of 26
EPO‐3.10. Inclusion of community gardens, edible
landscaping, and urban micro‐farms as part of open
spaces outside of watercourses and wetlands in
subdivisions is encouraged where appropriate.
The PRAT plan adopted last fall discusses
community gardens within public parks
as a priority. The UDC update includes
provisions for urban agriculture.
EPO‐3.11. Support resource conservation through
recycling, composting, and other appropriate means.
The Solid Waste Division operates a
recycling service, has completed a pilot
composting project, and now includes the
service through its solid waste division.
Goal EPO‐4: Promote uses of the natural environment
that maintain and improve habitat, water quantity,
and water quality, while giving due consideration to
the impact of City regulations on economic viability.
Implementation Actions
EPO‐4.1. Eliminate reliance on private maintenance of
public infrastructure, including public parks, trail
systems, and stormwater facilities. Identify a sustainable
and reliable public funding source for this infrastructure.
Electors approved formation of a park
and trail maintenance district in May of
2020. Implementation is ongoing.
EPO‐4.2. Update floodplain and other regulations that
protect the environment.
The Engineering Division has been tasked
with reviewing wetland regulations.
Recent US Supreme Court decisions have
changed the legal standards for
wetlands. Revised standards will go to
public hearing at the Commission on Sept
9, 2025.
EPO‐4.3. Pursue an inter‐jurisdictional effort to establish
baseline information on air quality trends and enhance
monitoring facilities.
EPO‐4.4. Collaborate with other Montana cities working
with regulatory agencies to establish fair and
technologically feasible water treatment standards.
Department of Utilities staff are engaged
with the Montana League of Cities and
DEQ on review of draft water treatment
standards. Staff supported passage of
revised nutrient standards in the 2025
legislature.
EPO‐4.5. Complete the update for an integrated Hazard
Management and Mitigation Plan.
The updated plan was approved by
Resolution 5256 in 2021.
EPO‐4.6. Develop a plan to mitigate conflicts between
humans and wildlife through the use of proactive, non‐
lethal measures.
The Solid Waste Division completed a
bear resistant contain pilot test and is
now expanding availability of bear
162
Page 19 of 26
resistant totes. A grant was obtained to
reduce costs to the City.
THEME 5: A CITY THAT PRIORITIZES ACCESSIBILITY AND MOBILITY | GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS
Our City fosters the close proximity of housing, services, and jobs, and desires to provide safe, efficient
mobility for pedestrians, cyclists, transit users, and drivers.
Goal M‐1: Ensure multimodal accessibility. Implementation Actions
M‐1.1. Prioritize mixed‐use land use patterns. Encourage
and enable the development of housing, jobs, and
services in close proximity to one another.
All zoning districts enable diverse uses.
Most districts specifically authorize
mixed residential and service/
commercial uses. The UDC update
includes revisions to parking
requirements that will make it easier to
construct mixed uses.
M‐1.2. Make transportation investment decisions that
recognize active transportation modes and transit as a
priority.
Capital Improvement programming,
prepared annually, includes funding to
close system gaps. The City included
active transportation as part of the PRAT
update (Goal 3). The City engages with
the Urban Transportation District
through the MPO planning process and
provides financial support for transit.
M‐1.3. Develop service standard levels for multimodal
travel.
The PRAT plan partially addresses this, as
will revision of engineering standards
completed in winter 2024 and alignment
with other plans and policies.
M‐1.4. Develop safe, connected, and complementary
transportation networks for pedestrians, bicyclists, and
users of other personal mobility devices (e‐bikes, electric
scooters, powered wheelchairs, etc.).
Like other objectives, this will be covered
by the PRAT plan, the CIP, the revisions
of the UDC, and the revision of
engineering standards to be employed
with all private and public projects that
include transportation components or
the opportunity for “affordances” of
concurrent planning and
implementation.
M‐1.5. Identify locations for key mobility hubs (e.g.
rideshare drop off/ pick up areas, bike/scooter share,
transit service, bike, and pedestrian connections).
Partially accomplished through the
routing map in the PRAT.
163
Page 20 of 26
M‐1.6. Integrate consideration of rideshare and other
mobility choices into community planning regulations.
The Transportation and Engineering
Department coordinated with private
companies to develop and implement a
plan to manage e‐scooters.
M‐1.7. Develop a trunk network of high‐frequency,
priority transit service connecting major commercial
nodes and coinciding with increased density.
Voters approved creation of an Urban
Transportation District in May 2023. The
UTD is now responsible for creation and
administration of the transit system. The
UTD participates in the Metropolitan
Planning Organization.
M‐1.8. Establish standards and procedures for
placement of bus shelters in City rights of way.
The City has established a memorandum
of understanding for placement of transit
shelters.
M‐1.9. Prioritize and construct key bicycle infrastructure,
to include wayfinding signage, connections, and
enhancements with emphasis on completing network
connectivity.
Partially accomplished through the
routing map and design standards in the
PRAT. Construction is planned and
funded through the CIP and budget
systems.
M‐1.10. In conjunction with the transportation plan,
work to develop a core network of “AAA” (appropriate
for all ages and abilities) bike routes covering at least 75
percent of households and 75 percent of jobs within ½
mile of the network.
The PRAT plan supports the development
of “AAA” bike routes, including bike
boulevards, buffered bike lanes and off‐
street facilities where appropriate or
feasible. The city can investigate grant
opportunities to offset the cost to fund
retrofitting existing facilities. The PRAT
plan will prioritize key off‐street routes
and have the provision for how to
provide wayfinding.
M‐1.11. Prioritize and construct key sidewalk
connections and enhancements.
The Engineering division is undertaking a
ped/bike gap analysis project in spring
2024 that was recently completed.
M‐1.12. Eliminate parking minimum requirements in
commercial districts and affordable housing areas and
reduce parking minimums elsewhere, acknowledging
that demand for parking will still result in new supply
being built.
Parking requirements are being
evaluated as part of the UDC update. City
Commission gave direction at a work
session on specific implementation.
M‐1.13. Work with community partners to expand the
Main Street to the Mountains network and integrate the
larger community recreational travel network.
The PRAT plan addresses this with Goal 3
in addition to ongoing partnerships with
GVLT and other community organizations
that focus on this network. In addition,
164
Page 21 of 26
the plan will explore additional sections
of the network, branding and naming.
M‐1.14. Identify possible routes for future bicycle and
pedestrian beltway/greenway.
The PRAT plan addresses this with Goal 3.
Goal M‐2: Ensure multimodal safety. Implementation Actions
M‐2.1. Work with the Public Works Department, Police
Department, and other partners to provide education on
safe travel behaviors and rules.
Bozeman's Streets Are For Everyone
(SAFE) Plan has been developed,
adopted, and implementation has begun.
M‐2.2. Review and, as appropriate, update the City’s
complete streets policy.
Review was completed. Appropriate
elements were included as part of the
UDC update (ongoing) and in the recently
completed update to the Engineering
Design Standards.
M‐2.3. Work with School District #7 and other
community partners in planning and operating safe
routes to local schools.
The City has coordinated with BSD7 and
the Western Transportation Institute to
identify infrastructure improvements as
well as organize a Walking School Bus
program and host several bicycle safety
events.
M‐2.4. Encourage the design of school sites to support
walking and biking.
M‐2.5. Develop safe crossings along priority and high
utilization pedestrian and biking corridors.
Bozeman's Streets Are For Everyone
(SAFE) Plan has been developed,
adopted, and implementation has begun.
THEME 6: A CITY POWERED BY ITS CREATIVE, INNOVATIVE, AND ENTREPRENEURIAL ECONOMY|
GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS
Our City benefits from and desires to further an expanding economy that is powered by the talents of its
residents, a dedicated and engaged business community, and strong regional partnerships.
Goal EE‐1: Promote the continued development of
Bozeman as an innovative and thriving economic
center.
Implementation Actions
EE‐1.1. Support the goals and objectives outlined in the
Bozeman Economic Development Strategy.
EE‐1.2. Invest in those infrastructure projects that will
strengthen business and higher education communities
as coordinated through the annual capital improvement
plan.
City supported the MSU Innovation
Campus with $3.6M in public
infrastructure support.
165
Page 22 of 26
EE‐1.3. Continue to facilitate live/work opportunities as a
way to support small, local businesses in all zoning
districts.
This calls for continuation of existing
policy and code. No reductions in
emphasis in this area are expected.
EE‐1.4. Support employee retention and attraction
efforts by encouraging continued development of
affordable housing in close proximity to large employers.
The City uses a variety of incentives,
financial and others, to encourage
construction of affordable housing.
EE‐1.5. Support expansion of current and emerging
infrastructure technologies including fiber optic service
and other communication infrastructure.
City Engineering has coordinated right of
way encroachments for fiber optic
installation.
EE‐1.6. Update the zoning map to correct deficiencies
identified in the annual land use inventory report.
Annual land use report has not identified
deficiencies at this point.
Goal EE‐2: Survey and revise land use planning and
regulations to promote and support economic
diversification efforts.
Implementation Actions
EE‐2.1. Ensure the future land use map contains
adequate areas of land for anticipated diverse users.
The future land use map in the growth
policy contains enough area to
accommodate all uses identified in the
plan development process.
EE‐2.2. Review and revise, or possibly replace, the
Business Park Mixed Use zoning district to include urban
standards and consider possible alterations to the
allowed uses.
This is being reviewed as part of the
overall UDC update.
EE‐2.3. Adopt zoning regulations that establish and
define the range of urban agricultural practices,
including vertical farms and other forms of urban
farming, as a permitted or conditional use in appropriate
locations. Urban agriculture can be compatible with a
variety of land use designations shown on the Future
Land Use Map.
This is being reviewed as part of the
overall UDC update.
THEME 7: A CITY ENGAGED IN REGIONAL COORDINATION | GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS
Our City, in partnership with Gallatin County, Montana State University, and other regional authorities,
desires to address the needs of a rapidly growing and changing regional population through strategic
infrastructure choices and coordinated decision‐making.
Goal RC‐1: Improve communication and coordination
with Gallatin County, the City of Belgrade, public
schools, and other regional public entities regarding
community planning and associated matters.
Implementation Actions
166
Page 23 of 26
RC‐1.1. Consider regional impacts when making policy
decisions affecting areas outside the City.
a) A joint project between the City,
County, and other partners to evaluate
environmentally sensitive lands in the
valley was completed in Dec 2023.
b) A study of water and sewer system
regionalization was completed in 2024.
c) The City is working with partners
investigating housing issues and possible
solutions throughout the county.
RC‐1.2. Coordinate planning activities to promote
consistency throughout the region for parks,
transportation, bus service, and other community
infrastructure.
a) The City and other jurisdictions formed
a Metropolitan Planning Organization to
coordinate transportation planning. The
first long‐range transportation plan
began development in spring 2025.
RC‐1.3. Research, understand, and collaboratively
construct infrastructure and transportation
improvements that benefit the region.
a) A study of water and sewer system
regionalization was completed in 2024.
b) The City and other jurisdictions formed
a Metropolitan Planning Organization to
coordinate transportation planning.
RC‐1.4. Participate in regularly scheduled coordination
meetings with Gallatin County and the City of Belgrade
planning departments and planning boards to
coordinate planning issues.
The Planning Coordinating Committee
meets six times per year and hosts
roundtables for shared board
engagement.
RC‐1.5. Implement the Triangle Community Plan in
coordination between Bozeman, Belgrade, and Gallatin
County.
The city coordinates policy on an ongoing
basis with the Triangle plan such as
supporting compact development on
centralized utilities, protection of
watercourses, coordination of
transportation.
RC‐1.6. Prepare for establishment of a Metropolitan
Planning Organization, anticipated to be required by
federal law after the completion of the 2020 US Census.
The City and other jurisdictions formed a
Metropolitan Planning Organization to
coordinate transportation planning.
Goal RC‐2: Continue and build on successful
collaboration with Gallatin County, neighboring
municipalities, and other agencies to identify and
mitigate potential hazards and develop coordinated
response plans.
Implementation Actions
167
Page 24 of 26
RC‐2.1. Prohibit development in environmentally‐
sensitive or hazard‐prone areas.
a) Updated floodplain regulations were
adopted in March 2021.
b) A joint project between the City,
County, and other partners to evaluate
environmentally sensitive lands in the
valley was completed in Dec 2023.
c) City is researching updates to wetland
regulations to account for changed
federal regulations and local needs.
RC‐2.2. Identify effective, affordable, and regionally‐
appropriate hazard mitigation techniques through the
Gallatin County Hazard Mitigation and Community
Wildfire Protection Plan and other tools. As a group,
annually review the Gallatin County Hazard Mitigation
Plan, and determine the need for updates and
enhancements.
Updated floodplain regulations were
adopted in March 2021.
RC‐2.3. Along with non‐profit and agency partners,
identify, map, and utilize geographic information
systems (GIS) data to locate and monitor developments
on environmentally sensitive and hazard‐prone areas.
A watercourse map update project is
underway.
RC‐2.4. Review and revise land use regulations and
standards that affect the wildland urban interface to
provide adequate public safety measures, mitigate
impacts on public health, and encourage fiscal
responsibility.
The City has adopted the Wildland Urban
Interface building code appendix.
RC‐2.5. Through coordination with non‐profit and agency
partners, identify and prioritize lands for acquisition or
placement of conservation easements with the goal of
lessening or eliminating development in environmentally
sensitive areas and/or preserving areas consistent with
the other priorities of this Growth Policy.
A joint project between the City, County,
and other partners to evaluate
environmentally sensitive lands in the
valley was completed in Dec 2023.
Goal RC‐3: Collaborate with Gallatin County regarding
annexation and development patterns adjacent to the
City to provide certainty for landowners and taxpayers.
Implementation Actions
RC‐3.1. Work with Gallatin County to create compact,
contiguous development and infill to achieve an efficient
use of land and infrastructure, reducing sprawl and
preserving open space, agricultural lands, wildlife
habitat, and water resources.
a) Gallatin County and City of Bozeman
exchange information on development
proposals which affect each other.
b) The city continues to support and
approve
168
Page 25 of 26
annexations that are filling in the holes in
the city.
RC‐3.2. Work with Gallatin County to keep rural areas
rural and maintain a clear edge to urban development
that evolves as the City expands outwards.
Staff coordinate information and
comment on proposed projects and
implications for utility extensions and city
growth.
RC‐3.3. Prioritize annexations that enable the
incremental expansion of the City and its utilities.
Resolution 2025‐07 was adopted spring
202025 and establishes annexation
policies that advance this objective.
RC‐3.4. Encourage annexation of land adjacent to the
City prior to development and encourage annexation of
wholly surrounded areas.
Resolution 2025‐07 was adopted spring
202025 and establishes annexation
policies that advance this objective.
RC‐3.5. Establish standard practices for sharing
development application information and exchanging
comments between the City and County.
Resolution 2025‐07 was adopted spring
202025 and establishes annexation
policies that advance this objective.
RC‐3.6. Develop shared information on development
processes.
Gallatin County and City of Bozeman
exchange information on development
proposals which affect each other. The
City and County both worked on the
sensitive lands plan completed in Dec
2023.
RC‐3.7. Provide education and information on the value
and benefits of annexation, including existing un‐
annexed pockets surrounding the City, to individual
landowners and the community at large. Establish
interlocal agreements, when appropriate, to formalize
working relationships and procedures.
Ongoing process of information sharing.
RC‐3.8. Coordinate with Gallatin County for siting,
development, and redevelopment of regional parks,
emergency services, fairgrounds, transportation
facilities, interchanges, or other significant regional
services.
a) A study of water and sewer system
regionalization was completed in 2024.
b) The City and other jurisdictions formed
a Metropolitan Planning Organization to
coordinate transportation planning.
Goal RC‐4. Ensure that all City actions support
continued development of the City, consistent with its
adopted Plans and standards.
Implementation Actions
RC‐4.1. Enhance collaboration between City agencies to
ensure quality design and innovation across public and
private areas.
The City has implemented ProjectDox
software to support more collaborative
application review across departments.
The same software is used for Building,
Planning, Engineering, and Fire review
169
Page 26 of 26
processes. Departments are collaborating
on code revisions that address multiple
priorities.
RC‐4.2. Further develop reasonable and relevant metrics
for community development within the City’s Planning
Area to determine whether the intent of this Plan is
being accomplished.
The GIS Division has completed and
released for use a growth policy metrics
tracking website.
RC‐4.3. Prioritize human well‐being and health in the
creation and implementation of land development
standards.
This is part of all code development and
review processes.
RC‐4.4. Update the Unified Development Code (UDC) to:
Implement a twice‐yearly code revision cycle.
Identify and make revisions to optimize the UDC
current conditions.
This practice was started. The twice‐
yearly cycle is paused during the overall
UDC update. Public suggestions during
the process have been considered and
where appropriate integrated.
Incorporate development minimums in
designated growth areas.
These have been established in
residential zoning districts and are being
reevaluated with the update of the
Unified Development Code.
Revise the zoning map to harmonize with the
future land use map.
A draft zoning map was prepared as part
of the UDC update.
170