HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-26-25 - Community Development Board - Agendas & Packet MaterialsA. Call to Order - 6:00 pm
B. Disclosures
C. Changes to the Agenda
D. Approval of Minutes
D.1 Approval of Minutes(Ruffalo)
E. Action Items
E.1 Annexation and Zone Map Amendment Requesting Annexation and the Establishment of an
Initial Zoning Designation of M-1 on 4.24 Acres, the 113 Maus Lane Annexation, Application
25213(Rogers)
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
CDB AGENDA
Monday, December 1, 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: 947 0602 4018
Approve
1
E.2 Annexation and Zone Map Amendment Requesting Annexation and the Establishment of an
Initial Zoning Designation of R-3 on 17.92 Acres, the L Street Annexation, Application
25360(Rogers)
F. Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and Jurisdiction of the Board
G. FYI/Discussions
G.1 Upcoming Items for Review at the December 15, 2025, Community Development Board
Meeting(Saunders)
H. Adjournment
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 25213
and move to recommend approval of the 113 Maus Lane Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies
required to complete the application processing.
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 25360
and move to recommend approval of the L Street Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required
to complete the application processing.
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.
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:Trenton Ruffalo
SUBJECT:Approval of Minutes
MEETING DATE:December 1, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:Approve
STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver
information to the community and our partners.
BACKGROUND:None
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None
ALTERNATIVES:Approve with corrections
FISCAL EFFECTS:None
Attachments:
110325 CDB Minutes.pdf
111725 CDB Minutes.pdf
Report compiled on: November 25, 2025
3
Community Development Meeting Minutes, 11.03.25
Page 1 of 7
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA MINUTES
November 3rd, 2025
F) Consent Items
General information about the Community Development Board is available in our Laserfiche repository.
G) Special Presentations
This board generally meets the first and third Monday of the month from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm.
A) 00:09:15 Call to Order - 6:00 pm
Present: Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Absent: None
Excused: Courtney Johnson
B) 00:09:52 Disclosures
C) 00:10:03 Changes to the Agenda
D) 00:10:10 Public Service Announcements
E) 00:10:12 Approval of Minutes
E.1 Approval of Minutes
102025 CDB Minutes.pdf
00:10:22 Motion to approve
Chris Egnatz: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
00:11:05 Vote on the Motion to approve The Motion carried 6 - 0.
4
Community Development Meeting Minutes, 11.03.25
Page 2 of 7
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
H) 00:12:02 Action Items
H.1 00:12:08 Ordinance 2151 Repeal and Replace Chapter 38, Unified Development
Code Including Text and Zoning Map to Comply with the Montana Land Use Planning Act
and Implement the Bozeman Community Plan, Application 21381
21381 Staff Report UDC Replacement 2025 - CDB.pdf
Process and New Code Review Criteria for Amendments Memo.pdf
Staff Recommended Revisions to Sept 19, 2025 UDC Draft.pdf
21381 UDC Repeal and Replacment CDB and CC Legal Newspaper Notice.pdf
MLUPA Code Compliance Summary 10-27-2025.pdf
SB382 MLUPA City Commission summary July 25, 2023.pdf
Group Engagement Log -10-27-2028.pdf
Framing System Raised Heel Trusses.pdf
USFWS critical-habitat-fact-sheet.pdf
BOZ UDC_Zoning District Conversion Guide_10.17.2025.pdf
01:20:52 Jim Webster provides public comment
01:24:03 Marcia Kaveny provides public comment
01:26:41 Alison Sweeney provides public comment
01:29:18 Matt Paine provides public comment
01:32:19 Daniel Cartie provides public comment
01:34:08 Christopher Spoges provides public comment
01:34:53 Jonathan Pitka provides public comment
01:36:22 Natsuki Nakamura provides public comment
01:38:49 Mary Ellen Spogis provides public comment
01:40:08 Kathy Paul provides public comment
01:43:25 Kathy Rich provides public comment
01:44:48 Craig Allen provides public comment
01:47:18 Phil Stewart provides public comment
5
Community Development Meeting Minutes, 11.03.25
Page 3 of 7
01:48:46 Richard Sharon provides public comment
01:51:59 David Mercer provides public comment
01:54:36 Kevin Lee provides public comment
01:56:22 Bob Rydell provides public comment
01:59:05 Angie Kaciolek provides public comment
02:02:05 Mary Bateson provides public comment
02:04:16 Amy Hoitsma provides public comment
02:08:51 John Meyer provides public comment
02:11:41 Erin George addresses the public
02:15:30 Motion to approve 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 21381 and move to recommend adoption of Ordinance 2151 with revisions as
recommended by Staff. Did not go to vote
Mark Egge: Motion
Jason Delmue: 2nd
02:19:30 Motion to amend This Board recommends to the City Commission to edit the current draft to
change the purpose of the NEHMU zone to the language set forth in memo item #10
Jason Delmue: Motion
Ben Lloyd: 2nd
02:20:11 Vote on the Motion to amend This Board recommends to the City Commission to edit the
current draft to change the purpose of the NEHMU zone to the language set forth in memo item #10 The
Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
6
Community Development Meeting Minutes, 11.03.25
Page 4 of 7
02:21:35 Motion to amend That this Board recommends to the City Commission to edit the draft to
increase the NEHMU maximum restaurant size to 3000 square feet, as reflected in memo item #7 and
Staff Suggested edit #23
Jason Delmue: Motion
Chris Egnatz: 2nd
02:22:35 Vote on the Motion to amend That this Board recommends to the City Commission to edit the
draft to increase the NEHMU maximum restaurant size to 3000 square feet, as reflected in memo item
#7 and Staff Suggested edit #23 The Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
02:23:55 Motion to amend This Board recommends to the City Commission to edit the current draft to
decrease the minimum ground-floor height of mixed-use buildings in B1, B2, B3, REMU, & NEHMU
zoning districts to 12ft as set forth in memo item #9.
Jason Delmue: Motion
Ben Lloyd: 2nd
02:32:02 Vote on the Motion to amend This Board recommends to the City Commission to edit the
current draft to decrease the minimum ground-floor height of mixed-use buildings in B1, B2, B3, REMU,
& NEHMU zoning districts to 12ft as set forth in memo item #9.
The Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
02:48:40 Motion to amend This Board recommends to City Commission amend the current draft of the
Development Code to reduce the minimum required density in RA from 10 to 6 units.
Mark Egge: Motion
Chris Egnatz: 2nd
7
Community Development Meeting Minutes, 11.03.25
Page 5 of 7
02:49:52 Vote on the Motion to amend This Board recommends to City Commission amend the current
draft of the Development Code to reduce the minimum required density in RA from 10 to 6 units. The
Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
02:50:25 Motion to amend This Board recommends to the City Commission to edit the required
minimum densities of RB to 8 units per acre, RC to 10 units per acres, & NEHMU at 8 dwellings per acres
as set forth in the chart as part of memo item #1. Friendly Amendment by Member Lloyd to change RD
and REMU edit to 14 units per acre.
Jason Delmue: Motion
Chris Egnatz: 2nd
02:56:44 Vote on the Motion to amend This Board recommends to the City Commission to edit the
required minimum densities of RB to 8 units per acre, RC to 10 units per acres, & NEHMU at 8 dwellings
per acres as set forth in the chart as part of memo item #1. Friendly Amendment by Member Lloyd to
change RD and REMU edit to 14 units per acre. The Motion carried 5 - 1.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue
Disapprove:
Mark Egge
02:57:35 Motion to amend This Board recommends to City Commission to edit the current draft to
remove the numeric cap (currently 24) on the number of units allowed in a building in the RC district in
reference to memo item #2.
Jason Delmue: Motion
Failed for lack of second 2nd
02:58:34 Item discussed: ADU inclusion in density calculations. No motion proposed.
03:08:13 Motion to amend This Board recommends to City Commission to modify current draft code to
add additional text, as indicated in Eric Bonnett's public comment (11/03), specifically amending the
8
Community Development Meeting Minutes, 11.03.25
Page 6 of 7
measurement section for wall-plate height definition to include the additional language that suggests
for shed-roofs, the measurement applies to the lowest two corners and the roof-form then exceeds
above this height, and high-side plate corners of a shed roof, located within 15ft of a property line
cannot exceed 6ft of the wall-plate height, specified by zoning district.
Mark Egge: Motion
Ben Lloyd: 2nd
03:10:49 Vote on the Motion to amend This Board recommends to City Commission to modify current
draft code to add additional text, as indicated in Eric Bonnett's public comment (11/03), specifically
amending the measurement section for wall-plate height definition to include the additional language
that suggests for shed-roofs, the measurement applies to the lowest two corners and the roof-form then
exceeds above this height, and high-side plate corners of a shed roof, located within 15ft of a property
line cannot exceed 6ft of the wall-plate height, specified by zoning district.
The Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
03:13:21 Motion to amend This Board recommends to City Commission to memo item #5 “change in
roof line” as mandatory in RC and RD Zones, and ensure roof line changes are accompanied by a façade
modulation of 12” or greater.
Jason Delmue: Motion
Mark Egge: 2nd
03:19:15 Vote on the Motion to amend This Board recommends to City Commission to memo item #5
“change in roof line” as mandatory in RC and RD Zones, and ensure roof line changes are accompanied
by a façade modulation of 12” or greater. The Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
03:26:20 Motion to approve Recommend to City Commission to edit the Zone Map so that 1921 W Koch
be designated B1 instead of RB.
9
Community Development Meeting Minutes, 11.03.25
Page 7 of 7
Jason Delmue: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
03:32:40 Vote on the Motion to approve Recommend to City Commission to edit the Zone Map so that
1921 W Koch be designated B1 instead of RB.
The Motion failed 2 - 4.
Approve:
Ben Lloyd, Jason Delmue
Disapprove:
Jennifer Madgic, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Mark Egge
03:33:32 Motion to amend This Board recommends to City Commission to increase requirements for flat
roof extension from 12” to 24” and returning the parapet perpendicular to building façade a set distance
so it looks like a continuous element from the street. Motion tabled until November 17th, 2025
Chris Egnatz: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
I) 03:39:07 Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and
Jurisdiction of the Board
J) 03:40:07 FYI/Discussions
J.1 03:40:10 Upcoming Items for the November 17, 2025, Community Development
Board Meeting
J.2 03:40:31 City Commission Approval of Bozeman Community Plan Technical
Compliance Update, Application 23333
K) 03:41:01 Adjournment
10
Bozeman Community Development Board Meeting Minutes, 11.17.25
Page 1 of 9
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
MINUTES
November 17th, 2025
General information about the Community Development Board is available in our Laserfiche repository.
A) 00:05:16 Call to Order - 6:00 pm Present: Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Absent: None
Excused: Courtney Johnson
B) 00:06:10 Disclosures
C) 00:06:20 Changes to the Agenda
D) 00:06:39 Approval of Minutes
D.1 Minutes
110325 CDB Minutes.pdf
E) 00:06:41 Action Items
00:09:46 Chris Saunders presents to the Board
E.1 00:06:45 Ordinance 2151 Repeal and Replace Chapter 38, Unified Development
Code Including Text and Zoning Map to Comply with the Montana Land Use Planning Act
and Implement the Bozeman Community Plan, Application 21381
21381 Staff Report UDC Replacement 2025 - CDB.pdf
Process and New Code Review Criteria for Amendments Memo.pdf
Staff Recommended Revisions to Sept 19, 2025 UDC Draft.pdf
21381 UDC Repeal and Replacment CDB and CC Legal Newspaper Notice.pdf
MLUPA Code Compliance Summary 10-27-2025.pdf
SB382 MLUPA City Commission summary July 25, 2023.pdf
Group Engagement Log -10-27-2028.pdf
Framing System Raised Heel Trusses.pdf
USFWS critical-habitat-fact-sheet.pdf
11
Bozeman Community Development Board Meeting Minutes, 11.17.25
Page 2 of 9
BOZ UDC_Zoning District Conversion Guide_10.17.2025.pdf
38.520.040 - Egnatz motion illustration.pdf
UDC edits for 11-17 v3 JD.pdf
00:10:35 Motion to approve Motion to remove Member Egnatz's revision (11/03/25) of the modulation
of building facade from the table and take it up for active consideration.
Hap Happel: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
00:10:51 Vote on the Motion to approve Motion to remove Member Egnatz's revision (11/03/25) of the
modulation of building facade from the table and take it up for active consideration. The Motion carried
6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
00:11:41 Motion to approve Update division 38.520 UDC Building Design Standards as captured in the
Redline draft included in the package and the materials submitted with this agenda. Primary updates
include: Facade modulation & roof-line elevation changes are now obligatory design strategies within
the code. Building walls facing rear or side yards will required to employ 2 articulation strategies, even
when abutting same property or intensity zones, and roof-line elevations changed and increased from
1ft to 2ft (11/03/25).
Chris Egnatz: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
00:23:51 Vote on the Motion to approve Update division 38.520 UDC Building Design Standards as
captured in the Redline draft included in the package and the materials submitted with this agenda.
Primary updates include: Facade modulation & roof-line elevation changes are now obligatory design
strategies within the code. Building walls facing rear or side yards will required to employ 2 articulation
strategies, even when abutting same property or intensity zones, and roof-line elevations changed and
increased from 1ft to 2ft (11/03/25). The Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
12
Bozeman Community Development Board Meeting Minutes, 11.17.25
Page 3 of 9
00:30:30 Motion to approve That this Board recommends to the City Commission the code section
38.530.040.B be removed from the draft code (11/17/25).
Jason Delmue: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
00:32:45 Vote on the Motion to approve That this Board recommends to the City Commission the code
section 38.530.040.B be removed from the draft code (11/17/25). The Motion failed 1 - 5.
Approve:
Mark Egge
Disapprove:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue
00:52:20 Motion to amend To have the Main motion (11/03/25) to include an addition recommendation
to City Commission that the Sketch Plan Review thresholds for in-fill sites be increased from 1 to 2 units
Mark Egge: Motion
Ben Lloyd: 2nd
00:54:51 Vote on the Motion to amend To have the Main motion (11/03/25) to include an addition
recommendation to City Commission that the Sketch Plan Review thresholds for in-fill sites be increased
from 1 to 2 units The Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
00:56:18 Motion to ammend That this Board recommend to the City Commission to increase maximum
allowed units in a building in RB 12 instead of the 8 that are in the current draft
Jason Delmue: Motion
Mark Egge: 2nd
01:06:25 Vote on the Motion to approve 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 21381 and move to recommend adoption of Ordinance 2151 with revisions as
recommended by Staff (11/17/25). The Motion failed 3 - 3.
Approve:
13
Bozeman Community Development Board Meeting Minutes, 11.17.25
Page 4 of 9
Henry Happel, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Chris Egnatz,
01:11:17 Motion to approve That this Board recommend to the City Commission to delete the maximum
number of units in a building in RC. Friendly Amendment by Member Egge to apply the removal of the
maximum number of units in RC to affordable housing developments only (11/17/25)
Jason Delmue: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
01:21:20 Vote on the Motion to approve That this Board recommend to the City Commission to delete the
maximum number of units in a building in RC. Friendly Amendment by Member Egge to apply the removal
of the maximum number of units in RC to affordable housing developments only (11/17/25) The Motion
carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
01:32:30 Motion to approve Recommend to the City Commission that more than a duplex or an ADU
should be allowed, in general, within the RA district for initial construction (11/17/25).
Jason Delmue: Motion
Mark Egge: 2nd
01:44:15 Vote on the Motion to approve Recommend to the City Commission that more than a duplex or
an ADU should be allowed, in general, within the RA district for initial construction (11/17/25).
The Motion failed 1 - 5.
Approve:
Jason Delmue
Disapprove:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Mark Egge
14
Bozeman Community Development Board Meeting Minutes, 11.17.25
Page 5 of 9
02:05:02 Motion to approve Recommend to the City Commission that the UDC not include a street-
facing entrance requirement (11/17/25).
Mark Egge: Motion
Ben Lloyd: 2nd
02:05:39 Vote on the Motion to approve Recommend to the City Commission that the UDC not include a
street-facing entrance requirement (11/17/25). The Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
02:34:05 Motion to approve as amended To recommend to the City Commission designate the
Centennial Neighborhood as RA zone in the future Zone Map
Amendment. Motion revised by Egnatz to include PLI & RC as designated in the draft map presented by
the City (11/17/25).
Chris Egnatz: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
02:40:43 Motion to amend Amend the previous motion to make the zone RB instead of RA (11/17/25).
Mark Egge: Motion
Jason Delmue: 2nd
02:44:46 Vote on the Motion to amend Amend the previous motion to make the zone RB instead of RA
(11/17/25). The Motion carried 4 - 2.
Approve:
Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
Jennifer Madgic, Chris Egnatz
02:47:45 Vote on the Motion to approve as amended To recommend to the City Commission designate
the Centennial Neighborhood as RA zone in the future Zone Map
Amendment. Motion revised by Egnatz to include PLI & RC as designated in the draft map presented by
the City (11/17/25). The Motion carried 4 - 2.
Approve:
15
Bozeman Community Development Board Meeting Minutes, 11.17.25
Page 6 of 9
Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
Jennifer Madgic, Chris Egnatz
03:13:18 Motion to approve That this Body recommend to the City Commission that R4 area located
from S. 4th Ave to the alley between Wilson & Tracy not be downzoned and instead become RC per the
conversion system (11/17/25).
Jason Delmue: Motion
Mark Egge: 2nd
03:14:52 Vote on the Motion to approve That this Body recommend to the City Commission that R4 area
located from S. 4th Ave to the alley between Wilson & Tracy not be downzoned and instead become RC
per the conversion system (11/17/25). The Motion carried 4 - 2.
Approve:
Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd
03:19:27 Motion to approve To leave the existing language in 38.410.010.B as currently set forth in the
new UDC (11/17/25)
Hap Happel: Motion
Mark Egge: 2nd
03:26:36 Vote on the Motion to approve To leave the existing language in 38.410.010.B as currently set
forth in the new UDC (11/17/25) The Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
03:53:23 Motion to approve as amended Motion to recommend edits to 38.320.030 General Residential
Uses and 38.530.040 Parking as outlined in the accessory document that is part public comment
(11/17/25).
16
Bozeman Community Development Board Meeting Minutes, 11.17.25
Page 7 of 9
Chris Egnatz: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
03:57:07 Motion to amend the previous motion to exclude the parking requirement (11/17/25)
Jason Delmue: Motion
Hap Happel: 2nd
03:57:28 Vote on the Motion to amend the previous motion to exclude the parking requirement
(11/17/25) The Motion carried 4 - 2.
Approve:
Ben Lloyd, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
Jennifer Madgic, Henry Happel
03:59:22 Vote on the Motion to approve as amended Motion to recommend edits to 38.320.030 General
Residential Uses and 38.530.040 Parking as outlined in the accessory document that is part public
comment (11/17/25). The Motion carried 5 - 1.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
Jason Delmue
04:10:21 Motion to approve This Board recommends to City Commission the elimination of the
requirement for amenity space and commercial open space in B3 (11/17/25)
Mark Egge: Motion
Jason Delmue: 2nd
04:14:27 Vote on the Motion to approve This Board recommends to City Commission the elimination of
the requirement for amenity space and commercial open space in B3 (11/17/25) The Motion failed 2 - 4.
Approve:
Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz
17
Bozeman Community Development Board Meeting Minutes, 11.17.25
Page 8 of 9
04:45:31 Motion to approve This Board recommends to the City Commission to implement the staff
recommended revisions to the September 19th 2025 UDC Draft that was circulated to this Board and
discussed (11/17/25).
Jason Delmue: Motion
Ben Lloyd: 2nd
04:46:03 Vote on the Motion to approve This Board recommends to the City Commission to implement
the staff recommended revisions to the September 19th 2025 UDC Draft that was circulated to this Board
and discussed (11/17/25). The Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
04:49:00 Motion to amend Having reviewed and considered the staff report, draft ordinance, public
comment, and all information presented, this Board hereby adopts the findings presented in the staff
report for application 21381 and moves to recommend adoption of Ordinance 2151 with such revisions
as may be approved by the City Commission in its discretion (11/17/25).
Hap Happel: Motion
Mark Egge: 2nd
04:53:01 Vote on the Motion to amend Having reviewed and considered the staff report, draft ordinance,
public comment, and all information presented, this Board hereby adopts the findings presented in the
staff report for application 21381 and moves to recommend adoption of Ordinance 2151 with such
revisions as may be approved by the City Commission in its discretion (11/17/25). The Motion carried 6 -
0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
04:53:36 Motion to approve CDB states to the Commission that the Current Draft (September 2025),
plus whichever of the CDB-recommended edits are accepted – and acknowledging that any or all of the
recommended edits might not be accepted – will be a significant improvement over the code currently
in place as well as achieve compliance with MLUPA and therefore recommends to the Commission to
approve Application 21381 as however revised by the Commission (11/17/25)
Jason Delmue: Motion
Mark Egge: 2nd
18
Bozeman Community Development Board Meeting Minutes, 11.17.25
Page 9 of 9
04:54:19 Vote on the Motion to approve CDB states to the Commission that the Current Draft (September
2025), plus whichever of the CDB-recommended edits are accepted – and acknowledging that any or all of
the recommended edits might not be accepted – will be a significant improvement over the code currently
in place as well as achieve compliance with MLUPA and therefore recommends to the Commission to
approve Application 21381 as however revised by the Commission (11/17/25)
The Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
04:55:36 Motion to approve Main Motion (11/03/25)
Mark Egge: Motion
Jason Delmue: 2nd
04:55:48 Vote on the Motion to approve Main Motion (11/03/25) The Motion carried 6 - 0.
Approve:
Jennifer Madgic, Ben Lloyd, Henry Happel, Chris Egnatz, Jason Delmue, Mark Egge
Disapprove:
None
F) 04:57:58 Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and
Jurisdiction of the Board
G) 04:58:19 FYI/Discussions
H) 04:59:58 Adjournment
This board generally meets the first and third Monday of the month from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm.
19
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Community Development Board
FROM:Tom Rogers, Senior Planner
Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Erin George, Director of Community Development
SUBJECT:Annexation and Zone Map Amendment Requesting Annexation and the
Establishment of an Initial Zoning Designation of M-1 on 4.24 Acres, the 113
Maus Lane Annexation, Application 25213
MEETING DATE:December 1, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative
RECOMMENDATION:Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials,
public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 25213 and move to recommend
approval of the 113 Maus Lane Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies
required to complete the application processing.
STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning,
ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban
approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density,
connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods.
BACKGROUND:The applicant and property owners seek to annex an existing parcel
consisting of 4.24 acres plus adjacent rights-of-way into the City limits and
establish an initial zoning of M-1, Light Manufacturing District. The property
is currently zoned M-1, Light Manufacturing, within the County administered
Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District.
The property has been used for a variety of uses over the years and hosts
two structures. The warehouse building is served by a failed septic system.
The lot is wholly surrounded by the city and is bounded by Montana Rail Link
to the northeast.
The Future Land Use Map in the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (BCP 2020)
designates the property as “Maker Space Mixed-Use” which includes the M-
1 district as implementing zoning districts. Adjacent municipal zoning
includes M-2 and M-1 zoning.
A previous owner of the subject property submitted application to annex
this property which was considered by the City Commission on May 17,
2010. The Commission voted to accept the petition to annex the property
20
subject to terms of annexation and contingencies for zoning. The property
owner did not complete the required steps to finalize the process. See
application A-10001 Williams Industrial Annex.
The proposed annexation would bring in additional right of way to build out
sections of Maus Lane upon future development of an additional internal
local street network.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:There are no identified conflicts on this application.
ALTERNATIVES:1. Approve the application with contingencies as presented;
2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended
zoning;
3. Deny the application based on findings of non-compliance with the
applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or
4. Open and continue the public hearing, with specific direction to staff or
the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items.
FISCAL EFFECTS:No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds
will be changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment.
Attachments:
25213 Maus Ln Annex_ZMA CDB.pdf
Report compiled on: November 24, 2025
21
Page 1 of 39
25213 Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA
Public Hearings: Community Development Board (ZMA only) December 1, 2025
City Commission (Annexation and map amendment) December 9, 2025
Project Description: 113 Maus Lane Annexation requesting annexation of 4.24 acres
and amendment of the City Zoning Map for the establishment of a zoning
designation of M-1 (Light Manufacturing District), Application 25213.
Project Location: Property addresses as 133 Maus Lane and more particularly
described as Tract 20 of Gordon Mandeville State School Section Subdivision,
Plat E-38, situated in the Southeast One-Quarter of Section 36, Township One
South (T1S), Range Five East (R5E), P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana.
Recommendation: Meets standards for approval with terms of annexation and
contingencies.
Recommended Zoning Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff
report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I
hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 25213 and
move to recommend approval of the 133 Maus Lane Zone Map Amendment, with
contingencies required to complete the application processing.
Recommended City Commission Annexation Motion: Having reviewed and
considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all
information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report
for application 25213 and move to approve the 133 Maus Lane Annexation
subject to the terms of annexation and direct staff to prepare an annexation
agreement.
Recommended City Commission Zoning Motion: Having reviewed and considered the
staff report, application materials, public comment, recommendation of the
Zoning Commission, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 25213 and move to approve the 133
Maus Lane Zone Map Amendment with contingencies of approval necessary to
complete adoption of an implementing ordinance.
Report Date: November 24, 2025
Staff Contact: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner
Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative
22
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 2 of 39
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is based on the application materials submitted and public comment
received to date. This report addresses both the zoning amendment for Community
Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission, as well as the
annexation and the zoning amendment for the City Commission. The application
materials are available on the City’s website in the laserfiche archive.
The application was found adequate prior to the adoption of the 2025 Bozeman Land Use
Plan. Therefore, review of the application follows the review process and criteria of the
Bozeman Community Plan 2020 and review of the development code at that time.
Unresolved Issues
There are no identified conflicts on this application.
Project Summary
The applicant and property owners seek to annex an existing parcel consisting of 4.24
acres plus adjacent rights-of-way into the City limits and establish an initial zoning of M-
1, Light Manufacturing District. The property is currently zoned M-1, Light Manufacturing,
within the County administered Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District.
The property has been used for a variety of uses over the years and hosts two structures.
The warehouse building is served by a failed septic system. The lot is wholly surrounded
by the city and is bounded by Montana Rail Link to the northeast.
The Future Land Use Map in the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (BCP 2020) designates
the property as “Maker Space Mixed-Use” which includes the M-1 district as
implementing zoning districts. Adjacent municipal zoning includes M-2 and M-1 zoning.
A previous owner of the subject property submitted application to annex this property
which was considered by the City Commission on May 17, 2010. The Commission voted
to accept the petition to annex the property subject to terms of annexation and
contingencies for zoning. The property owner did not complete the required steps to
finalize the process. See application A-10001 Williams Industrial Annex.
The proposed annexation would bring in additional right of way to build out sections of
Maus Lane upon future development of an additional internal local street network.
In determining whether the criteria applicable to this application are met, Staff considers
the entire body of plans and regulations for land development. Standards which prevent
or mitigate possible negative impacts are incorporated in many locations in the
municipal code but are principally in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code.
23
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 3 of 39
References in the text of this report to Articles, Divisions, or in the form xx.xxx.xxx are to
the Bozeman Municipal Code.
Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary
The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission
will hold a public hearing on December 1, 2025, and will forward their recommendation
to the City Commission.
No public comment has been received on this application at the time of publication of
this report.
Alternatives
1. Approve the application with contingencies as presented;
2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended zoning;
3. Deny the application based on findings of non-compliance with the applicable
criteria contained within the staff report; or
4. Open and continue the public hearing, with specific direction to staff or the
applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items.
24
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 4 of 39
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 2
Unresolved Issues .............................................................................................. 2
Project Summary ................................................................................................ 2
Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary .......................... 3
Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 3
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES: ......................................................................................... 5
SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED TERMS OF ANNEXATION ............................................. 9
SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT ........... 12
SECTION 4 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ........................................ 12
Annexation ....................................................................................................... 12
Zone Map Amendment ...................................................................................... 13
SECTION 6 - ANNEXATION STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS..................................... 13
SECTION 6 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS .................... 17
APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ................................................... 37
APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING ........................ 37
APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ................................. 39
FISCAL EFFECTS .................................................................................................... 39
ATTACHMENTS ...................................................................................................... 39
25
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 5 of 39
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES:
Map 1: Project Vicinity Map
26
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 6 of 39
Map 2: Future Land Use Designation
27
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 7 of 39
Map 3: Current Zoning Map
28
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 8 of 39
Map 4: Proposed Zoning for Property
29
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 9 of 39
SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED TERMS OF ANNEXATION
The following terms of annexation are recommended to enable the application to comply
with the City’s Annexation Policy and the requirements of state law for the provision of
services.
Recommended terms of annexation:
1. The documents and exhibits to formally annex the subject property must be
identified as the “133 Maus Lane Annexation”.
2. An Annexation Map, titled “133 Maus Lane Annexation Map” with a legal
description of the property and all adjoining un-annexed rights-of-way and/or
street access easements must be submitted by the applicant for use with the
Annexation Agreement. The map must be supplied as a PDF for filing with the
Annexation Agreement at the County Clerk & Recorder, and a digital copy for the
City Engineers Office. This map must be acceptable to the Director of Public
Works and City Engineers Office and must be submitted with the signed
Annexation Agreement.
3. The applicant must execute all contingencies and terms of said Annexation
Agreement with the City of Bozeman within 60 days of the distribution of the
annexation agreement from the City to the applicant or annexation approval shall
be null and void.
4. The landowners and their successors must pay all fire, street, water, and sewer
impact fees at the time of connection; and for future development, as required by
Chapter 2, Bozeman Municipal Code, or as amended at the time of application
for any permit listed therein.
5. If they do not already exist, the applicant must provide and file with the County
Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of
Special Improvement Districts (SIDs) for the following:
a. Street improvements to Maus Lane including lighting, signalization, paving,
curb/gutter, sidewalk, shared use path and storm drainage.
b. Street improvements to Lea Avenue including lighting, signalization, paving,
curb/gutter, sidewalk, shared use path and storm drainage.
c. Intersection improvements to Maus Lane and West Griffin Drive including
lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, shared
use path and storm drainage.
d. Intersection improvements to Maus Lane and West Griffin Avenue including
lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, shared
use path and storm drainage.
e. The document filed must specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the
completion of these improvements, the developer agrees to participate in an
30
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 10 of 39
alternate financing method for the completion of the improvements on a fair
share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property,
taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development,
or a combination thereof.
f. The applicant may obtain a copy of the template SID waiver from the City
Engineering Department. The document filed must specify that in the event
an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the applicant
agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of
said improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by
square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic
contribution from the development, or a combination thereof.
6. The Annexation Agreement must include the following notices:
a. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that, prior to development,
the applicant will be responsible for preparing a storm water master plan in
conjunction with future development. The storm water master plan shall
address maintenance and operations until and unless the City affirmatively
assumes responsibility for maintenance and operations of stormwater
facilities within the area of the annexation.
b. The Annexation Agreement must include notice the City will, upon annexation,
make available to the Property existing City services only to the extent
currently available, or as provided in the Agreement.
c. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that there is no right, either
granted or implied, for Landowner to further develop any of the Property until
it is verified by the City that the necessary municipal services are available to
the property.
d. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that, prior to development,
the applicant will be responsible for installing any facilities required to provide
full municipal services to the properties in accordance with the City of
Bozeman's infrastructure master plans and all City policies that may be in
effect at the time of development.
e. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that utility easements may be
required to be provided by the landowner at the time of development to ensure
necessary municipal services are available to the property.
f. The agreement must include notice that charges and assessments may be
required after completion of annexation to ensure necessary municipal
services are available to the property.
g. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that the City will assess
system development and impact fees in accordance with Montana law and
Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9, Bozeman Municipal Code.
31
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 11 of 39
h. All procedural terms necessary to establish the Annexation Agreement in
conformance with state law and municipal practice will be included with the
final Annexation Agreement.
7. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that the applicant must connect
to municipal services and will be responsible for installing any facilities required
to provide full municipal services to the property in accordance with city policy at
the time of connection.
8. The applicant must contact the City’s Engineering Department to obtain an
analysis of cash-in-lieu of water rights for the proposed annexation. The
determined amount must be paid prior to the adoption of Resolution of
Annexation, if applicable.
9. On-site Septic Abandonment. The applicant must properly abandon the existing
on-site septic tank and leach field prior to connection to the City sanitary sewer
system. The applicant must report the abandonment to the City Water and Sewer
Superintendent for inspection, and the applicant must report the abandonment
to the Gallatin City County Health Department. In addition to abandonment of the
septic tank and leach field, the applicant must demonstrate that the sanitary
sewer service to the septic tank has been completely disconnected from the old
septic system prior to connection to the City sanitary sewer system.
10. On-site Well Disconnect. The applicant must completely disconnect the on-site
well from the house prior to connection to the City water system to protect the
City’s system from cross contamination. The applicant must contact the City
Water and Sewer Superintendent to inspect the disconnect prior to connection of
water service from the house to the City water system.
11. City of Bozeman Resolution 2025-01- As presented in the application, Lot 20 of
the Gordon Mandeville State Subdivision contains two (2) City stormwater
drainage facilities. A public drainage easement must be provided over the existing
stormwater infrastructure observed on-site. The easement must meet City
standards for width and access. Please coordinate with the City Stormwater
Division to confirm the pipe location, alignment, and diameter to determine
appropriate easement boundaries and widths.
12. All final easements provided to the City must be stamped and signed by a
professional surveyor.
32
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 12 of 39
SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP
AMENDMENT
Please note that these contingencies are necessary for the City to complete the process
of the proposed amendment. These contingencies only apply in the event that the
related annexation request has previously been approved.
Recommended Contingencies of Approval:
1. That all documents and exhibits necessary to establish an initial municipal zoning
designation shall be identified as the “133 Maus Lane Annexation Zone Map
Amendment.” All required documents must be returned to the City within 60 days of
the City Commission action to annex the property or the preliminary approval shall
be null and void.
2. That the Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be finalized until the
Annexation Agreement is signed by the applicant and formally approved by the City
Commission. If the annexation agreement is not approved, the Zone Map
Amendment application shall be null and void.
3. That the applicant must submit a Zone Amendment map, titled “133 Maus Lane
Annexation Zone Map Amendment”. The map must be supplied as a PDF. This map
must be acceptable to the City Engineer’s Office and must be submitted within 60
days of the action to approve the zone map amendment. Said map shall contain a
metes and bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property including
adjacent rights-of-way or street easements, and total acreage of the property to be
rezoned, unless the property to be rezoned can be entirely described by reference to
existing platted properties or certificates of survey.
4. The Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant
provides an editable mete and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed
Montana surveyor.
SECTION 4 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS
Annexation
Having considered the criteria established for an annexation, the Development Review
Committee (DRC) did not find any deficiencies that prohibit annexation at this time that
could not be addressed through future development review processes and adopted City
Codes.
The City Commission will hold a public meeting on the annexation on December 9, 2025.
The meeting will begin at 6 p.m.
33
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 13 of 39
Zone Map Amendment
Having considered the criteria established for a zone map amendment, the Staff found
the requested zoning meets standards for approval as submitted. The Zone Map
Amendment (ZMA) is in conjunction with an annexation request. Staff’s
recommendation and staff responses are predicated on approval of the annexation,
application 25213.
The Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the amendment. The DRC did
not identify any infrastructure or regulatory constraints that would impede the approval
of the application that cannot be addressed with adopted standards and requirements
for future development.
The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission
will hold a public hearing on this zone map amendment on December 1, 2025, and will
forward a recommendation to the City Commission on the zone map amendment. The
meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in the Commission Room at City Hall, 121 N. Rouse Ave,
Bozeman, Montana.
The City Commission will hold a public meeting on the zone map amendment on
December 9, 2025. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in the Commission Room at City Hall,
121 N. Rouse Ave, Bozeman, Montana. The City Commission will conduct a public
hearing on the proposed Zone Map Amendment application.
SECTION 6 - ANNEXATION STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
In considering applications for approval of the requested annexation, the advisory
boards and City Commission shall consider the following:
Commission Resolution No. 2025-07 Policies [External Link]
Policy 1: Annexations must include dedication of all rights of way for collector and
arterial streets, public water, sanitary sewer, or storm or sewer mains. When
required, rights of way for anchor routes as recognized in the City’s adopted parks
and trails plans, must be provided when such anchor routes are not located within
the right of way for arterial or collector streets.
Criterion met. There are no Collector or Arterial streets identified in the Bozeman
Transportation Master Plan adjacent to this property. Maus Lane, which provides
primary access to the site, currently exists as a 60-foot-wide public right of way. See Plat
E-38, E-38B, E-38C, & E38F. It is clearly labeled as such on the zoning and annexation
34
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 14 of 39
exhibits.
Through coordination with City engineering and storm water, it was determined that
there is no existing City storm infrastructure along the northern boundary of the property.
There is, however, a historical drainage path from the neighboring private storm water
pond. An easement between the two private parties is provided for review in this
application. An easement for the city stormwater facility through the middle of the site
is also included.
No Anchor routes are identified in the Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan
(PROST) near or within the subject property.
Policy 2: Annexations may be required to include dedication of rights of way for
adjacent or internal local streets to complete street connectivity and provide
required legal and physical access.
Criterion met. Access is provided by Maus Lane and Lea Avenue, both are dedicated
public streets that connect to Griffin Drive. Griffin Drive is Minor Arterial Street according
to the Bozeman Transportation Plan.
Maus Lane currently exists as a 60-foot-wide public right of way. See Plat E-38, E-38B, E-
38C, & E38F. Therefore, no additional right-of-way are required to serve the site.
Additional internal streets may be required with development on site. Required internal
streets will be captured with subsequent site plan and/or subdivision review.
Policy 3: Annexations must include written waivers of a property owner’s right to
protest the creation of special improvement districts necessary to provide essential
services. The waivers must run with the land, be binding on the owner and owner’s
successors in interest and be recorded concurrently with the annexation agreement.
Criterion met. Waivers of the right to protest creation or improvement districts are
accounted for in the terms of annexation. These include street and intersection
improvements identified by the Engineering Department. See term of Annexation 5.
Policy 4: The petition for annexation must be in conformance with the current
Bozeman land use plan (growth policy). If a land use plan (growth policy)
amendment is necessary for anticipated land uses, the land use plan amendment
process must be completed prior to any action for approval of a petition for
annexation.
Criterion Met. The property is designated “Maker Space Mixed-Use” on the future land
use map. No growth policy amendment is required. The application includes a request
for initial zoning of M-1. See the zone map amendment section of this report for analysis
of the zone map amendment criteria.
35
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 15 of 39
Policy 5: The City prefers petitions for annexation of land larger than five acres.
However, the City will consider annexation of smaller areas of land when one or
more of the following are present: topographic limitations; the land is served by one
or more City utilities; septic system failure; extension and integration of
transportation infrastructure; enhancement of the existing traffic circulation
system or to provide for transportation systems that do not currently exist;
annexation will make the City boundaries more regular; annexation will better
incorporate unannexed property for the provision of City fire, police, and emergency
services; or when annexation provides improved access to and maintenance of
public facilities.
Criterion met. The lot is 4.24 acres and 5.13 acres with the adjacent right-of-way.
Further, annexation of the property will allow the city to require complete streets with
subsequent development which will improve transportation infrastructure in the area.
The property is a considered an “inholding” of unannexed property with the city limits. It
has been a long-standing policy to encourage those properties that use city
infrastructure and services for primary access to annex into the city and this action will
better incorporate unannexed property for provision of City fire, police, and emergency
service
Finally, this annexation will create a more regular boundary by filling in a hole in the city’s
Maker Space Mixed-Use designated area.
Policy 6: The City will review infrastructure and emergency services available to an
area proposed for annexation for the health, safety and welfare of the public and
conformance with the City’s adopted plans. If the City determines adequate
services cannot be provided to ensure public health, safety and welfare, the City
may deny the petition for annexation. Alternatively, the City may require all property
owners within the land to be annexed provide a written plan for accommodation of
services at the expense of the property owner(s). The land to be annexed may only
be provided sanitary sewer service via the applicable drainage basin defined in the
City Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan.
Criterion Met. City infrastructure and emergency services are available to the subject
property. An existing 6-inch ductile iron water pipe is in Lea Avenue that terminates on
the southeast of the subject property. Additional water supply is nearby with an 8-inch
ductile iron water pipe in Maus Lane and a another 6-inch ductile iron water pipe in Old
Buffalo Trail to the west.
Wastewater collection bounds the property on three sides with ample capacity to serve
the site.
36
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 16 of 39
Any future development will be required to connect to the City systems. The property is
located adjacent to existing urban development that is currently served by Bozeman Fire.
Per Term of Annexation 7, the Annexation Agreement required to finalize the requested
annexation will require the applicant to design extensions of services to meet the City’s
adopted infrastructure standards. These include provisions for minimum water pressure
and volumes, adequate sewer flows by volume, gravity flow of sewers, and other
standards necessary to protect public health and safety and ensure functional utilities.
Policy 7: The City may require annexation of any contiguous property for which City
services are requested or for which City services are currently being provided. In
addition, any person, firm, or corporation receiving water or sewer service outside of
the City limits is required as a condition of initiating or continuing such service, to
record a consent to annexation of the property serviced by the City.
The property is not currently provided City services. No emergency connection is
requested. City services will be required to be provided concurrent with future
development. Terms of Annexation 7 - 9 address connection to services.
Policy 8: The City Manager may enter into an agreement with a property owner for an
emergency connection to the City’s sanitary sewer or water system. In doing so, the
property owner must submit a petition for annexation and file a notice of consent to
annex with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office prior to connection to
City utilities. The City will prepare the notice of consent to annex. The agreement for
connection to City sewer or water must require the property owner to complete
annexation or consent to disconnection of the services. Connection for purposes of
obtaining City sewer services in an emergency requires, when feasible as
determined by the City, the connection to City water services.
Emergency connection is not being requested or required.
Policy 9: The use of Part 46 annexations is preferred.
This annexation is being processed under Part 46 provisions.
Policy 10: Where a road improvement district has been created, annexation does
not repeal the creation of the district. The City will not assume operations of a road
improvement district until the entirety of the district has been annexed. Any funds
held in trust for the district will be used to benefit the district after transfer to the
City. Inclusion within a district does not absolve a landowner of the obligation to
participate in general City programs that address the same subject.
No road improvement district is associated with this application.
37
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 17 of 39
Policy 11: The City requires connection to and use of City utilities and services upon
development of annexed properties. The City may establish a fixed time frame for
connection to municipal services. Upon development, unless otherwise approved
by the City, septic systems must be properly abandoned and the development must
be connected to the City sanitary sewer system. Upon development, unless
otherwise approved by the City, water wells on the subject property may be used for
irrigation but must be disconnected from any structure. Potable water must be
supplied from the City water distribution system. The property owner must contact
the City Water and Sewer Division to verify disconnection of wells and septic
systems.
An existing commercial structure is on the subject property which has an on-site well
and septic system and will be required to sever the use of the on-site systems and
connect to City water and sewer service. A term of annexation requires connection to
municipal water and sewer implements this policy. In conjunction with future
connection the septic system must be properly abandoned and the well disconnected
from the domestic supply. Terms of Annexation 7 – 10 address these issues.
Policy 12: All annexations must be contiguous with or wholly surrounded by the
existing City boundary. The City Commission may agree to annex property that is not
contiguous or wholly surrounded. If the land to be annexed is not contiguous to or
wholly surrounded by the City, the reasoning and justification for annexation must
be explicitly addressed within the petition and approved by the Commission prior to
adoption of a Resolution of Annexation.
This criterion is met. The property in question is contiguous to the City limits. Further,
the property is wholly surrounded by city limits.
SECTION 6 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the advisory boards and
City Commission must consider the following criteria (letters A-K). As an amendment is
a legislative action, the Commission has broad latitude to determine a policy direction.
The burden of proof that the application should be approved lies with the applicant.
A zone map amendment must be in accordance with the growth policy (criteria A) and be
designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers (criteria B), promote public health,
public safety, and general welfare (criteria C), and facilitate the provision of
transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements (criteria
38
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 18 of 39
D). Therefore, to approve a zone map amendment the Commission must find Criteria A-
D are met.
In addition, the Commission must also consider criteria E-K, and may find the zone map
amendment to be positive, neutral, or negative with regards to these criteria. To approve
the zone map amendment, the Commission must find the positive outcomes of the
amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K.
In determining whether the criteria are met, Staff considers the entire body of plans and
regulations for land development. Standards which prevent or mitigated negative
impacts are incorporated throughout the entire municipal code but are principally in
Chapter 38, Unified Development Code.
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria
A. Be in accordance with a growth policy.
Criterion met. The Bozeman Community Plan (BCP) 2020, Chapter 5, p. 73, in the section
titled Review Criteria for Zoning Amendments and Their Application, discusses how the
various criteria in 76-2-304 MCA are applied locally. Application of the criteria varies
depending on whether an amendment is for the zoning map or for the text of Chapter 38,
BMC. The first criterion for a zoning amendment is accordance with a growth policy.
Future Land Use Map
The proposed amendment is a change to the zoning map. Therefore, it is necessary to
analyze compliance with the future land use map. Chapter 3 of the BCP 2020 addresses
the future land use map. The introduction to that chapter discusses the importance of
the chapter. Following are some excerpts.
“Future land use is the community’s fundamental building block. It is an
illustration of the City’s desired outcome to accommodate the complex and
diverse needs of its residents.”
“The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes where in the
community. Each category has its own descriptions. Understanding the future
land use map is not possible without understanding the category descriptions.”
The area of this application is within the anticipated growth area of the City. As shown on
the maps in Section 1, on the excerpt of the current future land use map, the property is
designated as Maker Space Mixed-Use. The Urban Neighborhood designation
description reads:
39
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 19 of 39
“This classification provides areas for dynamic mixed uses including technology
industries, manufacturing, research and development, offices, and supportive
uses to provide employment and services to the community. Opportunity for
live/work may be provided or housing elements integrated on upper floors of
mixed-use buildings. Careful consideration is given to public policies supporting
compatibility to enable mixed uses to coexist in harmony. Development within
these areas is often intensive and the area is connected to significant
transportation corridors. Although use in these areas may be intense, they are
part of the larger community and standards for architecture and site design
apply.”
The correlation between the future land use map of the growth policy and the zoning
districts is presented in Table 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. As shown in the
following Correlation with Zoning Table excerpt, the M-1 district is an implementing
district of the Maker Space Mixed-Use designation.
Except from BCP2020 Future Land Use Map:
In finding that this application meets criterion A, the analysis is cognizant that in many
planning efforts and discussions over the decades, the Planning Board and City
Commission have considered the various elements of the question of to grow or not grow
and the consequences of either approach. After considering this question, they have
concluded that having growth within the physical boundaries of Bozeman results in
better outcomes than not. Therefore, the BCP 2020 approaches growth as something
that overall is positive but recognizes that it does not come without drawbacks and that
the community will change over time.
The location of this property is unique due its central location to functioning light and
heavy manufacturing district. Significant transportation corridors are nearby with access
to the Intestate system. Alos, the property is centrally located in the city proper, it is close
to other commercial, residential, and educational areas creating a symbiotic tapestry of
uses.
The property is currently zoned M-1 in the Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District.
The Couty M-1 zone mimics Bozeman’s M-1 zone. Industrial use will support the nearby
North Park and Midtown Urban Renewal Districts.
40
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 20 of 39
Goals and Policies
A zoning amendment is also evaluated against the goals and policies of the BCP 2020.
Most of the goals and policies are not applicable to this application. Relevant goals and
objectives have been identified by staff. Conflict with the text of the growth policy hasn’t
been identified.
The Short-Term Action list on page 63 of the BCP 2020 describes 14 items to implement
the growth policy. The first two relate to direct changes to the zoning map in support of
listed goals and objectives. These include increasing the intensity of zoning districts in
already developed areas. Beginning on page 71 of the BCP 2020 in the section titled
Zoning Amendment Review, the document discusses how the city implements zoning for
new areas, amendments to areas, and revisions to existing text. This section includes a
discussion of when the City may initiate a zoning change to a more intensive district to
increase development opportunities. This section demonstrates that the City, as a
matter of policy, is supportive of more intensive zoning districts and development. It is
inconsistent with this approach to zone at annexation for lower intensities than what
infrastructure and planning documents will support. This policy approach does not
specify any individual district but does lean towards the more intensive portion of the
zoning district spectrum.
The applicant identified several goals and policies from the Bozeman Community Plan 2020
(BCP2020) in support of the M-1 zoning request. Staff generally concurs with the identified
goals, there are few details describing how the proposed development will further the
stated goals and objectives. Therefore, staff augments the record with the following
analysis.
R-2.3 Make good financial investments that have the potential for economic benefit to
the investor and the broader community both through direct and indirect returns.
Comment: The city has invested in infrastructure to serve this and adjacent properties to
support economic activity as described in the BCP2020. Industrial activity generally
adds base economic value compared to service industries which directly supports the
community.
The North Park and Midtown Urban Renewal Districts are nearby. These districts are
tooled to maximize economic growth to reinvest in the community. Annexing and zoning
property near supports synergies between a variety of business with access to multiple
transportation systems.
41
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 21 of 39
R-2.8 Harmonize with Existing Activity: Expand, enhance, or leverage work being done to
build on existing efforts.
Comment: The city has invested in infrastructure to serve this and adjacent properties to
support economic activity as described in the BCP2020. Industrial activity generally
adds base economic value compared to service industries which directly supports the
community. Further, the North Park development has invested considerable resources
to install city services and rail connection just to the west.
DCD-1.5 Identify underutilized sites, vacant, and undeveloped sites for possible
development or redevelopment, including evaluating possible development incentives.
Comment: The site is fully served by existing municipal services with no current
commercial activity. Annexing the property will decommission the existing well and
septic system, improving environmental health, and allow connection to city services
which in turn, will enable the property to be utilized for light manufacturing.
DCD-1.11 Pursue annexations consistent with the future land use map and adopted
facility plans for development at urban intensity.
Comment: The subject property is well within the facility plan boundaries and the
proposed M-1 zoning is consistent with the future land use map.
RC-3.4 Encourage annexation of land adjacent to the City prior to development and
encourage annexation of wholly surrounded areas.
Comment: The revised Annexation Policy, see Resolution 2025-007, clarifies required
submittal requirements and process to annex property at a property owners’ discretion.
As noted in Section 1 – Map Series, the property is wholly surrounded by the city and
annexation will further several desired outcomes detailed in the City’s Annexation policy
and BCP 2020 goals.
Staff has identified additional goals furthered by this application. They include:
Goal DCD-1: Support urban development within the City.
Comment: The proposed zoning is occurring in conjunction with an annexation. Any
future development will be required to occur at urban densities and will be within the
City. If the City Commission declines the annexation, then the requested M-1 zoning will
not occur.
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.
42
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 22 of 39
Comment: Gallatin County adopted the Gallatin County/Bozeman Area Plan (GCBA
Plan), a neighborhood plan under their growth policy, to identify County priorities for this
area of the county. Implementing zoning was updated for the new neighborhood plan
and is now in place.
“The purposes of the [County] Growth Policy and the 2005 Bozeman Area Plan are to
provide comprehensive, long-range guidance relative to the growth and
development…”
The annexation of inholdings will limit industrial developments encroaching into
agricultural lands outside of the city limits.
Goal RC-3: Collaborate with Gallatin County regarding annexation and development
patterns adjacent to the City to provide certainty for landowners and taxpayers.
Gallatin County has been notified of the proposed annexation.
Goal N-4: Continue to encourage Bozeman’s sense of place.
N-4.1 Continue to recognize and honor the unique history, neighborhoods, neighborhood
character, and buildings that contribute to Bozeman’s sense of place through programs
and policy led by both City and community efforts.
The proposed amendment does not alter the zoning on any adjacent property and
correspondingly the character of that adjacent property. As noted in other criteria in this
report, the proposed amendment is consistent with the planned development of the area
as industrial and commercial activity. While the application does not further all goals of
the BCP 2020, taken as a whole, the application is supportive of and in accordance with,
the BCP 2020.
B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers.
Criterion Met. The property can be served by the Bozeman Fire Department. Fire
protection water supply will be provided by the City of Bozeman water system. There are
two existing structures without services on the property. The property is not within any
delineated floodplain nor does it have other known natural hazards. Upon annexation
the subject property will be provided with City emergency services including police, fire
and ambulance. Future development of the property will be required to conform to all
City of Bozeman public safety, building and land use requirements. The City provides
emergency services to adjacent properties and no obstacles have been identified in
extending service to this parcel.
43
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 23 of 39
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
18.02 International
Fire code
Adopt standards for
fire prevention and
control
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Site plan and building
permit
38.400
Transportation
Facilities and
Access
Streets standards for
size and
construction
Transportation
Master Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
38.400.010 Streets,
general
Access for
emergency services
Transportation
Master Plan
Subdivision or site plan.
38.410.090 Fire
protection
requirements
Development design
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Subdivision, site plan,
and building permit
C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare.
Criterion Met. See comments in Section 6, Criteria A, B and D. City development
standards included in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code, building codes, and
engineering standards all ensure that this criterion is met. Adequate water and sewer
supply and conveyance provide for public health through clean water. Rapid and
effective emergency response provides for public safety. The City’s standards ensure
that adequate services are provided prior to construction of homes which advances this
criterion. General welfare has been evaluated during the adoption of Chapter 38 and
found to be advanced. Provision of parks, control of storm water, and other features of
the City’s development standards advance the general welfare. Compliance with the
BCP 2020 advances the well-being of the community as a whole.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
18.02 International
Fire code
Adopt standards for
fire prevention and
control
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Site plan and building
permit
38.400
Transportation
Facilities and
Access
Streets standards for
size and
construction
Transportation
Master Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
44
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 24 of 39
38.410.070
Municipal water,
sewer systems
Location and
requirement to
install.
Sewer collection
facilities plan, Water
facilities plan
Subdivision or site plan.
38.410.090 Fire
protection
requirements
Development design
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Subdivision, Site plan,
and building permit
38.420 Parks Standards for
location, type, and
development of
parks and trails
Park, Recreation,
and Active
Transportation Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
38.5 Project Design Site layouts,
landscaping,
building
configuration, signs,
lighting
Site plan and building
permit
D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and
other public requirements.
Criterion Met. This property is included in future planning areas. The City conducts
extensive planning for municipal transportation, water, sewer, parks, and other facilities
and services provided by the City. The adopted plans allow the City to consider existing
conditions and identify enhancements needed to provide additional service needed by
new development. The City implements these plans through its capital improvements
program that identifies individual projects, project construction scheduling, and
financing of construction.
As stated in 38.300.020.C, the designation of a zoning district does not guarantee
approval of new development until the City verifies the availability of needed
infrastructure. All zoning districts in Bozeman enable a wide range of uses and
intensities. At time of future subdivision or site plan review the need for individual
services can be more precisely determined. No subdivision or site plan is approved
without demonstration of adequate capacity.
38.300.020.C, “Placement of any given zoning district on an area depicted on the
zoning map indicates a judgment on the part of the city that the range of uses
allowed within that district are generally acceptable in that location. It is not a
guarantee of approval for any given use prior to the completion of the appropriate
review procedure and compliance with all of the applicable requirements and
45
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 25 of 39
development standards of this chapter and other applicable policies, laws and
ordinances. It is also not a guarantee of immediate infrastructure availability or a
commitment on the part of the city to bear the cost of extending services.”
The application site is located well within the City’s land use, transportation, parks, and
utility planning areas. Those plans show this property as developing within the City when
development is proposed. Adequacy of all these public requirements is evaluated during
the subdivision and site development process. All zoning districts in Bozeman enable a
range of uses and intensities. At the time of future subdivision or site plan review the
need for individual services can be more precisely determined. No subdivision or site
plan is approved without demonstration of adequate capacity.
The future development of the area may require dedication and construction of
additional streets, provision of parks, if required, extension of water and sewer services,
and placement of easements for telecommunication, electric service, and similar dry
utilities. As noted in Section 6, Criterion A, major transportation corridors are nearby and
can serve the site. Paved streets serve the site.
Redevelopment and further development are evaluated to ensure all minimum
standards for the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other
public requirements are met. Any identified deficiencies must be corrected.
No additional right-of-way for major streets is required. With future development
proposals, the applicant must demonstrate not just possible but actual street networks
and utility connections existing or to be constructed to support the intensity of
development proposed. See also Section 6, Criterion F regarding transportation and
Section 5, annexation Policies 8, 9, and 12. The criterion is met.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
18.02 International
Fire code
Adopt standards for
fire prevention and
control
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Site plan and building
permit
38.400
Transportation
Facilities and
Access
Streets standards for
size and
construction
Transportation
Master Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
38.410.060
Easements
Location and form of
easements for
utilities
Transportation
Master Plan, Sewer
collection facilities
Annexation for collector
and arterial streets.
46
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 26 of 39
plan, Water facilities
plan
Subdivision or site plan
for all others.
38.410.070
Municipal water,
sewer systems
Location and
requirement to
install.
Sewer collection
facilities plan, Water
facilities plan
Subdivision or site plan.
38.410.090 Fire
protection
requirements
Development design
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Subdivision, site plan,
and building permit
38.420 Parks Standards for
location, type, and
development of
parks and trails
Park, Recreation,
and Active
Transportation Plan
Subdivision or site plan
E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air.
Criterion Met. The M-1 zoning designation has requirements for setbacks, height, and lot
coverage which provide for the reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Any future
development of the property will be required to conform to City standards for setbacks,
height, lot coverage, and buffering.
In addition to the zoning standards, adopted building codes contain more detailed
requirements for air circulation, window placement, and building separation that further
ensure the intent of this criterion is satisfied.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
38.320 Form and
Intensity Standards
Standards for
building placement
and maximum size
Subdivision, site plan
review, building permit
38.420 Parks Standards for
location, type, and
development of
parks and trails
Park, Recreation,
and Active
Transportation Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
38.520.060 On-site
residential and
commercial open
space
Private land open
area requirements
Site plan
47
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 27 of 39
F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems.
Neutral. The proposed zoning, while similar to the existing zoning, will allow the property
to develop at a higher intensity than would otherwise be allowed in the County with the
associated Department of Environmental Quality limitations for septic systems.
The City conducts routine transportation monitoring, modeling, and planning to
understand existing conditions and future needs of the transportation system. The 2017
Transportation Master Plan is the most recent transportation plan. Figure 2.5, Existing
Major Street Network, shows North 7th Avenue as a Principal Arterial and Griffin Drive as
an arterial street. Both Maus Lane and Lea Avenue are local streets. The entire frontage
of Maus Lane adjacent to the subject property is within a dedicated 60-foot right-of-way
dedicated with the original Gordon Mandeville State School subdivision, see Plat E-38.
Lea Avenue on the other had was not dedicated with the subdivision nor does it front on
the property to be annexed. Lea Avenue was created through subsequent subdivisions
and was dedicated as a 40-foot right-of-way in 1978 through plat E-38-B and E-38-C.
Further capacity expansion to the transportation network is planned although limited.
Network capacity and expansion will be largely limited to multi-modal service and
improvements to the stormwater management. Dedicated right-of-way existing for all
access points, but the roadways are not fully constructed to meet modern Bozeman
complete streets standards. Further development and redevelopment will likely trigger
the developer to improve deficient components of the streets and may include off-site
street improvements.
These expected actions to implement the Transportation Master Plan will mitigate
impact on the larger transportation network as the overall area develops. Not all of these
expansions will be the responsibility of individual projects.
The City has set minimum standards applicable to development to limit block length,
ensure trail and sidewalk connections, and provide streets adequate to carry traffic
projected from development. These standards are not applied at the time of the ZMA but
are implemented during the subdivision and site plan processes required before any
construction may begin. See also Section 6, Criterion D.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
38.400
Transportation
Facilities and
Access
Streets standards for
size and
construction
Transportation
Master Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
48
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 28 of 39
38.410.060
Easements
Location and form of
easements for
utilities
Transportation
Master Plan,
Annexation for collector
and arterial streets.
Subdivision or site plan
for all others.
38.420.110
Recreation
Pathways
Location and
requirement to
install.
Park, Recreation,
and Active
Transportation Plan
Annexation for Class 1
Trails easement.
Subdivision or site plan
for all else.
The property has a Walk Score of 40, a transit score of 21, and a bike score of 53. These
values are provided by Walk Score, a private organization which presents information on
real estate and transportation through walkscore.com. The algorithm which produces
these numbers is proprietary. A score is not an indication of safety or continuity of
services or routes. Scores are influenced by proximity of housing, transit, and services
and expected ability, as determined by the algorithm, to meet basic needs without using
a car. Sites located on the edge of the community have lower scores than those in the
center of the community as the area is still under development and therefore diversity of
uses is less than in fully established areas. There are no adopted development standards
relating to the walk score. The City recently upgraded pedestrian facilities along Griffin
Drive and it is unknown whether those enhancements are reflected in the scoring.
According to Walk Score® the walks score measures the walkability of any address
based on the distance to nearby places and pedestrian friendliness.
90 – 100 Walker’s Paradise. Daily errands do not require a car.
70 – 89 Very Walkable. Most errands can be accomplished on foot.
50 – 69 Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot.
25 – 49 Car-Dependent. Most errands require a car.
0 – 24 Car-Dependent. Almost all errands require a car.
Prior to occupancy or other appropriate trigger, the applicant must show all applicable
transportation systems are adequate to serve the proposed development and must
meet minimum City standards. The Applicant has been advised of specific code
provisions that will apply with future development proposals.
49
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 29 of 39
G. Promotion of compatible urban growth.
Criterion Met. The Bozeman Community Plan establishes a preferred and compatible
development pattern. “The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes
where in the community… The land use categories and descriptions provide a guide for
appropriate development and redevelopment locations for civic, residential,
commercial, industrial, and other uses. The future land use designations are important
because they aim to further the vision and goals of the City through promoting
sustainability, citizen and visitor safety, and a high quality of life that will shape
Bozeman’s future.” (Community Plan P. 51)
Individuals may have widely varying opinions about what constitutes compatibility. To
address this wide variation of viewpoint, Compatible development and Compatible land
use are defined in Article 38.7 BMC to establish a common reference for consideration
of this criterion and application of development standards. They are defined as:
“Compatible development. The use of land and the construction and use of
structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing
neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's adopted growth policy.
Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of
architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity;
materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration
with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural
elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open
spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or
monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.
Compatible land use. A land use which may by virtue of the characteristics of its
discernible outward effects exist in harmony with an adjoining land use of
differing character. Effects often measured to determine compatibility include,
but are not limited to, noise, odor, light and the presence of physical hazards such
as combustible or explosive materials.”
As noted in the definition of Compatible development, there are many elements that
contributed to compatibility. The final sentence of the definition deserves emphasis
“Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or
site design, density or use.” Compatible development can be different than what is
already in place. The City has adopted a variety of standards to implement compatibility.
The proposed M-1 is an industrial zone. As shown in the Section 1: Map Series, the
property is central to a large industrially designated area with other like zoned property
adjacent. Also, the existing zoning in the Gallatin County Bozeman Zoning District in the
50
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 30 of 39
County is M-1. The allowed uses for commercial, mixed-use, and industrial districts are
set in Table 38.310.040 [External Link]. Other unannexed properties are nearby including
a petroleum storage and distribution facility and an auto repair facility, both are zoned
M-1 in the county. The form and intensity standards for commercial, mixed-use, and
industrial are in Table 38.320.030 [External Link].
The intent of the M-1 light manufacturing district, 38.300.120.E, BMC, “ is to provide for
the community's needs for wholesale trade, storage and warehousing, trucking and
transportation terminals, light manufacturing and similar activities. The district should
be oriented to major transportation facilities yet arranged to minimize adverse effects
on residential development, therefore, some type of screening may be necessary.”
The proposed amendment is associated with an annexation creating an incremental
increase in the size of the City. As discussed in Section 6, Criterion A above, both the
City’s and County’s growth policies expect this area to continue developing as an
industrial area
The City Commission has adopted standards to control development impacts and
support compatibility. The following excerpt from the BCP 2020, page 75 describes the
City’s approach.
“What combination of uses under what conditions can work well together? There
is a wide range of possible answers for each community to consider. Some
communities take a highly prescriptive worst-case view and try to restrain all
possible points of perceived conflict. This tends to create a very homogenous
community with little interest or scope for creativity. Bozeman takes a different
approach. The worst case scenario is recognized as unlikely, but possible.
Development standards deal with the majority of cases, while restraining
extraordinary problems.
The City creates standards under items 1 through 3; when one district is adjacent
to another and is consistent with the growth policy, any physical conflicts will be
minimal, if present at all. The City’s zoning policy encourages continued
development of mixed uses. … The City uses the broad scope of its development
standards to enable differing uses to be successful near each other. This shows
on the zoning map where districts providing a wide diversity of uses are
intermixed.”
This proposal amends the zoning map and not the text. Therefore, no element of this
amendment modifies the standards of any zoning district. The character of the districts
as created by those standards remains intact.
51
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 31 of 39
As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical
extents of a zoning district. Zoning doesn’t freeze the character of an area in perpetuity.
Rather, it provides a structured method to consider changes to the character. The BCP
2020 notes,
“…when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and
possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an
annexation request there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In
this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for
the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.”
Staff concludes the proposed M-1 zoning is compatible with future land use map
designation, the existing character of the area, and compatible with the broader area
near the subject property. See also discussion for Section 6, Criteria A & H.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related Documents When standard is
applied
38.310 Permitted
Uses
What can be done
where in the city.
Growth policy Subdivision, site plan,
building permit
38.320 Form and
Intensity Standards
Standards for
building placement
and maximum size
Subdivision, site plan,
building permit
38.320.060 Zone
Edge Transitions
Height adjustments
on the edge of some
zones
Site plan
38.340 Overlay
District Standards
Historic preservation SOI Standards for
Historic Preservation,
Design Guidelines for
Historic Preservation
Site plan and building
permit
38.5 Project Design Site layouts,
landscaping,
building
configuration, signs,
lighting
Site plan and building
permit
H. Character of the district.
Criterion Met. Section 76-2-302, MCA says “…legislative body may divide the
municipality into districts of the number, shape, and area as are considered best suited
52
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 32 of 39
to carry out the purposes [promoting health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the
community] of this part.” Emphasis added.
This proposal amends the zoning map and not the text. Therefore, no element of this
amendment modifies the standards of any zoning district. The character of the districts
as created by those standards remains unaltered. Even though the criterion is most
applicable to text amendments it still must be applied to consideration of zoning map
amendments. The requested zoning meets the requirements of this criterion because it
is the same as adjacent properties and is substantially similar to the existing County
zoning designation of M-1 and promotes urban growth as called for in the BCP 2020. The
proposed amendment only applies to the Applicant’s property and does not change
what is or is not allowed on adjacent property.
As noted above, the City Commission has discretion within the limits of the State
established criteria in considering the location and geographical extents of a zoning
district. Implementation of zoning must also be in accordance with the adopted growth
policy. As noted in Section 6, Criterion A, the City policy calls for a diverse and densifying
land use pattern. See discussion in Section 6, Criterion A.
The BCP 2020 includes several objectives applicable to this criterion. These are:
▪ DCD-1.5 Identify underutilized sites, vacant, and undeveloped sites for possible
development or redevelopment, including evaluating possible development
incentives.
▪ DCD-1.11 Pursue annexations consistent with the future land use map and
adopted facility plans for development at urban intensity.
▪ EE-1.6 Update the zoning map to correct deficiencies identified in the annual
land use inventory report.
▪ EE-2.1 Ensure the future land use map contains adequate areas of land for
anticipated diverse users.
Application of any municipal zoning district to the subject property and subsequent
development will alter the existing largely undeveloped character of the subject
property. In this case the expected evolution of character will minimal and gradual
because the existing zoning is also M-1 and the primary impediment to development is
lack of water and sewer service to accommodate development. Adjacent municipal
zoning includes M-1 and M-2, two of the City’s primary industrial zones with access to
significant transportation facilities to support commercial activity.
Zoning doesn’t freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it provides a
structured method to consider changes to the character. The BCP 2020 notes,
53
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 33 of 39
“…when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and
possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an
annexation request, there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In
this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for
the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.”
See Section 6, Criterion A above for discussion about the application and growth policy
and anticipated change to the character of the area.
The City has defined compatible development as:
“The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony
with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives
of the city's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include,
but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural
elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of
operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and
sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized
transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not
require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.”
As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical
extents of a zoning district. To date, the City of Bozeman has not defined a specific area
outside of the area itself to be rezoned for consideration of this criterion. A review of the
existing uses within a quarter mile radius of the amendment site shows five zoning
districts. They include M-1, M-2, B-2, PLI, and M-1 in the County. All these districts can
be compatible with one another.
Page 77 of the BCP 2020 describing review of zoning map amendments states “When
evaluating compliance with criteria, it is appropriate to consider all the options allowed
by the requested district and not only what the present applicant describes as their
intensions.” When evaluating compatibility between zoning districts, Staff considers the
full range of allowable uses, not only what is built now or proposed by a specific project.
The maps in Section 1, all the municipally zoned areas in the immediate vicinity are in
the upper range of zoning district intensity. This is consistent with the City’s previous and
current growth policy and infrastructure planning. The character of the larger area is
stable fostering industrial and commercial activity.
Table 4 of the BCP 2020, see Section 6, Criterion A above, identifies the implementing
zoning districts of the Maker Space Mixed-Use future land use category. This category
54
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 34 of 39
allows for zoning districts that authorize a wide range of possible future development.
There are no zoning districts which are limited to only one type of development. All zoning
districts implementing the Maker Space Mixed-Use category provide for a range of
building typologies and uses. As noted in this report, the BCP 2020 calls for evaluation of
the entire range of uses in zoning districts when evaluating criteria for zoning
amendments.
Evaluation of this situation is guided by the growth policy. On page 76 of the BCP 2020
under discussion of application of this zoning criteria says:
“Second, when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual
and possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is
accompanying an annexation request, there is often a substantial change in
use that will occur. In this case, the Commission must look at what the growth
policy recommends for the area, as there is less built context to provide
guidance.”
The City has adopted many standards to identify and avoid or mitigate demonstrable
negative impacts of development. These will support the ability of future development in
M-1 to be compatible with adjacent development and uphold the industrial and
commercial character in an area.
The standards adopted by the City prevent physically dangerous spillover effects. An
example is the capture, treatment and discharge controls from additional storm water
runoff as additional impervious surfaces are built. Required setbacks from property
lines, landscaping requirements, and similar site and building standards address
character and compatibility. These and other standards carry out the intent and purpose
of the City’s land development standards in Chapter 38 of the municipal code.
Sec. 38.100.040. - Intent and purpose of chapter.
A. The intent of this unified development chapter is to protect the public
health, safety and general welfare; to recognize and balance the various
rights and responsibilities relating to land ownership, use, and
development identified in the United States and State of Montana
constitutions, and statutory and common law; to implement the city's
adopted growth policy; and to meet the requirements of state law.
Zoning does not prohibit change but provides a structure within which change can occur.
Such changes include modifications to both the text and zoning map. Such amendments
are authorized in the zoning enabling act for municipalities. Landowners have both
property rights and responsibilities. The City has adopted development standards to
ensure that responsibilities are met while landowners exercise their property rights. The
55
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 35 of 39
City has not chosen, and is not required, to adopt standards for all issues. For example,
standards have not been adopted regarding preservation of view sheds or extra
separation of buildings from unannexed property.
Finally, Theme 7 of the BCP 2020 includes this statement:
“RC-3.2 Work with Gallatin County to keep rural areas rural and maintain a clear
edge to urban development that evolves as the City expands outwards.”
This objective describes the situation now under review. The City is expanding outwards
by annexation. Gallatin County has identified this area as a growth area in its land use
planning documents. Staff concludes that M-1 is not significantly or detrimental from or
to the surrounding zoning is compatible urban growth called for in the growth policy. See
also discussion for Section 6, Criteria A, G, and F.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related Documents When standard is
applied
38.310 Permitted
Uses
What can be done
where in the city.
Growth policy Subdivision, site plan,
building permit
38.320 Form and
Intensity Standards
Standards for
building placement
and maximum size
Subdivision, site plan,
building permit
38.320.060 Zone
Edge Transitions
Height adjustments
on the edge of some
zones
Site plan
38.340 Overlay
District Standards
Historic preservation SOI Standards for
Historic Preservation,
Design Guidelines for
Historic Preservation
Site plan and building
permit
38.5 Project Design Site layouts,
landscaping,
building
configuration, signs,
lighting
Site plan and building
permit
I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses.
Criterion met. The proposed amendment does not modify the existing standards of the
M-1 districts. The current zoning is M-1 under the Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning
District which was originally created and administered by the City/County Planning
56
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 36 of 39
Board and are similar in use a, intensity, and general standards. Further, adjacent zoning
and uses are similar and supportive of additional M-1 zones. Therefore, the impact of the
amendment is limited to this application site.
The property is generally flat. There are no known water courses, wetlands, agricultural
water user facilities, or other natural features that might impede development. Unlike
many areas in the city, groundwater in the area is deeper and unlikely to require
substantial mitigation efforts for construction of budlings.
The property is within the City’s planning area for land use and utility extensions.
Municipal utilities and emergency services can be extended to the area. Therefore, M-1
uses are suitable for the subject property.
J. Conserving the value of buildings.
Neutral. The proposed amendment does not modify the existing standards of the M-1
district. M-1 is manufacturing and commercial in nature and allow a variety of building
mass and scales, function, with limited residential uses permitted by right. The Future
Land Use and zoning surrounding the property is industrial in nature.
Future development is not known at this juncture and will emerge with future
development applications. The permitted uses must conform to the adopted zoning.
Adjacent rights-of-way separate this property from adjacent property and will act as a
buffer to the existing developments. The location of amenities that may increase the
value of buildings such as parks, open space, trails, and value-added assets is
undermined.
Any new structures at the site will be required to meet setback and other protective
requirements set forth in the Bozeman Municipal Code. Compliance will alleviate
potential negative impacts to the value of surrounding buildings and properties. As
described in earlier criteria, the proposed zoning is compatible with existing buildings on
adjacent properties and does not create any new situations not in compliance with
municipal code.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
38.310 Permitted
Uses
What can be done
where in the city.
Growth policy Subdivision, site plan
review, building permit
38.320 Form and
Intensity Standards
Standards for
building placement
and maximum size
Subdivision, site plan
review, building permit
57
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 37 of 39
38.600 Natural
Resource Protection
Protect
watercourses and
wetlands
FEMA Floodplain
study
Subdivision, site plan
review, building permit
K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area.
Criterion Met. The proposed M-1 zoning designation will encourage the most appropriate
use of land as the property is adjacent is industrial and commercial in use. There is
access to the city’s services, including streets, thus can support a higher intensity of
uses as allowed within the M-1 zoning district. Furthermore, the proposed M-1 zoning
designation is consistent with the BCP 2020 future land use map designation of “Maker
Space Mixed-Use”.
APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Notice was published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on November 8 and 15, 2025. The
notice was posted on site and notices mailed by the applicant as required by 38.220 and
the required confirmation provided to the Planning Office. Notice was provided at least
15 and not more than 45 days prior to any public hearing.
No public comment has been received on this application as of the production of this
report.
APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING
Adopted Growth Policy Designation:
The property is designated as “Maker Space Mixed-Use” in the Bozeman Community
Plan 2020.
“This classification provides areas for dynamic mixed uses including
technology industries, manufacturing, research and development, offices,
and supportive uses to provide employment and services to the community.
Opportunity for live/work may be provided or housing elements integrated
on upper floors of mixed-use buildings. Careful consideration is given to
public policies supporting compatibility to enable mixed uses to coexist in
harmony. Development within these areas is often intensive and the area is
connected to significant transportation corridors. Although use in these
58
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 38 of 39
areas may be intense, they are part of the larger community and standards
for architecture and site design apply.”
Proposed Zoning Designation and Land Uses:
The applicant has requested zoning of M-1, Light Manufacturing District. The intent of the
M-1 district is:
Light manufacturing district (M-1). The intent of the M-1 light manufacturing
district is to provide for the community's needs for wholesale trade, storage and
warehousing, trucking and transportation terminals, light manufacturing and
similar activities. The district should be oriented to major transportation facilities
yet arranged to minimize adverse effects on residential development, therefore,
some type of screening may be necessary.
59
Staff Report for the Maus Lane Annexation and ZMA, Application 25213 Page 39 of 39
APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Owner: Richard Mari, 705 Circle F Trail, Bozeman, MT 59718
Applicant: Morrison Maierle, 2880 Technology Blvd., Bozeman, MT 59715
Representative: Morrison Maierle, 2880 Technology Blvd., Bozeman, MT 59715
Report By: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner, Community Development Department
FISCAL EFFECTS
No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be
changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment.
ATTACHMENTS
The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development
Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. The application materials can also
be viewed online by clicking the following web link.
https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=299734&dbid=0&repo=BOZEMAN
60
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Community Development Board
FROM:Tom Rogers, Senior Planner
Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Erin George, Director of Community Development
SUBJECT:Annexation and Zone Map Amendment Requesting Annexation and the
Establishment of an Initial Zoning Designation of R-3 on 17.92 Acres, the L
Street Annexation, Application 25360
MEETING DATE:December 1, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative
RECOMMENDATION:Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials,
public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 25360 and move to recommend
approval of the L Street Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required
to complete the application processing.
STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning,
ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban
approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density,
connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods.
BACKGROUND:The applicant and property owners seek to annex three existing parcels
consisting of 17.92 acres plus adjacent rights-of-way into the City limits and
establish an initial zoning of R-3, Residential Medium Density District. The
property is currently zoned A-S, Agricultural Suburban, within the County
administered Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District.
The properties make up a significant portion of an unannexed island with
city limits. The unannexed island consists of 52.5 acres of which this
annexation totals 17.92 acres or 34 percent of the area. Existing county
zoning is split equally of R-S, Residential Suburban and A-S, Agricultural
Suburban. The northern boundary of the property is directly adjacent to the
Story Mill Park.
The properties are largely vacant and undeveloped apart from some minor
agricultural buildings and an existing well. The east Gallatin River bisects the
property with adjacent potential wetlands as shown on the annexation map.
A full wetland delineation will be required with any future site development.
It also abuts the Pole Yard Urban Renewal District on the southern edge.
61
The Subject Property is located within the Idaho Pole Co. Superfund Site
boundary and the associated Controlled Groundwater Area (CGA). Any
future development of the property will require the installation of municipal
utilities provided by the City to support residential use. The CGA requires
that any excavation or disturbance of the soil be approved by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality (MDEQ). The applicant acknowledges this
requirement and will obtain the necessary approval prior to development.
The Subject Property lies outside of both the Treated Soils Area (TSA) and
the Residential Restricted Area.
The proposed annexation would bring in additional right of way to build out
sections of L Street and Story Mill Road upon future development along with
additional internal local street network.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:There are no identified conflicts on this application.
ALTERNATIVES:1. Approve the application with contingencies as presented;
2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended
zoning;
3. Deny the application based on findings of non-compliance with the
applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or
4. Open and continue the public hearing, with specific direction to staff or
the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items.
FISCAL EFFECTS:No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds
will be changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment.
Attachments:
25360 L Street Annex_ZMA CDB.pdf
Report compiled on: November 24, 2025
62
Page 1 of 44
25360 Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA
Public Hearings: Community Development Board (map amendment only) December 1,
2025
City Commission (Annexation and map amendment) December 16, 2025
Project Description: An application to annex three parcels of 17.92 acres into city limits
and amendment of the City Zoning Map for the establishment of a zoning
designation of R-3, Residential Medium Density, Application 25360.
Project Location: The property is addressed as 1215 L Street and generally located west
of the intersection of L Street and Story Mill Road. The property consists of three
parcels: Parcel I (9 acres) located in the Southwest One-quarter (SW1/4) of the
Northwest One-Quarter (NW ¼) West of Road and East of the River situated in
Section Five (5), Township Two (2) South, Range Six (6) East. Parcel II (0.96 acre)
located in the Southwest One-quarter (SW1/4) of the Northwest One-Quarter
(NW ¼) Section Five (5), in Township Two (2) South, Range Six (6) East, Abandoned
Menard Line. Parcel V (7.96 acres) described as Tract J in the Southwest One-
quarter (SW ¼) of the Northwest One-Quarter (NW ¼), Section Five (5) and the
Southeast One-Quarter (SE ¼) of the Northeast One-Quarter (NE ¼) Section Six
(6), in Township Two (2) South, Range Six (6). All parcels in Section 5 and Section
6, Township 2 South, Range 6 East, P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana.
Recommendation: Meets standards for approval with terms of annexation and
contingencies.
Recommended Zoning Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff
report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I
hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 25360 and
move to recommend approval of the L Street Zone Map Amendment, with
contingencies required to complete the application processing.
Recommended City Commission Annexation Motion: Having reviewed and
considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all
information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report
for application 25360 and move to approve the L Street Annexation subject to the
terms of annexation and direct staff to prepare an annexation agreement.
Recommended City Commission Zoning Motion: Having reviewed and considered the
staff report, application materials, public comment, recommendation of the
Zoning Commission, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 25360 and move to approve the L
63
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 2 of 44
Street Zone Map Amendment with contingencies of approval necessary to
complete adoption of an implementing ordinance.
Report Date: November 25, 2025
Staff Contact: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner
Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is based on the application materials submitted and public comment
received to date. This report addresses both the zoning amendment for Community
Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission, as well as the
annexation and the zoning amendment for the City Commission. The application
materials are available on the City’s website in the laserfiche archive.
The application was found adequate prior to the adoption of the 2025 Bozeman Land Use
Plan. Therefore, review of the application follows the review process and criteria of the
Bozeman Community Plan 2020 and review of the development code at that time.
Unresolved Issues
There are no identified conflicts on this application.
Project Summary
The applicant and property owners seek to annex three existing parcels consisting of
17.92 acres plus adjacent rights-of-way into the City limits and establish an initial zoning
of R-3, Residential Medium Density District. If the application is approved and filly
executed, the UDC Update will change the R-3 zone to R-B for all future development
proposals. The property is currently zoned A-S, Agricultural Suburban, within the County
administered Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District.
The properties make up a significant portion of an unannexed island with city limits. The
unannexed island consists of 52.5 acres of which this annexation totals 17.92 acres or
34 percent of the area. Existing county zoning is split equally of R-S, Residential
Suburban and A-S, Agricultural Suburban. The northern boundary of the property is
directly adjacent to the Story Mill Park.
The properties are largely vacant and undeveloped apart from some minor agricultural
buildings and an existing well. The east Gallatin River bisects the property with adjacent
potential wetlands as shown on the annexation map. A full wetland delineation will be
64
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 3 of 44
required with any future site development. It also abuts the Pole Yard Urban Renewal
District on the southern edge.
The Subject Property is located within the Idaho Pole Co. Superfund Site boundary and
the associated Controlled Groundwater Area (CGA). Any future development of the
property will require the installation of municipal utilities provided by the City to support
residential use. The CGA requires that any excavation or disturbance of the soil be
approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Montana Department
of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). The applicant acknowledges this requirement and will
obtain the necessary approval prior to development. The Subject Property lies outside of
both the Treated Soils Area (TSA) and the Residential Restricted Area.
The proposed annexation would bring in additional right of way to build out sections of L
Street and Story Mill Road upon future development along with additional internal local
street network.
In determining whether the criteria applicable to this application are met, Staff considers
the entire body of plans and regulations for land development. Standards which prevent
or mitigate possible negative impacts are incorporated in many locations in the
municipal code but are principally in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code.
References in the text of this report to Articles, Divisions, or in the form xx.xxx.xxx are to
the Bozeman Municipal Code.
Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary
The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission
will hold a public hearing on December 1, 2025, and will forward their recommendation
to the City Commission.
No public comment has been received on this application at the time of publication of
this report.
Alternatives
1. Approve the application with contingencies as presented;
2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended zoning;
3. Deny the application based on findings of non-compliance with the applicable
criteria contained within the staff report; or
4. Open and continue the public hearing, with specific direction to staff or the
applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items.
65
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 4 of 44
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 2
Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................. 2
Project Summary ............................................................................................................... 2
Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary .............................. 3
Alternatives ........................................................................................................................ 3
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES: ...................................................................................................... 5
SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED TERMS OF ANNEXATION .................................................. 10
SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT ............ 12
SECTION 4 – GENERAL NOTICES ........................................................................................ 13
SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS............................................... 15
Annexation ....................................................................................................................... 15
Zone Map Amendment ................................................................................................... 15
SECTION 6 - ANNEXATION STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS .......................................... 16
SECTION 7 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ....................... 20
APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ............................................................ 42
APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING ............................ 42
APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ...................................... 43
FISCAL EFFECTS .................................................................................................................... 44
ATTACHMENTS ...................................................................................................................... 44
66
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 5 of 44
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES:
Map 1: Project Vicinity Map
67
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 6 of 44
Map 2: Future Land Use Designation
68
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 7 of 44
Map 3: Current Zoning Map
69
Page 8 of 44
Map 4: Applicant Annexation map
70
Page 9 of 44
Map 5: Idaho Pole Control Groundwater Area
71
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 10 of 44
SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED TERMS OF ANNEXATION
The following terms of annexation are recommended to enable the application to comply
with the City’s Annexation Policy and the requirements of state law for the provision of
services.
Recommended terms of annexation:
1. The documents and exhibits to formally annex the subject property must be
identified as the “L Street Annexation”.
2. An Annexation Map, titled “L Street Annexation Map” with a legal description of
the property and any adjoining un-annexed rights-of-way and/or street access
easements must be submitted by the applicant for use with the Annexation
Agreement. The map must be supplied as a PDF for filing with the Annexation
Agreement at the County Clerk & Recorder, and a digital copy for the City
Engineers Office. This map must be acceptable to the Director of Public Works
and City Engineers Office and must be submitted with the signed Annexation
Agreement.
3. The applicant must execute all contingencies and terms of said Annexation
Agreement with the City of Bozeman within 60 days of the distribution of the
annexation agreement from the City to the applicant or annexation approval shall
be null and void.
4. The landowners and their successors must pay all fire, street, water, and sewer
impact fees at the time of connection; and for future development, as required by
Chapter 2, Bozeman Municipal Code, or as amended at the time of application
for any permit listed therein.
5. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 - L Street is classified as a Collector in
the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP), which has a minimum right-of-
way ROW width of 90 feet. The applicant must provide their half along the property
frontage by easement prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation. The
easement must be executed using the city's standard language. An easement
exhibit must be included with the easement document.
6. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 - Story Mill Road is classified as a
Collector in the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP), which has a
minimum right-of-way ROW width of 90 feet. The applicant must provide their half
along the property frontage by easement prior to the adoption of Resolution of
Annexation. The easement must be executed using the city's standard language.
An easement exhibit must be included with the easement document.
7. If they do not already exist, the applicant must provide and file with the County
Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of
Special Improvement Districts (SID’s) for the following:
72
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 11 of 44
a. Street improvements to L Street from North Wallace Avenue to Story Mill
Road including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, shared
use path and storm drainage.
b. Street improvements to Story Mill Road from L Street to Bridger Drive including
lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, shared use path and
storm drainage.
c. Street improvements to North Wallace Avenue from L Street to East Tamarack
Street including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, shared
use path and storm drainage.
d. Intersection improvements to East Tamarack Street and North Wallace
Avenue including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter,
sidewalk, shared use path and storm drainage.
e. Intersection improvements to L Street and the railroad right-of-way including
lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, shared
use path and storm drainage.
f. The document filed must specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the
completion of these improvements, the developer agrees to participate in an
alternate financing method for the completion of the improvements on a fair
share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property,
taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development,
or a combination thereof.
g. The applicant may obtain a copy of the template SID waiver from the City
Engineering Department. The document filed must specify that in the event
an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the applicant
agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of
said improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by
square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic
contribution from the development, or a combination thereof.
8. The Annexation Agreement must include the following notices:
a. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that, prior to development,
the applicant will be responsible for preparing a storm water master plan in
conjunction with future development. The storm water master plan shall
address maintenance and operations until and unless the City affirmatively
assumes responsibility for maintenance and operations of stormwater
facilities within the area of the annexation.
b. The Annexation Agreement must include notice the City will, upon annexation,
make available to the Property existing City services only to the extent
currently available, or as provided in the Agreement.
c. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that there is no right, either
granted or implied, for Landowner to further develop any of the Property until
73
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 12 of 44
it is verified by the City that the necessary municipal services are available to
the property.
d. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that, prior to development,
the applicant will be responsible for installing any facilities required to provide
full municipal services to the properties in accordance with the City of
Bozeman's infrastructure master plans and all City policies that may be in
effect at the time of development.
e. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that utility easements may be
required to be provided by the landowner at the time of development to ensure
necessary municipal services are available to the property.
f. The agreement must include notice that charges and assessments may be
required after completion of annexation to ensure necessary municipal
services are available to the property.
g. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that the City will assess
system development and impact fees in accordance with Montana law and
Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9, Bozeman Municipal Code.
h. All procedural terms necessary to establish the Annexation Agreement in
conformance with state law and municipal practice will be included with the
final Annexation Agreement.
9. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that the applicant must connect
to municipal services and will be responsible for installing any facilities required
to provide full municipal services to the property in accordance with city policy at
the time of connection.
10. The applicant must contact the City’s Engineering Department to obtain an
analysis of cash-in-lieu of water rights for the proposed annexation. The
determined amount must be paid prior to the adoption of Resolution of
Annexation, if applicable.
11. All final easements provided to the City must be stamped and signed by a
professional surveyor prior to final approval of the annexation Resolution.
SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP
AMENDMENT
Please note that these contingencies are necessary for the City to complete the process
of the proposed amendment. These contingencies only apply if the related annexation
request has previously been approved.
Recommended Contingencies of Approval:
74
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 13 of 44
1. That all documents and exhibits necessary to establish an initial municipal zoning
designation shall be identified as the “L Street Annexation Zone Map Amendment.”
All required documents must be returned to the City within 60 days of the City
Commission action to annex the property or the preliminary approval shall be null
and void.
2. That the Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be finalized until the
Annexation Agreement is signed by the applicant and formally approved by the City
Commission. If the annexation agreement is not approved, the Zone Map
Amendment application shall be null and void.
3. That the applicant must submit a Zone Amendment map, titled “L Street Annexation
Zone Map Amendment”. The map must be supplied as a PDF. This map must be
acceptable to the City Engineer’s Office and must be submitted within 60 days of the
action to approve the zone map amendment. Said map shall contain a metes and
bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property including adjacent
rights-of-way or street easements, and total acreage of the property to be rezoned,
unless the property to be rezoned can be entirely described by reference to existing
platted properties or certificates of survey.
4. The Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant
provides an editable mete and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed
Montana surveyor.
SECTION 4 – GENERAL NOTICES
1. The Parks, Recreation, and Active Trails plan identifies a potential PRAT trail
connecting to the existing dog park to the north, traversing through portions of Parcel
I and V and generally located along the East Gallatin River corridor. Subsequent
development on Parcels I and V should anticipate incorporating the proposed PRAT
trail in development review plans.
2. A notice attached to the annexation agreement as Exhibit “C” is required to convey
to the current and future property owners of the controls related to the Idaho Pole
Superfund Site including:
a. Recorded Documents
i. Frequently Asked Questions:
https://www.bozeman.net/Home/ShowDocument?id=10586 [External Link]
ii. Amendment to Restated and Amended Declarations of Institutional Controls
on Real Property (Document No. 2591055).
75
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 14 of 44
https://www.bozeman.net/Home/ShowDocument?id=10592 [External Link]
iii. Final Designation and Decision of Groundwater Control (Final Order No.
41H-114172)
https://www.bozeman.net/Home/ShowDocument?id=10594 [External Link]
a) The applicant must conform to all rules and regulations established within the
superfund site. The applicant is responsible for all permitting applicable to the
superfund site.
b) During the future development process, the developer needs to coordinate with
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Montana Department of
Environmental Quality (MDEQ) to ensure compliance with the Superfund remedy
including the Institutional Controls (ICs) outlined above, and if needed, the
developer will need to submit a soil management plan to EPA and MDEQ for
approval. The developer will also need approval from other state and federal
agencies, as needed, depending on the nature and location of development.
Additionally, the Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) requires Idaho Pole Co. to
provide a copy of this UAO to all prospective owners or successors before a
controlling interest in assets, property rights, or stock is transferred to the
prospective owner or successor. If a developer wants to change a component of
the remedy, such as digging up and removing waste, EPA and MDEQ would need
to be involved and a remedy change considered, and signed, possibly including
public input.
c) Any future development (construction, utilities, etc.) requires written approval
from EPA and MDEQ outlining conditions of approval including a soil
management plan. The applicant must provide written approval from the EPA and
MDEQ outlining conditions of approval with the future development application.
d) A Controlled Groundwater Area (CGA) was issued by the Montana Division of
Natural Resources in 2001 that restricts groundwater use for any purpose, except
as provided in the remedial action plan or as otherwise authorized by EPA and
MDEQ. Recorded land use restrictions include the following covenants,
conditions and restrictions (among others) that run with the land: No excavation
to saturated soil or groundwater within the CGA without a soil management plan
approved by EPA and MDEQ.
e) With the future development application, the applicant must provide elevations
and locations of saturated soil and groundwater and report all excavations that
will impact these areas.
76
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 15 of 44
f) Any future development on the subject property will be evaluated by the City to
ensure that proposed development and land uses in the application are
consistent with permissible uses for this brownfield land under the EPA
document to protect health, welfare, and safety. The EPA imposed Institutional
Controls on Real Property, Document No. 2554371, or amended. Prior to
approval of any development application to the City of Bozeman, revisions to the
Restated and Amended Declaration of Institutional Controls on Real Property,
Document No. 2554371, or amended, may be required. Without supplying it,
revising the institutional controls as allowed by the EPA prior to submitting
application for development the applicant risks severe delays in review of their
project or possible denial.
g) Any subdivision of the properties will require additional notices to be placed on
the face of the plat placing owners of the controlled groundwater institutional
controls.
SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS
Annexation
Having considered the criteria established for an annexation, the Development Review
Committee (DRC) did not find any deficiencies that prohibit annexation at this time that
could not be addressed through future development review processes and adopted City
Codes.
The City Commission will hold a public meeting on the annexation on December 16,
2025. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m.
Zone Map Amendment
Having considered the criteria established for a zone map amendment, the Staff found
the requested zoning meets standards for approval as submitted. The Zone Map
Amendment (ZMA) is in conjunction with an annexation request. Staff’s
recommendation and staff responses are predicated on approval of the annexation,
application 25360.
The Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the amendment. The DRC did
not identify any infrastructure or regulatory constraints that would impede the approval
of the application that cannot be addressed with adopted standards and requirements
for future development and recommended Terms of Annexation.
77
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 16 of 44
The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission
will hold a public hearing on this zone map amendment on December 1, 2025, and will
forward a recommendation to the City Commission on the zone map amendment. The
meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in the Commission Room at City Hall, 121 N. Rouse Ave,
Bozeman, Montana.
The City Commission will hold a public meeting on the zone map amendment on
December 16, 2025. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in the Commission Room at City
Hall, 121 N. Rouse Ave, Bozeman, Montana. The City Commission will conduct a public
hearing on the proposed Zone Map Amendment application.
SECTION 6 - ANNEXATION STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
In considering applications for approval of the requested annexation, the advisory
boards and City Commission shall consider the following:
Commission Resolution No. 2025-07 Policies [External Link]
Policy 1: Annexations must include dedication of all rights of way for collector and
arterial streets, public water, sanitary sewer, or storm or sewer mains. When
required, rights of way for anchor routes as recognized in the City’s adopted parks
and trails plans, must be provided when such anchor routes are not located within
the right of way for arterial or collector streets.
Criterion met. L Street and Story Mill Road are designated Collector streets according to
the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan. Terms of annexation ensure required right-of-
way are incorporated in the annexation agreement for both L Street and Story Mill Road.
Further, required road easements are shown on the annexation and zoning maps.
No Anchor Routes are identified on the subject property. The Parks, Recreation, and
Active Trails plan identifies a potential PRAT trail connecting to the existing dog park to
the north, traversing through portions of Parcel I and V and generally located along the
East Gallatin River corridor. Subsequent development on Parcels I and V should
anticipate incorporating the proposed PRAT trail in development review plans.
Policy 2: Annexations may be required to include dedication of rights of way for
adjacent or internal local streets to complete street connectivity and provide
required legal and physical access.
Criterion met. Access is provided by L Street and Story Mill Road; both are largely
dedicated public streets that connect to Bridger Drive to the north and L Streets turns
78
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 17 of 44
into Wallace Avenue to the south through COS 2865 and Northern Pacific Addition to
Bozeman.
Additional wight of way are included in the terms of annexation to meet minimum
requirements for Collector Streets pursuant to the Bozeman Transportation Master
Plan. Internal street dedication is not required with annexation. Internal streets
circulation will be addressed with subsequent development applications.
Policy 3: Annexations must include written waivers of a property owner’s right to
protest the creation of special improvement districts necessary to provide essential
services. The waivers must run with the land, be binding on the owner and owner’s
successors in interest and be recorded concurrently with the annexation agreement.
Criterion met. Waivers of the right to protest creation or improvement districts are
accounted for in the terms of annexation. These include street and intersection
improvements identified by the Engineering Department. See term of Annexation 5.
Policy 4: The petition for annexation must be in conformance with the current
Bozeman land use plan (growth policy). If a land use plan (growth policy)
amendment is necessary for anticipated land uses, the land use plan amendment
process must be completed prior to any action for approval of a petition for
annexation.
Criterion Met. The property is designated “Urban Neighborhood” on the future land use
map. No growth policy amendment is required. The application includes a request for
initial zoning of R-3. See the zone map amendment section of this report for analysis of
the zone map amendment criteria.
Policy 5: The City prefers petitions for annexation of land larger than five acres.
However, the City will consider annexation of smaller areas of land when one or
more of the following are present: topographic limitations; the land is served by one
or more City utilities; septic system failure; extension and integration of
transportation infrastructure; enhancement of the existing traffic circulation
system or to provide for transportation systems that do not currently exist;
annexation will make the City boundaries more regular; annexation will better
incorporate unannexed property for the provision of City fire, police, and emergency
services; or when annexation provides improved access to and maintenance of
public facilities.
Criterion met. The three lots involved consist of 17.92 acres.
Policy 6: The City will review infrastructure and emergency services available to an
area proposed for annexation for the health, safety and welfare of the public and
79
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 18 of 44
conformance with the City’s adopted plans. If the City determines adequate
services cannot be provided to ensure public health, safety and welfare, the City
may deny the petition for annexation. Alternatively, the City may require all property
owners within the land to be annexed provide a written plan for accommodation of
services at the expense of the property owner(s). The land to be annexed may only
be provided sanitary sewer service via the applicable drainage basin defined in the
City Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan.
Criterion Met. City infrastructure and emergency services are available to the subject
property. The subject properties are within the planned service area for the Bozeman
Wastewater Collection System Facility Plan, December 2024 Update [External Link] and
the Water Facilities Plan, December 2024 Update [External Link] includes the geographic
area of the subject properties to be annexed.
The property is entirely with in the Upper Rouse sewer collection zone and the Northeast
water pressure zone.
There are no water delivery or wastewater collection adjacent to the properties. Any
future development will be required to connect to the City systems. The property is
located adjacent to existing urban development that is currently served by Bozeman Fire.
Per Term of Annexation 8 a-h and 9, the Annexation Agreement required to finalize the
requested annexation will require the applicant to design extensions of services to meet
the City’s adopted infrastructure standards. These include provisions for minimum
water pressure and volumes, adequate sewer flows by volume, gravity flow of sewers,
and other standards necessary to protect public health and safety and ensure functional
utilities.
Policy 7: The City may require annexation of any contiguous property for which City
services are requested or for which City services are currently being provided. In
addition, any person, firm, or corporation receiving water or sewer service outside of
the City limits is required as a condition of initiating or continuing such service, to
record a consent to annexation of the property serviced by the City.
The property is not currently provided City services. No emergency connection is
requested. City services will be required to be provided concurrently with future
development. Terms of Annexation 7 - 9 address connection to services.
Policy 8: The City Manager may enter into an agreement with a property owner for an
emergency connection to the City’s sanitary sewer or water system. In doing so, the
property owner must submit a petition for annexation and file a notice of consent to
annex with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office prior to connection to
City utilities. The City will prepare the notice of consent to annex. The agreement for
80
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 19 of 44
connection to City sewer or water must require the property owner to complete
annexation or consent to disconnection of the services. Connection for purposes of
obtaining City sewer services in an emergency requires, when feasible as
determined by the City, the connection to City water services.
Emergency connection is not being requested or required.
Policy 9: The use of Part 46 annexations is preferred.
This annexation is being processed under Part 46 provisions.
Policy 10: Where a road improvement district has been created, annexation does
not repeal the creation of the district. The City will not assume operations of a road
improvement district until the entirety of the district has been annexed. Any funds
held in trust for the district will be used to benefit the district after transfer to the
City. Inclusion within a district does not absolve a landowner of the obligation to
participate in general City programs that address the same subject.
No road improvement district is associated with this application.
Policy 11: The City requires connection to and use of City utilities and services upon
development of annexed properties. The City may establish a fixed time frame for
connection to municipal services. Upon development, unless otherwise approved
by the City, septic systems must be properly abandoned and the development must
be connected to the City sanitary sewer system. Upon development, unless
otherwise approved by the City, water wells on the subject property may be used for
irrigation but must be disconnected from any structure. Potable water must be
supplied from the City water distribution system. The property owner must contact
the City Water and Sewer Division to verify disconnection of wells and septic
systems.
An existing ag structure with no wastewater treatment systems or potable water systems
facilities are on the subject property.
Three groundwater monitoring MBMG GWIC Wells are on the subject property. A MBMG
GWIC Well is a well registered in Montana's Ground Water Information Center, managed
by the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology (MBMG). This database contains records,
including water well logs, water quality data, and water level records, for wells across
the state of Montana. The GWIC database is accessible online [External Link] and
includes a mapping tool for locating wells.
A term of annexation requires connection to municipal water and sewer implements this
policy. Terms of Annexation 7 – 9 address these issues.
81
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 20 of 44
Policy 12: All annexations must be contiguous with or wholly surrounded by the
existing City boundary. The City Commission may agree to annex property that is not
contiguous or wholly surrounded. If the land to be annexed is not contiguous to or
wholly surrounded by the City, the reasoning and justification for annexation must
be explicitly addressed within the petition and approved by the Commission prior to
adoption of a Resolution of Annexation.
This criterion is met. The property in question is contiguous to the City limits. The
property is bounded on the north, east, and south by City limits. Further, the property is
wholly surrounded by city limits.
SECTION 7 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the advisory boards and
City Commission must consider the following criteria (letters A-K). As an amendment is
a legislative action, the Commission has broad latitude to determine a policy direction.
The burden of proof that the application should be approved lies with the applicant.
A zone map amendment must be in accordance with the growth policy (criteria A) and be
designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers (criteria B), promote public health,
public safety, and general welfare (criteria C), and facilitate the provision of
transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements (criteria
D). Therefore, to approve a zone map amendment the Commission must find Criteria A-
D are met.
In addition, the Commission must also consider criteria E-K, and may find the zone map
amendment to be positive, neutral, or negative with regards to these criteria. To approve
the zone map amendment, the Commission must find the positive outcomes of the
amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K.
In determining whether the criteria are met, Staff considers the entire body of plans and
regulations for land development. Standards which prevent or mitigated negative
impacts are incorporated throughout the entire municipal code but are principally in
Chapter 38, Unified Development Code.
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria
A. Be in accordance with a growth policy.
Criterion met. The Bozeman Community Plan (BCP) 2020, Chapter 5, p. 73, in the section
titled Review Criteria for Zoning Amendments and Their Application, discusses how the
82
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 21 of 44
various criteria in 76-2-304 MCA are applied locally. Application of the criteria varies
depending on whether an amendment is for the zoning map or for the text of Chapter 38,
BMC. The first criterion for a zoning amendment is accordance with a growth policy.
Future Land Use Map
The proposed amendment is a change to the zoning map. Therefore, it is necessary to
analyze compliance with the future land use map. Chapter 3 of the BCP 2020 addresses
the future land use map. The introduction to that chapter discusses the importance of
the chapter. Following are some excerpts.
“Future land use is the community’s fundamental building block. It is an
illustration of the City’s desired outcome to accommodate the complex and
diverse needs of its residents.”
“The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes where in the
community. Each category has its own descriptions. Understanding the future
land use map is not possible without understanding the category descriptions.”
The area of this application is within the anticipated growth area of the City. As shown on
the maps in Section 1, on the excerpt of the current future land use map, the property is
designated as Urban Neighborhood. The Urban Neighborhood designation description
reads:
“This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types,
shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are
discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density
due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep
slopes. Complementary uses such as parks, home-based occupations, fire
stations, churches, schools, and some neighborhood-serving commerce provide
activity centers for community gathering and services. The Urban Neighborhood
designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal
boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development.
Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed
density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not
required or restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed-use areas to facilitate the
provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of
a car.”
The correlation between the future land use map of the growth policy and the zoning
districts is presented in Table 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. As shown in the
83
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 22 of 44
following Correlation with Zoning Table excerpt, the R-3 and R-5 districts are
implementing district of the Urban Neighborhood designation.
Except from BCP2020 Future Land Use Map:
In finding that this application meets criterion A, the analysis is cognizant that in many
planning efforts and discussions over the decades, the Planning Board and City
Commission have considered the various elements of the question of to grow or not grow
and the consequences of either approach. After considering this question, they have
concluded that having growth within the physical boundaries of Bozeman results in
better outcomes than not. Therefore, the BCP 2020 approaches growth as something
that overall is positive but recognizes that it does not come without consequences and
that the community will change over time.
The location of this property is unique due its proximity to the northeast neighborhood
area and access to this area’s arts, culture, restaurants, housing, and other activities,
the Bridger View Redevelopment site, Story Mill Park, employment, and recent city
investment in road infrastructure, namely to Story Mill Road and Wallace Avenue.
The R-3 zoning district correlates with the principles applied in the Bozeman Community
Plan 2020. A few of the ten principles listed under Basic Planning Precepts of the Plan
are supported by these districts. For example, “land use designations must respond to
a broad range of factors, including infrastructure, natural, and economic constraints,
other community priorities, and expectations of all affected parties concerning private
development.” And “gathering places and open spaces, including parks and trails,
should be in convenient locations to those they serve. Quality and function is superior to
quantity alone.” The latter is achieved by the City’s adopted development code.
The subject property is designated as an “Annexation Holding Area” according to the
Gallatin County Growth Policy 2024 Future Land Use Map [External Link], pages 8-11.
The property is currently zoned A-S in the Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District.
The County A-S district is a largely a holding designation near city limits and designed to
convert to urban development.
84
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 23 of 44
Goals and Policies
A zoning amendment is also evaluated against the goals and policies of the BCP 2020.
Most of the goals and policies are not applicable to this application. Relevant goals and
objectives have been identified by staff. Conflict with the text of the growth policy hasn’t
been identified.
The Short-Term Action list on page 63 of the BCP 2020 describes 14 items to implement
the growth policy. The first two relate to direct changes to the zoning map in support of
listed goals and objectives. These include increasing the intensity of zoning districts in
already developed areas. Beginning on page 71 of the BCP 2020 in the section titled
Zoning Amendment Review, the document discusses how the city implements zoning for
new areas, amendments to areas, and revisions to existing text. This section includes a
discussion of when the City may initiate a zoning change to a more intensive district to
increase development opportunities. This section demonstrates that the City, as a
matter of policy, is supportive of more intensive zoning districts and development. It is
inconsistent with this approach to zone at annexation for lower intensities than what
infrastructure and planning documents will support. This policy approach does not
specify any individual district but does lean towards the more intensive portion of the
zoning district spectrum.
The applicant identified several goals and policies from the Bozeman Community Plan
2020 (BCP2020) in support of the R-3 zoning request found in File 007 ZMA Narrative
[External Link]. Staff generally concurs with the identified goals. It should be noted that
the analysis is against the BCP 2020 and associated implementing zoning districts of R-
1 through R-5 and not the existing zoning administered by the County. Goals and policies
identified by the applicant include the following:
▪ Goal N-1: Support well-planned, walkable neighborhoods.
▪ N-1.1: Promote housing diversity, including missing middle housing
▪ N-1.2: Increase required minimum densities in residential districts.
▪ N-1.3: Revise the zoning map to lessen areas exclusively zoned for single type
housing.
▪ N-1.11: Enable a gradual and predictable increase in density in developed areas
over time.
▪ Goal DCD-1: Support Urban Development within the City.
▪ DCD-1.11: Pursue annexations consistent with the future land use map and
adopted facility plans for development at urban intensity.
85
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 24 of 44
Staff augments the record with the following analysis.
Goal N-3: Promote a diverse supply of quality housing units.
Comment: As noted above the area is designated as Urban Neighborhood according to
the FLUM. This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types,
shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged.
Although, in limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site
constraints and/or natural features, we generally assume the most density permitted by
a given zoning district. As noted on the annexation and zoning maps, there are natural
features that will limit impervious surfaces and placement of buildings.
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. Limited commercial
activities are available today. The city must balance encouraging housing development
with development constraints and proximity to employment, entertainment, education,
and supporting its climate action initiatives. The applicant has requested a mid-range
density zoning designation.
Detailed analysis of site conditions is a requirement of both subdivision and zoning
review and will identify areas to be protected. For example, the watercourse setback
along the East Gallatin River will apply regardless of what municipal zoning district is
placed on the property. Therefore, the proposed combination of R-3 is appropriate for
this property.
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.
Comment: Gallatin County adopted the Gallatin County/Bozeman Area Plan (GCBA
Plan), a neighborhood plan under their growth policy, to identify County priorities for this
area of the county. Implementing zoning was updated for the new neighborhood plan
and is now in place.
“The purposes of the [County] Growth Policy and the 2005 Bozeman Area Plan are
to provide comprehensive, long-range guidance relative to the growth and
development…”
The GCBA Plan recognizes the area is in transition. On page 1 of the GCBA Plan it says,
“It is not the intent of this Plan to prematurely discourage existing agricultural
86
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 25 of 44
operations; rather it is the intent to accommodate the needs of present agriculture while
recognizing an inevitable transition to a more urban landscape.”
Gallatin County recently completed adoption of a future land use map for their growth
policy. The County’s FLUM shows this property as part of the “annexation holding area”
and “Public Lands, Protected, and Constrained Areas” adjacent to Bozeman.
Goal RC-3: Collaborate with Gallatin County regarding annexation and development
patterns adjacent to the City to provide certainty for landowners and taxpayers.
Comment: Gallatin County has been notified of the proposed annexation. The site is
within the Annexation Holding Area on the County’s future land use map supporting
their growth policy.
RC-3.3 Prioritize annexations that enable the incremental expansion of the City and its
utilities.
Comment: The property in question is contiguous to the City limits on the east and south.
It adds approximately 160 acres to the City limits that is available for urban development
while maintaining a consistent city border.
RC-3.4 Encourage annexation of land adjacent to the City prior to development and
encourage annexation of wholly surrounded areas.
Comment: The property is adjacent to and surrounded by the City and does not create
any new unannexed areas surrounded by City limits. The property is seeking annexation
and municipal zoning for the purpose of residential development. Annexation is
happening before development.
In addition to goals and objectives, the BCP 2020 includes descriptive statements
regarding what the goals and objectives seek to support and create.
There is recognition of the role that a sense of place serves in Goal N-4. Neighborhoods
do have physical attributes that help them be distinctive. In this case the presence of
watercourse and sensitive lands supports an opportunity to create unique areas through
a well-planned subdivision or site plan.
See also RC – 3.3 response.
The proposed amendment does not alter the zoning on any adjacent property and
correspondingly the character of that adjacent property. As noted in other criteria in this
report, the proposed amendment is consistent with the planned development of the area
as homes with an urban intensity. While no application furthers every goal of the BCP
2020, taken as a whole, the application is supportive of and in accordance with, the BCP
2020.
87
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 26 of 44
DCD-1.5 Identify underutilized sites, vacant, and undeveloped sites for possible
development or redevelopment, including evaluating possible development incentives.
Comment: The site is undeveloped and within the municipal service area. The future land
use designates the area for residential use and is near multiple recreation and park areas
and is relatively close to other essential services promoting neighborhoods.
B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers.
Criterion Met. The property can be served by the Bozeman Fire Department. Fire
protection water supply will be provided by the City of Bozeman water system. There are
no habitable existing structures without services on the property. Upon annexation the
subject property will be provided with City emergency services including police, fire and
ambulance.
The property is bisected by the East Gallatin River as noted on the annexation and zoning
maps. Full analysis of the water course, associated wetlands, and flood prone areas are
analyzed with subsequent development for either site plan or subdivision. Development
must mitigate impacts and ensure safety by meeting all applicable adopted standards
such as setbacks for wetlands, water course, and flood zones.
Future development of the property will be required to conform to all City of Bozeman
public safety, building and land use requirements. The City provides emergency services
to adjacent properties and no obstacles have been identified in extending service to this
parcel.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
18.02 International
Fire code
Adopt standards for
fire prevention and
control
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Site plan and building
permit
38.400
Transportation
Facilities and
Access
Streets standards for
size and
construction
Transportation
Master Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
38.400.010 Streets,
general
Access for
emergency services
Transportation
Master Plan
Subdivision or site plan.
38.410.090 Fire
protection
requirements
Development design
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Subdivision, site plan,
and building permit
88
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 27 of 44
C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare.
Criterion Met. See comments in Section 6, Criteria A, B and D. City development
standards included in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code, building codes, and
engineering standards all ensure that this criterion is met. Adequate water and sewer
supply and conveyance provide for public health through clean water. Rapid and
effective emergency response provides for public safety. The City’s standards ensure
that adequate services are provided prior to construction of homes which advances this
criterion. General welfare has been evaluated during the adoption of Chapter 38 and
found to be advanced. Provision of parks, control of storm water, and other features of
the City’s development standards advance the general welfare. Compliance with the
BCP 2020 advances the well-being of the community as a whole.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
18.02 International
Fire code
Adopt standards for
fire prevention and
control
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Site plan and building
permit
38.400
Transportation
Facilities and
Access
Streets standards for
size and
construction
Transportation
Master Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
38.410.070
Municipal water,
sewer systems
Location and
requirement to
install.
Sewer collection
facilities plan, Water
facilities plan
Subdivision or site plan.
38.410.090 Fire
protection
requirements
Development design
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Subdivision, Site plan,
and building permit
38.420 Parks Standards for
location, type, and
development of
parks and trails
Park, Recreation,
and Active
Transportation Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
38.5 Project Design Site layouts,
landscaping,
building
configuration, signs,
lighting
Site plan and building
permit
89
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 28 of 44
D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and
other public requirements.
Criterion Met. This property is included in future planning areas. The City conducts
extensive planning for municipal transportation, water, sewer, parks, and other facilities
and services provided by the City. The adopted plans allow the City to consider existing
conditions and identify enhancements needed to provide additional service needed by
new development. The City implements these plans through its capital improvements
program that identifies individual projects, project construction scheduling, and
financing of construction.
As stated in 38.300.020.C, the designation of a zoning district does not guarantee
approval of new development until the City verifies the availability of needed
infrastructure. All zoning districts in Bozeman enable a wide range of uses and
intensities. At time of future subdivision or site plan review the need for individual
services can be more precisely determined. No subdivision or site plan is approved
without demonstration of adequate capacity.
38.300.020.C, “Placement of any given zoning district on an area depicted on the
zoning map indicates a judgment on the part of the city that the range of uses
allowed within that district are generally acceptable in that location. It is not a
guarantee of approval for any given use prior to the completion of the appropriate
review procedure and compliance with all of the applicable requirements and
development standards of this chapter and other applicable policies, laws and
ordinances. It is also not a guarantee of immediate infrastructure availability or a
commitment on the part of the city to bear the cost of extending services.”
The application site is located well within the City’s land use, transportation, parks, and
utility planning areas although with no current capacity constructed. The Applicant
acknowledges service limitation and states all future development must meet adopted
City codes for water, sewer, transportation, parks, and all other required components.
Further, staff has included notices to the extend and nature of the institutional controls
imposed by the EPA and DEQ for the groundwater control area associated with the Idaho
Pole Superfund site. These notices are included as an attachment to the annexation
agreement as Exhibit “C”.
Adequacy of all these public requirements is evaluated during the subdivision and site
development process. All zoning districts in Bozeman enable a range of uses and
intensities. At the time of future subdivision or site plan review the need for individual
services can be more precisely determined. No subdivision or site plan is approved
without demonstration of adequate capacity.
90
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 29 of 44
The future development of the area may require dedication and construction of
additional streets, provision of parks, if required, extension of water and sewer services,
and placement of easements for telecommunication, electric service, and similar dry
utilities. As noted in Section 6, Criterion A, major transportation corridors are nearby and
can serve the site. Paved streets serve the site.
Redevelopment and further development are evaluated to ensure all minimum
standards for the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other
public requirements are met. Any identified deficiencies must be corrected.
Additional right-of-way for major streets is required. With future development proposals,
the applicant must demonstrate not just possible but actual street networks and utility
connections existing or to be constructed to support the intensity of development
proposed. See also Section 6, Criterion F regarding transportation and Section 5,
annexation Policies 8, 9, and 12. The criterion is met.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
18.02 International
Fire code
Adopt standards for
fire prevention and
control
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Site plan and building
permit
38.400
Transportation
Facilities and
Access
Streets standards for
size and
construction
Transportation
Master Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
38.410.060
Easements
Location and form of
easements for
utilities
Transportation
Master Plan, Sewer
collection facilities
plan, Water facilities
plan
Annexation for collector
and arterial streets.
Subdivision or site plan
for all others.
38.410.070
Municipal water,
sewer systems
Location and
requirement to
install.
Sewer collection
facilities plan, Water
facilities plan
Subdivision or site plan.
38.410.090 Fire
protection
requirements
Development design
Fire/EMS master
plan, International
Fire Code
Subdivision, site plan,
and building permit
38.420 Parks Standards for
location, type, and
Park, Recreation,
and Active
Transportation Plan
Subdivision or site plan
91
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 30 of 44
development of
parks and trails
E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air.
Criterion Met. The R-3 zoning designation has requirements for setbacks, height, and lot
coverage which provide for the reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Any future
development of the property will be required to conform to City standards for setbacks,
height, lot coverage, and buffering.
In addition to the zoning standards, adopted building codes contain more detailed
requirements for air circulation, window placement, and building separation that further
ensure the intent of this criterion is satisfied.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
38.320 Form and
Intensity Standards
Standards for
building placement
and maximum size
Subdivision, site plan
review, building permit
38.420 Parks Standards for
location, type, and
development of
parks and trails
Park, Recreation,
and Active
Transportation Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
38.520.060 On-site
residential and
commercial open
space
Private land open
area requirements
Site plan
F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems.
Neutral. The proposed zoning allows considerably more residential development than
would otherwise be allowed in the County with the associated Department of
Environmental Quality limitations. Both the Gallatin County and Bozeman Growth
Policies acknowledge this intentional difference and harmonize the desired future for
this and other similar areas adjacent to the city.
The City conducts routine transportation monitoring, modeling, and planning to
understand existing conditions and future needs of the transportation system. The 2017
Transportation Master Plan is the most recent transportation plan. Figure 2.5, Existing
Major Street Network, shows L Street and Story Mill Road as a Collector Street.
92
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 31 of 44
Capacity expansion to the transportation network is a responsibility of the developer.
With development both L Steet and Story Mill roads must be improved a city standard
that includes accommodation of pedestrian and multi-model modes of transportation.
These expected actions to implement the Transportation Master Plan will mitigate
impact on the larger transportation network as the overall area develops.
City plans acknowledge the tension created with development. Not all goals and policies
are furthered immediately with a particular application. The need for housing, the logical
extension of city limits, and planned future commercial and other supporting uses near
the subject property outweigh negatives associated with this development. Future
development of this property provides opportunity to expand the pedestrian network
through installation of sidewalks. Bike and pedestrian travel are much more sensitive to
distance than motor vehicle travel. Sidewalk installation is a minimum development
standard under Chapter 38. This expands and improves the non-motorized
transportation system. These links will be required with any future development under
any municipal zoning district.
The City has set minimum standards applicable to development to limit block length,
ensure trail and sidewalk connections, and provide streets adequate to carry traffic
projected from development. These standards are not applied at the time of the ZMA but
are implemented during the subdivision and site plan processes required before any
construction may begin. See also Section 6, Criterion D.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
38.400
Transportation
Facilities and
Access
Streets standards for
size and
construction
Transportation
Master Plan
Subdivision or site plan
review
38.410.060
Easements
Location and form of
easements for
utilities
Transportation
Master Plan,
Annexation for collector
and arterial streets.
Subdivision or site plan
for all others.
38.420.110
Recreation
Pathways
Location and
requirement to
install.
Park, Recreation,
and Active
Transportation Plan
Annexation for Class 1
Trails easement.
Subdivision or site plan
for all else.
93
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 32 of 44
The property has a Walk Score of 20, no transit score, and a bike score of 54. These
values are provided by Walk Score, a private organization which presents information on
real estate and transportation through walkscore.com. The algorithm which produces
these numbers is proprietary. A score is not an indication of safety or continuity of
services or routes. Scores are influenced by proximity of housing, transit, and services
and expected ability, as determined by the algorithm, to meet basic needs without using
a car. Sites located on the edge of the community have lower scores than those in the
center of the community as the area is still under development and therefore diversity of
uses is less than in fully established areas. There are no adopted development standards
relating to the walk score.
According to Walk Score® the walks score measures the walkability of any address
based on the distance to nearby places and pedestrian friendliness.
90 – 100 Walker’s Paradise. Daily errands do not require a car.
70 – 89 Very Walkable. Most errands can be accomplished on foot.
50 – 69 Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot.
25 – 49 Car-Dependent. Most errands require a car.
0 – 24 Car-Dependent. Almost all errands require a car.
Prior to occupancy or other appropriate trigger, the applicant must show all applicable
transportation systems are adequate to serve the proposed development and must
meet minimum City standards. The Applicant has been advised of specific code
provisions that will apply with future development proposals.
Future development of L Street and Story Mill Road to city standard will include
pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The site is adjacent to trail links in Story Mill Park to the
north.
G. Promotion of compatible urban growth.
Criterion Met. The Bozeman Community Plan establishes a preferred and compatible
development pattern. “The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes
where in the community… The land use categories and descriptions provide a guide for
appropriate development and redevelopment locations for civic, residential,
commercial, industrial, and other uses. The future land use designations are important
because they aim to further the vision and goals of the City through promoting
sustainability, citizen and visitor safety, and a high quality of life that will shape
Bozeman’s future.” (Community Plan P. 51)
94
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 33 of 44
Individuals may have widely varying opinions about what constitutes compatibility. To
address this wide variation of viewpoint, Compatible development and Compatible land
use are defined in Article 38.7 BMC to establish a common reference for consideration
of this criterion and application of development standards. They are defined as:
“Compatible development. The use of land and the construction and use of
structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing
neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's adopted growth policy.
Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of
architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity;
materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration
with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural
elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open
spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or
monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.
Compatible land use. A land use which may by virtue of the characteristics of its
discernible outward effects exist in harmony with an adjoining land use of
differing character. Effects often measured to determine compatibility include,
but are not limited to, noise, odor, light and the presence of physical hazards such
as combustible or explosive materials.”
As noted in the definition of Compatible development, there are many elements that
contributed to compatibility. The final sentence of the definition deserves emphasis
“Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or
site design, density or use.” Compatible development can be different than what is
already in place. The City has adopted a variety of standards to implement compatibility.
The proposed R-3 is a residential zone. As shown in the Section 1: Map Series, the
property is central to a larger area of anticipated residential development. As noted
earlier in this report, expected densities are different between the county and the city
and that may cause a perception of incompatibility, however, the use is the same,
residential.
The allowed uses for residential districts are set in Table 38.310.030 [External Link].
Other unannexed properties are nearby comprised of a menagerie of suburban and
ranchette sized properties. The form and intensity standards for residential districts are
in Table 38.320.030 [External Link].
Pursuant to section 38.310.010.D, BMC, the intent of the R-3 residential medium density
district is to provide for the development of one- to five-household residential structures
near service facilities within the city. This purpose is accomplished by:
95
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 34 of 44
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 housing types, including single household dwellings, two
to four household dwellings, and townhouses to serve the varied needs of
households of different size, age and character, while reducing the adverse effect
of non-residential uses.
Use of this zone is appropriate for areas with good access to parks, community
services and/or transit.
The proposed amendment is associated with an annexation creating an incremental
increase in the size of the City. As discussed in Section 6, Criterion A above, both the
City’s and County’s growth policies expect this area to continue developing as an
industrial area
The City Commission has adopted standards to control development impacts and
support compatibility. The following excerpt from the BCP 2020, page 75 describes the
City’s approach.
“What combination of uses under what conditions can work well together? There
is a wide range of possible answers for each community to consider. Some
communities take a highly prescriptive worst-case view and try to restrain all
possible points of perceived conflict. This tends to create a very homogenous
community with little interest or scope for creativity. Bozeman takes a different
approach. The worst case scenario is recognized as unlikely, but possible.
Development standards deal with the majority of cases, while restraining
extraordinary problems.
The City creates standards under items 1 through 3; when one district is adjacent
to another and is consistent with the growth policy, any physical conflicts will be
minimal, if present at all. The City’s zoning policy encourages continued
development of mixed uses. … The City uses the broad scope of its development
standards to enable differing uses to be successful near each other. This shows
on the zoning map where districts providing a wide diversity of uses are
intermixed.”
This proposal amends the zoning map and not the text. Therefore, no element of this
amendment modifies the standards of any zoning district. The character of the districts
as created by those standards remains intact.
As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical
extents of a zoning district. Zoning doesn’t freeze the character of an area in perpetuity.
96
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 35 of 44
Rather, it provides a structured method to consider changes to the character. The BCP
2020 notes,
“…when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and
possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an
annexation request there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In
this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for
the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.”
Staff concludes the proposed R-3 zoning is compatible with future land use map
designation, the existing character of the area, and compatible with the broader area
near the subject property. See also discussion for Section 6, Criteria A & H.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related Documents When standard is
applied
38.310 Permitted
Uses
What can be done
where in the city.
Growth policy Subdivision, site plan,
building permit
38.320 Form and
Intensity Standards
Standards for
building placement
and maximum size
Subdivision, site plan,
building permit
38.320.060 Zone
Edge Transitions
Height adjustments
on the edge of some
zones
Site plan
38.340 Overlay
District Standards
Historic preservation SOI Standards for
Historic Preservation,
Design Guidelines for
Historic Preservation
Site plan and building
permit
38.5 Project Design Site layouts,
landscaping,
building
configuration, signs,
lighting
Site plan and building
permit
H. Character of the district.
Criterion Met. Section 76-2-302, MCA says “…legislative body may divide the
municipality into districts of the number, shape, and area as are considered best suited
to carry out the purposes [promoting health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the
community] of this part.” Emphasis added.
97
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 36 of 44
This proposal amends the zoning map and not the text. Therefore, no element of this
amendment modifies the standards of any zoning district. The character of the districts
as created by those standards remains unaltered. Even though the criterion is most
applicable to text amendments it still must be applied to consideration of zoning map
amendments. The requested zoning meets the requirements of this criterion because it
is the same as adjacent properties and is substantially similar to the existing County
zoning designation of r-3 and promotes urban growth as called for in the BCP 2020. The
proposed amendment only applies to the Applicant’s property and does not change
what is or is not allowed on adjacent property.
As noted above, the City Commission has discretion within the limits of the State
established criteria in considering the location and geographical extents of a zoning
district. Implementation of zoning must also be in accordance with the adopted growth
policy. As noted in Section 6, Criterion A, the City policy calls for a diverse and densifying
land use pattern. See discussion in Section 6, Criterion A.
The BCP 2020 includes several objectives applicable to these criteria. Namely:
N-1.11 Enable a gradual and predictable increase in density in developed areas over
time.
N-1.2 Increase required minimum densities in residential districts.
N-3.5 Strongly discourage private covenants that restrict housing diversity or are
contrary to City land development policies or climate action plan goals.
Application of any municipal zoning district to the subject property and subsequent
development will alter the existing character of the subject property, which is semi-rural.
Likewise, development under any municipal zoning district will be visually different from
adjacent unannexed property. This is true even if both are used for similar types of
housing due to the differences between municipal and county zoning. Similarly,
development will likely be different from other annexed properties.
Zoning doesn’t freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it provides a
structured method to consider changes to the character. The BCP 2020 notes,
“…when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and
possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an
annexation request, there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In
this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for
the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.”
See Section 6, Criterion A above for discussion about the application and growth policy
and anticipated change to the character of the area.
98
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 37 of 44
The City has defined compatible development as:
“The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony
with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives
of the city's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include,
but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural
elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of
operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and
sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized
transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not
require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.”
As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical
extents of a zoning district. To date, the City of Bozeman has not defined a specific area
outside of the area itself to be rezoned for consideration of this criterion. A review of the
existing uses within a quarter mile radius of the amendment site shows a variety of
zoning districts. Including:
▪ Story Mill Park to the north.
▪ County R-S zoning of semi-rural residential areas to the east and west
▪ R-S on the southwest point
▪ R-4 zoning to the north
▪ Light industrial (M-1) on the southwest
▪ An area of manufacture housing zoning (R-MH) to the southeast
▪ Other R-3 to the east
Page 77 of the BCP 2020 describing review of zoning map amendments states “When
evaluating compliance with criteria, it is appropriate to consider all the options allowed
by the requested district and not only what the present applicant describes as their
intensions.” When evaluating compatibility between zoning districts, Staff considers the
full range of allowable uses, not only what is built now or proposed by a specific project.
The maps in Section 1, show municipally zoned areas in the immediate vicinity are both
low and high range of zoning district intensity. This is consistent with the City’s previous
and current growth policy and infrastructure planning. The character of the larger area is
in the process of changing with Stockyards master site plan, Bridger View
Redevelopment project, and Story Mill Park. Therefore, the character is not fully defined
and is suitable to add additional uses. The City, as shown by an examination of the zoning
map and authorized uses in all zoning districts, strives to encourage a diverse
development pattern and avoid large areas of single use development. Therefore, when
99
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 38 of 44
considering the character of an area it is expected that there will be diversity of
development types. This diversity is also shown on the zoning maps in Section 1.
Evaluation of local development patterns has shown that development within the City is
more land efficient than rural or suburban development in unannexed areas. Urban
intensity development whether more intensive apartment style development or more
typical medium density residential is much more land efficient than rural/suburban
development. Suburban development consumes 135 times the amount of land and the
rural consumes 594 times the amount of land per home than urban development.
Development within the City also provides for a wide range of housing types to meet a
wide range of housing needs. Development within the City lessens likelihood of
conversion of agricultural and open spaces to other uses but does convert uses on some
land with annexation. The City expects urban development within the municipal
boundary.
Table 4 of the BCP 2020, see Section 6, Criterion A above, identifies the implementing
zoning districts of the Urban Neighborhood future land use category. That category
allows for zoning districts that authorize a wide range of possible future development.
There are no zoning districts which are limited to only one type of development. All zoning
districts implementing the Urban Neighborhood category provide for a range of housing
types, institutions, and commercial activities. The expansiveness and intensity allowed
varies between districts. As noted in this report, the BCP 2020 calls for evaluation of the
entire range of uses in zoning districts when evaluating criteria for zoning amendments.
The R-3 zoning districts and the adjacent R-S, R-2, R-3, R-4, M-1, and R-MH zoning
districts are residential in nature and are more similar than different in uses and
standards. Development in R-3 is more intensive than that allowed in the R-1 district,
such as a limited apartment buildings (structures that host up to eight dwellings units)
and apartment building. These are subject to the standards of Article 38.5. Article 38.5
which imposes a variety of standards on site and building design to mitigate potential
impacts on adjacent properties.
Evaluation of this situation is guided by the growth policy. On page 76 of the BCP 2020
under discussion of application of this zoning criteria is saying:
“Second, when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual
and possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is
accompanying an annexation request, there is often a substantial change in
use that will occur. In this case, the Commission must look at what the growth
policy recommends for the area, as there is less built context to provide
guidance.”
100
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 39 of 44
The City has adopted many standards to identify and avoid or mitigate demonstrable
negative impacts of development. These will support the ability of future development in
R-3 to be compatible with adjacent development and uphold the residential character in
an area where R-3 is applied even if the intensity between districts is different. The
following excerpt from the BCP 2020, page 75 describes the City’s adopted approach.
“What combination of uses under what conditions can work well together? There
is a wide range of possible answers for each community to consider. Some
communities take a highly prescriptive worst-case view and try to restrain all
possible points of perceived conflict. This tends to create a very homogenous
community with little interest or scope for creativity. Bozeman takes a different
approach. The worst-case scenario is recognized as unlikely, but possible.
Development standards deal with the majority of cases, while restraining
extraordinary problems.
The City creates standards under items 1 through 3; when one district is adjacent
to another and is consistent with the growth policy, any physical conflicts will be
minimal, if present at all. The City’s zoning policy encourages continued
development of mixed uses. … The City uses the broad scope of its development
standards to enable differing uses to be successful near each other. This shows
on the zoning map where districts providing a wide diversity of uses are
intermixed.”
The standards adopted by the City prevent physically dangerous spillover effects. An
example is the capture, treatment and discharge controls from additional storm water
runoff as additional impervious surfaces are built. Required setbacks from property
lines, landscaping requirements, protection of wetlands and watercourses, and similar
site and building standards address character and compatibility. These and other
standards carry out the intent and purpose of the City’s land development standards in
Chapter 38 of the municipal code.
Sec. 38.100.040. - Intent and purpose of chapter.
A. The intent of this unified development chapter is to protect the public health,
safety and general welfare; to recognize and balance the various rights and
responsibilities relating to land ownership, use, and development identified in
the United States and State of Montana constitutions, and statutory and
common law; to implement the city's adopted growth policy; and to meet the
requirements of state law.
Zoning does not prohibit change but provides a structure within which change can occur.
Such changes include modifications to both the text and zoning map. Such amendments
101
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 40 of 44
are authorized in the zoning enabling act for municipalities. Landowners have both
property rights and responsibilities. The City has adopted development standards to
ensure that responsibilities are met while landowners exercise their property rights. The
City has not chosen, and is not required, to adopt standards for all issues. For example,
standards have not been adopted regarding preservation of view sheds or extra
separation of buildings from unannexed property.
Finally, Theme 7 of the BCP 2020 includes this statement:
“RC-3.2 Work with Gallatin County to keep rural areas rural and maintain a clear
edge to urban development that evolves as the City expands outwards.”
This objective describes the situation now under review. The City is expanding inwards
and outwards by annexation. Gallatin County has identified this area as a growth area in
its land use planning documents. Staff concludes that R-3 is not significantly different
from or detrimental to the surrounding zoning is compatible urban growth called for in
the growth policy. See also discussion for Section 6, Criteria A, G, and F.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related Documents When standard is
applied
38.310 Permitted
Uses
What can be done
where in the city.
Growth policy Subdivision, site plan,
building permit
38.320 Form and
Intensity Standards
Standards for
building placement
and maximum size
Subdivision, site plan,
building permit
38.320.060 Zone
Edge Transitions
Height adjustments
on the edge of some
zones
Site plan
38.340 Overlay
District Standards
Historic preservation SOI Standards for
Historic Preservation,
Design Guidelines for
Historic Preservation
Site plan and building
permit
38.5 Project Design Site layouts,
landscaping,
building
configuration, signs,
lighting
Site plan and building
permit
102
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 41 of 44
I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses.
Criterion met. The proposed amendment does not modify the existing standards of the
R-3 district. The current zoning is A-S under the Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning
District which was originally created and administered by the City/County Planning
Board. Adjacent properties are both designated for residential development and are
zoned similarly. Therefore, the impact of the amendment is limited to this application
site.
The property is generally flat with the East Gallatin River bisecting the property south to
north. The property is within the City’s planning area for land use and utility extensions
and the County’s annexation holding area. There is frontage on L Street and Story Mill
Roads which are both designated Collector Streets. Municipal utilities and emergency
services can be extended to the area.
The property is within the City’s planning area for land use and utility extensions.
Municipal utilities and emergency services can be extended to the area. Therefore, R-3
uses are suitable for the subject property.
J. Conserving the value of buildings.
Neutral. The proposed amendment does not modify the existing standards of the R-3
district. R-3 is residential in nature and allows a variety of building mass, scale, and form.
The Future Land Use and zoning surrounding the property is residential in nature.
Future development is not known at this juncture and will emerge with future
development applications. The permitted uses must conform to the adopted zoning. Any
new structures at the site will be required to meet setback and other protective
requirements set forth in the Bozeman Municipal Code. Compliance will alleviate
potential negative impacts to the value of surrounding buildings and properties. The
location of amenities that may increase the value of buildings such as parks, open
space, trails, and value-added assets is undermined.
As described in earlier criteria, the proposed zoning is compatible with existing buildings
on adjacent properties and does not create any new situations not in compliance with
municipal code.
Municipal Code
Section and Title
Subject Related
Documents
When standard is
applied
38.310 Permitted
Uses
What can be done
where in the city.
Growth policy Subdivision, site plan
review, building permit
103
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 42 of 44
38.320 Form and
Intensity Standards
Standards for
building placement
and maximum size
Subdivision, site plan
review, building permit
38.600 Natural
Resource Protection
Protect
watercourses and
wetlands
FEMA Floodplain
study
Subdivision, site plan
review, building permit
K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area.
Criterion Met. The proposed R-3 zoning designation will encourage the most appropriate
use of land as the property is adjacent to both residential and industrial uses. There is
access to the city’s services, including streets, thus the site can support a medium
intensity of uses as allowed within the R-3 zoning district. Furthermore, the proposed R-
3 zoning designation is consistent with the BCP 2020 future land use map designation of
“Urban Neighborhood”.
APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Notice was published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on November 8 and 15, 2025. The
notice was posted on site and notices mailed by the applicant as required by 38.220 and
the required confirmation provided to the Planning Office. Notice was provided at least
15 and not more than 45 days prior to any public hearing.
No public comment has been received on this application as of the production of this
report.
APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING
Adopted Growth Policy Designation:
The property is designated as “Urban Neighborhood” in the Bozeman Community Plan
2020.
“This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes,
sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. In
limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site
constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes.
Complementary uses such 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
104
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 43 of 44
designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal
boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development.
Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density.
Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or
restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed-use areas to facilitate the provision of
services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car.”
Proposed Zoning Designation and Land Uses:
The applicant has requested zoning of R-3, Residential Medium Density District whose
intent is to:
The intent of the R-3 residential medium density district is to provide for the development
of one- to five-household residential structures near service facilities within the city. 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 housing types, including single household dwellings, two
to four household dwellings, and townhouses to serve the varied needs of
households of different size, age and character, while reducing the adverse effect
of non-residential uses.
Use of this zone is appropriate for areas with good access to parks, community
services and/or transit.
APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Owner: Idaho Pole Company, 3325 Meridian Avenue East, Suite 4, Edgewood, WA
98371
Applicant: Sanbell, 106 East Babcock, Bozeman, MT 59715
Representative: Sanbell, 106 East Babcock, Bozeman, MT 59715
105
Staff Report for the L Street Annexation and ZMA, Application 25360 Page 44 of 44
Report By: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner, Community Development Department
FISCAL EFFECTS
No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be
changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment.
ATTACHMENTS
The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development
Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. The application materials can also
be viewed online by clicking the following web link.
https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=301760&dbid=0&repo=BOZEMAN
106
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Community Development Board
FROM:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Erin George, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:Upcoming Items for Review at the December 15, 2025, Community
Development Board Meeting
MEETING DATE:December 1, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION:Information only, no action required.
STRATEGIC PLAN:4.1 Informed Conversation on Growth: Continue developing an in-depth
understanding of how Bozeman is growing and changing and proactively
address change in a balanced and coordinated manner.
BACKGROUND:The following items are presently scheduled for review at the December 15,
2025, Community Development Board meeting:
1. 1071 Story Mill Road Zone Map Amendment, Application 25525,
considered in role as Planning Commission.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None.
ALTERNATIVES:None.
FISCAL EFFECTS:No budgeted funds are expended with this item.
Report compiled on: November 25, 2025
107