The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09-Affordable Housing Plan - RMFRocky Mountain Flats – Aordable Housing Plan (Item E from Aordable Housing Ordinance 2025-001) 1. Requested Incentives: Type ‘C’ Incentives Requested - One additional story of height (15’ max) beyond that allowed in the R-4 zoning district (Sec. 38.380.040, E.3.a.) – R-4 Residential High Density: two 4-story buildings; one 5-story building (added height and stories) - Minimum vehicle requirement of 0.75 space per dwelling (Sec. 38.380.040, E.3.b)(vehicle parking reduction) - The number of bicycle racks provided must exceed or be equal to 50% of the number of dwellings within the development (bicycle parking reduction) - For multi-household dwellings and mixed-use buildings in all zoning districts, the minimum lot area per dwelling does not apply (density bonus) 2. Applicable AMI & Rental Rates – Current 2025 Section 42 LIHTC/HUD income and rent levels; will be updated at time buildings are Placed In Service but the AMI %s will remain 30-80%: 3. Total number of a?ordable dwelling units: 296 units, 100% of the project. There will be no market rate units. 4. Rocky Mountain Flats is to be managed by BlueLine Property Management, which is an experienced LIHTC Property Management company. Additionally, the tenants will be income qualified by a third-party compliance reviewer and the files are required to be submitted and approved by the Montana Board of Housing. 5. Development Standards per 38.380.050 a. The aordable dwellings must be constructed with th e same features, such as appliances, as market-rate dwellings within the same development but the quality of the features may vary between market rate and the aordable dwellings. There are no market-rate dwellings, so all are similar. b. The mix of bedrooms per unit in aordable dwellings must be as similar as possible to the mix of bedrooms per unit of the market-rate dwellings in the development. There are no market-rate dwellings, so all are similar. c. A one-bedroom dwelling must include a bedroom separated from other living areas of the dwelling by a solid door. For the purposes of this division, a one- bedroom dwelling must be greater than or equal to 450 square feet of floor area. All one bedroom units have separate bedrooms within the unit and are greater than 450 sf. d. Access to shared amenities, including parking, by residents of the aordable dwellings must be the same as those in market-rate dwellings in the development. For amenities other than parking, the cost of any such amenity must be included in the required aordable rental r ate. See item 6 below. e. All the aordable dwellings to be developed pursuan t to this division must be completed and a certificate of occupancy issued prior to or at the same time as the market- rate dwellings. The timing of construction and distribution aordable dwellings throughout a development must b e approved in the aordable housing plan. There are no market-rate dwellings, so this does not apply. f. Project is not a multi-phase development so this does not apply. 6. Amenities and facilities provided to all tenants: a. Community room b. Outdoor recreation area(s) c. Parking and bike parking d. Balconies e. In-unit laundry f. Energy Star Appliances g. Follows all Montana Board of Housing Design Requirements 7. The incentives will be applied to all buildings and units in the project as 100% of the units are a?ordable. Building A & C are not adding an additional story beyond that allowed in the R-4 zone district. 8. Number of Bedrooms in each dwelling unit: Unit Size Quantity 1 Bedroom/1Bath 20 2 Bedroom/1 Bath 132 3 Bedroom/2 Bath 108 4 Bedroom/2 Bath 36 Total 296 9. See site plan – 100% of units are a?ordable 10. Estimated Construction Completion is December 2027 for all units 11. Construction in Phases: No, Concurrent Construction of Infrastructure and Buildings is being requested. 12. Preapplication community meeting documentation attached below. NOTICING PROCEDURE NOTICING CHECKLIST PROPERTY OWNER RECORDS AND NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS CERTIFICATION AND SIGNATURES CMN1 COMMUNITY MEETING NOTICING CHECKLIST Prior to the submittal of a site plan application pursuant to BMC 38.230.090, an applicant for an affordable housing development proposing to use Type A, B, or C incentives must hold a community meeting to inform residents and property owners of the proposed development and to solicit feedback from the community. The applicant is responsible for mailing a notice 20 business days prior to the community meeting per the requirements of the Affordable Rental Housing division 38.380 in the code. See form CMN2 Community Meeting Noticing Instructions and Declaration Form on how to notice your community meeting for your project. A site plan application is not complete unless the application includes the required documentation of the community meeting including the list of adjoiners. The following are the required submittal materials for applications that must conduct a Community Meeting prior to Site Plan submittal 1. Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form CMN1. 2. Legible list of full names and mailing addresses of all property owners within 200 feet of the project site. If a condominium is within this required notice area, all owners of the condominium must be included in the list. 3. Full name and address of the Neighborhood Association presiding officer (if applicable). Current property owners of record can be found at the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office in the Gallatin County Courthouse at 311 West Main Street Bozeman, Montana. To find the current Neighborhood Association presiding officer contact information, please refer to our Neighborhoods Program Homepage. I, , hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the attached name and address list of all adjoining property owners (including all condominium owners), within 200 feet of the property located at , is a true and accurate list from the last declared Gallatin County tax records. I further understand that an inaccurate list may delay review of the project. Signature Date CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building phone 406-582-2260 20 East Olive Street fax 406-582-2263 Bozeman, MT 59715 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net/planning CMN1 Noticing Checklist Page 1 of 1 Revision Date: May 2025 Christian Pritchett 5532 Fowler Lane 6.2.2025 CMN2 Noticing Instructions Page 1 of 3 Revision Date: May 2025 NOTICING PROCEDURE COMMUNITY MEETING NOTICE INFORMATION MAILING NOTICES CMN2 COMMUNITY MEETING NOTICING INSTRUCTIONS & DECLARATION FORM Prior to the submittal of a site plan application pursuant to BMC 38.230.090, an applicant for an affordable housing development proposing to use Type A, B, or C incentives must hold a community meeting to inform residents and property owners of the proposed development and to solicit feedback from the community. The applicant is responsible for mailing a notice 20 business days prior to the community meeting per the requirements of the Affordable Housing division 38.380 in the code. This handout provides instructions for the notice contents and the procedures for sending notices for your project. The instructions listed below are to be followed for the Community Meeting noticing. If the Community Meeting is not noticed according to the requirements of the Affordable Housing division 38.380 in the code, the project may be delayed if the error is discovered during the process. The applicant is responsible for following the notice instructions provided by the City and for providing accurate notice materials. The applicant must create a notice and the notice must contain the following information: 1. The date, time, and location of the community meeting (must be within city limits) 2. At a minimum, the notice must include the location of the proposed development, a description of the proposed development, incentives the applicant proposes to use, and the number and location of market rate and affordable units 3. A statement inviting the community to attend the meeting and informing the community that the purpose of the meeting is to seek community input on the proposed development and the use of incentives 4. Contact information for the developer and any other project representatives, including the mailing and email addresses and telephone number of the person who may be contacted for further information and clearly state which email address to use to submit comments. 5. A statement that the comments must be submitted to the developer and/or project representative email provided and not be sent to the City. The comments must not be sent or copied to comments@bozeman.net until such time the project is submitted formally to the City and the project is noticed. 1. At least 20 business days prior to the community meeting, the developer must mail by first class mail written notice of the community meeting to the owners of all property and all mailing addresses within a 200-foot radius of the proposed development site. If a condominium is within this required notice area, all owners of the condominium must be included in the list. 2. In addition to the above, if the proposed development is located within the boundaries of a city recognized neighborhood association pursuant to chapter 2, article 5, written notice of the community meeting must be provided at least 20 business days prior to the meeting to the presiding officer of the applicable neighborhood association, to the city neighborhood liaison, and to the chair of the InterNeighborhood council. 3. The applicant/representative must print the notice in color and place them in envelopes with stamps with the applicant’s return address. 4. The notice must be mailed to the adjoining property owners and neighborhood representative as identified on the notice by the end of the business date. 5. The applicant/representative must verify the mail date and certify that the notice was mailed through the notice declaration form on the following page within three business days of the notice sent. This must be emailed to the Development Review Coordinator. CMN2 Noticing Instructions Page 3 of 3 Revision Date: May 2025 NOTICE MAILING DECLARATION NOTICE MAIL DATE CONTACT US COMMUNITY MEETING NOTICING INSTRUCTIONS & DECLARATION FORM I, , hereby certify (Check all that apply): the project notice was mailed to all adjoining property owners (including all condominium owners, within 200 feet of the property) the project notice was mailed to the appropriate neighborhood association presiding officer (if applicable) The project notice was mailed according to the dates noted on this form. I declare under penalty of perjury and under the laws of the state of Montana, that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: Signature The project mail notice was prepared according to the notice instructions and place into the US Mail on: Month Day Year Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street Bozeman, MT 59715 phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net/planning Christian Pritchett x x 6.2.2025 April 20259th Per Ordinance 2025-001 Affordable Housing Ordinance, in this packet you’ll find: a. Copy of the mailed notice of the community meeting b. Summary of comments made at the meeting as well as any submitted through 5/22/2025 which was the last day of the 20-business day window to accept comment. c. A copy of all written comments received at or after the community meeting d. A copy of the materials distributed at the community meeting e. How comments were addressed or why comments were not addressed in this application Rocky Mountain Flats 1004 South Ave. W. Missoula, MT 59801 April 9, 2025 To whom it may concern: This noƟce is to invite neighbors of Rocky Mountain Flats, an affordable housing development located at 5532 Fowler Lane, to an upcoming community meeƟng which will be held at the Bozeman Public Library (626 E. Main St.) Community Room on May 8, 2025 at 1:30 pm, which is at least 20 business days from the date of this leƩer, pursuant to BMC Ordinance 2025-001. The purpose of this meeƟng is to seek community input on the proposed development and the use of affordable housing incenƟves. This project will create 296 affordable housing mulƟfamily units for residents making 30%-80% of Area Median Income and intends to qualify for Type C incenƟves in the Affordable Housing Ordinance 2025-001. If you’d like to submit a wriƩen comment, they can be sent to maddy@bluelinedevelopment.com or mailed to the address below. Comments will be accepted through May 22, 2025, ten business days following the meeƟng, per the ordinance. Rocky Mountain Flats AƩn: Maddy or Jason 1004 South Ave. W. Missoula, MT 59801 For addiƟonal informaƟon about this meeƟng, please call 406-926-1401. Sincerely, ChrisƟan PritcheƩ Chief Development Officer BlueLine Development, Inc. B. Summary of Comments Two written comments were submitted at the meeting on May 8, 2025: 1. Concern over the building size and distance from commercial services causing traffic pollution/cost of living 2. Concern about Gabriel Street running along the park/greenspace In total, 45 email comments were received through May 22, 2025. Below you will find the summary of the themes from the comments and following those, a more detailed summary of each comment. We believe this list is comprehensive of the comments and themes we received and responses to these can be found in section E. 1. Location: proximity to services 2. Location: better alternative sites exist 3. Density 4. Building size (5-story) 5. Meah Lane build-out 6. Implication on existing Meadow Creek Park 7. Traffic safety and pollution 8. Pedestrian infrastructure 9. Negative impact on neighborhood: property value 10. Water usage 11. Request for usable community space/outdoor space 12. Request for bike/pedestrian infrastructure 13. Request for addition to Meadow Creek Park 14. Developer experience 15. Parking 16. Clarification of affordability 17. Cost of infrastructure 18. Tenant turnover 19. Tenant/resident support 20. Property Management concerns 21. Snow removal Written comment #1 – Lorre Jay Size of building concern (5 story) Traffic pollution Written comment #2 – Lorre Jay Meadow Creek Park safety concern Email comment #1 – Alexis Ackman Location/traffic concern Safety concern Email comment #2 – Tanya Andreason Meah extension Usable community space/open space Water usage Email comment # 3 – Karl Schwartz Increased traffic/Safety hazards Negative impact on neighborhood Email comment #4 – Melody Schwartz Traffic pollution Services near site Email comment #5 – Lavonne Rus-Ogilvie Parking Email comment #6 – Elizabeth and John Ansley Location/transportation Parks/greenspace Email comment #7 – Heather Nelson Location/transportation. Park/greenspace and safety concern Developer qualifications Email comment #8 – Scott and Catherine Walgren Location to services Road concerns Meadow Creek Park concerns Better alternative locations exist Email comment #9 – Molly Siverts/Buckley Traffic concerns Infrastructure and Meadow Creek Park concerns Email comment #10 – Tammy Friedlund Location to services Lack of sidewalks/Road access concern Email comment #11 – LeeAnn Weinheimer Location to services Green space, pedestrian infrastructure Traffic/Meah Ln. Property value concern Email comment #12 – Martha Koscinski Location concern Parking concern Email comment #13 – Mary Davidson Traffic concern Infrastructure Developer qualification Email comment #14 – Keith Weinheimer Location to services Property value concern Traffic concern Email comment #15 – David Owen Location/better alternatives: See responses Email comments #4 and Email comment#8 Nominal rent pricing comment Email comment #16 – Stefanie Toth Pedestrian safety/traffic pollution/liability for low-income families Alternate location Email comment #17 – Lisa Gaulzetti No actionable comment, see previous comments regarding location and site selection. Email comment #18 – Brad Peters Location to services/Transportation Increased Traffic Negative impact to neighborhood Email comment #19 – Angela Reese Location to services/transportation Meah Lane extension Email comment #20 – Angela Reese (2nd email) Cost of infrastructure Location to services/transportation Developer experience Email comment #21 – Brett Gunnik Location to services Email comment #22 – Kate Ryan Location to services Meah Lane extension Density/Property Value: Developer experience Turnover concern Email comment #23 – Aaron Holland Traffic pollution Pedestrian infrastructure Property value: Turnover concern Location to services Developer experience Email comment #24 – Bob Stevens Location to services Property value Email comment #25 – Abbey Tate Traffic pollution Pedestrian infrastructure Property value: Turnover concern Location to services Developer experience Email comment #26 – Gail Beaudoin Location to services Water usage Traffic concerns Email comment #27 – Chuck and Deborah Widger Traffic concerns Meah Lane extension Location to services Property value Email comment #28 – Casey O'Callaghan Location to services Meah Lane extension Email comment #29 – Jessica Rondon Location to services/lack of transportation Increased Traffic/Safety issues Negative impact on neighborhood Developer experience Email comment #30 – Diane Buss Location concerns Traffic and safety hazards Negative impact on neighborhood Email comment #31 – Ron Buss Location concerns Traffic and safety hazards Negative impact on neighborhood Email comment #32 – Heidi Morrison Location to services Transportation Parking ratio Overdevelopment of the area Broader Planning & Zoning concerns Email comment #33 – Melissa Haugen Location to services Meah Lane extension Developer experience Email comment #34 – Benjamin Madsen Location to services Neighborhood concerns Email comment #35 – Laura Pace Location to services/lack of transportation Increased Traffic/Safety issues Negative impact on neighborhood Developer experience Email comment #36 – Tim Briggs Location to services/lack of transportation Increased Traffic/Safety issues Negative impact on neighborhood Developer experience Email comment #37 – Douglas and Jennifer Moffet Location to services Public transportation Traffic and safety hazards Email comment #38 – Steve Wiechmann Location to services Water use Meah Lane extension Email comment #39 – Joe Polus Location to services Public transportation/urban sprawl Meadow Creek Park concerns Neighborhood/Property Value Developer experience – tenant turnover Email comment #40 – Dan Stebbins Public transportation request Would like to see bike/pedestrian infrastructure Email comment #41 – Lorre Jay Meadow Creek Park/Gabirel St. location Support for tenants Traffic pollution Developer experience Negative reviews of BlueLine Property Management Email comment #42 – Ryan O’Callaghan Location to services Plowing/snow removal Email comment #43 – Flynn Murray Traffic pollution and safety Meah Lane extension Email comment # 44 – Beth Schoessow Location to services Pedestrian safety Email comment #45 – Janalynn Wong Location to services Public transportation Parking ratio General overdevelopment of the area C. Copies of comments received at meeting on May 8, 2025 and via email through May 22, 2025 To the Bozeman City Commissioners and other Parties, We are writing to express concern about the development proposed at the newly annexed 5523 Fowler property (Rocky Mountain Flats). This area is problematic for this type of development for several reasons, and we would appreciate you taking a thoughtful look at the issues enumerated below and reconsider approving this type of development in this location. First - It is our understanding that all proposals for new commercial construction have not been approved in the area, and many have been rezoned for high density residential instead. Leaving this area of Bozeman without crucial necessities for this kind of development. This area of town is already fairly isolated, but to propose low-income housing in the area seems rather negligent. Low-income housing should be in areas where work is accessible by walking, biking or public transit. This area is the edge of town, not anywhere near the Main St./Huffine, 19th or 7th corridors that are the highest concentrations of employers. Just look at the Complimentary Districts in the 2020 Community Plan and note that the major areas of commerce are nowhere near this location. Bozeman’s Streamline routes would likely take a person 45 min to well over an hour of riding to get to those areas of commerce in Bozeman. Low-income households often do not have access to reliable transportation and walking or biking are pretty much out of the questions for 5+ months of the year here. Second -3 miles is the approximate distance to the nearest grocery store, almost 3 miles to the nearest fire station and even further to get to the hospital or another medical facility. Again, when you have reliable transportation it isn’t nearly as daunting, but for families that would already likely be struggling these services are simply too far away to be considered reasonable to walk or bike, leaving only public transportation or driving as the option. Modality is paramount in the Community Development plan and this isolated area leaves few options for multi-modality transit for basic life necessities. The old saying “location, location, location” rings loud and true for low-income development and residents. Third - There is a total and utter lack of infrastructure in this area to support the in-process and existing developments, but to add another almost 300 units, that will likely house 400- 600 people, is absurd. Direct access to main roadways is virtually non-existent and the available plan just punches onto roads in the Meadow Creek community which are neighborhood roads, not access roads. Blackwood would be the nearest potential more direct access route to 19th, but that currently dead ends at Parkway. On top of access to main roadways, there are roadway safety considerations that are being completely disregarded. Fowler is not improved enough to handle higher amounts of traffic, Stucky is increasingly dangerous and not improved enough for the traffic it already handles. The other potential access roadways in the area to 19th (Graf and Blackwood) are not connected to Fowler or to 19th. This puts all current residents in this area at unmitigated and seemingly unconsidered risk. Regardless of speed limits or other traffic laws, it will push high speed traffic through the neighborhood and not onto main thoroughfare streets. How will existing community members be able to respond to these concerns? They won’t as the level of Bozeman PD is also inadequate for the level of growth in the area. There is no plan or assurance that existing members of the area matter and that concerns or other issues that WILL arise can be handled appropriately. Based on the plan designs available, there appear to be less than 1 parking space per unit. The existing developments nearby will then bear the burden of street parking which is frankly inconsiderate. It is also against the development plans that were approved, followed and written into covenants in the existing neighborhoods. Meadow Creeks development covenants and bylaws are available and can be read if you would like to understand what was considered at the time this neighborhood was approved and what the current residents abide by. This area was originally developed to include trails, preserve trees, open space and a general feel of Bozeman. This plan includes none of these essential items and leaves the neighboring developments to “pick up the slack and burden.” Fourth - There are also significant concerns among folks who own homes and live in the area because there is a component of pride in ownership which will always lack in developments like this. Statistically speaking pride in ownership facilitates community, growth, social networks, identity, etc.. The only pride in this scenario is that a developer who received some sort of incentive (tax or otherwise). The area neighborhoods with ownership are watching this area of town be rezoned and over developed at every turn with priority that appears to be pro developer/company owned and not individual ownership. Simply put, this area is 100% overwhelmed by the new developments and feels no consideration is being given to the existing. In the past few years there has been only 1 known development (Grad Cielo II) that will be individually owned units/homes rather than development group owned/managed. Even with a management company there is typically very little done to address the ongoing maintenance, cleanliness and aesthetics of the developments. This concern is evidenced by the online reviews for currently managed properties. What recourse does the City offer to the other neighborhoods and developments? Fifth – Unfortunately, the current reality of Bozeman and other cities is that housing is not the only limiting factor to affordability. This is a land-locked community where almost all essentials (groceries, etc.) have to be transported great distances to be available for consumption/use. There is no way around this added cost of living. Even with a reduction in rent it does not mean the struggles of these families will be ameliorated to an extent that affordable will be with in range. According to Bozeman’s’ 2020 Community Plan “The needs of new and existing development coexist and they should remain in balance: neither should overwhelm the other.” Additionally, according to the 2020 plan “Urban design should integrate residential and commercial land use activities…” , include “Variety of housing and employment opportunities.”, “Encourage distribution of affordable housing units…with priority given to locations near commercial, recreational and transit assets.” These and other elements of the Community Plan support that this is not an appropriate development for this area. Higher density development is understood to be the priority of the City’s plan, but the expectation is that is will be reasonable and that existing communities also matter. The solution to low-income house cannot just be “well here is some land, and here is a developer willing to do it.” Based on the incredible numbers of developments that are currently in progress in the Bozeman area it would seem like there could be or should have been discussions and negotiations with those developers to allow for incentives for lower income residents to be considered as tenants across the City. Many of the approved developments were granted rezoning concessions and very likely some other tax/other incentives in the process. If those developments have already received incentives and concessions from the city, shouldn’t they also be participants in addressing affordable housing? Working with those developers would help spread the “burden” of low-income housing across the town and include those residents in all communities rather than create low-income projects in isolated pockets of Bozeman. The city has maintained that they consider the highest and best use of our very limited resource, land, in their process of development. However, there seems to be a serious lack of appropriate use in this location given the actual statistical data surrounding low-income projects. There are hundreds of units coming up in Bozeman and Belgrade already that could represent real opportunity for low- income residents and those opportunities are being ignored. The name of Bozeman’s development game has been too little too late and unfortunately it appears the ship has sailed for appropriate planning. However, it has become very clear over the past 10 years that wealthy developers seem to be the only consideration here. Low-income households deserve better than some pocket of land at the edge of town nowhere near the jobs and other life essentials that they require. Thank you for taking the time to read our concerns. Sincerely, Brian & Heidi Morrison 3328 S. 30th Ave. D. Materials Distributed at Community Meeting At the community meeting held 5/8/2025 at the Bozeman Public Library, there were 4 stations to cover the items required of the Affordable Housing Ordinance: 1. How the project meets needs of Affordable Housing in the community 2. Design Elements 3. Incentives Proposed 4. Parking & Transportation 2025 RENTS Number Bedrooms Baths Rents Incomes Gross Rents Utility Allowance Net Rents Voucher PMT Rents 2 1 1 30%30%669.00$ (24.00)$ 645.00$ 645.00$ 8 2 1 30%30%803.00$ (41.00)$ 762.00$ 762.00$ 4 3 2 30%30%928.00$ (62.00)$ 866.00$ 866.00$ 2 4 2 30%30%1,035.00$ (80.00)$ 955.00$ 955.00$ 6 1 1 40%40%892.00$ (24.00)$ 868.00$ -$ 868.00$ 6 2 1 40%40%1,071.00$ (41.00)$ 1,030.00$ -$ 1,030.00$ 2 3 2 40%40%1,238.00$ (62.00)$ 1,176.00$ -$ 1,176.00$ 4 4 2 40%40%1,381.00$ (80.00)$ 1,301.00$ -$ 1,301.00$ 6 1 1 50%50%1,115.00$ (24.00)$ 1,091.00$ -$ 1,091.00$ 38 2 1 50%50%1,338.00$ (41.00)$ 1,297.00$ -$ 1,297.00$ 20 3 2 50%50%1,547.00$ (62.00)$ 1,485.00$ -$ 1,485.00$ 4 4 2 50%50%1,726.00$ (80.00)$ 1,646.00$ -$ 1,646.00$ 4 1 1 60%60%1,338.00$ (24.00)$ 1,314.00$ -$ 1,314.00$ 38 2 1 60%60%1,606.00$ (41.00)$ 1,565.00$ -$ 1,565.00$ 54 3 2 60%60%1,857.00$ (62.00)$ 1,795.00$ -$ 1,795.00$ 7 4 2 60%60%2,071.00$ (80.00)$ 1,991.00$ -$ 1,991.00$ 0 1 1 70%70%1,561.00$ (24.00)$ 1,537.00$ -$ 1,537.00$ 16 2 1 70%70%1,874.00$ (41.00)$ 1,833.00$ -$ 1,833.00$ 6 3 2 70%70%2,166.00$ (62.00)$ 2,104.00$ -$ 2,104.00$ 8 4 2 70%70%2,416.00$ (80.00)$ 2,336.00$ -$ 2,336.00$ 2 1 1 80%80%1,785.00$ (24.00)$ 1,761.00$ -$ 1,761.00$ 26 2 1 80%80%2,142.00$ (41.00)$ 2,101.00$ -$ 2,101.00$ 22 3 2 80%80%2,476.00$ (62.00)$ 2,414.00$ -$ 2,414.00$ 11 4 2 80%80%2,762.00$ (80.00)$ 2,682.00$ -$ 2,682.00$ 296 Family Unit Mix 1. How the project meets Affordable Housing needs in the community Program and Location Information Affordable Housing Program IRC Section 42 Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Year 2025 State MT County Gallatin County MSA Bozeman, MT MSA Rent Calculation Based on MTSP Persons/Bedroom 1.5 Person/Bedroom 4 Person AMI $120,700 HUD Published 50% National Non-Metropolitan Median Income $41,150 Held Harmless You have indicated that your project was placed in service on or after 04/01/2025 and is therefore eligible to have its income and rent limit held harmless beginning with the 2025 limits. Placed in Service Date On or after 04/01/2025 Rent Floor Election On or after 04/01/2025 Income Limits for 2025 (Based on 2025 MTSP Income) Persons 60%30%40%50%70%80% 140% Next Available Unit Rule 1 Persons $49,980 $24,990 $33,320 $41,650 $58,310 $66,640 $69,972 2 Persons $57,120 $28,560 $38,080 $47,600 $66,640 $76,160 $79,968 3 Persons $64,260 $32,130 $42,840 $53,550 $74,970 $85,680 $89,964 4 Persons $71,400 $35,700 $47,600 $59,500 $83,300 $95,200 $99,960 5 Persons $77,160 $38,580 $51,440 $64,300 $90,020 $102,880 $108,024 6 Persons $82,860 $41,430 $55,240 $69,050 $96,670 $110,480 $116,004 7 Persons $88,560 $44,280 $59,040 $73,800 $103,320 $118,080 $123,984 8 Persons $94,260 $47,130 $62,840 $78,550 $109,970 $125,680 $131,964 9 Persons $99,960 $49,980 $66,640 $83,300 $116,620 $133,280 $139,944 10 Persons $105,660 $52,830 $70,440 $88,050 $123,270 $140,880 $147,924 11 Persons $111,360 $55,680 $74,240 $92,800 $129,920 $148,480 $155,904 12 Persons $117,120 $58,560 $78,080 $97,600 $136,640 $156,160 $163,968 Rent Limits for 2025 (Based on 2025 MTSP Income) Bedrooms (People)60%30%40%50%70%80%FMR 1 Bedrooms (1.5)$1,338 $669 $892 $1,115 $1,561 $1,785 $1,626 2 Bedrooms (3)$1,606 $803 $1,071 $1,338 $1,874 $2,142 $2,087 3 Bedrooms (4.5)$1,857 $928 $1,238 $1,547 $2,166 $2,476 $2,924 4 Bedrooms (6)$2,071 $1,035 $1,381 $1,726 $2,416 $2,762 $3,453 MARKET STUDY SUMMARY Market Study Company: Project Name: Project Market Area: Is the project, as proposed, viable? YES 0 bedroom 1 bedroom 2 bedroom 3 bedroom 4 bedroom Reference page: 5 bedroom 73 # of all New Units Needed: 2,787 Reference page: 61 # of units needed for the targeted AMI of the project: 2,787 Reference page: 61 Vacancy Rate: 4.1% Reference page: 55 Months to Lease-up: 10 Reference page: 62 Capture Rate: 10.6% Reference page: 61 (projected income eligible tenants who will move in next year/proposed units) Absorption Rate: 44.8% Reference page: 61 (proposed units/existing LIH, market area units required) Penetration Rate: 4.2% Reference page: 62 (existing LIH units/total eligible households) 8,446 Reference page: 61 Distance (miles) to: (only fill this out at full market study) miles to grocery store (convenience store does not count) A Project is located within 1½ miles of the specified amenity or essential service. Number of LI households that can afford rent of proposed project: 2 1 miles to medical services appropriate and available to all prospective tenants (e.g., hospital, doctor offices, etc.) and are one of the following: Public or contracted transportation (not including taxi or school bus service) is reasonably available to the specified amenity or service (i.e., the Project is located within ¼ mile of fixed bus stop or on a same day call basis) (or letter from provider committing to establish such service); or Where applicable, the specified amenity or service is available via a no-charge delivery service to the Project Location (all distances must be as specified in the Project’s market study). 1,797$ 16.4% 2,007$ 10.4% Prior & Associates Rocky Mountain Flats Bozeman & Surrounding Unincorporated Lands Average (comparable/acheivable) market unit rents in immediate area and the percent the proposed project rents are below these rents. Market Rents % Project Rents Below 2,339$ 11.3% 3,200$ 27.8% All other services and distance to each. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Childcare Center 2.4 Miles Fire Station 2.4 Miles Medical Offices 1.3 Miles Fire Station 1.8 Miles Pharmacy 1.8 Miles Senior Center 3.8 Miles Government Offices 3.6 Miles Post Office 3.5 Miles Police Station 2.4 Miles Bus Stop 1.9 Miles Hospital 3.6 Miles Medical Clinic 2.0 Miles Community Center 4.8 Miles Park Adjacent Library 3.7 Miles University 1.8 Miles Recreation Center 3.6 Miles Middle School 1.7 Miles High School 2.9 Miles Head Start 2.6 Miles Big Box Retail Store 4.1 Miles Shopping Mall 2.1 Miles Elementary School 2.3 Miles Specialty Market 2.0 Miles Neighborhood Shopping Center 1.7 Miles Community Shopping Center 2.0 Miles Distance (mi) Convenience Store 2.1 Miles Grocery Store 1.8 Miles Other Service HSS TYPE BOPTION BTYPE BOPTION B TYPE BOPTION B TYPE B OPTION B TYPE BOPTION BTYPE BOPTION B UPTYPE B OPTIO N B TYPE B OPTION BTYPE BOPTION BTYPE BOPTION BTYPE BOPTION BTYPE B OPTION B UP UPTYPE B OPTION B HSSTYPE BOPTION BTYPE BOPTION BTYPE BOPTION BHS S TYPE BOPTIO N B TYPE BOPTION B TYPE BOPTION B TYPE BOPTION BTYPE BOPTION BTYPE BOPTION B UPTYPE BOPTION BTYPE BOPTION BTYPE B OPTIO N BTYPE BOPTI O N B TYPE BOPTION BTYPE B OPTI ON B UP Y Y PLAYGROUND BUILDING #C(33,056 SF, 4-STORY)BUILDING #A(33,056 SF, 4-STORY)EDGERTON AVE.FOWLER LANEMEAH LANE GABRIEL AVE.BUILDING #B(19,536 SF, 5-STORY) SCALE :1 OVERALL FLOOR PLANS N.T.S.N ROCKY MOUNTAIN FLATS | NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 5/8/2025 B. Design Elements Rocky Mountain Flats – Affordable Housing Ordinance Incentives Proposed Type ‘C’ Incentives Applied to Rocky Mountain Flats - One additional story of height (15’ max) beyond that allowed in the R-4 zoning district (Sec. 38.380.040, E.3.a.) – R-4 Residential High Density: two 4-story buildings; one 5-story building (added height and stories) - Minimum vehicle requirement of 0.75 space per dwelling (Sec. 38.380.040, E.3.b)(vehicle parking reduction) - The number of bicycle racks provided must exceed or be equal to 50% of the number of dwellings within the development (bicycle parking reduction) - For multi-household dwellings and mixed-use buildings in all zoning districts, the minimum lot area per dwelling does not apply (density bonus) 3. Incentives Proposed Rocky Mountain Flats – Parking & Transportation Information 5532 Fowler Lane, Bozeman, MT Vehicle parking (.75 stalls per unit): 232 provided (222 required) Off Street Standard 175 ADA Van Stalls 16 On Street; adjacent 41 Total 232 *Additional 27 stalls are designed into streets, but are not directly adjacent to the property Bicycle parking (.5 per unit): 150 Provided (148 Required) 4. Parking & Transportation April 4, 2025 To whom it may concern, HRDC’s Streamline has started discussions with developers of project #24492 for future transit service. The project is located within the Gallatin Valley Urban Transportation District (UTD) boundaries, meaning it is within the planning area when making updates to the Transit Development Plan (TDP) every three to five years. We are currently in the process of updating the 2021 TDP, the long-term service recommendations are to supply areas south of Montana State University campus with mirco-transit or on-demand services. The update to the TDP is focused primarily on the long-term service. It has been paused, however we did get as far as very preliminary route and service expansion recommendations. Due to the pause on the work to the TDP the preliminary recommendations have not been publicly vetted. I will share that there is a recommendation to provide service to the south of MSU. The type and frequency of the service will depend a lot on how dense and walkable (or transit friendly) the area is developed. Please feel free to reach out with any questions. Sincerely, Sunshine Ross HRDC/Streamline Transportation Director p: (406) 587-2434 e: sross@thehrdc.org Streamline is a program of HRDC. p: 406.587.2434 e: info@streamlinebus.com a: 1812 North Rouse Bozeman, Montana 59715 PROPOSED CONNECTION TONEIGHBORING DEVELOPMENTPROPOSED CONNECTION TONEIGHBORING DEVELOPMENTPEDESTRIAN EASEMENT ASBLOCK DESIGNATORLANDSCAPEBLOCK FRONTAGELANDSCAPEBLOCK FRONTAGELANDSCAPEBLOCK FRONTAGELANDSCAPEBLOCK FRONTAGE20'-0" SETBACK15'-0" SETBACK10'-0" EASEMENT15'-0" SETBACK10'-0" PUBLIC UTIL. EASEMENT20'-0" PUBLIC STREET & UTIL. EASEMENT20'-0" EX. R.O.W.10'-0" EASEMENT15'-0" SETBACK15'-0" SETBACK10'-0" EASEMENT10'-0" EASEMENT60'-0" PUBLICSTREET & UTILITYEASEMENT60'-0" PUBLICSTREET & UTILITYEASEMENT10'-0" PEDESTRIANEASEMENT10'-0" SETBACK10'-0" SETBACK10'-0" PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT 10'-0" SETBACK 10'-0" SETBACKBLACKWOODROADFOWLER LANE S. 31ST AVE MEAH LANEBLACKWOOD ROADEDGERTON AVE.OPEN SPACE /PARKLANDDEDICATIONGABRRIEL AVE. 20'-0" SETBACK15'-0" SETBACK60'-0" PUBLICSTREET & UTILITYEASEMENTVIEW TRIANGLEVIEW TRIANGLEVIEW TRIANGLESCALE :1SITE EASEMENT & SETBACK DIAGRAMN.T.S.N24.115edinc Job #:1535 liberty lanesuite 110bmissoula, montana59808phone: 406.540.4437design + architectureincTHIS SHEET IS INTENDED TO BE PRINTED INCOLOR TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THEINFORMATION BEING PRESENTED.CONCEPT REVIEW: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 2024 ENCOMPASS DESIGN INC.CAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT: ROCKY MOUNTAIN FLATS BOZEMAN, MONTANA12/18/2024A1.0SITE SETBACK& EASEMENTPLANPROPERTY LINEHATCH DESIGNATIONLEGEND - SITE PLANCONCRETE WALKSDENSE HEDGES FORSCREENINGSOD / NATIVE SEEDLANDSCAPINGPLAY SURFACESETBACK LINEEASEMENT LINEROAD CENTERLINEPROPERTY CORNERVEGETATIONTREESSHRUBSWATERSANITARY SEWERBURIED POWERSTORMWATERRETENTION LOCATIONSSDSDSTORM SEWERASPHALTPERVIOUS PAVING FOR FIRELANE (GRASSCRETE)FENCE S. 31ST AVE MEAH LANECCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CC CC CC CC CC CC C CSCALE :1SITE PLAN1" = 50'-0"NSCALE: 1" = 50'-0"50'100'0150'EXTENSION OF ADJACENT PARK(39,877 SF TO COUNT TOWARDSPARKLAND REQUIREMENTS)PROPOSED CONNECTION TONEIGHBORING DEVELOPMENTPROPOSED CONNECTION TONEIGHBORING DEVELOPMENTPROPOSED CONNECTION TONEIGHBORING DEVELOPMENTEDGERTON AVE. FOWLER LANE S. 31ST AVE MEAH LANE PARKLANDDEDICATION VIAEASEMENTCOMMUNITYROOMGABRIEL AVE.TYP.COMMONSFIRE LANEFIRE LANE FIRE LANE FIRE LANE FIRE LANE FIRE LANEFIRE LANEFIRE LANEFIRE LANEFIRE LANEFIRE LANE10'-0" PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT 10'-0" SETBACK 10'-0" SETBACK626131329795299774513143339511111651101416151611513111172101371015217171773818187720BUILDING #B(19,536 SF, 5-STORY)BUILDING #C(33,056 SF, 4-STORY)BUILDING #A(33,056 SF, 4-STORY)5226158107231081223721TYP233318TYP.919155102354TYP4TYP4TYP3333333511515177TYP.24KEYED NOTES - SITE PLAN1.COVERED ENTRY2.5' WIDE CONCRETE SIDEWALKS, 7' WIDE AT PARKING STALLS.3.OPEN SPACE LANDSCAPING, PROVIDE WITH TREES, SHRUBS ANDIRRIGATION PER CITY OF BOZEMAN4.ASPHALT DRIVEWAY5.BIKE PARKING, 296 SPACES MIN.6.ACCESSIBLE ROUTE7.4' SCREENING ALONG PARKING8.TRASH ENCLOSURE W/ 5' LANDSCAPE SCREENING AROUNDENCLOSURE. NOTE: EACH BUILDING HAS A TRASH CHUTE & TRASHROOM. MAINTENANCE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MOVING TRASH FROMTRASH ROOMS TO TRASH ENCLOSURES.9.PARKING STALL, TYP.10.ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALLS, TYP.11.10' PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT W/ 10' SETBACK TO CREATEBLOCKS.12.FENCED PLAYGROUND13.EXTERIOR PATIO W/ 36" FENCE RAISED 1' MIN. FROM SIDEWALK14.COVERED MAIL BOXES.15.FIRE RISER & WATER ENTRANCE W/ METER.16.ELECTRICAL GEAR W/ INDIVIDUAL METERS OPEN TO EXTERIOR.17.6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK18.MID-BLOCK CROSSWALK19.OUTDOOR COMMON PATIO SPACE20.DOG PARK21.PICNIC AREA W/ TABLES & HORSESHOE PITS22.10' WIDE MULTI-USE PATH23.PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING24.SNOW STORAGEXPROPERTY LINEHATCH DESIGNATIONLEGEND - SITE PLANCONCRETE WALKSDENSE HEDGES FORSCREENINGSOD / NATIVE SEEDLANDSCAPINGPLAY SURFACESETBACK LINEEASEMENT LINEROAD CENTERLINEPROPERTY CORNERVEGETATIONTREESSHRUBSWATERSANITARY SEWERBURIED POWERSTORMWATERRETENTION LOCATIONSSDSDSTORM SEWERASPHALTPERVIOUS PAVING FOR FIRELANE (GRASSCRETE)FENCE24.115edinc Job #:1535 liberty lanesuite 110bmissoula, montana59808phone: 406.540.4437design + architectureincTHIS SHEET IS INTENDED TO BE PRINTED INCOLOR TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THEINFORMATION BEING PRESENTED.CONCEPT REVIEW: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 2024 ENCOMPASS DESIGN INC.CAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT: ROCKY MOUNTAIN FLATS BOZEMAN, MONTANA12/18/2024A1.2SITE PLAN &SITEINFORMATIONLEGAL ADDRESS:S23, T02 S, R05 E, N2S2SW4SW4 10.00ACBUILDING INFORMATION: SEE UNIT MIX DIAGRAMZONING CODE AND SITE INFO:AHJ: CITY OF BOZEMAN·GROSS SITE AREA:435,600 SF (10 ACRES)··LOT AREA (N.I.C. R.O.W. DEDICATIONS): 317,555 (7.29 ACRES)··OPEN SPACE PROVIDED: 49,208 SF··LANDSCAPING PROVIDED:·SITE ZONING: R-4 - RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY·USE: APARTMENT BUILDING·MAX LOT AREA (TABLE 38.320.030.A): 2.5 ACRES- NOTE 3 ALLOWS FOR DEVIATION WHEREDEVELOPMENT IS CONTEXTUALLY APPROPRIATE·MAX DENSITY:··BASE R-4 ZONE DISTRICT: FIRST DWELLING = 3,000 SF, EACH DWELLING AFTER = 1,200 SF(262 UNITS USING NET LOT AREA)··DEEP INCENTIVES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING: NO MAXIMUMPROPOSED = 296 UNITS·MIN DENSITY (TABLE 38.320.030.C): 8 UNITS / ACREPROPOSED DENSITY = 40.6 UNITS / ACRE USING NET LOT AREA·MAX FLOOR AREA RATIO: 1.5:1 (595,415 SF W/ 25% INCREASE)PROPOSED = 352,623 SF·MAX LOT COVERAGE: 50% (158,778 SF)PROPOSED = 85,648 SF·MAX BUILDING HEIGHT (TABLE 38.320.030.C):··BASE R-4 ZONE DISTRICT: 40' IF ROOF SLOPE LESS THAN 3:12, 50' IF ROOF SLOPE IS 3:12 ORGREATER··DEEP INCENTIVES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING: 70' IF ROOF SLOPE IS LESS THAN 3:12, 80' IFROOF SLOPE IS 3:12 OR GREATERPROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT:+/- 60' FOR 5 STORY BUILDING·SETBACKS (TABLE 38.320.030.A): FRONT = 15', 13'-6" WITH DEPARTURE FOR HOUSINGREAR = 20', 18' WITH DEPARTURE FOR HOUSINGSIDE = 5', 4'-6" WITH DEPARTURE FOR HOUSING·DEPARTURES FOR HOUSING CREATION (38.320.070)··BUILDING SETBACKS - 10% REDUCTION··BUILDING HEIGHT - 5' INCREASE··MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE - 10% ABOVE MAX··PARKING REDUCTIONS - DO NOT APPLY WITH USE OF DEEP INCENTIVES FOR AFFORDABLEHOUSING··USEABLE OPEN SPACE - 20% REDUCTION IF WITHIN 14 MILE OF EXISTING PARK·AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENT TO MEET "DEEP INCENTIVES" ASSUMED FOR SITE DESIGN (AMINIMUM OF 50% OF UNITS AT A MAX OF 80% OF AMI)(38.380.020-1)··TWO ADDITIONAL STORIES (15' FOR EACH) ABOVE BASE REQUIREMENT FOR R-4 DISTRICT··NO MIN. ON SITE VEHICLE PARKING REQUIRED, BICYCLE STANDARDS STILL APPLY··EXEMPTION FROM: (1)MINIMUM LOT SIZE, LOT AREA PER DWELLING UNITS, AND LOTWIDTH REQUIREMENT IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS.(2)SECTION 38.510.030.E TO J BLOCKFRONTAGE STANDARDS, PROVIDED THAT VEHICLE PARKING IS PROHIBITED BETWEEN THEFRONT OR SIDE OF A PRINCIPAL BUILDING AND A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET;(3)SECTION38.530.040.E MAXIMUM FAÇADE WIDTH STANDARDS;(4)SECTION 38.530.040.F ROOFLINEMODULATION STANDARDS;(5)SECTION 38.530.050 BUILDING DETAIL STANDARDS;AND(6)SECTION 38.530.060 BUILDING MATERIAL STANDARDS.··CONCURRENT CONSTRUCTION OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND HOSING PER 38.270.030·NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER: NET SITE AREA IS LESS THAN 10 ACRES DUE TO R.O.W. THEREFORENEIGHBORHOOD CENTER IS NOT REQUIRED. (7.29 ACRES)·PARKLAND DEDICATION (TABLE 38.420.020.A) IS APPLIED TO 8 UNITS PER ACRE OR 58 UNITS AND IS.03 ACRES PER DU OR 1.74 ACRES. A MAX OF 12 UNITS PER ACRE IS REQUIRED TO BE USED FORDEDICATION CALCULATION OR 12 X 7.29 X .03 = 2.62 ACRES. CASH IN LIEU MUST BE USED FOR UPTO 4 UNITS PER ACRE OR 29 UNITS (DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MIN. AND MAX.) OR .87 ACRES.··PROPOSED PARKLAND DEDICATED ACREAGE IS .92 ACRES. THIS DESIGN PROPOSES THEREMAINING 2.14 ACRES OF REQUIRED PARKLAND DEDICATION TO BE PROVIDED USING THECASH-IN-LIEU OPTION·PROJECT DESIGN:··BLOCK FRONTAGE: THE SURROUNDING AREAS SHOW LANDSCAPED BLOCK FRONTAGEREQUIREMENTS, SO WE ARE ASSUMING THIS WILL APPLY (38.510.030.C).···10' MIN. SETBACK···ENTRANCES VISIBLE AND ACCESSIBLE FROM STREET···15% FACADE TRANSPARENCY···MIN. 3' DEEP WEATHER PROTECTION AT ENTRANCES, PARKING TO SIDE, REAR, BELOWOR ABOVE RESIDENTIAL USES AND ARE LIMITED TO 50% OR LESS OF THE STREETFRONTAGE···LANDSCPAPING, PATIO SPACE, OR PEDESTRIAN ORIENTATED SPACE BETWEEN STREETAND BUILDING.···6' MIN. SIDEWALKS ADJACENT TO ARTERIAL STREETS AND PUBLIC PARKS, 5' MIN.ELSEWHERE.*NOTE:BLOCK FRONTAGE STANDARDS "E-J" DO NOT APPLY WHEN USING DEEP INCENTIVES FORAFFORDABLE HOUSING·SITE PLANNING & DESIGN (38.520)··MIN. 100 SF OF OPEN SPACE PER 1 BED (2,000 SF X .80, FOR 20% REDUCTION = 1,600 SF)··MIN. 150 SF OF OPEN SPACE FOR 2+ BED UNITS (41,400 SF X .8 FOR 20% REDUCTION =33,120 SF)··GROUND LEVEL PRIVATE OUTDOOR SPACE CAN COUNT TOWARDS OPEN SPACEREQUIREMENT (76 SF PER GROUND FLOOR UNIT AND BALCONIES CAN COUNT TOWARDSNO MORE THAN 50% (76 SF PER UNIT OR 14,208 SF PROVIDED)··20,512 SF REQUIRED BEYOND BALCONIES (35,412 SF PROVIDED)·BUILDING DESIGN (38.530)··FACADE ARTICULATION - RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS- FEATURES USED FOR FACADEARTICULATION AT INTERVALS LESS THAN 30':···WINDOWS···ENTRIES / PATIOS / DECKS···CHANGE IN BUILDING MATERIAL, SIDING STYLE AND/OR COLOR···VERTICAL BUILDING MODULATION··BLANK WALLS 15' X 10' ARE NOT PRESENT IN THE CURRENT DESIGN.*NOTE:DEEP INCENTIVES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING REMOVES REQUIREMENTS FOR ROOFLINEMODULATION, BUILDING DETAILS AND BUILDING MATERIALS·PARKING (38.540): NONE REQUIRED USING AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEEP INCENTIVES, MAX OF 1.5PER UNIT OR 444 SPACES (38.540.050-1.b.1)PROVIDED:153 OFF STREET 90 DEGREE STALLS (9' X 18')10 ADA STALLS6 ADA VAN STALLS40 OFF STREET 90 DEGREE COMPACT STALLS (8' X 16', 17%)44 ON-STREET PARALLEL STALLS ADJACENT TO PARCELS (7' X 24')237 STALLS TOTAL (.80 STALLS PER UNIT)53 ADDITIONAL ON-STREET STALLS ON OPPOSITE SIDE OF R.O.W.*NOTE:2' ADDED TO LENGTH OF STALLS NOT ADJACENT TO SIDEWALK OR LANDSCAPING··BICYCLE PARKING: 1 PER UNIT REQ'D = 296, 300 PROVIDED·LANDSCAPING (38.550.030)··PARKING LOT - 4' WIDE X 4'-6' TALL SCREENING REQUIRED ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIALDISTRICTS, TREES WITHIN 20' OF PARKING LOT AND WITH DENSITY PER 38.550.050.C.2.BAND WITHIN 70' OF EACH SPACE, 20 SF OF LANDSCAPE AREA WITH THE PARKING LOT, FOREACH SPACE, MAX OF 100' BETWEEN LANDSCAPE AREAS (···20 SF X 193 STALLS IN PARKING LOT = 3,860 SF REQ'DPROPOSED = 4,405 SF··STREET FRONTAGE- ONE LARGE CANOPY TREE PER 50'··LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION DESIGN TO BE BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO MEET "CITY OFBOZEMAN LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION PERFORMANCE AND DESIGN STANDARDSMANUAL"··SETBACK LANDSCAPING REQUIREDPROJECT / ZONING INFO S. 31ST AVE MEAH LANECCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CC CC CC CC CC CC C CSCALE :1BLOCK FRONTAGE & OPEN SPACE PLAN1" = 50'-0"NSCALE: 1" = 50'-0"50'100'0150'EDGERTON AVE. FOWLER LANE S. 31ST AVE GABRIEL AVE.PARKLAND DEDICATIONVIA EASEMENT -EXTENSION OFADJACENT PARK(39,877 SF TO COUNTTOWARDS PARKLANDREQUIREMENTS)SHARED USEABLE OPEN SPACEAREA 7 (13,971 SF)DOG PARKPICNIC AREA W/HORSESHOE PITSSHARED USEABLE OPENSPACE AREA 6 (7,260 SF)PLAYGROUNDSHARED USEABLEOPEN SPACE AREA 2(5,233 SF)SHARED USEABLE OPENSPACE AREA 1 (6,702 SF)WALKING PATH W/ TABLES &/OR BENCHESWALKING PATH W/ TABLES &/OR BENCHESSHARED USEABLE OPENSPACE AREA 5 (5,984 SF)SHARED USEABLE OPENSPACE AREA 3 (1,975 SF)SHARED USEABLE OPENSPACE AREA 4 (1,095 SF)INDOOR COMMONS W/OUTDOOR PATIO SPACEWALKING PATH W/ BENCHES LANDSCAPE BLOCK FRONTAGETOTAL WIDTH OFFRONTAGE = 272'-558"STREET FACINGENTRANCELANDSCAPE BLOCK FRONTAGEFRONT OF BUILDING #ATOTAL WIDTH OF FRONTAGE = 367'-438"WIDTH OF PARKING LOT = 170'-6" (46%)LANDSCAPE BLOCK FRONTAGE LANDSCAPE BLOCK FRONTAGEFRONT OF BUILDING #BSTREET FACINGENTRANCESTREET FACINGENTRANCESTREET FACINGENTRANCELANDSCAPE BLOCK FRONTAGE FRONT OF BUILDING #C TOTAL WIDTH OF FRONTAGE = 230'-0 316"WIDTH OF PARKING LOT = 62'-0" (22%)TOTAL WIDTH OF FRONTAGE = 278'-2716"TOTAL WIDTH OF FRONTAGE = 357'-6116"WIDTH OF PARKING LOT = 173'-1058" (49%)BUILDING #B(19,536 SF, 5-STORY)BUILDING #C(33,056 SF, 4-STORY)BUILDING #A(33,056 SF, 4-STORY)STREET FACINGENTRANCESTREET FACINGENTRANCE24.115edinc Job #:1535 liberty lanesuite 110bmissoula, montana59808phone: 406.540.4437design + architectureincTHIS SHEET IS INTENDED TO BE PRINTED INCOLOR TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THEINFORMATION BEING PRESENTED.CONCEPT REVIEW: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 2024 ENCOMPASS DESIGN INC.CAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT: ROCKY MOUNTAIN FLATS BOZEMAN, MONTANA12/18/2024A1.3BLOCKFRONTAGE &OPEN SPACEPLANREQUIRED:MIN. 100 SF OF OPEN SPACE PER 1 BED (2,000 SF X .80, FOR 20% REDUCTION = 1,600 SF)MIN. 150 SF OF OPEN SPACE FOR 2+ BED UNITS (41,400 SF X .8 FOR 20% REDUCTION = 33,120 SF)PROPOSED:GROUND LEVEL PRIVATE OUTDOOR SPACE CAN COUNT TOWARDS OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT (76 SFPER GROUND FLOOR UNIT AND BALCONIES CAN COUNT TOWARDS NO MORE THAN 50% (76 SFPER UNIT OR 14,208 SF PROVIDED)OUTDOOR SHARED OPEN SPACE AREA 1: 6,702 SFOUTDOOR SHARED OPEN SPACE AREA 2: 5,233 SFOUTDOOR SHARED OPEN SPACE AREA 3: 1,975 SFINTERIOR COMMON RECREATION SPACE / SHARED PATIO SPACE AREA 4 = 1,095 SFOUTDOOR SHARED OPEN SPACE AREA 5: 5,984 SFOUTDOOR SHARED OPEN SPACE AREA 6: 7,260 SFOUTDOOR SHARED OPEN SPACE AREA 7: 13,971 SFTOTAL:56,428 SFUSEABLE OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS: E. Community Comment Responses 1. Location: proximity to services According to our Market Study, a full-service grocery store is located 1.8 miles from the proposed site, and several convenience stores are within 2.1 miles. For more detailed information, please refer to page 5 of the meeting materials, where a service inventory highlights nearby amenities and their distances from the site. It’s also important to note that in most developing areas, housing tends to lead commercial growth. As residential density increases in this part of Bozeman, it's expected that additional services—such as grocery, convenience stores, retail, dining, and health care, for example—will follow to meet local demand. This pattern of development is consistent with Bozeman’s long- term growth planning and is part of how vibrant, complete neighborhoods are formed over time. Our project is designed to align with that growth, helping to create the population base that supports the expansion of nearby services and infrastructure. Please also refer to responses below: #5. Traffic pollution and #13. Parking and Transportation. 2. Location: better alternative sites exist The selection of the site for Rocky Mountain Flats was guided by several important factors, including sufficient size and acreage, cost feasibility, and the ability to support the proposed density needed to make affordable housing viable. A key consideration in the selection was that this site is located within a HUD Qualified Census Tract (QCT). This designation means that, prior to our proposed development, HUD had already determined that at least 50% of the households in the area have incomes at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI). This is significant for two main reasons: • Financial Feasibility: Being located in a QCT strengthens the financial viability of the project • Community Integration: It also underscores that Rocky Mountain Flats will be part of a neighborhood where future residents share similar economic circumstances to those already living in the area. This helps ensure that the development is not only financially sound, but also socially and economically integrated, aligning with the existing character and needs of the community. This site selection supports both the long-term sustainability of the project and its compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. 3. Density We understand that some residents are concerned about density and growth in this part of Bozeman. It’s important to note that the proposed project has been carefully designed and planned in full compliance with the City of Bozeman’s zoning, land use policies, and growth strategy. This site is zoned R-4, a designation that allows for residential development and was reviewed and approved by the City earlier this year as part of its comprehensive planning efforts. That zoning decision took into account infrastructure capacity, traffic, proximity to services, and long-term housing needs. Bozeman is experiencing significant housing pressure, and part of the City’s strategy to address this challenge is to encourage thoughtful, well-planned infill development in areas already served by or ability to update the infrastructure. Our development aligns with these principles by using existing city services, adding pedestrian and transit connections, and contributing to a more sustainable pattern of growth. 4. Building height Two of the three buildings will be four stories tall, while one will be five stories. This design helps us meet the necessary housing density for the site, due to the affordable rents that the project will be required to maintain, while preserving important green space for residents and the community. Additionally, to help minimize the overall height impact, the residential units will feature 8-foot ceilings—slightly lower than the standard 9-foot ceilings typically found in similar developments. This adjustment allows us to reduce the visual and physical scale of the buildings while still meeting housing needs. Each building will also have a flat roof, and the 5-story building will be located in the interior of the site to help further reduce visual impact. 5. Meah Lane Extension As part of our commitment to support the City’s long-term planning goals, our site design includes the extension of Meah Lane. This extension is intended to connect with both existing and future roadway and sidewalk infrastructure, enhancing neighborhood connectivity and accessibility. The City specifically requested this connection during the pre-Concept Review process, and we’ve worked to integrate it thoughtfully into our development plan to support efficient traffic flow and pedestrian access. 6. Implications to existing Meadow Creek Park There is concern and confusion regarding the relationship between our project and the existing Meadow Creek playground. We want to clarify that the current site plan does not place Gabriel Road directly adjacent to the playground. In fact, the design includes a substantial area of green and open space alongside the park, creating a generous buffer that enhances the existing recreational area rather than intruding upon it. Our goal is to respect and compliment the existing neighborhood amenities. The green space adjacent to the park will help maintain the sense of openness and provide a natural transition between our development and the community’s playground, supporting a safe and inviting environment for all residents. 7. Traffic safety and pollution Key aspects of the project are designed to mitigate these impacts: • Local Relocation: Many future residents are expected to relocate from within the Bozeman area, particularly from higher-cost housing. This means that the majority will not be adding new vehicles to the regional traffic network, resulting in a much lower net increase in vehicle emissions than if all residents were moving in from outside the greater area. • Alternative Transportation Options: We are incorporating bike parking into the development to encourage sustainable transportation. In addition, Streamline has indicated that this area may be included in their future service expansion, offering residents public transit options that reduce car dependence. • Traffic Impact Study Findings: A comprehensive Traffic Impact Study was conducted as part of the Site Plan application. The results show that the development will not cause roadway capacity issues at nearby intersections. Specifically, the study concludes that all intersections will continue to operate at Level of Service (LOS) B or better, with only minimal increases in delay compared to if the development were not built. Together, these factors reflect our commitment to minimizing environmental impacts and supporting a more sustainable, well-connected community. 8. Pedestrian infrastructure Our site will connect seamlessly to both existing and future roadways and sidewalk networks, including the planned development to the north. This will create continuous, safe, and accessible pathways for pedestrians, improving walkability throughout the neighborhood and supporting non-vehicle travel. These connections were incorporated into our design at the City’s request during the pre-Concept Review process, and we remain committed to contributing to a pedestrian-friendly, well-connected community for all residents. 9. Negative impact on neighborhood: property value Research consistently shows that well-designed affordable housing has no negative impact on nearby property values. In fact, thoughtful development can enhance community appeal by revitalizing underutilized spaces and supporting local businesses and services 10. Water usage We understand the community’s interest in how this development will address infrastructure needs, and we want to assure residents that all utility systems—including water, sanitary sewer, stormwater, and irrigation—are being professionally engineered in close coordination with the City of Bozeman Engineering Department and local irrigation district managers. • Water Supply & Pressure: We are aware of existing concerns about low water pressure in the area. To ensure reliable service for both domestic water use and fire suppression systems, we will be installing booster pumps as part of the development infrastructure. This will help maintain consistent water pressure within the project. Additionally, the project will be installing low flow water fixtures in all units as this is a requirement of Montana Board of Housing. • Stormwater Management: In response to more stringent stormwater regulations, our development is being designed to meet or exceed the City’s updated standards for on-site stormwater infiltration. Additionally, stormwater management along Fowler Lane is being addressed comprehensively through coordination with other developments in the area. Our project will tie into these broader improvements to ensure effective and environmentally responsible stormwater handling. • Irrigation System: The existing irrigation ditch is being relocated to the west side of Fowler Lane. This move is being carefully coordinated with adjacent developments to the north and the local irrigation district to ensure continued functionality and alignment with long-term planning goals. • Sanitary Sewer: Based on our engineering review and site conditions, sanitary sewer service is not expected to pose any issues. Our site naturally slopes toward the existing municipal system, allowing for gravity-fed flow with no current concerns about capacity. 11. Request for usable community space/outdoor space The design includes a variety of amenities aimed at fostering connection, recreation, and quality of life for residents. • A community room with kitchen area and an outdoor patio will serve as a shared space for gatherings, events, and activities. • Multiple outdoor use areas are planned throughout the development, including one adjacent to the existing playground on Meah Lane, creating synergy with existing neighborhood amenities. • A dedicated dog run will be included to support pet-friendly living and encourage active, outdoor lifestyles. These spaces are designed to be inclusive and welcoming, helping to build a sense of community while enhancing the neighborhood’s overall livability. 12. Request for bike/pedestrian infrastructure Rocky Mountain Flats will include 150 bicycle parking spaces conveniently located throughout the site. These facilities are designed to support both residents and visitors who choose to bike as a primary or secondary mode of transportation. In addition to on-site bike parking, the project is being designed to connect seamlessly with Bozeman’s broader bikeable infrastructure, helping to link this neighborhood with other parts of the city via existing and future bicycle routes. This approach supports the City of Bozeman’s goals for reducing vehicle traffic, lowering emissions, and creating a more connected, active community. We look forward to contributing to a more bike-friendly Bozeman and welcome input on how to make these amenities as useful and accessible as possible. See response 9 regarding pedestrian infrastructure. 13. Request for addition to Meadow Creek Park This is part of the greenspace plan for Rocky Mountain Flats – it’s included in the site plan submittal and please see response 6 above. 14. Developer experience BlueLine is a mission-driven, for-profit, Montana-based developer that has developed over 50 projects in 15 states across the mountain west region, mainly focused on Low Income Housing Tax Credit and affordable multifamily development. BlueLine has extensive experience and knowledge utilizing the Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program, Federal HOME Investment Partnerships Program, National Housing Trust Fund (NHTF), CDBG, NSP, TCAP, 1602 Exchange and ARPA funds Federal and State Housing Choice Vouchers, and myriad local funding sources. Each project is as unique as the residents who inhabit the finished housing, which is why BlueLine does not merely rely on its experience with established financial programs but also concentrates on finding creative funding solutions that are customized to specific, local needs. For Rocky Mountain Flats, we’re proud to be partnering with the Human Resource Development Council (HRDC), a trusted Bozeman-based nonprofit with a long-standing commitment to serving Southwest Montana. HRDC brings decades of experience in delivering vital services across the region, including housing assistance, food security, early childhood education, and transportation. Notably, HRDC also manages and operates Streamline, the local public bus service, which plays a key role in connecting Bozeman residents to jobs, schools, and essential services. This partnership enhances the Rocky Mountain Flats project by integrating affordable housing with a broader network of support services and future transit access, helping to ensure long-term success and sustainability for residents and the surrounding community. 15. Parking & Transportation As part of the Affordable Housing Ordinance, Rocky Mountain Flats is applying for Type C incentives as 100% of the units are affordable, deed-restricted units. Within Type C incentives is a reduction of required parking to .75 spaces per unit. We understand parking is an important concern, which is why the current site plan for Rocky Mountain Flats exceeds this requirement, proposing 0.79 spaces per unit—a thoughtful balance between practical use and land efficiency. In parking studies BlueLine has commissioned, the Area Median Income (AMI) was compared to resident’s vehicle ownership and it can be seen that residents with lower income levels own fewer vehicles and as the income increases the vehicle ownership increases. Often with the population our projects serve in comparable locations and with the same AMIs, we see around 70% of the households owning/using a car. Parking studies comparing vehicle ownership by household income levels consistently show that households at lower Area Median Income (AMI) levels tend to own fewer vehicles, with vehicle ownership increasing as income rises. For developments similar to Rocky Mountain Flats, which serve residents at comparable income levels, we typically see that about 70% of households own or regularly use a car. In addition, our project is designed to support multi-modal transportation, including 150 on-site bicycle parking spaces and future connection to Streamline bus routes, which are operated by our community partner, the Human Resource Development Council (HRDC). These features help reduce the need for car ownership and promote more affordable, sustainable living. 16. Clarification of affordability Rocky Mountain Flats is designed to meet a need in the community by providing affordable housing for households earning between 30% and 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI). Rental rates for these homes will be capped at 30% of a household’s income, in accordance with guidelines set by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). To ensure lasting affordability and housing stability, all units in the development will be deed-restricted for a minimum of 50 years. This long-term commitment helps preserve affordability well into the future, benefiting not just current residents, but future generations as well. At current income and rent levels, these units are expected to be priced 25% to 45% below HUD’s Fair Market Rent (FMR) for the Bozeman area, making a real difference for working families, seniors, and others in need of secure, cost-accessible housing. 17. Cost of infrastructure The project will be designed to support 296-units and those costs are included in the project budget. Please see response #10 regarding Water Use. 18. Tenant turnover A number of comments reference “tenant turnover” as a concern and this is a misunderstanding that came up in community comments following the May 8th meeting. Some interpreted a mention of “33% turnover” as a projected turnover rate specific to the Rocky Mountain Flats development. In fact, this figure came from a regional statistic used in a Market Study commissioned by BlueLine and conducted by Prior & Associates, a 3rd party market study provider, to evaluate the need for affordable housing in the area. To clarify: The 33% turnover rate is a regional average for subsidized housing in HUD Region VIII, which covers the entire state of Montana and several surrounding states. It is not a projection or expectation for this specific project, but rather a data point used to assess housing demand. BlueLine Property Management’s portfolio of affordable housing projects—across multiple states—has consistently maintained annual occupancy rates over 90%. This reflects the stability and long-term residence that affordable housing typically provides, especially when paired with community services and well-managed properties like Rocky Mountain Flats. 19. Tenant/resident support While BlueLine Property Management brings extensive experience in managing affordable housing communities and supporting resident needs, one of the key strengths of the Rocky Mountain Flats project is our partnership with the Human Resource Development Council (HRDC). HRDC’s long-standing role in the region allows us to connect residents to a wide range of optional support services—including access to transportation, job training, children’s services, financial counseling, food assistance, and more. These services can be facilitated on an as-needed, as-requested basis, giving residents the flexibility to engage based on their individual circumstances and goals. This approach not only helps residents maintain housing stability, but also supports long-term success by integrating affordable housing with meaningful, local resources. 20. Property Management capability BlueLine Property Management Company (BLPMC) brings a high level of expertise to the ongoing operation of the Rocky Mountain Flats development. With a focus on excellence in multi-family property management, BLPMC provides full-service oversight, including: • Daily operations and leasing • Maintenance and upkeep • Market analysis and financial underwriting • Resident engagement and support BLPMC specializes in affordable housing management, with a current portfolio of 21 properties totaling 1,100 units. Our team has over 50 years of combined experience specifically in Tax Credit compliance and affordable property management— ensuring long-term financial viability, regulatory adherence, and high-quality living environments for residents. This depth of experience ensures that Rocky Mountain Flats will be well-managed, maintained to a high standard, and responsive to the needs of its residents and the broader community. 21. Snow removal With extensive experience developing and managing properties throughout the Mountain West, BlueLine understands firsthand how critical snow removal is for the safety, accessibility, and overall livability of a housing community—especially during long Montana winters. To ensure effective service, snow removal is included as a dedicated line item in the project’s operating budget for Rocky Mountain Flats. This ensures that adequate resources are allocated each year to maintain safe walkways, driveways, parking areas, and access routes, both for residents and for neighboring properties. Additionally, snow storage and removal is a consideration and condition of engineering design and will be reviewed by the City of Bozeman during permitting.