HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-21-2026- City Commission Agendas & Packet MaterialsA. Call Special Meeting to Order - 12:00 PM - Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse
B. Pledge of Allegiance and a Moment of Silence or Mindfulness
C. Authorize Absence
D. Commission Disclosures
E. Action Item
E.1 Make and Adopt Additional Findings of Fact Regarding Preliminary Planned Unit
THE CITY COMMISSION OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
Monday, September 21, 2026
City Commission 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. Adaptive listening devices and handheld microphones are available for use by audience
members upon request.
How to Participate:
If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda please send an email to
comments@bozemanmt.gov or visit the Public Comment Page prior to 12:00 p.m. on the day of the
meeting. At the direction of the City Commission, anonymous public comments are not distributed to
the City Commission or staff.
Public comments will also be accepted in-person and through video conference during the appropriate
agenda items but you may only comment once per item and oral comments are usually limited to three
(3) minutes.
As always, the meeting will be recorded and streamed through the Commission's video page and
available in the City on cable channel 190.
For more information please contact the City Clerks' Office at 406.582.2320.
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
+1 646 931 3860
Access code: 953 1424 1562
1
Development Application 22293 and Preliminary Plat Application 22294 in Accordance with
the Court's August 3, 2026 Order Re: Cross Motions for Summary Judgment in the Bridger
Center, LLC v. City of Bozeman Matter (Quasi-Judicial)(Rischke)
F. Public Comment on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and Jurisdiction of the
Commission
G. FYI / Discussion
H. Adjournment
Consider the Motion: I move to adopt the additional Findings of Fact applicable to Preliminary PUD
Application 22293 and Preliminary Plat Application 22294.
This is the time to comment on any matter falling within the scope of the Bozeman City
Commission. 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 City Commission
cannot take action on any item which does not appear on the agenda. All persons addressing the
City Commission 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 (3) minutes.
Written comments can be located in the Public Comment Repository.
2
Memorandum
REPORT TO:City Commission
FROM:Greg Sullivan, City Attorney
Kelley Rischke, Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT:Make and Adopt Additional Findings of Fact Regarding Preliminary Planned
Unit Development Application 22293 and Preliminary Plat Application 22294
in Accordance with the Court's August 3, 2026 Order Re: Cross Motions for
Summary Judgment in the Bridger Center, LLC v. City of Bozeman Matter
(Quasi-Judicial)
MEETING DATE:September 21, 2026
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Quasi-Judicial
RECOMMENDATION:Consider the Motion: I move to adopt the additional Findings of Fact
applicable to Preliminary PUD Application 22293 and Preliminary Plat
Application 22294.
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:On March 21, 2023, the Bozeman City Commission held a public hearing to
consider planning applications 22293, a preliminary planned unit
development application, and 22294, a preliminary plat application, which
requested relaxations from code requirements and proposed development
of 16 residential lots known as Shady Glen. For each application, the
Commission heard presentations from City staff and the developer and took
public comment. After considering the application materials, the
presentations, recommendations of the advisory board, and public
comment, the Commission articulated its rationale and made oral findings
supporting its decision to deny both applications. The Commission adopted
written findings of fact for Application 22293 and Application 22294,
attached.
On June 1, 2023, the applicant filed an appeal of the City's denial of its
applications in state district court, alleging the decisions were arbitrary,
capricious, or unlawful. The City has been litigating this matter ever since.
In February, 2026, the Plaintiff and the City each filed motions for summary
judgment, asking the judge to decide whether the City's decisions were
arbitrary, capricious, or unlawful. After considering the extensive briefing on
the motions, on August 3, 2026, the Court issued an Order on the parties'
3
cross motions for summary judgment remanding this matter to the City
Commission for additional findings and proceedings.
Therefore, the purpose of this action item is to make additional findings in
accordance with the Court's Order.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None
ALTERNATIVES:As directed by the Commission
FISCAL EFFECTS:None
Attachments:
Bridger Center v. City of Bozeman Order re- Cross Motions for
Summary Judgment.pdf
Shady Glen Findings PUDP_22293_signed.pdf
Shady Glen PPlat Findings_22294_signed.pdf
Report compiled on: September 10, 2026
4
MONTANA EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, GALLATIN COUNTY
* * * * * * *
BRIDGER CENTER, LLC, a Montana limited ) Cause No. DV-23-541
liability company )
)
Plaintiff,) ORDER RE:
) CROSS MOTIONS FOR
v.) SUMMARY JUDGMENT
)
CITY OF BOZEMAN, by and through its City )
Commission )
)
)
Defendant.)
________________________________
On February 13, 2026, Plaintiff Bridger Center, LLC (Bridger Center)filed
a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment with a Brief in Support of the Motion. On
that same day, Defendant City of Bozeman (City)filed a Cross-Motion for
Summary Judgment with a Brief in Support of the Motion. The parties have
completed briefing on the Motions and neither party has requested a hearing
pursuant to the provisions of M.R.Civ.P.56.
BACKGROUND
On February 17, 2023, Bridger Center submitted applications for a Planned
Unit Development (PUD) and Major Subdivision consisting of sixteen lots. The
development was to be known as Shady Glen.In the PUD application, Bridger
FILED
STATE OF MONTANA
By: __________________
CLERK
64.00
Gallatin County District Court
Amariah Mitchell
DV-16-2023-0000541-RP
08/03/2026
Sandy Erhardt
Ohman, Peter B.
5
2
Center requested the City approve six relaxations from the Bozeman Municipal
Code (BMC):
1.BMC 38.310.030.A –A relaxation to allow townhouses as a permitted
use in the R-1 zoning district in order to provide two affordable housing
units. (relaxation 1).
2.BMC 38.400.010.A.8 –A relaxation for the design of a dual (combined)
use access for pedestrians and emergency or other authorized vehicles.
(relaxation 2).
3.BMC 38.400.050.A. –A relaxation from specific right-of-way and local
street design standards, for Shady Glen Lane. (relaxation 3).
4.BMC 38.410.040.D –A relaxation from right-of-way and design
standards for a pedestrian access doubling as an emergency vehicle
access. (relaxation 4).
5.BMC 38.410.100.A.2.c.4. –A relaxation from watercourse setback and
wetland buffer requirements. This relaxation request is to reduce the 50-
foot setback to 35-feet. This reduction affects 9 of the proposed 16
residential lots.(relaxation 5).
6.BMC 38.410.100.A.2.d –A relaxation to allow placement of fill material,
for non-exempt uses, within the East Gallatin River’s 100-year
floodplain. The applicant proposed to place fill within the shallow
floodplain fringe on 7 of the proposed 16 residential lots.(relaxation
6).
Bridger Center sought these six requested relaxations to accommodate the unique
site conditions, including floodplain and wetlands which reduced the developable
area. A PUD allows relaxations from the BMC when the overall development is
superior to that offered by the basic existing zoning standards.
City staff recommended the City Commission approve the project,
determining “[t]he application conforms to standards and is sufficient for approval
with conditions and code provisions with the approval of the requested
relaxations.”
On October 27, 2022, the Development Review Committee found the PUD
Application sufficient for continued review. The Community Development (CD)
6
3
Board reviewed the PUD Application on March 6, 2023, and recommended
approval of the PUD Application with conditions in a split vote of 4-3. The City
Commission held a public hearing on March 21, 2023. After review of the Record
information and hearing public comments, the motion to approve vote failed 0-5.
The Subdivision Application also was considered by the CD Board and City
Commission at the same meetings as their review of the PUD Application. The City
Commission made individual findings that the Subdivision Application did not
meet the zoning criteria due to the denial of the PUD Application and ultimately
voted to deny the Subdivision Application. The City incorporated its PUD Findings
into its Subdivision Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision. The
City Commission determined Shady Glen “is not consistent with the review
criteria, specifically the requirement that the PUD is a superior community
product to that offered by the existing zoning standards . . . .”
Bridger Center has now filed this appeal of Commission’s denial of its PUD
and Subdivision Applications pursuant to § 76-3-625(1), MCA.Bridger Center
contends the City’s decision to deny the PUD and Subdivision Applications was
arbitrary, capricious, and unlawful because the Commission’s decisions directly
conflict with analyses and recommendations from the City’s trained staff and
technical subject matter experts, and the City failed to explain why it weighed
certain evidence as more credible than other evidence.
The City contends the City Commission’s decisions were based on a robust
record supporting that Plaintiff’s proposed development, including the relaxations
from the BMC, did not create a superior product to that offered by the basic
existing zoning standards.
7
4
II. STANDARDS OF REVIEW
A.Summary Judgment
A party is entitled to summary judgment if “the pleadings, the discovery and
disclosure materials on file, and any affidavits show that there is no genuine issue
as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of
law.” M.R.Civ.P.56(c)(3). “In a summary judgment proceeding, the evidence must
be viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and all reasonable
inferences therefrom will be drawn in favor of the party opposing the summary
judgment.” Oliver v. Stimson Lumber Co., 1999 MT 328, ¶ 22, 297 Mont. 336, 993
P.2d 11.
The moving party must first demonstrate that no genuine issue of material
fact exists precluding the entry of summary judgment as a matter of law. Sunset
Point Partnership v. Stuc-O-Flex International, Inc., 287 Mont. 388, 954 P.2d
1156 (1998); Dobrocke v. City of Columbia Falls, 2000 MT 179, 300 Mont. 348, 8
P.3d 71. Once the moving party has met its burden to establish the absence of
genuine issues of material fact, the opposing party must present material and
substantial evidence establishing the existence of issues of fact essential to one or
more elements of the case; mere conclusory or speculative statements are
insufficient. Gonzales v. Walchuk, 2002 MT 262, ¶ 9, 312 Mont. 240, 59 P.3d 377.
If the Court concludes that there is no genuine issue of material fact, then the Court
must determine whether the moving party is entitled to summary judgment as a
matter of law. Brothers v. General Motors Corp., 202 Mont 477, 481, 658 P.2d
8
5
1108, 1110 (1983); Clark v. Eagle Systems, Inc., 279 Mont. 279, 287, 927 P.2d 995,
1000 (1996).
B.Appeals of Subdivision Denials under § 76-3-625(1), MCA.
Section 76-3-625(1), MCA, authorizes a person who has filed a subdivision
application to initiate an action against the governing body to recover actual
damages. Section 76-3-625(2), MCA, further provides that a person aggrieved by
a decision of the governing body to deny an application and preliminary plat for a
proposed subdivision may appeal the denial. The “governing body’s decision,
based on the record as a whole, must be sustained unless the decision being
challenged is arbitrary, capricious, or unlawful.” Section 76-3-625(1) and (2)(c),
MCA.
The decision by a governing body to deny an application is unlawful “when
it fails to comply with the requirements of applicable statutes.” Aspen Trails LLC
v. Simmons, 2010 MT 79, ¶ 31, 356 Mont. 41, 230 P.3d 808; accord, Citizens for
Responsible Dev. v. Bd. of Co. Commrs., 2009 MT 182,¶ 26, 351 Mont. 40, 208
P.3d 876. The decision is arbitrary if it came “about seemingly at random or by
chance or as an impulsive and unreasonable act of will.” Silva v. City of Columbia
Falls, 258 Mont.329, 335, 852 P.2d 671, 675 (1993). The decision is capricious “if
it is the product of a sudden,impulsive, and seemingly unmotivated notion or
action.” Pfeil Acq. LLC v. Gallatin Co. Consv. Dist.,2022 MT 237, ¶ 12, 411 Mont.
18, 521 P.3d 47 (citation omitted).
Additionally, when deciding whether a governing body’s decision was
arbitrary, capricious,or unlawful, the Court reviews whether the governing body
9
6
“carefully considered and addressed the information before it,” and whether it
“acted largely in conformance with that information.” Richards v. County of
Missoula, 2012 MT 236, ¶ 18, 366 Mont. 416, 288 P.3d 175.
In reviewing the city commission’s decision, “the District Court’s job is not
to re-try the facts” but rather determine whether “the record contains sufficient
evidence showing the city’s commission’s decision . . . was reasonable and based in
fact. . . .” Town & Country Foods, Inc. v. City of Bozeman, 2009 MT 72, ¶27, 349
Mont. 453, 203 P.3d 1283. Moreover, “[w]hile the record may contain conflicting
evidence, as long as a substantial amount of the evidence supports the governing
body’s decision and the governing body explains why it weighed certain evidence
as more credible than other evidence, the governing body’s decision should be
upheld.” MM&I, LLC v. Bd. of County Comm’rs of Gallatin County, 2010 MT 274,
¶30, 358 Mont. 420, 246 P.3d 1029; see also Richards v. County of Missoula,2009
MT 453, ¶22, 354 Mont. 334, 223 P.3d 878.
III. DISCUSSION
For proposed developments seeking relaxations, the City must determine
that Bridger Center’s proposed deviation would produce a “superior” environment:
The review authority must make a determination that the deviation[s] will
produce an environment, landscape quality and character superior to that
produced by the existing standards of this chapter, and which will be
consistent with the intent and purpose of this division 38.430, with the
adopted goals of the city growth policy and with any relevant adopted design
objectives plans.
Section 38.430.030.A.4.c, BMC.
10
7
For each relaxation requested, Bridger Center provided documentation of
why the proposed relaxation was necessary and/or would produce a superior
environment. Additionally, City staff provided its rationale for supporting each
proposed relaxation and the facts supporting that rationale. However, in the City
Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen PUD (Findings of Fact),
the City Commission either made contrary determinations that the proposed
relaxations did not meet the goals of the community growth policy and did not
create a superior product than what could be achieved by adhering to the zoning
regulations, or simply did not directly address why the relaxation should be denied.
While the City’s Findings of Fact offer various rationales for denying the
relaxations, the record lacks any explanation as to why the Commission weighed
certain evidence as more credible than other evidence, especially in light of its own
staff’s contrary recommendations. The City relied on public comments and the
Commissioners’ interpretation of the growth policy, but the City has not offered
any explanation why it ultimately weighed that evidence as more credible than
other evidence of record and city staff’s recommendations.The Commission is
required to explain why it weighed certain evidence as more credible than other
evidence in order for its decision to be upheld. MM&I, LLC, ¶30. As a result, the
Court concludes the City Commission has failed to make adequate findings
supporting its denial of the proposed relaxations.
The Court concludes that the governing body's findings are insufficient to
permit meaningful judicial review pursuant to § 76-3-625(1), MCA. Accordingly,
Bridger Center is entitled to summary judgment on its claim that the Commission's
decision cannot be sustained on the present record. The Court expresses no
11
8
opinion regarding the ultimate merits of the application. Rather, the matter is
remanded to the City Commission for additional findings and further proceedings
consistent with this Order.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Bridger Center's
Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part, Defendant's Cross-Motion
for Summary Judgment is DENIED, and this matter is REMANDED to the City
Commission for additional findings and further proceedings consistent with this
Order.
Electronically signed and dated below.
cc:Brian K. Gallik/Erin L. Arnold
Elizabeth L. Lund
Electronically Signed By:
Hon. Judge Peter Ohman
Mon, Aug 03 2026 12:58:42 PM 12
Page 1 of 45
22293 City Commission Findings of Fact for the Shady Glen Preliminary
Planned Unit Development (PUDP)
Public Meeting/Hearing Dates:
Community Development Board met (acting in their capacity as the Design Review
Board (DRB)) - Monday, March 6, 2023 at 6:00 pm.
City Commission meeting met Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 6:00 pm
Project Description: A preliminary planned unit development (PUDP) to request relaxations
required for major subdivision application requesting to subdivide 11.87 acres into 16
residential lots (two of which are proposed to be deed restricted affordable housing lots)
and 5 common open space lots (one of which is proposed to be a 7.129 acre wildlife
refuge). There are 6 relaxations being requested with this PUDP. Anywhere a relaxation
is not being requested, the application is required to meet the Bozeman Municipal Code
(BMC).
This PUDP is being reviewed concurrently with the Shady Glen preliminary plat (PP)
application, Application 22294.
Project Location: The property is legally described as Bridger Creek Subdivision, Tract 1-A,
Plat J-200K, COS 885, Amended Plat of Lot 57A of the Amended Plat Lots 56, 57 &
58A of Bridger Creek Subdivisions Phase 1, Section 31, Township 1 South, Range 6
East, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana.
Staff Recommendation: The application conforms to standards and is sufficient for approval
with conditions and code provisions with the approval of requested relaxations.
Recommended City Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application
materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 22293 and move to approve the Shady Glen
PUDP, with contingencies required to complete the application processing.
Report Date: April 7, 2023
Staff Contact: Lynn Hyde, Development Review Planner
Lance Lehigh, Project Engineer
Agenda Item Type: Action (Quasi-judicial)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City Commission voted unanimously against the motion to approve application 22293,
therefore denying the application. The application materials are available in the City’s
Laserfiche archive and may be accessed through the Community Development viewer as well.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
13
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 2 of 45
Ninety seven written public comments have been received as of the writing of these findings.
The public comment can be found in the City’s Laserfiche archive and available to the public.
Unresolved Issues.
There are no unresolved issues with this application other than the 7 staff-recommended
conditions of approval noted in Section 3 below found on page 14.
Project Summary
The Department of Community Development received a preliminary planned unit development
(PUDP) Application on September 2, 2022 concurrently with a major subdivision preliminary
plat application, requesting to develop 11.87 acres into 16 residential lots, two of which are
proposed to be deed restricted affordable housing units, and 5 common open space lots. Common
Open Space Lot 3 is a 7.129 acre lot proposed to be set aside as a wildlife refuge. The parcel is
zoned R-1, Residential Low Density District.
The PUDP proposal requests 6 relaxations from development standards which are listed below.
The application is required to meet all other requirements that are not included in a relaxation
request. Below are brief summaries of the relaxation requests which are discussed in further
detail in this report.
1. BMC 38.310.030.A – A relaxation to allow townhouses as a permitted use within the R-1
zoning district in order to provide two deed-restricted affordable housing units. 2. BMC 38.400.010.A.8 – A relaxation for the design of a dual (combined) use access for pedestrians and emergency or other authorized vehicles. 3. BMC 38.400.050.A. – A relaxation from specific right-of-way and local street design
standards, for Shady Glen Lane.
4. BMC 38.410.040.D – A relaxation from right-of-way and design standards for a pedestrian access doubling as an emergency vehicle access. 5. BMC 38.410.100.A.2.c.4. – A relaxation from watercourse setback and wetland buffer requirements. This relaxation request is to reduce the 50-foot setback to 35-feet. This
reduction affects 9 of the proposed 16 residential lots.
6. BMC 38.410.100.A.2.d – A relaxation to allow placement of fill material, for non-exempt uses, within the East Gallatin River’s 100-year floodplain. This allowance for fill in the 100-year floodplain affects 7 of the proposed 16 residential lots and 1 open space lot.
A PUD is a discretionary approval and the review authority must find that the overall
development is superior to that offered by the basic existing zoning standards as required in
BMC 38.430.030.A.4. The intent of a PUD is to promote maximum flexibility and innovation in
development proposals within the City. The applicants can request relaxations from the code in
exchange for a higher quality of design. The obligation to show a superior outcome for the
community is the responsibility of the applicant. The applicant asserts that the overall
community outcome of the proposal is superior to what would be obtained from the application
of the default R-1 zoning district.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
14
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 3 of 45
Note that the PUD criteria found in BMC 38.430 have since been replaced by a new planned
development zone district (PDZ) criteria. This application now qualifies under the current UDC
provisions for a “Legacy planned unit development”, pursuant to Section 38.440.010.A because the application was deemed “adequate for further review” on October 27, 2022, prior to the City’s October 27, 2022 replacement of UDC PUD standards with new Planned Development Zone (PDZ) District. The new PDZ regulations established new procedures for
review of older PUDs and PUD applications, now deemed “legacy” PUDs. This application
is being reviewed and evaluated by the previous PUD review criteria as well as by relevant process and review criteria for “legacy” PUDs. Should this Preliminary PUD be approved by the City Commission, it would be deemed a Legacy Preliminary PUD and a Legacy Final PUD would follow the procedures and standards of UDC 38.440.020, Legacy Final Plan
Review and Approval. Individual lot development proposals, such as a site plan, would be measured by the approved Legacy Final PUD and relevant R-1 District and UDC standards in effect at the time of such an application. Any amendment to an approved Legacy Final PUD must meet the standards for “minor amendments” pursuant to UDC 38.440.030. Changes greater than minor amendments must be processed as a new Planned Development Zone
(PDZ) application subject to UDC 38.430 standards.
A copy of the applicable code is included in the project development folder and titled, Bozeman
Municipal Code Jan 3, 2022 Reference Copy – Chapter 38, and linked in the appendices.
The Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed the application. Based on its
evaluation of the application against the criteria, the DRC found the application sufficient for
continued review on October 27, 2022. The application is complete for design review purposes.
The Community Development (CD) Board, acting in their capacity as the Design Review Board
(DRB) reviewed the application on March 6, 2023. The DRB is the design review advisory board
to the City Commission on this application. The CD Board motion to recommend approval with
recommended conditions passed, 4-3. The link to view the full CD Board meeting is provided.
The City Commission held a public hearing on the application on March 21, 2023. After the City
Commission reviewed and considered the application materials, staff report, advisory review
board recommendations, public comment, and all the information presented, the motion to
approve failed on a vote of 0-5. The City Commission made individual findings supporting the
decision and a summary of the findings for this project can be found below in this report,
specifically Section 7 – Findings of Fact, Order and Appeal Provisions. The City Commission’s
alternative findings can also be found in Section 6 – Staff Analysis and Findings, which
identifies the relaxations the City Commission did not support. Without the relaxations, the
application fails to comply with regulations applicable to the project. These PUD findings of fact
are meant to be incorporated into and supplement the preliminary plat application 22294 findings
of fact because the preliminary plat is inextricably linked to and depends upon approval of the
PUD application.
The link to view the full City Commission meeting is provided.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
15
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 4 of 45
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1
Unresolved Issues. .............................................................................................................. 2
Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2
SECTION 1 – MAP SERIES .......................................................................................................... 5
SECTION 2 – REQUESTED RELAXATIONS .......................................................................... 14
SECTION 3 – RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL .......................................... 14
SECTION 4 – CODE REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................... 16
SECTION 5 – RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ............................................ 18
SECTION 6 – STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ................................................................ 19
Applicable Planned Unit Development Review Criteria, Section 38.230.100.A, ............ 19
Conditional Use Permit Review Criteria, Section 38.230.110 ......................................... 30
Planned Unit Development Design Review Criteria, Section 38.430.090.E .................... 32
SECTION 7 – FINDINGS OF FACT, ORDER AND APPEAL PROVISIONS ......................... 38
APPENDIX A – PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY..................................... 41
APPENDIX B – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................... 44
APPENDIX C – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ......................................................... 44
APPENDIX D – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ................................. 45
FISCAL EFFECTS ....................................................................................................................... 45
ATTACHMENTS ......................................................................................................................... 45
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
16
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 5 of 45
SECTION 1 – MAP SERIES
Exhibit 1 – Zoning
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
17
Page 6 of 45
Exhibit 2 – Community Plan 2020 Future Land Use
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
18
Page 7 of 45
Exhibit 3 – Current Land Use
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
19
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 8 of 45
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
20
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 9 of 45
Exhibit 4 – Preliminary Plat
Exhibit 5 – Landscaping Plan
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
21
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 10 of 45
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
22
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 11 of 45
Exhibit 6 – Wetland Delineation Map
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
23
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 12 of 45
Exhibit 7 – Watercourse setback and wetland impacts
Exhibit 8 – Shady Glen ‘Green Plan’ & Wildlife Refuge
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
24
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 13 of 45
Exhibit 9 – Multi-modal network
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
25
Page 14 of 45
SECTION 2 – REQUESTED RELAXATIONS
The applicant requested 6 relaxations with the preliminary planned unit development (PUDP)
application.
1. BMC 38.310.030.A – A relaxation to allow townhouses as a permitted use in the R-1
zoning district in order to provide two affordable housing units.
2. BMC 38.400.010.A.8 – A relaxation for the design of a dual (combined) use access for
pedestrians and emergency or other authorized vehicles.
3. BMC 38.400.050.A. – A relaxation from specific right-of-way and local street design
standards, for Shady Glen Lane.
4. BMC 38.410.040.D – A relaxation from right-of-way and design standards for a
pedestrian access doubling as an emergency vehicle access.
5. BMC 38.410.100.A.2.c.4. – A relaxation from watercourse setback and wetland buffer
requirements. This relaxation request is to reduce the 50-foot setback to 35-feet. This
reduction affects 9 of the proposed 16 residential lots.
6. BMC 38.410.100.A.2.d – A relaxation to allow placement of fill material, for non-exempt
uses, within the East Gallatin River’s 100-year floodplain. The applicant proposed to
place fill within the shallow floodplain fringe on 7 of the proposed 16 residential lots..
The requested relaxations may be granted with a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The criteria
for granting PUD relaxations found in BMC 38.430.030.A.4.c (This project began review and
received adequacy prior to the effective date of the new PDZ. Compliance with the previous
PUD code sections is the basis for the review and decision. A copy of the applicable code is
included in the project development folder and title, Bozeman Municipal Code Jan 3, 2022
Reference Copy – Chapter 38.). Staff has reviewed the criteria and finds the relaxations meet
justification for approval. Anywhere a relaxation is not requested, the application has been found
in compliance with the Bozeman Municipal Code.
The City Commission determined that the application is not consistent with the review criteria,
specifically the requirement that the PUD is superior community product to that offered by the
basic existing zoning standards, and, acting in their capacity as the review authority, denied the
project. The City Commissions findings are discussed below where they found the application
did not meet the criteria and determined the proposed plan could be detrimental to the health,
safety and welfare of the community, both existing and proposed.
SECTION 3 – RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this
report. These conditions are specific to this project.
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
26
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 15 of 45
1. The approved affordable housing plan must be recorded concurrent with the final plat and
a reference to the recorded document must be provided on the conditions of approval
page of the final plat. The reference on the conditions of approval sheet must be, “This
subdivision is subject to affordable housing requirements to satisfy planned unit
development requirements voluntarily opted into by the subdivider. The subdivision’s
requirements and obligations can be found in the Shady Glen Affordable Housing Plan
recorded as document no.__________ at the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorders
Office.”
This condition is satisfied with the recording of the final plat mylars and the affordable
housing plan for the subdivision. The Clerk and Recorder should write in the document
number for the recorded affordable housing plan on the conditions of approval sheet prior
to the filming/scanning of the final plat.
2. The subdivider must install perpetual wetland boundary markers on the watercourse
setback line on Lots 8, 9 & 10 prior to final plat approval. The wetland boundary markers
proposed must be approved by the Community Development Department prior to
installation.
3. Building Design Guidelines must be established and include a requirement applicable to
all lots within the wetland buffer, and backing up to existing wetlands to ensure proper
stewardship of the adjacent critical lands. At a minimum they must include the below:
i. The back yard areas of lots near the wetlands will be filled ‘close to street
level’ in order to create a fill slope at the back lot lines while will be
planted with native grasses. Storm runoff from top slopes will drain as
sheet flow over the slope, and the vegetation will ‘intercept, filter and
infiltrate’ any runoff that does occur. This creates a buffer to protect the
undeveloped floodplain and wetland areas from sediment and nutrients.
ii. The HOA/POA require homeowners to use phosphorous-free fertilizers
and to not dispose of trash, grass clippings or yard waste within the
wetland buffer. Signage will be included noting the restrictions of pets
from the wildlife refuge. The covenants will also include a requirement to
install and maintain continuous fencing along the wildlife preserve.
iii. In accordance with MPDES stormwater discharge requirements, any
construction related sediment will be intercepted during construction with
a silt fence, wattles or other filtration measures.
4. The subdivision must install a fence along the southern boundary of the proposed Shady
Glen Wildlife Refuge adjacent to the Bridger Center Subdivision and on the east along
the boundary with the proposed residential lots in this development. The fence design and
materials must be approved by the Community Development Department prior to
installation. Fence materials must limit passage of materials and equipment, minimize
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
27
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 16 of 45
visual impact, and maximize durability and longevity. Fence installation must be
completed prior to final plat approval; financial guarantee of this work is not allowed. In
addition, the subdivision covenants will include a requirement for the applicant to install
and the homeowners association to maintain the previously described fence.
5. The Planned Unit Development is permitted through the Conditional Use Permit process. The right to a use and occupancy permit is contingent upon the fulfillment of all general and special conditions imposed by the conditional use permit procedure and all of the conditions constitute restrictions running with the land use, apply and must be adhered to
by the owner of the land, successors or assigns, are binding upon the owner of the land, their successors or assigns, must be consented to in writing, and must be recorded as such with the County Clerk and Recorder’s office by the property owner prior to the issuance of any building permits, final plan approval or commencement of the conditional use.
6. The applicant shall complete construction or other provision of all identified public
benefits which were the basis of the planned unit development qualifying for review and all amenities depicted on the preliminary planned unit development application materials prior to the issuance of the 9th building permit within the development. This includes the construction of the two affordable townhomes, the completion of the improvements
associated with Common Open Spaces 03 & 04, as well as the way-finding
improvements. This obligation must be included on the Conditions of Approval sheet of the associated final plat.
7. A wayfinding signage and educational signage program must be submitted to the city for review and approval with the final PUD approval. As the wayfinding program is part of
the PUD performance points, the improvements must be completed with the PUD
improvements.
SECTION 4 – CODE REQUIREMENTS
1. Sec. 38.100.080 – Compliance with regulations required.
The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or State law. 2. Sec. 38.220.020 & 38.610.050. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant must provide the
Community Development Department with a written statement of a wetland boundary
determination from the U.S. Army Corps of the wetland status. If the wetlands are determined to be jurisdictional, an approved 404 permit for any changes to the wetland must be submitted to the Community Development office prior to final plat approval. The applicant must contact the Gallatin County Conservation District, Montana Department
of Environmental Quality, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding the proposed
project and any required permits (i.e., 310, 404, Turbidity exemption, etc.) must be obtained by the applicant. Approved stream and wetland permits shall be provide prior to public infrastructure approval for public infrastructure impacts to jurisdictional wetland and streams. Permits and a FEMA approved LOMR-F must be provided prior to final plat
approval.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
28
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 17 of 45
3. BMC 38.220.320. In order to disclose to future purchasers their obligations regarding
open space established in the municipal code the following language shall be included on
the Conditions of Approval Sheet of the final plat: “As established by 38.220.320.A,
38.340.150.A.3.d, and other applicable elements of the municipal code effective on
[DATE of Preliminary plat sufficiency determination], ownership of all common open
space areas and trails, and responsibility of maintenance thereof and for city assessments
levied on the common open space lands shall be that of the property owners’ association.
Maintenance responsibility shall include, in addition to the common open space and
trails, all vegetative ground cover, and irrigation systems in the public right-of-way
boulevard strips along all external perimeter development streets and as adjacent to
public parks or other common open space areas. All areas within the subdivision that are
designated herein as common open space including trails are for the use and enjoyment
by residents of the development and the general public. The property owners’ association
shall be responsible for levying annual assessments to provide for the maintenance,
repair, and upkeep of all common open space areas, fencing on common open space and
trails. At the same time of recording the final plat of the subdivision the subdivider shall
transfer ownership of all common open space areas within each phase to the property
owners’ association created by the subdivider to maintain all common open space areas
within Shady G subdivision. The City may release the Shady Glen Property Owners’
Association from the obligation to maintain parks dedicated to the City at the City’s
discretion.”
4. BMC 38.220.320. Covenants. Covenants, restrictions, and articles of incorporation for
the creation of a POA (Documents) shall be submitted at least 30 working days prior to
submitting the final plat application for review by the Department of Community
Development and shall contain, but not be limited to the following items: 1) the
orientation and setbacks for corner lots, 2) all additional setbacks required when lots are
adjacent to pathway corridors and minor arterial roads, 3) provisions for fences, 4)
provisions for snow removal, maintenance and upkeep of all common areas, public and
private parks, trails, storm water runoff facilities, 5) guidelines that outline architectural
and landscape requirements for each individual lot and/or phase of the subdivision,
including placement of boulevard trees at a regular spacing for each residential lot, 6)
provisions that outline the renewal of an annual contract with a certified landscape
nursery person for the upkeep and maintenance of all parklands, common open space,
trails, etc., 7) landscape details for detention ponds, outlet structures, boulevard trees,
parkland, irrigation, etc., 8) mitigation of groundwater with established floor elevations,
9) noxious weed control, and 10) assessment of existing and future Special Improvement
Districts. These documents shall be executed and submitted with the initial final plat to
be filed with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder at the time of recording of the final
plat.
5. BMC 38.400.010. No parking is allowed along the cul-de-sac. No parking signs must be
installed prior to final plat approval.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
29
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 18 of 45
6. BMC 38.410.100. With the final plat, a watercourse planting plan must be prepared that
identifies the maintenance of the watercourse setback landscaping. The landscaping
identified in the watercourse planting plan must be installed or financially guaranteed
prior to final plat approval.
7. BMC 38.410.100. No accessory structures, patios, or recreational equipment (i.e.
swingset, trampoline. etc.) can be located within the watercourse setback. This language
must be included in the POA documents and covenants.
SECTION 5 – RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS
The Development Review Committee (DRC) determined the application was sufficient for
continued review and recommended approval with conditions on October 27, 2022.
The Community Development (CD) Board, acting in their capacity as the Design Review Board
(DRB) reviewed the application on March 6, 2023. The DRB is the design review advisory board
to the City Commission on this application. The CD Board motion to recommend approval with
recommended conditions passed, 4-3. The link to view the full CD Board meeting is provided.
Summary of the Community Development Board’s discussion is below. These points were
expressed by at least one member, however the bullets don’t necessarily represent the thoughts
of the entire board.
1. Positives:
a. Alternative right-of-way width provides a superior design and creativity
surrounding the roadways. Like that it pulls the development further from the
wetlands setback.
b. The Board expressed enthusiasm of the multi-modal connectivity that is provided.
c. Commended the applicant for continuing to be creative and work with neighbors.
d. The Board liked that the project adds net increase in floodplain compensatory
storage.
e. The Board appreciated the affordable housing component.
2. Concerns:
a. The Board expressed the desire to have a full local street as a secondary
emergency access.
b. Expressed concern that the HOA must maintain the gated secondary access lane
free from snow build-up so Fire and EMT vehicles may access the Site.
c. Discussion surrounding if the wetland mitigation impacts proposed are adequate.
3. Neutral:
a. Members of the Board expressed desire to design the secondary access for
pedestrians first and emergency vehicles second. This would include treatments
that make a pedestrian feel welcome and safe.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
30
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 19 of 45
b. Members of the Board expressed desire to have greater densities for infill
projects, although understand the constraints of this site.
c. The Board expressed the disappointment that the adjacent private property owners
were not able to come to an agreement to provide a secondary full local street.
d. Would like to understand the long term plan for the affordable housing units.
The City Commission held a public hearing on the application on March 21, 2023. After the City
Commission reviewed and considered the application materials, staff report, advisory review
board recommendations, public comment, and the motion to approve failed on a vote of 0-5. The
analysis and summary findings for this project can be found below in this report, specifically
Section 7 – Findings of Fact, Order and Appeal Provisions. The City Commission’s alternative
findings can also be found in Section 6 – Staff Analysis and Findings, which identifies the
relaxations the City Commission did not support. Without the relaxations, the application fails to
comply with regulations applicable to the project. These PUD findings of fact are meant to be
incorporated into and supplement the preliminary plat application 22294 findings of fact because
the preliminary plat is inextricably linked to and depends upon approval of the PUD application.
The link to view the full City Commission meeting is provided.
SECTION 6 – STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials,
municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the
review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis in this
report is a summary of the completed review.
The City Commission determined that the application does not meet the criteria of this section,
and acting in their capacity as the review authority, denied the project. The City Commission’s
findings are discussed below where they found the application did not meet the criteria and
determined the proposed plan could be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the
community. Specifically, the Commission found relaxations requests 2, 3, 4, and 5 were not
consistent with the review criteria nor did the PUD provide a superior outcome to that offered by
the basic existing zoning standards as required by the UDC.
Applicable Planned Unit Development Review Criteria, Section 38.230.100.A,
The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically
listed as conditions of approval, do not in any way create a waiver or other relaxation of the
lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or State law. In considering applications
for plan approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider the
following:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
31
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 20 of 45
1) Conformance to and consistency with the city’s adopted growth policy.
Yes. The property has a future land use designation of Urban Neighborhood and is zoned R-1.
The applicant proposes to set aside a large amount of the property (approximately 60%) as a
wildlife refuge to protect the important ecosystem and wildlife habitat. The remaining 40% of
the site is proposed to be developed consistent with the Urban Neighborhood designation and R-
1 zoning district.
The project is in conformance to and consistent with the City’s adopted growth policy. Refer to
Appendix A, Project Site Zoning and Growth Policy for additional discussion as well as goals
and objectives this project is achieving.
City Commission Findings: No. The Commission acknowledged that this is a challenging site.
Commissioners also acknowledged that the proposed PUD is infill development in an area in the
community where the city wishes to grow, which would satisfy some portions of the Bozeman
Community Plan 2020 (Growth Policy) recognizing the need for more housing development,
and, with respect to this project, a small addition of affordable housing. However, the
Commission also noted the location of the affordable housing units and overall site design raised
some inconsistencies between the proposed housing and goals of the Growth Policy, including
Goals N-1.1 and R-2.4. Ultimately, the Commission did not find that the proposed PUD creates
a superior outcome for the community, particularly given its incongruities with other parts of the
City’s adopted growth policy.
The Commission found that the proposed cul-de-sac does not further growth policy goals
addressing well-planned neighborhoods, including connectivity for both vehicles and
pedestrians. Goals N-1.9 and M-1.4 expressed in the City’s Growth Policy address
transportation networks, connectivity, and multimodal means of travel. Further, the Commission
noted the proposed cul-de-sac design and narrower road width with a sidewalk and parking only
along one side of the street would limit public access to the development’s proposed wildlife
refuge and trails to those who are able to walk there via connecting trails, contrary to the City’s
inclusivity goals addressed in R-2.4, EPO-1.3, EPO-1.4, and M-1.4 of the Growth Policy. Our
parks are meant to be enjoyed by everyone in the community, getting there by whatever means
they would like.
The Commission found that the proposed gated and locked emergency and pedestrian secondary
access to the development creates hazards to safety and hinders the efficient provision of
emergency services. One theme in the Growth Policy is to be a resilient city, with Goal R-2.7
“include flexible and adaptable measures that consider future unknowns of changing climate,
economic, and social conditions” and R-2.2 expressing the desire to “ensure that strategies
directly address the reduction of risk to human well-being, physical infrastructure, and natural
systems.” Application 22293 is contrary to this goal by relying on a gated and locked second
emergency access point for the neighborhood. In the event of a disaster, possibly due to this
neighborhood’s proximity to an industrial M-1 zoning district and the East Gallatin River and its
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
32
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 21 of 45
associated floodplain and wetlands, this neighborhood could be particularly vulnerable to the
need for emergency services and could be hindered from receiving emergency services or
efficient evacuation of residents due to a gated and locked secondary vehicle access. In addition,
the proposed PUD is inconsistent with goals R-1.6, EPO-3.9, and RC-4.3 in the Growth Policy.
The Commission also determined that the proposed development is inconsistent with Growth
Policy goals related to protecting environmentally sensitive areas, including wetlands and
floodplains, as well as protection of public health and safety during flood events. The
Commission recognized public comment provided at the hearing and discussed recent changes to
regional watercourses, including extraordinary flood events and the potential effects of climate
change, in considering the applicant’s request to reduce the UDC required 50-foot watercourse
setback to 35 feet. Further, the Commission found it not prudent to rely on a future
homeowner’s association to enforce conditions designed to mitigate impacts of the development
on nearby wetlands and watercourses, for example prohibiting the use of certain fertilizers,
requiring interception of stormwater and other runoff, and prohibiting pets in the wildlife refuge.
The Commission’s findings demonstrate that the proposed development is inconsistent with
Growth Policy goals EPO-1.5, EPO-3.9, RC-2.1, RC-2.4, and RC-4.3.
2) Conformance to this chapter, including the cessation of any current violations.
Yes. The project, if approved, will conform to the Bozeman Municipal Code other than the
requested relaxations. If the Commission does not approve the relaxations then the project will
not be in conformance and is not approvable, nor is the concurrent subdivision, Application
22294. There are no known documented violations of the BMC for this property. The applicant’s
narrative adds that there have been numerous informal illegal ‘encampments’ that have been
removed from the property.
City Commission Findings: No. The Commission found that several relaxations were
incompatible with standards of the Unified Development Code (UDC) that protect the health,
safety and welfare of the community. Specifically, the Commission cited the gated and locked
secondary access as a danger to public health and safety and not in conformance to provisions of
the UDC meant to reasonably mitigate risk. If a fire, flood, or other natural disaster occurred in
or near the subdivision, ingress and egress could be hindered due to the location and nature of the
primary and secondary access. The Commission also found that requests for relaxations related
to street width and design requirements are an unacceptable deviation from requirements of the
UDC. Additionally, efforts proposed to mitigate the negative impacts of allowing development
within the watercourse setback were deemed inconsistent with the intent and purpose of various
sections of the UDC designed to ensure the City’s wetlands and watercourses are protected.
Overall, the Commission determined that the application does not conform to the requirements of
38.430.030.A.4.c, BMC because it fails to present an environment, landscape quality and
character superior to that produced by existing UDC standards.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
33
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 22 of 45
3) Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances and regulations.
Yes. If Relaxation 1, allowing townhomes in the R-1 zoning district, is approved, the uses of the
site are consistent with the R-1 zoning district. No specific conflicts have been identified.
Additional steps will be required including, but not limited to, final payment for cash-in-lieu of
water rights and parkland, finalization of the preliminary and final plat, recording of required
easements, construction of infrastructure, PUD final plan documents and approval and building
permits. The Building Division will review the requirements of the International Building Code
for compliance at the time of building permit application.
4) Conformance with special review criteria for applicable permit type as specific in
article 2;
Yes. This Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and PUD criteria are reviewed below. The project
meets the requirements and criteria as presented.
City Commission Findings: No. The City Commission found that the PUD does not create a
superior outcome for the community than that produced by existing standards. Commission
findings regarding CUP and PUD criteria are included below.
5) Conformance with the zoning provisions of article 3, including: (Permitted uses;
Form and intensity standards; applicable zone specific or overlay standards; general
land use standards and requirements; applicable supplemental use criteria; and
wireless facilities and/or affordable housing provisions.)
Yes, with approval of the requested relaxations.
Relaxation 1 is requesting to allow townhouses (2) in this development. Currently, Section
38.310.030, Table 38.310.030.A does not allow townhouse/rowhouse typologies in the R-1
zoning district. Previously, townhouses were a permitted use in the R-1 zoning district in order to
satisfy the affordable housing provisions in the inclusionary zoning. Since that time, the State
Legislature has removed the ability for local municipalities to require affordable housing, and
with the redaction of the affordable housing ordinance, the ability to allow deed restricted
affordable townhouse/rowhouse units in the R-1 zoning district was also removed from the code.
Staff supports this relaxation. The applicant is voluntarily providing affordable housing unit
(using the performance points towards the PUD), and the intent meets the City’s requirements
previously required per Section 38.380.060 of the Unified Development Code. Staff finds this
relaxation furthers the goals of the growth policy. In addition, a large portion of the site is
remaining undeveloped, thus an increase in density for two units is not harmful to the
neighborhood proposed or larger community at large. Refer to Exhibit 8 – Shady Glen Green
Space Plan to see the amount of space preserved. Recommended Condition of Approval 1
includes an Affordable Housing Plan requirement.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
34
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 23 of 45
City Commission Findings: The City Commission found that although there is a community
need for affordable housing, this proposal does little to address affordable housing needs. In
addition, the placement of the affordable housing next to the industrial zone to the south and
cut off from the rest of the development, places the affordable units in a less desirable
location than all other dwellings in the development. The proposed location of the two
affordable housing units separates them from the market rate housing by the emergency
access, and places the two affordable housing lots next to the industrial zoning district to the
south, which makes these two lots the only lots that border the industrial zone to the south.
These considerations contributed to the Commission’s determination that the benefits of two
units of affordable housing was not sufficient to constitute a superior character, quality, or
environment than by complying with all UDC standards.
6) Conformance with the community design provisions of article 4, including
transportation facilities and access, community design and element provisions, and
park and recreational requirements.
Access to the site is via a proposed extension from Birdie Drive through The Links
Condominium development to the east via an existing public access easement. A secondary
emergency access to the site comes from the south off Commercial Drive. The access is gated at
the property line that meets the Fire Department access requirements. It is not feasible to create a
full street connection to Commercial Drive to south due to physical constraints of the right-of-
way alignment. Portions of the right-of-way that would be required were vacated previously by
the city.
A cul-de-sac is proposed at the northern end of Shady Glen Lane which are typically prohibited
unless they are deemed “necessary due to topography, the presence of critical lands, access
control, adjacency to parks or open space, or similar site constraints. Pedestrian walks must be
installed at the end of culs-de-sac where deemed appropriate” (BMC38.400.010.A.9). The cul-
de-sac is necessary due to adjacency to park, open space, wetlands, and lack of access to adjacent
streets. A pedestrian walkway was provided at the end of the culs-de-sac to the adjacent
pedestrian path on the northeast portion of the subdivision. The cul-de-sac was reviewed by the
Engineering Department as well as the emergency services and found to be adequate. Refer to
Code Requirement 5 which prohibits parking at the end of the culs-de-sac.
City Commission Findings: The City Commission recognized that the site is difficult to
develop, but also noted that current development standards prohibit cul-de-sac design, except in
extraordinary circumstances. The developer was encouraged to meet with neighbors obtain
easements to establish a more logical, fully operational secondary access point to the
development. Additionally, the Commission noted that the cul-de-sac design contributed to the
feeling that this development has elements of a gated community, in that the cul-de-sac
contributes to a lack of public access to amenities like the wildlife refuge and the public trail
system.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
35
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 24 of 45
Per BMC 38.410.040.B,“Block length must not be designed, unless otherwise impractical, to be
more than 400 feet in length or less than 300 feet in length. Block lengths may be longer than
400 feet if necessary due to topography, the presence of critical lands, access control, or
adjacency to existing parks or open space. In no case may a block exceed 1,320 feet in length.
Based on the applicant’s diagram, staff reviewed and concurred that this subdivision is in
compliance with this code provision. Due to the unique nature of this subdivision and the layout,
it is somewhat debatable as to what is considered the start of the block. If the block is considered
to start from the pedestrian connection to Commercial Drive and end at the cul-de-sac, the block
is less than 600’, however if the block is considered to start at Birdie Drive and end at the cul-de-
sac, the distance is 1,140’. Although longer than the typical 300 to 400 feet block, it is within the
1,320’ maximum, thus staff determined a relaxation is not necessary based upon measurements
provided. Whether the block is considered to start at the pedestrian right-of-way that connects to
Commercial Drive, or if the block starts at Birdie Drive, the road is less than 1,320 feet to the
cul-de-sac, thus meeting this code requirement. Refer to Exhibit 9 – Multi-modal network which
contains measurements for the block segments.
Relaxation 2 requests allowing a dual access for pedestrians and emergency (or other authorized)
vehicles. BMC 38.400.010.A.8 requires second or emergency access in order to facilitate
movement, the provision of emergency services and the placement of utility easements. The
entire access is required to be maintained for all-season access by a private-party maintenance
agreements set up by the Shady Glen Property Owner’s Association. The proposed dual access
would also provide an emergency access through route between the existing cul-de-sacs of
Bridger Center Drive/Commercial Drive and Birdie Drive.
Staff supports this proposed relaxation as the dual access furthers the multi-modal connectivity
between neighborhoods and trail systems for pedestrians and bicycles. In addition, the
emergency access provides a new connection for both the proposed neighborhood as well as
existing neighborhoods, and is a solution for a property that otherwise does not have a
secondary access option. Refer to Exhibit 9 – Multi-modal network. The Fire Department has
reviewed the application and determined the design is adequate to provide the requisite
secondary emergency access.
City Commission Findings: The City Commission determined that the proposed gated and
locked dual access for pedestrian and emergency vehicles do not facilitate efficient movement
into and out of the subdivision, nor does it adequately provide access for emergency services
entering the development or the evacuation of people out of the development. Citing concerns
with flooding or potential industrial disasters, as well as the very limited number of keys to the
gate, the City Commission found this requested relaxation unacceptable. The Commission also
expressed concerns that inappropriate snow storage would prevent access to the locked gate and
would hinder emergency and pedestrian access.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
36
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 25 of 45
Relaxation 3 is requesting a reduced width for the right-of-way provided with Shady Glen Lane.
BMC 38.400.050.A requires all streets and road to meet the right-of-way width and construction
standards contained in this chapter. A typical local street section is 60’ and includes a 5’
sidewalk on both sides of the street, boulevard landscape strip, parking and two travel lanes. The
application proposes the below changes to a standard street section in order to better protect the
critical wetlands by shifting the lots easterly away from the wetlands.
• Provide 5’ sidewalk on the west side of Shady Glen Lane immediately adjacent to the
street, removing the boulevard strip. In lieu of a boulevard strip and street trees, the
Development Guidelines will require trees to be planted on each residential lot.
• Eliminate the sidewalk on the eastern side of Shady Glen Lane as there is an existing
gravel trail that runs parallel where a sidewalk would be, and because there are no lots
proposed on the eastern side of Shady Glen Lane.
• Eliminate the east side parking lane as there are no residential lots on the eastern side and
would likely be providing excessive on-street parking.
Staff supports this proposed relaxation in order to shift the lots to the east where possible in
order to mitigate impacts to the wetlands. Staff finds this design proposal to impact the wetlands
less than the alternatives which could include, a full street section, with the lots pushed further
into the wetland setbacks. Another alternative, interestingly enough would not have required a
relaxation, would be to have the street going through the wetland. Streets are an exempt
improvement in the wetland, even though in this case, it would have had a greater impact on the
wetlands that the back yards of the lots in the wetland. This design provides the least impact to
the wetland setbacks of all the alternatives explored. Refer to Code Requirements 2, 3, 4, 6 & 7.
City Commission Findings: The City Commission likewise determined that relaxation 3 does
not conform to the City’s community design requirements, particularly those related to
transportation facilities and access to public recreation amenities. The Commission noted that
the combined effect of the street design of a cul-de-sac, a reduced width street, parking limited to
only one side of the street, and a sidewalk on only one side of the street is an unacceptable
limitation of public access to the wildlife refuge and trail system proposed in the development.
By effectively hindering public access through street design relaxations, the development’s
proposed public recreation amenities are not inclusive to all citizens of Bozeman.
Relaxation 4 is requesting alternative design requirements for the dual-access as it relates to the
pedestrian right-of-way design requirements. BMC 38.410.040.D requires pedestrian rights-of-
way meet specific design requirements including specific setbacks for adjacent buildings,
maintenance requirements and that the walk is constructed as a city standard sidewalk. The
proposal requests to specify the setback for adjacent buildings as 7.5’ instead of the required 10’
and to construct the pathway as asphalt in lieu of concrete (which is the ‘city standard sidewalk’
material).
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
37
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 26 of 45
Setbacks adjacent to pedestrian rights-of-way less than 30’ wide (this right-of-way is proposed at
20’) must be not less than ten feet. The applicant’s narrative states “Because the 20-foot width is
a requirement for the emergency access and a single-use pedestrian walk could meet the
standards at a 10-foot width, the widening of a 10-foot walk to 20 feet is required only due to the
unique, dual-use nature of the pedestrian walk. The proposed widening would result in a
pedestrian ‘corridor’ (walkway plus setbacks) of 35 feet which exceeds the standards, in terms of
total width including setbacks, by 5 feet.”
The second portion of this relaxation is the proposed surface material. The code provision states
that a pedestrian walk is to be constructed as a city standard sidewalk which would include the
surface material. Typical city standard sidewalk is concrete, the proposal is for asphalt due to the
dual use nature of the access.
Staff concurs that if this pedestrian access is to also be used as an emergency access, additional
consideration to design criteria is warranted. The reduced setback from 10’ to 7.5’ (2.5’ less) is
not anticipated to take away from the resident’s privacy, nor the user’s experience of the public
pathway. In addition, if the proposal is to use this access as a secondary emergency vehicle
access, asphalt is the likely surface material. Staff supports this relaxation. Code Requirement 4
addresses the components that must be placed in the CC&Rs.
7) Conformance with the project design provisions of article 5, including compatibility
with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the site and adjacent
neighborhoods and other approved development; design and arrangement of the
elements of the plan; landscaping; open space; lighting; signage
Not applicable as any residence of 5 or fewer units does not have to adhere to Article 5.
8) Conformance with environmental and open space objectives set forth in articles 4-6,
including:
The project site is comprised of 3.26 acres of wetlands. Four wetland systems and one non-
wetland water way were delineated during the wetland delineation. The wetlands were labeled as
Wetland 1, Wetland 2, Wetland 3, Wetland 4, and Wetland 4a. Refer to previous Exhibit 6 –
Wetland Delineation Map.
Relaxation 5 is requesting a reduction from the 50’ setback that is required to 35’ for 9 of the
proposed 16 residential lots. BMC 38.410.100.A.2.c.4 requires that setbacks be extended a
minimum of 50 feet beyond the perimeter of a connected wetlands. Exhibit 7 – Watercourse
setback shows the proposed extend of a 35’ setback. BMC 38.410.100.A.2.b(2) states [nothing in
this section prohibits an owner of affected property from:] when applicable, seeking a deviation
to dimensional standards of the watercourse setback, as allowed by and subject to the
requirements of divisions 38.340 or 38.430 of this chapter. The reference to BMC 38.430 is the
reference to an applicant’s ability to request a reduction to the watercourse setback through a
PUD process. The applicant states in the narrative, “A relaxation of the 50-foot wetland buffer
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
38
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 27 of 45
width to 35 feet is requested to allow for reasonable building envelopes and to achieve minimum
net density required in R-1 zoning. The residential lots have been arranged to ensure that all
building envelopes would be outside of the proposed 35 foot wetland buffer.”
In order to ensure proper stewardship of the wetland buffer, the applicant proposes the following:
a. Building Design Guidelines are proposed to include a requirement, applicable to all lots
within the wetland buffer, and backing up to existing wetlands, to route their roof
drainage to rain barrels or on-property infiltration facilities. This will reduce the volume
of runoff towards the wetlands.
b. The back yard areas of lots near the wetlands will be filled ‘close to street level’ in order
to create a fill slope at the back lot lines while will be planted with native grasses. Storm
runoff from top slopes will drain as sheet flow over the slope, and the vegetation will
‘intercept, filter and infiltrate’ any runoff that does occur. This creates a buffer to protect
the undeveloped floodplain and wetland areas from sediment and nutrients.
c. The HOA/POA require homeowners to use phosphorous-free fertilizers and to not
dispose of trash, grass clippings or yard waste within the wetland buffer. Signage will be
included noting the restrictions of pets from the wildlife refuge. The covenants will also
include a requirement to install and maintain continuous fencing along the wildlife
preserve.
d. In accordance with MPDES stormwater discharge requirements, any construction related
sediment will be intercepted during construction with a silt fence, wattles or other
filtration measures.
The US Army Corps of Engineers has issued a wetland fill permit coinciding with the proposed
areas of wetland impacts. The total impacts are less than 0.10 acres. The applicant’s narrative
speculates that these efforts to protect the wetland may “reduce wetland impacts to zero and,
over time, might even result in a net increase in wetlands acreage on the site”.
Staff concurs that the mitigation measures are robust, and supports the relaxation request with
the proposed Condition of Approval 2 that requires the developer to install perpetual wetland
boundary markers on the watercourse and Condition of Approval 3 that requires the
establishment of Building Design Guidelines.
City Commission Findings: The City Commission disagreed with staff analysis and found that
the proposed development fails to conform to the UDC’s environmental objectives. The
Commission found reduction of the watercourse setback to 35 feet unacceptable for two reasons.
First, the Commission expressed concern about the burden imposed on the homeowner’s
association to perpetually inform residents and diligently enforce the many required mitigation
efforts proposed by the developer and required as conditions of approval to protect the nearby
wetlands for generations to come. Requirements for rain barrels, infiltration systems, building
design guidelines, phosphorus-free fertilizers, proper disposal of trash, grass clippings, and yard
waste, restricting pets from the wildlife refuge, and ensuring that residents do not mow beyond
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
39
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 28 of 45
wetland boundary markers are only effective if they are enforced. Noting that homeowner’s
associations can go out of business or otherwise fail to fulfill requirements imposed by the City,
the Commission was unconvinced that environmental objectives in the UDC would be met by
allowing encroachment into the wetland buffer. Second, the Commission found, in weighing
community benefits offered in the application to all the requested relaxation requests, the
proposal does not create a superior development to that which would be developed using
standards set forth in code.
Relaxation 6 is requesting a relaxation to allow placement of fill material, for non-exempt uses,
within the East Gallatin River’s 100-year floodplain. The applicant proposed to place fill within
the shallow floodplain fringe on 7 of the 16 proposed residential lots. The fill is proposed to be
excavated from elsewhere on the site, removing old railroad bed fill, and increasing the
floodplain storage elsewhere on the site with a net increase in available floodplain storage. BMC
38.410.100.A.2.d states “No newly constructed residential or commercial structure, addition to
an existing structure, fence, deck fill material (other than that required for exempt uses), parking
lot or other impervious surfaces, or other similar improvements may be located within required
watercourse setback, unless approved through, and in conformance with, a variance or deviation
process as authorized in this chapter.” As previously discussed, a planned unit development is a
‘deviation process’ authorized in this chapter. In order to mitigate any potential impacts to the
wetland, the applicant has proposed to pull fill from a historic railroad bed west of Lot 5, and
place the fill on the backs of Lot 3,4 8, 9, 10 & 11. The applicant’s narrative states, “The
combined fill volume below the 100-year flood elevation (i.e., loss of flood storage capacity) will
be less than the excavation volume below the 100-year flood elevation west of Lot 5 (i.e., gain in
flood storage capacity). In other words, the proposed grading actually increases flood storage
volume as compared to existing conditions. This is a rare occurrence for this type of
relaxation/variance request in that the proposed plan to place fill within the floodplain would not
negatively impact flood conveyance or storage capacity.” A CLOMR permit has already been
obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and can be found in the
application materials.
Staff supports this relaxation request as it is increasing the floodplain capacity, as well as
providing mitigation measures for stormwater runoff from the urban development prior to
reaching the wetlands.
City Commission Findings: Commissioners expressed general concerns with relaxation 6, given
climate changes and the potential for an increased number of flood events, but did not make any
specific findings.
9) Conformance with the natural resource protection provisions of article 4 and article
6.
The undeveloped site is home to existing wildlife. The applicant’s narrative states “large
ungulates such as white tail deer, moose and possible mule deer inhabit the property during
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
40
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 29 of 45
different seasons. Smaller mammals consisting of squirrels, raccoons, rabbits, skunks, beavers,
mink and possible otters frequent the property periodically. Avian species notably a variety of
raptors, songbirds, wading birds, upland birds, waterfowl, and cranes have been viewed on the
property. Naturally, the development of a site will disturb the existing ecosystem. This site is
inside city limits and urban type development is anticipated. The applicant is proposing to leave
over 60% in a wildlife refuge. The lack of human intrusion on these 7.13 acres allows wildlife a
secure place to shelter and feed. In addition, this park is contiguous with Glen Lake Rotary Park
which extends the natural setting of the existing park, and allow for fluid migration for the
wildlife without crossing urban interface. The wildlife refuge will protect wildlife movement
areas and the existing federally protected wetlands, water bodies, and wildlife habitat from
human impacts. In addition, the Shady Glen HOA will require homeowners with lot lines
adjoining the wildlife preserve to provide fencing to protect wildlife from pets and vice versa.
A representative from the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks stated “This development alone is not
likely to negatively impact big game at a population level for several reasons. It represents a
small parcel (about 12 acres), most of which will be preserved in open space. This open space is
currently planned to be adjacent to other open space lands owned by the City of Bozeman and
along the banks of the East Gallatin River. Placing open space lands together amplifies benefits
of the open space to wildlife. The proposed area is not in crucial big game winter range nor a
known migration corridor for big game species. Finally, the area is proximate to other major
developments at the outskirts of Bozeman”.
In order to minimize human and wildlife conflict, the trails are not being placed on the wildlife
refuge. In addition, Recommended Condition of Approval 3 above requires the applicant to
construct a fence between the wildlife refuge and the commercial users to the south to minimize
user conflict. Lot owners will be required to install fencing along the west lot lines, bordering the
wildlife refuge to provide separation between the wildlife and residential units.
The vegetation on site consist of Palustrine Scrub/shrub broadleaf deciduous forest, wetlands,
and a fallowed hay pasture grassland. The forested areas are dominated by sandbar willow, red-
osier dogwood, woods rose, quaking aspen and Bebb’s willow, alder, and canary reed grass. The
wetland areas of the site are characterize by plant communities typically found in riparian areas
or areas Saturday by groundwater conditions including, but not limited to: reed canary grass;
beaked sedge; wooly sedge; wheat sedge; round-fruit rush; Colorado rush; Baltic rush; common
cattail; and common spike-rush. There are also noxious weeds onsite. A weed management plan
was submitted to, and approved by, Gallatin County. The application also notes they have
removed approximately 2 tons of household trash from four homeless camps located within the
Aspen grove on the property. While the development will naturally disturb vegetation where
homes are proposed, however the remainder of the site will be improved to a superior
environmental condition, and preserved.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
41
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 30 of 45
Areas disturbed during construction will be reclaimed through plantings of diverse riparian
vegetation consisting of riparian grasses, forbs, scrub/shrubs and trees that tolerate saturated to
semi-saturated soil conditions. The applicants narrative states, “Best Management Practices
(BMPs) will be installed prior to project initiation to ensure that storm runoff from the areas of
ground disturbance will be contained and treated onsite during and after construction. Low
Impact Development (LID) designs such as infiltration galleries and biofiltration will be
incorporated into the project’s final landscape design. These design features will help with water
conservation.”
10) Other related matters, including relevant comment from affected parties.
In total there were 97 written public comments, and 11 oral public comments at the public
hearing. The Commission referred generally to public comment provided by Diana Sauther
regarding movement of waterways in the Gallatin Valley in making some of their findings.
11) If the development includes multiple lots that are interdependent for circulation or
other means of addressing requirements of this chapter, whether the lots are either:
a) configured so that the sale of individual lots will not alter the approved
configuration or use of the property or cause the development to become
nonconforming; or
b) The subject of reciprocal and perpetual easements or other agreements to which the
City is a party so that the sale of individual lots will not cause one or more elements of
the development to become nonconforming.
Not applicable. The site will be subdivided according to the concurrent subdivision (22294).
12) Phasing of items listed in section 38.230.020.B, including but not limited to
buildings and infrastructure.
Not applicable. The project is proposed to be constructed in one phase. A subdivision is being
reviewed concurrently with this PUD.
Conditional Use Permit Review Criteria, Section 38.230.110
Planned Unit Developments (PUD) are reviewed as Conditional Use Permits (CUP), thus the
PUD must also be reviewed against the CUP criteria. See staffs analysis below.
E. In addition to the review criteria of section 38.230.110, the review authority shall, in
approving a conditional use permit determine favorably as follows:
E.1) That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and topography to accommodate
such use, and all yards, spaces, walls and fences, parking, loading and landscaping are
adequate to properly relate such use with the land and uses in the vicinity.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
42
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 31 of 45
Yes the site is adequate is size to accommodate the land use. Typically, at 5 dwelling units
per acre, before removing the critical areas, this site would be expected to have 55 or more
units. Due to the critical areas including wetlands, floodplains, and setbacks, the developable
area of the property is greatly reduced and 16 units are being proposed. The applicant has
worked to use the developable area of the site, and the remainder will be an added benefit to
the proposed neighborhoods, existing neighborhoods, community at large and wildlife but
providing missing links to the multi-modal network, additional wildlife refuge areas, and
affordable housing units.
City Commission Findings: Refer to Commission findings above. The Commission
determined that the site and proposed design are inadequate to accommodate parking,
standard street width, connectivity of streets, and protection of the wetland buffer through
watercourse setback requirements.
E.2) That the proposed use will have no material adverse effect upon the abutting property.
Person objecting to the recommendations of review bodies carry the burden of proof.
Yes. While change is inevitably going to have an effect on neighbors, this development
provides a net gain to the neighborhood and has no material adverse effects. The added
emergency access can be used by both the commercial development to the south and The
Links Condominium, the pedestrian connection provides a missing link for the multi-modal
network, and the wildlife refuge adds to an existing park to provide a contiguous habitat for
wildlife. The proposal includes improvements to the existing stormwater system to provide
needed updates and maintenance. The increased floodplain capacity will benefit all residents
in the area.
City Commission Findings: Refer to Commission findings above. The Commission found
that a reduction in the required watercourse setback and ineffective enforcement of
mitigation tactics would negatively impact the wetlands for generations to come.
E.3) That any additional conditions stated in the approval are deemed necessary to protect
the public health, safety and general welfare.
Yes. The PUD has Conditions of Approval that address the wetland setbacks and ensure the
requested reduced setback does not have harmful effects on the natural environment. In
addition, special conditions are in place to address the adjacency of residential developments
with a proposed wildlife refuge, special fencing, ingress/egress, maintenance of the grounds,
and emergency access.
F.) In addition to all other conditions, the following general requirements apply to every
conditional use permit granted:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
43
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 32 of 45
F.1) That the right to a use and occupancy permit shall be contingent upon the fulfillment of
all general land and special conditions imposed by the conditional use permit procedure;
and
F.2) That all of the conditions shall constitute restrictions running with the land use, shall
apply and be adhered to by the owner of the land, successors or assigns, shall be binding
upon the owner of the land, his successors or assigns, shall be consented to in writing, and
shall be recorded as such with the county clerk and recorder’s office by the property owner
prior to the issuance of any building permits, final plan approval or commencement of the
conditional use.
The necessary recording of documents will be addressed as part of the final PUD plan
process and will be required prior to the approval of the final plat. Refer to Recommended
Conditions of Approval 5 & 6 for the requirements to record CUP documents.
Planned Unit Development Design Review Criteria, Section 38.430.090.E
2.a) All land uses within a proposed planned unit development must comply with the
applicable objectives and criteria of the mandatory “all development” group.
2.a.1) Does the development comply with all city design standards, requirements and
specifications for the following services: water supply, trails/walks/bike ways, sanitary
supply, irrigation companies, fire protection, electricity, flood hazard areas, natural gas,
telephone, storm drainage, cable television, and streets?
Yes. The proposed development will be connected to and be served by City utilities. The Fire
Department has reviewed the proposal and found it satisfactory to provide service to the
proposed residential lots. The Parks Department has found the design satisfactory. In
addition, the subdivision is proposed in very close proximity to Story Mill Community Park,
Glen Lake Rotary Park, and with the dual access pedestrian connection, provides a missing
link for pedestrians and bicyclists in the non-motorized network for the area connecting the
trail system to the north of the subdivision to the Glen Lake Rotary Park trail system. The
proposal includes a wayfinding signage program with educational posts throughout. Refer to
Recommended Condition of Approval 7.
The proposed development will be connected to and served by City utilities. Appropriate
easements for street construction, utilities, emergency access, and trails are provided. The site
is near the new construction public safety center and the response time is expected to be
under 2 minutes. See list of relaxations for additional information on pedestrian access,
streets, and setbacks.
City Commission Findings: No. Refer to Commission findings above. Relaxations
proposed in the application are unacceptable and do not comply with city design standards,
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
44
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 33 of 45
particularly those regarding street width, sidewalks, cul-de-sac design, secondary access, and
flood hazard areas.
2.a.2) Does the project preserve or replace existing natural vegetation?
Yes. As stated previously, A weed management plan was submitted to, and approved by,
Gallatin County. Areas disturbed will be reclaimed through approved plantings. In addition,
the applicant states Best Management Practices will be used during construction. Low Impact
Design will be incorporated into the project’s final design.
2.a.3) Are the elements of the site plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and
landscaping, etc.) designed and arranged to produce an efficient, functionally organized and
cohesive planned unit development?
Yes. The applicant has continued to work with city staff and advisory boards to balance the
competing elements of the site. The property is a legal non-conforming lot that would not be
approved today because of the lack of frontage to a public street and street connectivity. This
lack of frontage creates challenges for access to the site, and the applicant has worked to
secure an access easement via The Links Condominium. If the adjacent neighborhoods were
being created today, they would most likely be required to provide a through street to the
Shady Glen Property as is required in BMC 38.400.010.A.1 Relation to undeveloped areas.
This code provision states “When a proposed development adjoins undeveloped land, and
access to the undeveloped land would reasonably pass through the new development, streets
and alleys within the proposed development must be arranged to allow the suitable
development of the adjoining undeveloped land.” Those neighborhoods were developed
under a previous code and previous planning theory that did not require a connection to the
Shady Glen property. The applicant has worked with the adjacent property owners and the
City to resolve the access and easement issues on this somewhat ‘land-locked’ parcel and has
arrived at a solution that is acceptable to the city departments including planning,
engineering, and fire. Relaxations are requested to accommodate the existing site conditions
created by the previous development of the surrounding properties, and provide additional
improvements and preservation of critical areas that are above and beyond the required UDC.
City Commission Findings. No. Refer to Commission findings above. The Commission
found that the placement and location of the affordable housing units did not create a
cohesive planned unit development, and in the inverse, separated the affordable housing from
the market rate housing in a way that appeared to be placing the affordable housing in a less
desirable location. Further, the Commission found that the street design, secondary locked
and gated access, and associated requested relaxations did not promote efficient or functional
circulation for the site and was contrary to public health and safety objectives.
2.a.4) Does the design and arrangement of elements of the site plan (e.g., building
construction, orientation, and placement; transportation networks; selection and placement
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
45
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 34 of 45
of landscape materials; and/or use of renewable energy sources; etc.) contribute to the
overall reduction of energy use by the project?
Yes. The design includes enhancing the multi-modal network and decreasing the number of
single occupancy vehicle trips required. Infill development is generally a thoughtful use of
urban land as it utilizes existing infrastructure including wet and dry utilities as well as the
existing street network to serve additional residential units. These components contribute to
the overall reduction of energy use. The development is also adding to the green space and
flood storage capacity within the city limits which helps reduce the urban heat affect, and
also provides mitigation during heavy water events. The use of Low Impact Development
landscaping and stormwater practices will also further the goals of water conservation.
2.a.5) Are the elements of the site plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and
landscaping, etc.) designed and arranged to maximize the privacy by the residents of the
project?
Yes. The developments lot sizes are consistent with the form and intensity standards adopted
to ensure each residential unit has adequate lot size. Future building permits will be required
to meet the required setbacks. The site is leaving over 60% undeveloped in a natural state
which is above and beyond open space requirements that provide light and air for residents.
One of the relaxation requests is requesting to reduce the setback from 10’ to 7.5’ where
adjacent to a pedestrian right-of-way. This condition affects two lot lines, and staff concurs
this condition is necessary due to the necessity of a widened pedestrian pathway to
accommodate emergency vehicles, and does not take away from the resident’s privacy.
2.a.6) Park land. Does the design and arrangement of buildings and open space areas
contribute to the overall aesthetic quality of the site configuration, and has the area of park
land or open space been provided for each proposed dwelling as required by section
38.420.020?
Yes. The applicant looks to dedicate over 7 acres (> 60%) of the site to a protected wildlife
refuge as well as provide open space and recreational space. This dedicated area exceeds the
city requirement per section 38.420.020 and table 38.420.020.A. The required dedication is
.03 acres based on the maximum required dedication per acre of 10 Dwellings for R-1 (10
dwellings x .03 acres). The applicant is providing 7.15 acres of wildlife refuge habitat and
.52 acres of open space which far exceeds the requirements for even 16 dwellings (16
dwellings x .03) at .48 acres. In addition, the developer will provide a play area and
gathering area accessible by trails at the southeast end of the wildlife refuge. The dedication
of this property to open space demonstrates Shady Glen’s efforts to create a superior
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
46
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 35 of 45
environment, exceed the requirements of the code standards, and create an excellent living
environment within the Bozeman community.
2.a.7) Performance. All PUDs shall earn at least 20 performance points.
Yes. The PUD is exceeding the 20 performance points required and has calculated a total of
108.42 performance points. The point math is outlined below:
• The two affordable house units receive a total of 37.5 performance points. This is
calculated by 3 points for each percent of dwellings to be constructed with a long
term contractual obligation to provide affordable housing. Each lot is 6.25% of the
total lots (12.5% for the two lots), multiplied by 3 points equals 37.5 points)
• The open space lots 03 and 04 receive 60.07 performance points. These two lots total
7.13 acres, or 60.07% of the total sites 11.87 acres, which receives 60.07 performance
points. This is calculated by one point for each percent of the project area provided as
non-public open space.
• The common open space lots 01, 02, and 04 receive 6.85 performance points. These
three lots total 0.65 acres out of the projects total 11.87 acres, which is 5.48%. This is
calculated by 1 ¼ point per percent of open space open to the public.
• The wayfinding signage program receives 4.00 performance points. The proposal
includes the incorporation of way-finding measures such as directional and
educational sign boards and posts.
2.a.8) Is the development being properly integrated into development and circulation
patterns of adjacent and nearby neighborhoods so that this development will not become an
isolated "pad" to adjoining development?
Yes. The development will correct the isolation imposed on this property by decisions made
over the years that resulted in very limited access and easement connections to adjacent
properties. The applicant has made exemplary efforts to incorporate comments obtained from
the City representatives through various meetings. The modifications suggested and
discussed with city representatives including placement of the lots, roads, sidewalks, wildlife
refuge, and wetlands have been incorporated. The project will provide an emergency vehicle
access swing gate with Knox padlock and will address flood plain and watercourse setbacks
as stated elsewhere in this application. As noted in this and the original documents, the
applicant has engaged with the adjacent property owners and the City to resolve access and
easement issues. The site layout looks to accommodate UDC issues where applicable and
requests relaxations where necessary to protect and enhance the wetlands and wildlife
habitats, provide safe and convenient access, and improve the property with respect to the
City Community Plan. Relaxations are requested to accommodate existing site conditions
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
47
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 36 of 45
imposed on the lot by previous development of surrounding properties and to provide
additional improvements above and beyond the City UDC.
City Commission Findings: No. Refer to Commission findings above. The City
Commission found the proposed development is isolated and creates the sense of a “gated
community,” provides inadequate traffic circulation, an is not properly integrated into
surrounding neighborhoods because it has only one vehicular access point, and terminates in
a cul-de-sac.
2.b.) Residential. Planned unit developments in residential areas (R-S, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4,
RMH and R-O zoning districts) may include a variety of housing types designed to enhance
the natural environmental, conserve energy, recognize, and to the maximum extent possible,
preserve and promote the unique character of neighborhoods, with provisions for a mix of
limited commercial development. For purposes of this section, "limited commercial
development" means uses listed in the B-1 neighborhood service district (article 10 of this
chapter), within the parameters set forth below. All uses within the PUD must be sited and
designed such that the activities present will not detrimentally affect the adjacent residential
neighborhood. The permitted number of residential dwelling units shall be determined by the
provision of and proximity to public services and subject to the following limitations:
2.b.1) On a net acreage basis, is the average residential density in the project (calculated for
residential portion of the site only) consistent with the development densities set forth in the
land use guidelines of the city growth policy?
Yes. The development proposes single family detached houses which is an allowed use in the
R-1 zone district. In addition, the applicant is requesting a relaxation to allow two townhouse
units. This use is unique in adding two affordable units which are needed and desired by the
community. The size of the subject site is adequate to serve these two additional lots, and
does not detract from the intent of the R-1 zoning district. It is consistent with the
development surrounding the subject property.
2.b.2) Does the project provide for private outdoor areas (e.g., private yards, patios and
balconies, etc.) for use by the residents and employees of the project which are sufficient in
size and have adequate light, sun, ventilation, privacy and convenient access to the
household or commercial units they are intended to serve?
Yes. Every lot and/or home has access to private outdoor space. There are common open
space lots that will provide pedestrian amenities.
2.b.3) Does the project provide for outdoor areas for use by persons living and working in
the development for active or passive recreational activities?
Yes. As discussed previously, there is ample open space in and around the development and
larger neighborhood parks nearby.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
48
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 37 of 45
2.b.4) If the project is proposing a residential density bonus as described below, does it
include a variety of housing types and styles designed to address community wide issues of
affordability and diversity of housing stock?
Not applicable.
2.b.5) Is the overall project designed to enhance the natural environment, conserve energy
and to provide efficient public services and facilities?
Yes. Shady Glen is designed and intended to achieve a vibrant infill project while creating a
distinct identity and connecting to natural areas and open space.
City Commission Findings: No. Refer to Commission findings above. The Commission
found that the project fails to protect the existing watercourse and wetlands because the
proposal is to encroach into the wetland setback and proposals to mitigate the impact of
development in these sensitive natural areas would likely be insufficient to protect them,
particularly in the long term. In addition, the Commission found that while the proposal was
protecting sensitive areas through the wildlife refuge, it limited public access to the resource
by proposing reduced parking for the residents, effectively excluding public access to the
wildlife refuge.
2.b.6) Residential density bonus. If the project is proposing a residential density bonus (30
percent maximum) above the residential density of the zoning district within which the
project is located and which is set forth in article 8 of this chapter, does the proposed project
exceed the established regulatory design standards (such as for setbacks, off-street parking,
open space, etc.) and ensure compatibility with adjacent neighborhood development? The
number of dwelling units obtained by the density bonus shall be determined by dividing the
lot area required for the dwelling unit type by one plus the percentage of density bonus
sought. The minimum lot area per dwelling obtained by this calculation shall be provided
within the project. Those dwellings subject to chapter 10, article 8, shall be excluded in the
base density upon which the density bonus is calculated.
Not applicable.
2.b.7) Limited commercial. If limited commercial development, as defined above, is
proposed within the project, is less than 20 percent of the gross area of the PUD designated
to be used for offices or neighborhood service activities not ordinarily allowed in the
particular residential zoning district?
No limited commercial is proposed.
2.b.8) Does the overall PUD recognize and, to the maximum extent possible, preserve and
promote the unique character of neighborhoods in the surrounding area?
Yes. Shady Glen will have its own, unique character reinforced through architecture, site
design and circulation. Visual and physical connections to adjacent neighborhoods and
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
49
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 38 of 45
shared open space transitions will promote its individuality as well as allow it to blend in
with the pattern of the larger neighborhood.
City Commission Findings: No. Refer to Commission findings above. Shady Glen is not
adequately incorporated into the neighboring development because the only connection is
through an existing condominium development. This condition, along with other proposed
transportation design relaxations, creates elements of a “gated community.” No traffic
circulation is able to occur because of the one point of access, terminating in a cul-de-sac.
The pedestrian access point on the north of the cul-de-sac is insufficient to provide the
required compliance with this standard. In addition, the design and layout does not provide
opportunity for the general public to park adjacent to the public areas and enjoy the benefits
of the open space and wildlife refuge. Due to the reduced street frontage and parking along
with the lack of connectivity to other neighborhoods, the proposed natural amenities and
recreational opportunities are accessible primarily to residents or to those who are able to
walk or bike there via nearby trails, which has the effect of privatizing a public access
amenity.
SECTION 7 – FINDINGS OF FACT, ORDER AND APPEAL PROVISIONS
A. PURSUANT to Chapter 38, Division 38.230, 38.430, BMC, and other applicable sections
of Chapter 38, BMC, public notice was given, opportunity to submit comment was
provided to affected parties, and a review of the preliminary planned unit development
described in these findings of fact was conducted. The applicant presented to the City a
proposed preliminary plan for a planned unit development to allow a residential
development with relaxations to zoning regulations and City standards which is affiliated
with a preliminary plat application (application 22294).
B. The purposes of the preliminary planned unit development review were to consider all
relevant evidence relating to public health, safety, welfare, and the other purposes of
Chapter 38, BMC; to evaluate the proposal against the criteria and standards of Chapter
38 BMC, BMC; and to determine whether the planned unit development should be
approved, conditionally approved, or denied.
C. The matter of the preliminary planned unit development was considered by the City
Commission at a public hearing on March 21, 2023 at which time the Department of
Community Development Staff reviewed the project, submitted and summarized the
conditions of approval, clarified unresolved issues and summarized the public comment
submitted to the City prior to the public hearing.
D. The City Commission requested public comment at the public hearing on March 21, 2023
and 11 members of the public offered testimony on the application as submitted.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
50
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 39 of 45
E. It appeared to the City Commission that all parties and the public wishing to examine the
proposed preliminary PUD and offer comment were given the opportunity to do so. After
receiving the recommendation of the relevant advisory bodies established by Section
Chapter 38, BMC, and considering all matters of record presented with the application
and during the public comment period defined by Chapter 38, BMC, the City
Commission found that the proposed preliminary PUD does not comply with the
requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or the Growth Policy. Commission
findings supporting the denial of the application, as presented above, are incorporated by
reference here. Therefore, being fully advised of all matters having come before them
regarding this application, the City Commission denied the PUD application.
F. The preliminary PUD does not meet the criteria of Applicable Plan Review Criteria
outlined in Section 38.230.100, BMC and the Planned Unit Development Review Criteria
outlined in Section 38.430.090.E, BMC, and is therefore denied for the reasons described
in the analysis section and summarized below:
a. The Commission found that the relaxations requested, specifically 2, 3, 4 and 5,
presented an unacceptable departure from code provisions designed to protect
public health, welfare, and safety. The Commission noted the intent and
requirement of a PUD is to provide a superior outcome to the community at large,
and not just to the developer.
b. The Commission noted that the single point of public vehicular access and its
proximity to the secondary gated and locked access could leave the majority of
proposed homes vulnerable and not able to receive emergency services in a
natural disaster or other life threatening event. The requested relaxations would
have negative impacts to public health and safety and the proposed PUD does not
provide a superior outcome for the community, as required for approval.
G. Pursuant to 38.250.090, this City Commission decision may be appealed as authorized by
state law.
DATED this ________ day of _____________________, 2023
BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION
_________________________________
CYNDY ANDRUS
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
May2nd
51
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 40 of 45
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
MIKE MAAS
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
GREG SULLIVAN
City Attorney
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
52
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 41 of 45
APPENDIX A – PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY
Zoning Designation and Land Uses:
The subject property is zoned R-1, Residential Low Density District. The intent of the R-1
district is to provide for primarily single-household residential development and related uses
within the city at urban densities.
Adopted Growth Policy Designation:
Table 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 shows the correlation between future land use
map designations and implementing zoning districts. (See below for the Table)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
53
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 42 of 45
The subject property is designated as Urban Neighborhood. This category primarily includes
urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single
type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross
density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes.
Complementary uses such as parks, home-based occupations, fire stations, churches, schools,
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
54
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 43 of 45
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.
This proposed development is well-suited to implement the Urban Neighborhood by providing
lots that will support detached residential lots as well as two townhouse lots with affordable
housing units. The urban neighborhood designation recognizes that at times lower densities may
develop due to site constraints and/or natural features. The presence of water features and
wetlands on this site, as well as the access constraints limit the density that can be realized on the
property. However, the density provided is meeting the minimum of 5 dwelling units per acre
when the critical lands and common open space lands are removed from the gross lot size. The
townhouse and multi-household lots will support construction of “missing middle” housing
which is contemplated throughout the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. The proposed
development is also located in a central area with relatively quick access to a variety of goods
and services. The planned unit development is being reviewed concurrently with the Shady Glen
Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat, Application 22294.
The growth policy encourages development to be walkable, which is defined in the glossary as:
Walkable. A walkable area has:
• A center, whether it’s a main street or a public space.
• People: Enough people for businesses to flourish and for public transit to run frequently.
• Parks and public space: Functional and pleasant public places to gather and play.
• Pedestrian design: Buildings are close to the street, parking lots are relegated to the back.
• Schools and workplaces: Close enough that walking to and from home to these destinations is
realistic.
• Complete streets: Streets designed for bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit.
With the complexity of features needed to create a walkable environment, no one site is likely to
provide all the needed elements. The additional density will help provide for element two with
potential for additional persons in the area.
The site has a Walk Score of 34, a Transit score of 7, and a Bike Score of 44. Average scores for
the city as a whole are out of 100: Walk Score 47; Transit Score 21; and Bike Score 62 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. This site is an infill development,
surrounded by existing residential uses with complimentary uses such as schools, parks, grocery
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
55
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 44 of 45
stores, and employment opportunities within a relatively short distance. There are no adopted
development standards relating to the walk score.
The proposed development is adjacent to Glen Lake Rotary Park and is approximately .16 miles
from Story Mill Park. The PUD is adjacent to an existing commercial neighborhood to the south.
While some of the businesses are heavier commercial uses that may not provide daily services,
there is a close coffee shop, convenience store, meadery, brewery among other services that will
provide daily destinations to future residents of the Shady Glen Subdivision. In addition, Story
Mill Community Center is.16 miles away. A unique outcome of the design of the PUD is many
of these amenities are closer to walk to than they are to drive due to the emergency access that
serves as a dual pedestrian access. This design will further the walkability goal of the growth
policy.
The proposed planned unit development meets the following Bozeman Community Plan 2020
goals:
N-1.1 Promote housing diversity, including missing middle housing
N-1.10 Increase connectivity between parks and neighborhoods through continued trail and
sidewalk development. Prioritize closing gaps within the network.
N-1.11 Enable a gradual and predictable increase in density in developed area over time
N – 3.3 Encourage distribution of affordable housing units throughout the City with priority
given to locations near commercial, recreational, and transit assets.
N-3.8 Promote the development of “Missing Middle” housing (townhouses, multi-household)
APPENDIX B – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Background and Description
A preliminary planned unit development (PUDP) application by the applicant, Bechtle
Architects, 4515 Valley Commons Drive 201, Bozeman, MT 59718, representing the property
owner Bridger Center LLC, Thomas Murphy, 280 W Kagy Blvd Ste D-105 Bozeman, MT
59715.
APPENDIX C – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Notice was provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to the close of the public
comment period/City Commission public hearing per BMC 38.220.420, The public notice period
for this application is set to run from February 26 through March 21, 2023, with publications in
the legal advertisements section of the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on Sunday, February 26, and
Sunday, March 5, 2023. The applicant posted public notice on the subject property on February
26, 2023. The applicant sent public notice to all landowners of record within 200-feet of the
subject property via first class mail, on February 24, 2023.
At the time this report was written, 97 public comments had been received.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
56
City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, 22293
Page 45 of 45
APPENDIX D – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Owner: Bridger Center LLC, Thomas Murphy, 280 W Kagy Blvd Ste D-105, Bozeman,
MT 59715
Applicant: Bechtle Architects, Nicole Boteilho, 4515 Valley Commons Drive 201, Bozeman,
MT 59718
Representative: Morrison Maierle, Mike Hickman, 2880 Technology Blvd, Bozeman, MT 59718
Report By: Lynn Hyde, Development Review Planner
FISCAL EFFECTS
No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by
this planned unit development.
ATTACHMENTS
Application materials – Available through the Laserfiche archive, the full file is linked below. https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=265046&dbid=0&repo=BOZEMAN as well as digitally at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715.
This project can be viewed on the Community Development Viewer interactive map directly with this link: https://gisweb.bozeman.net/Html5Viewer/?viewer=planning&FILE_NUMBER=21-201
Public Comment: Note the public comment is housed under the subdivision folder and titled,
Shady Glen, App 22294 https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=273209&dbid=0&repo=BOZEMAN Bozeman Municipal Code January 3, 2022 Reference Copy – Chapter 38
Bozeman Municipal Code Jan 3, 2022 Reference Copy -Chapter 38.pdf
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
57
Page 1 of 34
Bozeman City Commission Findings of Fact and Order for the Shady Glen
Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat; Application No. 22294
Community Development Board, acting in their capacity as the Planning Board,
considered the application at their March 6, 2023 meeting and the motion recommending
conditional approval passed, 4-3.
City Commission public hearing was held at their Tuesday, March 21, 2023 meeting and
the motion to deny the application passed, 5-0.
Project Description: A major preliminary plat subdivision application requesting to subdivide
11.87 acres into 16 residential lots (two of which are proposed to be deed restricted
affordable housing lots) and 5 common open space lots (one of which is proposed to be a
7.129 acre wildlife refuge). The subdivision is being reviewed concurrently with the
Shady Glen preliminary planned unit development (PUDP), Application 22293.
Project Location: The property is legally described as Bridger Creek Subdivision, Tract 1-A,
Plat J-200K, COS 885, Amended Plat of Lot 57A of the Amended Plat Lots 56, 57 &
58A of Bridger Creek Subdivisions Phase 1, Section 31, Township 1 South, Range 6
East, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana.
Staff Finding: The application conforms to standards and is sufficient for approval with
conditions and code provisions.
City Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public
comment, and all the information presented, I move to deny application 22294 and find
that the application no longer meets zoning requirements as a result of the Commission’s
denial of preliminary PUD application number 22293.
Report Date: April 11, 2023
Staff Contact: Lynn Hyde, Development Review Planner
Lance Lehigh, Project Engineer
Agenda Item Type: Action (Quasi-judicial)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is based on the application materials submitted and public comment received to date.
The application materials are available in the City’s Laserfiche archive and may be accessed
through the Community Development viewer as well. Ninety seven written public comments
have been received as of the writing of this report. The public comments can be viewed in the
City’s Laserfiche archive and available to the public. The City Commission’s Findings of Fact
and Order on application 22293 are essential to the findings relevant to this application and are
incorporated herein by reference.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
58
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 2 of 34
Unresolved Issues.
The subdivision is reliant upon an approved PUD before it can be approved. In addition, staff has
5 recommended conditions of approval noted in Section 3 below found on page 9.
Project Summary
The Department of Community Development received a Preliminary Plat Application on
September 2, 2022 requesting to subdivide 11.87 acres to create 16 residential lots, two of which
are proposed to be deed restricted affordable housing lots for townhouses, and 5 common open
space lots. Common open space Lot 3 is a 7.129 acre lot proposed to be set aside as a wildlife
refuge. The site is currently undeveloped. The property will have access to Commercial Drive.
The property is zoned R-1.
On December 22, 2022 the Development Review Committee (DRC) found the application
sufficient for continued review and recommends the conditions and code provisions identified in
this report.
The subdivider did not request any subdivision or zoning variances with this application however
the preliminary plat approval is reliant upon the approval of the PUD, Application 22293.
The Community Development (CD) Board, acting in their capacity as the Planning Board
reviewed the application on March 6, 2023. The Planning Board is the advisory board to the City
Commission on this application. The Planning Board motion to recommend approval with
recommended conditions passed, 4-3. The link to view the full CD Board meeting is provided.
The City Commission held a public meeting on the application on March 21, 2023. Based on the
vote to deny the Planned Unit Development as outlined in application 22293 Findings of Fact for
the Shady Glen PUD, a new motion was made by the Commission:
“Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the
information presented, I move to deny application 22294 and find that the application no
longer meets zoning requirements as a result of the Commission’s denial of preliminary
PUD application number 22293.”
Upon further discussion of the motion, the City Commission made individual findings that the
application does not meet the zoning criteria due to the denial of the PUD application. The
Findings of Fact for PUD application 22293 are incorporated by reference and attached to these
findings of fact. The Commission unanimously voted in favor of the motion, therefore denying
the preliminary plat application. A summary of the Commission’s findings can be found in
Section 7 – Findings of Fact, Order of Appeal and Provisions. Analysis of the Commission’s
alternative findings can be found in Section 6 – Staff Analysis and Findings.
The link to view the full City Commission meeting is provided.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
59
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 3 of 34
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1
Unresolved Issues. .............................................................................................................. 2
Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2
SECTION 1 – MAP SERIES .......................................................................................................... 4
SECTION 2 – REQUESTED VARIANCES ................................................................................. 9
SECTION 3 – RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ............................................ 9
SECTION 4 – CODE REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................... 10
SECTION 5 – RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ............................................ 15
SECTION 6 – STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ................................................................ 16
Applicable Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 38.240.150.B, BMC. .......................... 16
Applicable Review Criteria, Bozeman Municipal Code ................................................... 18
38.220.060 Documentation of compliance with adopted standards ................................. 23
SECTION 7 – FINDINGS OF FACT, ORDER AND APPEAL PROVISIONS ......................... 27
APPENDIX A – PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY..................................... 31
APPENDIX B – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................... 33
APPENDIX C – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ......................................................... 34
APPENDIX D – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ................................. 34
FISCAL EFFECTS ....................................................................................................................... 34
ATTACHMENTS ......................................................................................................................... 34
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
60
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 4 of 34
SECTION 1 – MAP SERIES
Exhibit 1 – Zoning
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
61
Page 5 of 34
Exhibit 2 – Community Plan 2020 Future Land Use
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
62
Page 6 of 34
Exhibit 3 – Current Land Use
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
63
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 7 of 34
Exhibit 4 – Preliminary Plat
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
64
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 8 of 34
Exhibit 5 – Landscaping Plan
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
65
Page 9 of 34
SECTION 2 – REQUESTED VARIANCES
The subdivider did not request any subdivision or zoning variances with this preliminary plat
application, however the preliminary plat is not approvable without a favorable motion on the
PUD that was reviewed and discussed concurrently, Shady Glen PUD, Application 22293.
The City Commission did not approve the PUD and therefore, the subdivision must comply with
all standards as presented in the municipal code.
SECTION 3 – RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this
report. These conditions are specific to this project.
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1. The approved affordable housing plan must be recorded concurrent with the final plat and
a reference to the recorded document must be provided on the conditions of approval
page of the final plat. The reference on the conditions of approval sheet must be, “This
subdivision is subject to affordable housing requirements to satisfy planned unit
development requirements voluntarily opted into by the subdivider. The subdivision’s
requirements and obligations can be found in the Shady Glen Affordable Housing Plan
recorded as document no.__________ at the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorders
Office.”
This condition is satisfied with the recording of the final plat mylars and the affordable
housing plan for the subdivision. The Clerk and Recorder should write in the document
number for the recorded affordable housing plan on the conditions of approval sheet prior
to the filming/scanning of the final plat.
2. The subdivider must install perpetual wetland boundary markers on the watercourse
setback line on Lots 8, 9 & 10 prior to final plat approval. The wetland boundary markers
proposed must be approved by the Community Development Department prior to
installation.
3. Building Design Guidelines must be established and include a requirement applicable to
all lots within the wetland buffer, and backing up to existing wetlands to ensure proper
stewardship of the adjacent critical lands. At a minimum they must include the below:
i. The back yard areas of lots near the wetlands will be filled ‘close to street
level’ in order to create a fill slope at the back lot lines while will be
planted with native grasses. Storm runoff from top slopes will drain as
sheet flow over the slope, and the vegetation will ‘intercept, filter and
infiltrate’ any runoff that does occur. This creates a buffer to protect the
undeveloped floodplain and wetland areas from sediment and nutrients.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
66
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 10 of 34
ii. The HOA/POA require homeowners to use phosphorous-free fertilizers
and to not dispose of trash, grass clippings or yard waste within the
wetland buffer. Signage will be included noting the restrictions of pets
from the wildlife refuge. The covenants will also include a requirement to
install and maintain continuous fencing along the wildlife preserve.
iii. In accordance with MPDES stormwater discharge requirements, any
construction related sediment will be intercepted during construction with
a silt fence, wattles or other filtration measures.
4. The subdivision must install a fence along the southern boundary of the proposed Shady
Glen Wildlife Refuge adjacent to the Bridger Center Subdivision and on the east along
the boundary with the proposed residential lots in this development. The fence design and
materials must be approved by the Community Development Department prior to
installation. Fence materials must limit passage of materials and equipment, minimize
visual impact, and maximize durability and longevity. Fence installation must be
completed prior to final plat; financial guarantee of this work is not allowed.
5. The applicant shall complete construction or other provision of all identified public
benefits which were the basis of the planned unit development qualifying for review and
all amenities depicted on the preliminary planned unit development application materials
prior to the issuance of the 9th building permit (approximately 50% complete) within the
development. This includes the construction of the two affordable townhomes, the
completion of the improvements associated with Common Open Spaces 03 & 04, as well
as the way-finding improvements. This obligation must be included on the Conditions of
Approval sheet of the associated final plat.
SECTION 4 – CODE REQUIREMENTS
1. Sec. 38.100.080 – Compliance with regulations required.
The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not
specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or
other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law.
2. Sec. 38.220.020 & 38.610.050. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant must provide the
Community Development Department with a written statement of a wetland boundary
determination from the U.S. Army Corps of the wetland status. If the wetlands are
determined to be jurisdictional, an approved 404 permit for any changes to the wetland
must be submitted to the Community Development office prior to final plat approval. The
applicant must contact the Gallatin County Conservation District, Montana Department
of Environmental Quality, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding the proposed
project and any required permits (i.e., 310, 404, Turbidity exemption, etc.) must be
obtained by the applicant. Approved stream and wetland permits shall be provide prior to
public infrastructure approval for public infrastructure impacts to jurisdictional wetland
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
67
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 11 of 34
and streams. Permits and a FEMA approved LOMR-F must be provided prior to final plat
approval.
3. BMC 38.220.070. The applicant shall submit with the application for final plat review
and approval, a written narrative stating how each of the conditions of preliminary plat
approval and noted code provisions have been satisfactorily addressed. This narrative
shall be in sufficient detail to direct the reviewer to the appropriate plat, plan, sheet, note,
covenant, etc. in the submittal.
4. BMC 38.220.070.A.7. Simultaneously with filing of the final plat, in conjunction with
required or offered dedications, the subdivider (or owner of the property being
subdivided if the owner is not the subdivider) shall transfer ownership to the property
owners’ association (POA) of any open space proposed to be conveyed to the POA and
all its right, title, and interest in any improvements made to such parkland or open space.
For the transfer of real property, the subdivider or owner of the property shall submit with
the application for final plat a warranty deed or other instrument acceptable to the City
Attorney transferring fee simple ownership to the POA and associated realty transfer
certificate. The subdivider or owner of the property must record the deed or instrument at
the time of recording of the final plat. For personal property installed upon open space
owned by the property owners association, the subdivider shall provide an instrument
acceptable to the City Attorney transferring all its rights, title and interest in such
improvements including all applicable warranties to such improvements.
5. BMC 38.220.070. The final plat must contain the following notation on the Conditions of
Approval sheet:
a. The responsibility of maintenance for the stormwater facilities, stormwater open space
lots, pedestrian open space lots and street frontage landscaping for the perimeter streets
must be that of the property owners’ association. Maintenance responsibility must
include, all vegetative ground cover, boulevard trees and irrigation systems in the public
right-of-way boulevard strips along all external perimeter development streets. The
property owners’ association must be responsible for levying annual assessments to
provide for the maintenance, repair, and upkeep of all perimeter street frontage
landscaping and stormwater facilities and all open space landscaping.
b. Due to known high groundwater conditions in the area no basements will be permitted
with future development of the site. No crawl spaces will be permitted with future
development of the site, unless a professional engineer registered in the State of Montana
certifies that the lowest point of any proposed structure is located above the seasonal high
groundwater level and provide supporting groundwater data prior to the release of
building permit. In addition, sump pumps are not allowed to be connected to the sanitary
sewer system. Sump pumps are also not allowed to be connected to the drainage system
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
68
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 12 of 34
unless capacity is designed into the drainage system to accept the pumped water. Water
from sump pumps may not be discharged onto streets, such as into the curb and gutter.
c. All downstream water user facilities will not be impacted by this subdivision.
d. All lots are subject to a ten foot wide front setback utility easement.
e. All open space and public access areas are to be owned and maintained by the property
owners’ association.
6. BMC 38.220.300 & 310. The POA documents must be finalized and recorded with the
final plat. The POA documents must include the requirements of Section 38.220.300 and
310.
7. BMC 38.220.320. In order to disclose to future purchasers their obligations regarding
open space established in the Municipal Code the following language shall be included
on the Conditions of Approval Sheet of the final plat: “As established by 38.220.320.A,
38.340.150.A.3.d, and other applicable elements of the Bozeman Municipal Code
effective on [DATE of Preliminary plat sufficiency determination], ownership of all
common open space areas and trails, and responsibility of maintenance thereof and for
city assessments levied on the common open space lands shall be that of the property
owners’ association. Maintenance responsibility shall include, in addition to the common
open space and trails, all vegetative ground cover, and irrigation systems in the public
right-of-way boulevard strips along all external perimeter development streets and as
adjacent to public parks or other common open space areas. All areas within the
subdivision that are designated herein as common open space including trails are for the
use and enjoyment by residents of the development and the general public. The property
owners’ association shall be responsible for levying annual assessments to provide for the
maintenance, repair, and upkeep of all common open space areas and trails. At the same
time of recording the final plat of the subdivision the subdivider shall transfer ownership
of all common open space areas within each phase to the property owners’ association
created by the subdivider to maintain all common open space areas within Shady Glen
subdivision.
8. BMC 38.220.320. Covenants. Covenants, restrictions, and articles of incorporation for
the creation of a POA (Documents) shall be submitted at least 30 working days prior to
submitting the final plat application for review by the Department of Community
Development and shall contain, but not be limited to the following items: 1) the
orientation and setbacks for corner lots, 2) all additional setbacks required when lots are
adjacent to pathway corridors and minor arterial roads, 3) provisions for fences, 4)
provisions for snow removal, maintenance and upkeep of all common areas, public and
private parks, trails, storm water runoff facilities, 5) guidelines that outline architectural
and landscape requirements for each individual lot and/or phase of the subdivision,
including placement of boulevard trees at a regular spacing for each residential lot, 6)
provisions that outline the renewal of an annual contract with a certified landscape
nursery person for the upkeep and maintenance of all parklands, common open space,
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
69
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 13 of 34
trails, etc., 7) landscape details for detention ponds, outlet structures, boulevard trees,
parkland, irrigation, etc., 8) mitigation of groundwater with established floor elevations,
9) noxious weed control, and 10) assessment of existing and future Special Improvement
Districts. These documents shall be executed and submitted with the initial final plat to
be filed with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder at the time of recording of the final
plat.
9. BMC 38.240.150.A.3.d Transfer of ownership of public land, off-site land, private land,
personal property, improvements and water rights; documents required.
a. For the transfer of real property in satisfaction of required or offered dedications to the
city, and required or offered donations or grants to the POA, the subdivider or owner of
the property must submit with the application for final plat a warranty deed or other
instrument acceptable to the city attorney transferring fee simple ownership to the City or
the POA.
b. For the transfer of personal property installed upon POA-owned open space, the
subdivider must provide the city an instrument acceptable to the city attorney transferring
all its rights, title and interest in such improvements including all applicable warranties to
such improvements to the City or the POA.
c. The subdivider or owner of the property must record the deed or instrument transferring
ownership or interest at the time of recording of the final plat with the original of such
deed or instrument returned to the City or POA as applicable.
d. For the transfer of ownership interest in water, the subdivider or owner of the property
must submit with the application for final plat a deed or other instrument acceptable to
the City Attorney transferring ownership to the City or POA, along with all required state
department of natural resources and conservation documentation, certification and
authorization.
10. BMC 38.240.420. If there are liens or mortgages against the property, the appropriate
Mortgagee certificate must be included with the final plat.
11. BMC 38.240.450 requires a certificate of completion of improvements. The certificate
must specifically list all installed improvements and financially guaranteed
improvements.
12. BMC 38.240.520 requires a certificate of completion of non-public improvements.
Certificate must specifically list all installed improvements and financially guaranteed
improvements.
13. BMC 38.240.530. When irrigation of public facilities are to be installed prior to final plat
approval, the final plat of subdivision must contain a certificate of completion of water-
related improvements. The certificate must list all completed and accepted improvements,
including but not limited to all irrigation system record drawings. The subdivision
proposes irrigation of public street frontage. This certificate must be provided on the final
plat.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
70
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 14 of 34
14. BMC 38.270.030, Completion of Improvements. If it is the developer’s intent to file the
plat prior to the completion of all required improvements, the developer shall enter an
Improvements Agreement with the City of Bozeman guaranteeing the completion of all
improvements in accordance with the preliminary plat submittal information and
conditions of approval. If the final plat is filed prior to the installation of all
improvements, the developer shall supply the City of Bozeman with an acceptable
method of security equal to 150 percent of the cost of the remaining improvements.
15. BMC 38.270.030. The applicant must submit plans and specifications for water and
sewer main extensions, streets, and storm water improvements, prepared and signed by a
professional engineer (PE) registered in the State of Montana, which must be provided to
and approved by the City Engineer. Water and sewer plans must also be approved by the
Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The applicant must also provide
professional engineering services for construction inspection, post-construction
certification, and preparation of mylar record drawings. Construction shall not be
initiated on the public infrastructure improvements until the plans and specifications have
been approved and a preconstruction conference has been conducted. Building permits
will not be issued prior to City acceptance of the site infrastructure improvements unless
all provisions set forth in Section 38.270.030.C of the Bozeman Municipal Code are met
to allow for concurrent construction.
16. BMC 38.400.010. No parking is allowed along the cul-de-sac. No parking signs must be
installed prior to final plat approval or financially guaranteed.
17. BMC 38.410.060.A. The final plat must provide all necessary utility easements and they
must be described, dimensioned and shown on each subdivision block of the final plat in
their true and correct location. The recorded easement number must be documented on
the final plat.
a. The applicant is advised that all dedicated public easements must be recorded using the
City’s standard template easement documents separate from the plat and the recorded
document number must be listed on the final plat. Easements will be deemed inadequate
if they are not in a final draft format (signatures are not required for the draft review).
Easements must be stamped by a licensed professional surveyor. In preparing signature
blocks on any upcoming documents, please make the following changes: Jeff Mihelich,
City Manager; Mike Maas, City Clerk. If a new member is established, the easement
documents must be updated.
18. Easements
a. BMC 38.410.060. The applicant must provide a ten foot private utility easement (power,
gas, communication, etc.) along the development’s property frontage. The applicant may
contact the Engineering Department to receive a copy of a utility easement template. The
easement must be recorded and provided to engineering prior to final plat approval. The
recorded easement number must be written in on the final plat.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
71
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 15 of 34
b. BMC 38.410.060.A. The final plat must provide and depict all necessary utility
easements and they must be described, dimensioned and shown on each subdivision
block of the final plat in their true and correct location.
c. BMC 38.410.060. The proposed water and sewer lines extending from Shady Glen Lane
to Boylan Road reside in a public access and utility easement. The final plat must
reference the recorded easement number.
19. BMC 38.410.100. With the final plat, a watercourse planting plan must be prepared that
identifies the maintenance of the watercourse setback landscaping. The landscaping
identified in the watercourse planting plan must be installed or financially guaranteed
prior to final plat approval.
20. BMC 38.410.100. No accessory structures, patios, or recreational equipment (i.e.
swingset, trampoline. etc.) can be located within the watercourse setback. This language
must be included in the POA documents and covenants.
21. BMC 38.410.120. If mail delivery will not be to each individual lot within the
development, the developer shall provide an off-street area for mail delivery within the
development in cooperation with the USPS. It shall not be the responsibility of the City
to maintain or plow any mail delivery area constructed within a City right-of-way. If
cluster boxes are used, a dedicated area to pull up and access the boxes must be provided.
22. BMC 38.410.130.C. If water rights or cash-in-lieu of water rights, have not been
provided with final plat, then water rights or cash-in-lieu must be provided with any
future site plan
23. BMC 38.420.030. Final payment for cash-in-lieu of parkland will be determined and paid
at the time of final plat approval. A parkland table and cash in lieu amount must be
printed on the final plat.
24. BMC 38.430.040. The Planned Unit Development Final Plan shall be completed and
approved by the City of Bozeman before the approval of the final plat.
25. BMC 38.600.210. A floodplain permit must be submitted and approved prior to final plat
approval.
SECTION 5 – RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS
The Department of Community Development received a Preliminary Plat Application on
September 2, 2022 requesting to subdivide 11.87 acres to create 16 residential lots, two of which
are proposed to be deed restricted affordable housing lots for townhouses, and 5 common open
space lots. Common open space Lot 3 is a 7.129 acre lot proposed to be set aside as a wildlife
refuge. The site is currently undeveloped. The property will have access to Commercial Drive.
The property is zoned R-1.
On December 22, 2022 the Development Review Committee (DRC) found the application
sufficient for continued review and recommends the conditions and code provisions identified in
this report.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
72
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 16 of 34
The subdivider did not request any subdivision or zoning variances with this application however
the preliminary plat approval is reliant upon the approval of the PUD, Application 22293.
The Community Development (CD) Board, acting in their capacity as the Planning Board
reviewed the application on March 6, 2023. The Planning Board is the advisory board to the City
Commission on this application. The Planning Board motion to recommend approval with
recommended conditions passed, 4-3. The link to view the full CD Board meeting is provided.
The City Commission held a public meeting on the application on March 21, 2023. Based on the
vote to deny the Planned Unit Development as outlined in application 22293 Findings of Fact for
the Shady Glen PUD, a new motion was made by the Commission:
“Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the
information presented, I move to deny application 22294 and find that the application no
longer meets zoning requirements as a result of the Commission’s denial of preliminary
PUD application number 22293.”
Upon further discussion of the motion, the City Commission made individual findings that the
application does not meet the zoning criteria due to the denial of the PUD application. The
Findings of Fact for PUD application 22293 and are incorporated by reference and attached to
these findings of fact. The Commission unanimously voted in favor of the motion, therefore
denying the preliminary plat application. A summary of the Commission’s findings can be found
in Section 7 – Findings of Fact, Order of Appeal and Provisions. Analysis of the Commission’s
alternative findings can be found in Section 6 – Staff Analysis and Findings.
The link to view the full City Commission meeting is provided.
SECTION 6 – STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials,
municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the
review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis in this
report is a summary of the completed review.
Applicable Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 38.240.150.B, BMC.
In considering applications for subdivision approval under this title, the advisory boards and City
Commission shall consider the following:
1) Compliance with the survey requirements of Part 4 of the Montana Subdivision and
Platting Act
The preliminary plat was prepared in accordance with the surveying and monumentation
requirements of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act by a Professional Engineer registered
in the State of Montana. As noted in the code requirements, the final plat must comply with State
statute, Administrative Rules of Montana, and the Bozeman Municipal Code.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
73
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 17 of 34
2) Compliance with the local subdivision regulations provided for in Part 5 of the Montana
Subdivision and Platting Act
The final plat must comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman
Municipal Code. The subdivider is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions not
specifically listed as a condition of approval, do not, in any way, create a waiver or other
relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or State law. Sections 3
and 4 of this report identify conditions and code provisions necessary to meet all municipal
standards. The listed code requirements address necessary documentation and compliance with
standards. Therefore, upon satisfaction of all conditions and code corrections the subdivision will
comply with the subdivision regulations.
City Commission Findings: Part 5 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act authorizes
municipalities to adopt local regulations governing subdivisions. The City of Bozeman has
adopted local regulations in accordance with state law. As described more fully in criterion 4
below, the Commission found the Shady Glen preliminary plat application does not comply with
local subdivision regulations found in Chapter 38, Articles 3, 4, and 6 of the Bozeman Municipal
Code. Specifically, the application does not comply with Montana Code Annotated sections 76-
3-504(1)(e), (f), and (g)(i), nor does the proposal comply with associated local regulations
regarding permitted uses, street design and connectivity, public access, unnecessary
environmental degradation (including development within watercourse setbacks); danger of
injury to public health, safety and welfare in diminished ability to provide public services in the
event of fire and flood hazards due to the secondary gated and locked access and a single access
cul-de-sac extending away from the two means of emergency access. For additional findings, see
the attached findings of fact for the associated PUD. This criterion is not met.
3) Compliance with the local subdivision review procedures provided for in Part 6 of the
Montana Subdivision and Platting Act
The Bozeman Planning Board public meeting and City Commission public meeting were
properly noticed in accordance with state law and the Bozeman Municipal Code.
The subdivider requested review of this subdivision under the terms of 76-3-616 MCA as
authorized in BMC 38.240.100.
The Department of Community Development received a preliminary plat application on
September 2, 2022. The DRC reviewed the preliminary plat application and determined the
submittal did not contain detailed, supporting information that was sufficient to allow for the
continued review of the proposed subdivision on October 12, 2022.
A revised application was received on October 24, 2022. The DRC determined the application
was adequate for continued review on December 22, 2023 and recommended conditions of
approval and code corrections for the staff report.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
74
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 18 of 34
The City scheduled public notice for this application for publication in the legal advertisements
section of the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on Thursday, February 23, 2023 for postings on
Sundays, February 26, 2023 and March 5, 2023. The applicant posted public notice on the
subject property on February 26, 2023. The applicant sent public notice to all landowners of
record within 200-feet of the subject property via first class mail, on February 24, 2023. Ninety
seven public comments had been received on this application as of the writing of this report.
4) Compliance with Chapter 38, BMC and other relevant regulations
Community Development staff and the DRC reviewed the preliminary plat against all applicable
regulations and the application complies with the BMC and all other relevant regulations with
conditions and code corrections. This report includes Conditions of Approval and required code
provisions as recommended by the DRC for consideration by the City Commission to complete
the application processing for final plat approval. All municipal water and sewer facilities will
conform to the regulations outlined by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality and
the requirements of the Design Standards and Specifications Policy and the City of Bozeman
Modifications to Montana Public Works Standard Specifications.
Applicable Review Criteria, Bozeman Municipal Code
In considering applications for approval the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider
applicable Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) sections. The subdivision as proposed (and with
Recommended Conditions of Approval and Code Requirements), complies with the BMC except
where noted. Where the proposal does not comply with the BMC, the applicant has requested
relaxations through the concurrent PUDP application (Application 22293).
BMC 38.310.030, Table 38.310.030.A
In accordance with the table of permitted uses in residential zones, townhouses are not a
permitted housing typology in the R-1 zoning district. The applicant has requested through the
PUD process to allow townhouses as a permitted use. The applicant desires to provide affordable
housing units on these two lots. Previously townhouses were a permitted use in the R-1 zoning
district in order to satisfy the affordable housing provisions in the inclusionary zoning state
permitted legislature. Since that time, the State Legislature has removed the ability for local
municipalities to require affordable housing, and with the redaction of the affordable housing
ordinance, the ability to allow deed restricted affordable townhouse/rowhouse units in the R-1
zoning district was also removed from the code. As the applicant is desiring to voluntarily
provide affordable housing, staff finds this request supports the growth policy goals, however an
approved PUD is required as the subdivision application is not currently in compliance with this
code section.
The concurrent Shady Glen Preliminary PUD must be approved prior to the preliminary plat
being approvable and before the applicant may submit a final plat. The Shady Glen Final PUD
must be approved before the subdivision final plat can be approved.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
75
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 19 of 34
BMC 38.400.010.A.2
“Developers must arrange streets and alleys to provide for the continuation of streets and alleys
between adjacent developed properties when such continuation is necessary for the convenient
movement of traffic, effective provision of emergency services and efficient provision of
utilities.”
The layout includes a gated access to Commercial Drive/Endurance Lane which does not provide
for the continuation of local streets between developed properties.
BMC 38.400.010.A.8
“To facilitate traffic movement, the provision of emergency services and the placement of utility
easements all developments must be provided with a second means of access. If, in the judgment
of the development review committee (DRC), a second dedicated right-of-way cannot be
provided for reasons of topography or other physical conditions, the developer must provide an
emergency access, built to the standards detailed in these regulations.”
The required right-of-way does not exist to provide a full street as a secondary access. Additional
easements would be needed and at this time there is not a willing property owner(s) to provide
the secondary access easements. Primary public vehicular access would be via the Links
Condominiums to Birdie Drive. The addition, the secondary gated emergency access improves
the connectivity for emergency services as well as pedestrians. The emergency access gate is
required to be maintained for all-season access. Staff determined an additional full access was
not feasible, and the second emergency access is adequate for approval.
The concurrent PUD must be approved prior to the preliminary plat being approvable.
BMC 38.400.010.A.9
“Culs-de-sac are generally prohibited. The review authority may consider and approve the
installation of a cul-de-sac only when necessary due to topography, the presence of critical
lands, access control, adjacency to parks or open space, or similar site constraints. Pedestrian
walks must be installed at the end of culs-de-sac where deemed appropriate.”
Staff finds that a cul-de-sac design for this layout is sufficient. The cul-de-sac is necessary due to
adjacency to park, open space and site constraints. A pedestrian walkway was provided at the
end of the culs-de-sac to the adjacent pedestrian path on the northeast portion of the subdivision.
The cul-de-sac was reviewed by the Engineering Department as well as the emergency services
and found to be adequate.
BMC 38.410.040.D
“Rights-of-way not less than ten feet wide for pedestrian walks are required where deemed
necessary to provide circulation or access to parks, open space, schools, playgrounds, shopping
centers, transportation, and other community facilities. In addition, no continuous length of
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
76
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 20 of 34
block may exceed 600 feet without intersection a street or pedestrian walk. Pedestrian walks
must also be installed at the end of cul-de-sac where deemed appropriate.”
The dual access connection to Commercial drive is also serving as a pedestrian right-of-way. In
accordance, the pedestrian walks must be maintained by the Shady Glen property owners
association and cleared for all season use. The applicant is proposing to construct this facility
with asphalt as it is a dual access for both pedestrians/bicyclists as well as vehicular access in
case of an emergency. The Fire Department as found this design sufficient to provide service to
the neighborhood. In addition to providing secondary access for the proposed subdivision, it also
provides secondary access for the commercial development to the south that currently only has
one access. City staff finds that this design and maintenance plan is sufficient and meets the
requirements of the code.
The concurrent PUD must be approved prior to the preliminary plat being approvable.
BMC 38.400.050.A
“All streets and road providing access to, and within the proposed development must meet the
following standards. (1) Right-of-way width and construction standards contained in this
chapter. . . and BMC 38.400.060.A. states all street improvements must be designed by and
constructed under the supervision of a professional civil engineer, registered in the state, and
must meet or exceed the right-of-way and construction standards adopted by the city (including
but not limited to an adopted transportation plan or specifications manual) and required for the
type of street to be constructed.
The subdivision proposed a street section with a 42’ right-of-way instead of a 60’ right-of-way.
The street section would be made up with a 5’ wide sidewalk on the west side of the street, and
no sidewalks on the east side as there is already a pedestrian facility that travels parallel where a
sidewalk would go. In addition, the 8’ parking lane is proposed to be removed from the east side
of the street. Removing these components from the street reduces the right-of-way width 18’
which minimizes the encroachment and disturbances into the wetland. Staff supports this design
in order to shift the lots to the east where possible in order to mitigate impacts to the wetlands.
Staff finds this design proposal impacts the wetlands less than other development alternatives
explored.
The concurrent PUD must be approved prior to the preliminary plat being approvable.
BMC 38.410.040.B.
“Block length must not be designed, unless otherwise impractical, to be more than 400 feet in
length or less than 300 feet in length. Block lengths may be longer than 400 feet if necessary due
to topography, the presence of critical lands, access control, or adjacency to existing parks or
open space. In no case may a block exceed 1,320 feet in length.
Based on the applicant’s diagram, staff reviewed and concurred that this subdivision is in
compliance with this code provision. Due to the unique nature of this subdivision and the layout,
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
77
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 21 of 34
it is somewhat debatable as to what is considered the start of the block. Whether the block is
considered to start at the pedestrian right-of-way that connects to Commercial Drive, or if the
block starts at Birdie Drive, the road is less than 1,320 feet to the cul-de-sac, thus meeting this
code requirement.
BMC 38.410.100.A.2.c.4.d
“Setback must include connected wetlands. The buffer width must be extended by a minimum of
50 feet beyond the perimeter of the connected wetlands.”
The applicant has provided information showing how two wetlands (labeled Wetland 1 and
Wetland 2) are connected to the greater watercourses. Therefore the delineated buffer must be
extended by a minimum of 50’ beyond the perimeter of the wetlands. The applicant is requesting
a reduction to the wetland setback from 50’ to 35’. Condition of Approval 2 requires permanent
wetland boundary markers to be placed on site to minimize possible encroachments into the
proposed setback. This relaxation is requested in the concurrent PUD application. Staff concurs
that the reduced wetland setbacks are adequately mitigated by robust mitigation measures
including, on-site infiltration for both the houses as well as the rear yards, requirement for
phosphorous-free fertilizers, and the installation of perpetual wetland markers. Refer to
Condition of Approval 2 & 3.
The concurrent PUD must be approved prior to the preliminary plat being approvable.
BMC 38.410.100.A.2.d
“No newly constructed residential or commercial structure, addition to an existing structure,
fence, deck, fill material (other than that required for exempt uses), parking lot or other
impervious surfaces, or other similar improvements may be located within required watercourse
setbacks, unless approved through, and in conformance with, a variance or deviation process as
authorized in this chapter.”
The application proposed to place fill in Lots 3, 4, 8, 9, & 10 as well as in one common open
space for utilities. Placement of fill within a watercourse setback is not allowed, thus the
applicant has requested a relaxation to this requirement in the concurrent PUD application. The
application is proposing to pull fill from an historic railroad bed on site, and place the fill on the
backs of Lots 3, 4, 8, 9, 10 & 11. The applicants narrative states, “The combined fill volume
below the 100-year flood elevation (i.e., loss of flood storage capacity) will be less than the
excavation volume below the 100-year flood elevation west of Lot 5 (i.e., gain in flood storage
capacity). In other words, the proposed grading actually increases flood storage volume as
compared to existing conditions. This is a rare occurrence for this type of relaxation/variance
request in that the proposed plan to place fill within the floodplain would not negatively impact
flood conveyance or storage capacity.” A CLOMR permit has already been obtained from the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and can be found in the application materials.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
78
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 22 of 34
Staff supports this relaxation request as it is increasing the floodplain capacity, as well as
providing mitigation measures for stormwater runoff from the urban development prior to
reaching the wetlands.
The concurrent PUD must be approved prior to the preliminary plat being approvable.
BMC 38.430.040
“When a subdivision is proposed in conjunction with a zoning planned unit development, the
subdivision review must be coordinated with the zoning review. All steps listed in this section
apply whether the application is for a subdivision or zoning PUD, and references herein to plan
includes plat unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. Approval of a planned unit
development consists of three procedural steps: pre-application, preliminary plan, and final
plan. All subdivision PUDs must also meet all standards for plats.”
The Planned Unit Development (PUD) is being reviewed concurrently with this preliminary plat
(PP) application. In order for the PP to be approvable, there must be a favorable motion made on
the PUD. The applications are both going to the advisory bodies and decision makers
concurrently. Condition of Approval 5 requires the public benefits portion of the PUD must be
completed prior to the 9th building permit of the development. This includes the construction of
the two affordable townhomes, the completion of the improvements associated with Common
Open Spaces 03 & 04, as well as the way-finding improvements. This obligation must be
included on the Conditions of Approval sheet of the associated final plat.
City Commission Findings: The City Commission found that, because the preliminary planned
unit development application and its necessary requested relaxations were denied, the
preliminary plat does not comply with multiple zoning standards as detailed in the attached
findings for application 22293. Specifically, the commission found that the proposed
subdivision does not comply with: PUD requirements 38.430.010, 38.430.030.A.4.c; specific
design provisions, including 38.400.080.A.2, 8, and 9 and 38.400.050.A; watercourse setback
provisions in 38.410.100.A.2.c; and several of the PUD review criteria in section 38.430.090.
Additionally, because the preliminary PUD application was denied in its entirety, this application
does not comply with BMC sections 38.310.030 and Table 38.310.030.A, 38.410.040.D, and
38.410.030.A.2.d.
5) The provision of easements to and within the subdivision for the location and installation
of any necessary utilities
The final plat will provide and depict all necessary utilities and required utility easements. Code
Provision No. 4, requires that all easements, existing and proposed, must be accurately depicted
and addressed on the final plat and in the final plat application. Public utilities are located within
dedicated street right of ways.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
79
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 23 of 34
6) The provision of legal and physical access to each parcel within the subdivision and the
notation of that access on the applicable plat and any instrument transferring the parcel
If the PUDP is approved, along with the relaxation requests, the final plat will provide legal and
physical access to each parcel within the subdivision. All of the proposed lots will have frontage
on public streets constructed to City standards with lot frontage meeting minimum standards
shown on the preliminary plat.
38.220.060 Documentation of compliance with adopted standards
The Development Review Committee (DRC) completed a subdivision pre-application plan
review on June 1, 2022 and no waivers or variances were requested. Staff offers the following
summary comments on the documents required with BMC 38.220.060, BMC.
38.220.060.A.1 – Surface water
All surface waters and delineated floodplains have been mapped. Over 60% of the site is
proposed to be set aside in common open space including a wildlife refuge. This provides many
benefits, including the ability to leave much of the surface water undisturbed. Refer to Section 4
Compliance with Chapter 38, BMC and other relevant regulations above in regards to impacts to
wetland setbacks as well as fill in the floodplain.
38.220.060.A.2 - Floodplains
A FIS (Flood Insurance Study), dated September 2, 2011 and published by FEMA, covers the
East Gallatin River floodplain in the project area. Applicable floodplain permits will or have
been applied for. Minimal fill is proposed in the floodplain and is discussed above under Section
4 Compliance with Chapter 38, BMC and other relevant regulations.
38.220.060.A.3 - Groundwater
The groundwater was monitored both in 2015 as well as 2020 to determine ground water depth
variations. The levels ranged from 3.6’ to 7.1’. The development areas will have fill brought in to
create an elevation suitable for development as well as to create a desired grade for gravity sewer
mains. This additional fill will create additional space between the groundwater and future
development. Code Provision No. 5c prohibits basements and crawl spaces due to the known
high groundwater.
38.220.060.A.4 - Geology, Soils and Slopes
This subdivision is located on a sloping formation of alluvial materials overlying Tertiary and
Quaternary age alluvial sediments, which is typical in the Gallatin Valley. No geologic hazards
were identified, thus no protective measures were necessary.
38.220.060.A.5 - Vegetation
The vegetation on site consist of Palustrine Scrub/shrub broadleaf deciduous forest, wetlands,
and a fallowed hay pasture grassland. The forested areas are dominated by sandbar willow, red-
osier dogwood, woods rose, quaking aspen and Bebb’s willow, alder, and canary reed grass. The
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
80
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 24 of 34
wetland areas of the site are characterize by plant communities typically found in riparian areas
or areas Saturday by groundwater conditions including, but not limited to: reed canary grass;
beaked sedge; wooly sedge; wheat sedge; round-fruit rush; Colorado rush; Baltic rush; common
cattail; and common spike-rush. There are also noxious weeds onsite. A weed management plan
was submitted to, and approved by, Gallatin County. The application also notes they have
removed approximately 2 tons of household trash from four homeless camps located within the
Aspen grove on the property. While the development will naturally disturb vegetation where
homes are proposed, however the remainder of the site will be improved to a superior
environmental condition, and preserved.
Areas disturbed during construction will be reclaimed through plantings of diverse riparian
vegetation consisting of riparian grasses, forbs, scrub/shrubs and trees that tolerate saturated to
semi-saturated soil conditions. The applicants narrative states, “Best Management Practices
(BMPs) will be installed prior to project initiation to ensure that storm runoff from the areas of
ground disturbance will be contained and treated onsite during and after construction. Low
Impact Development (LID) designs such as infiltration galleries and biofiltration will be
incorporated into the project’s final landscape design. These design features will help with water
conservation.”
38.220.060.A.6 - Wildlife
The undeveloped site is home to existing wildlife. The applicant’s narrative states “large
ungulates such as white tail deer, moose and possible mule deer inhabit the property during
different seasons. Smaller mammals consisting of squirrels, raccoons, rabbits, skunks, beavers,
mink and possible otters frequent the property periodically. Avian species notably a variety of
raptors, songbirds, wading birds, upland birds, waterfowl, and cranes have been viewed on the
property. Naturally, development of a site will disturb the existing ecosystem. This site is inside
city limits and urban type development is anticipated. The applicant is proposing to leave over
60% in a wildlife refuge. The lack of human intrusion on these 7.13 acres allows wildlife a
secure place to shelter and feed. In addition, this park is contiguous with Glen Lake Rotary Park
which extends the natural setting of the existing park and allows for fluid migration for wildlife
without crossing the urban interface. The wildlife refuge will protect wildlife movement areas
and the existing federally protected wetlands, water bodies, and wildlife habitats from human
impacts. In addition, the Shady Glen HOA will require homeowners with lot lines adjoining the
wildlife preserve to provide fencing to protect wildlife from pets and vice versa.
A representative from the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks stated “This development alone is not
likely to negatively impact big game at a population level for several reasons. It represents a
small parcel (about 12 acres), most of which will be preserved in open space. This open space is
currently planned to be adjacent to other open space lands owned by the City of Bozeman and
along the banks of the East Gallatin River. Placing open space lands together amplifies the
benefits of the open space to wildlife. The proposed area is not in a crucial big game winter
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
81
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 25 of 34
range nor a known migration corridor for big game species. Finally, the area is proximate to
other major developments at the outskirts of Bozeman”.
In order to minimize human and wildlife conflict, the trails are not being placed on the wildlife
refuge. In addition, Condition 4 above requires the applicant to construct a fence between the
wildlife refuge and the commercial users to the south to minimize user conflict. Lot owners will
be required to install fencing along the west lot lines, bordering the wildlife refuge to provide
separation between the wildlife and residential units.
38.220.060.A.7 - Agriculture
This subdivision will not impact agriculture. There is no agricultural production on the property.
The subject property is designated as Urban Neighborhood according to the City of Bozeman
Community Plan and anticipated urban development.
38.220.060.A.8 - Agricultural Water User Facilities
This subdivision will not impact agricultural water user facilities. No irrigation facilities are
present on the lots.
38.220.060.A.9 - Water and Sewer
The subdivision will not significantly impact city water and sewer infrastructure. Water and
sewer improvements will be designed to meet City of Bozeman Standards and State Department
of Environmental Quality Standards and Regulations.
38.220.060.A.10 - Stormwater Management
A stormwater management plan was submitting in accordance with the city’s requirements
adopted stormwater master plan. The stormwater facilities will be maintained by the Shady Glen
Homeowners Association. Development of site infrastructure will be performed in accordance
with an MPDES stormwater permit prepared by the contractor at the time of construction. The
subdivision will not significantly impact stormwater infrastructure.
38.220.060.A.11 - Streets, Roads and Alleys
The proposed subdivision has two access points. The main vehicular access is proposed from
Birdie drive, a city street, through The Links Condominium development. The proposed
connection will be through a Public Access and Utility Easement. A secondary access is
provided that will connect the proposed street Shady Glen Lane to Commercial Drive within the
Bridger Center to the south. The gated access will provide a secondary emergency access as well
as secondary pedestrian and bicycle access. The access will be maintained by the Shady Glen
Homeowners Association, including keeping it clear of snow during the winter. Refer to Section
4 Compliance with Chapter 38, BMC and other relevant regulations above for further discussion
on streets and access.
Due to the small number of lots, it was determined by the Engineering Department that a traffic
study would not be necessary.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
82
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 26 of 34
38.220.060.A.12 – Non-Municipal Utilities
The applicant has received confirmation of future service from Northwestern Energy and internet
providers.
38.220.060.A.13 - Land Use
The subdivision will not significantly impact land use. The property is zoned R-1 which
anticipates this level, or higher of development. Because the majority of the site is being set aside
in a wildlife refuge, the amount of development may be less than what was anticipated. The
proposed subdivision will create 16 lots, two of which are affordable units, and 5 common open
space lots.
Net residential density is defined as the number of residential dwelling units per buildable unit of
land, excluding any land used or to be used as street rights-of-way, parks, public buildings or
private non-residential uses. Taking this into consideration, and removing the land dedicated for
infrastructure and parklands, there is a net density of 5.59 units per acre. There is a minimum
density of 5 units per acre in the R-1 zoning district, thus this development provides density in
the developable acres as anticipated in the R-1 zoning district.
In order to minimize human conflicts with adjacent residential and commercial development,
fences are required to be in place. Refer to Condition of Approval 4.
38.220.060.A.14 - Parks and Recreation Facilities
This subdivision has proposed to provide cash-in-lieu of parkland which is supported by the
Parks Department. While the Subdivision is providing a large amount of common open space,
the open space is encumbered with wetlands and other critical areas that are not conducive to
being a city park, which are typically programmed with activities, either active or passive. In
addition, the subdivision is proposed in very close proximity to Story Mill Community Park,
Glen Lake Rotary Park, and with the dual access pedestrian connection, provides a missing link
for pedestrians and bicyclists in the non-motorized network for the area connecting the trail
system to the north of the subdivision to the Glen Lake Rotary Park trail system. Thus the Parks
Department supports the request to provide cash-in-lieu of parkland.
38.220.060.A.15 - Neighborhood Center Plan
Glen Lake Rotary Park and Story Mill Community Park serve as the Shady Glen neighborhood
center as they are within one-half mile of the subdivision.
38.220.060.A.16 - Lighting Plan
Subdivision or street lighting is required pursuant to BMC 38.570.030. All street lights installed
must use LED light heads and must conform to the City’s requirement for cut-off shields as
required by the City’s specifications.
38.220.060.A.17 - Miscellaneous
The proposed subdivision will improve the access to public lands by creating an additional
pedestrian connection. No known hazardous conditions exist on the property. The proposed
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
83
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 27 of 34
subdivision is outside of the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). No health or safety hazards on-
site or off-site will be created with this development.
38.220.060.A.18 - Affordable Housing
This application does not rely on incentives authorized in 38.380. However the applicant is
providing two deed restricted lots for townhouse units that will be affordable units. The
affordable units are being counted as performance points for the PUD evaluation. Refer to
Condition of Approval 1 for additional Affordable Housing requirements. The affordable
housing units must be provided as a component of the PUD improvements. All PUD
improvements must be completed prior to 50% completion of all building permits (or the 9th
building permit).
38.220.060.A.19 – Adopted Growth Policy
This proposal furthers the adopted growth policy. The subdivision is zoned R-1 which anticipates
residential development. Refer to Appendix A below, Project Size Zoning and Growth Policy for
further discussion on the adopted growth policies this proposal supports.
City Commission Findings: Refer to the attached Findings for application 22293. The
Commission determined that the proposed preliminary plat did not adequately protect
environmentally sensitive and hazard-prone areas because it allows encroachment into the
required watercourse setback. Additionally, proposals to mitigate the development’s impact to
wetland buffer zones are insufficient because they shift an extraordinary burden and
responsibility to police homeowners’ actions in perpetuity. The proposed plat’s street design,
including cul-de-sac configuration, reduced street width, sidewalk on only one side of the street,
and parking on only one side of the street, was an unacceptable alternative to streets constructed
to code standards and would have the effect of limiting public access to recreational amenities
and limit the efficient movement of people and vehicles. The Commission found the proposed
gated and locked secondary access to be a hindrance to emergency services and evacuation,
which is detrimental to public health and safety. The Commission found that the location of the
two affordable housing units offered with the proposed development were inconsistent with the
City’s goals to integrate affordable housing seamlessly into neighborhoods and foster inclusivity
with vulnerable populations. The Commission determined that, although the proposed
preliminary plat satisfied some elements of the growth policy, on balance, the application was
contrary to more goals articulated in the growth policy.
SECTION 7 – FINDINGS OF FACT, ORDER AND APPEAL PROVISIONS
A. PURSUANT to Chapter 38, Article 3, BMC and other applicable sections of Chapter 38,
BMC, public notice was given, opportunity to submit comment was provided to affected
parties, and a review of the preliminary plat described in these findings of fact was
conducted. The applicant presented to the City a proposed preliminary plat application to
allow a residential development affiliated with a preliminary planned unit development
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
84
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 28 of 34
that requested six relaxation to zoning regulations (Application 22293). Approval of the
planned unit development with the six relaxations to standards is necessary prior to
approval of the subdivision.
B. The purposes of the preliminary plat review were to consider all relevant evidence
relating to public health, safety, welfare, and the other purposes of Chapter 38, BMC; to
evaluate the proposal against the criteria and standards of Chapter 38 BMC; and to
determine whether the preliminary plat should be approved, conditionally approved, or
denied.
C. The matter of the preliminary plat was considered by the City Commission at a public
meeting on March 21, 2023 at which time the Department of Community Development
Staff reviewed the project, submitted and summarized the conditions of approval,
clarified unresolved issues and summarized the public comment submitted to the City
prior to the public hearing.
D. The City Commission requested public comment at the public meeting on March 21,
2023 and no members of the public offered public testimony on the application as
submitted.
E. It appeared to the City Commission that all parties and the public wishing to examine the
proposed preliminary plat and offer comment were given the opportunity to do so. After
receiving the recommendation of the relevant advisory bodies established by Section
Chapter 38, BMC, and considering all matters of record presented with the application
and during the public comment period defined by Chapter 38, BMC, the City
Commission amended the proposed motion based on the denial of the planned unit
development which resulted in a subdivision application that did not comply with zoning
standards. Therefore, being fully advised of all matters having come before it regarding
the application, the City Commission makes the following decision:
F. For the reasons stated above and in the PUD application 22293 findings of fact, the
preliminary plat does not meet the requirements of Chapter 76 of the Montana Code
Annotated, nor does it meet the applicable subdivision review criteria, found in Chapter
38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. As detailed in the analysis section above, the
preliminary plat application relied on approval of several relaxations found in its
accompanying planned unit development application. The Commission denied PUD
application 22293 citing unacceptable impacts to the environment and to public health,
safety, and welfare. Without the approval of the PUD relaxations, the preliminary plat
does not comply with applicable zoning standards such as, permitted uses, lot sizes,
secondary emergency access design, wetland setback, street design, and non-exempt fill
material within the floodplain. The offered mitigation for these impacts was insufficient
to adequately protect public health and safety and unacceptably degraded wetlands by
allowing development in the watercourse setback. Therefore, pursuant to the City
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
85
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 29 of 34
Commission’s review authority and the authority found in 38.200.010.H, preliminary plat
application 22294 is denied.
G. The basis of the Commission’s decision includes the entire record of this matter,
including the applicant’s materials and presentation, public comment, advisory board
opinions, the staff report and presentation, and Commission discussion and questions.
H. These findings of fact satisfy the requirements in 38.240.130.A.5.e, BMC and Montana
Code Annotated section 76-3-620.
I. The City Commission decision may be appealed by bringing an action in the Eighteenth
District Court of Gallatin County. As outlined in 76-3-625, the petition must be presented
to the court within 30 days of the final decision.
DATED this ________ day of _____________________, 2023
BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION
_________________________________
CYNTHIA L. ANDRUS
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
MIKE MAAS
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
May2nd
86
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 30 of 34
GREG SULLIVAN
City Attorney
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
87
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 31 of 34
APPENDIX A – PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY
Zoning Designation and Land Uses:
The subject property is zoned R-1, Residential Low Density District. The intent of the R-1
district is to provide for primarily single-household residential development and related uses
within the city at urban densities.
Adopted Growth Policy Designation:
Table 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 shows the correlation between future land use
map designations and implementing zoning districts. (See below for the Table)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
88
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 32 of 34
The subject property is designated as Urban Neighborhood. This category primarily includes
urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single
type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross
density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes.
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.
This proposed subdivision is well-suited to implement the Urban Neighborhood by providing
lots that will support detached residential lots as well as two townhouse lots with affordable
housing units. The urban neighborhood designation recognizes that at times lower densities may
develop due to site constraints and/or natural features. The presence of water features and
wetlands on this site, as well as the access constraints limit the density that can be realized on the
property. However, the density provided is meeting the minimum of 5 dwelling units per acre
when the critical lands and common open space lands are removed from the gross lot size. The
townhouse and multi-household lots will support construction of “missing middle” housing
which is contemplated throughout the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. The proposed
subdivision is also located in a central area with relatively quick access to a variety of goods and
services. As previously discussed, the subdivision relies on a recommendation of approval for
the Shady Glen PUDP, application 22293 that is being considered concurrently with this
preliminary plat application.
The growth policy encourages development to be walkable, which is defined in the glossary as:
Walkable. A walkable area has:
• A center, whether it’s a main street or a public space.
• People: Enough people for businesses to flourish and for public transit to run frequently.
• Parks and public space: Functional and pleasant public places to gather and play.
• Pedestrian design: Buildings are close to the street, parking lots are relegated to the back.
• Schools and workplaces: Close enough that walking to and from home to these destinations is
realistic.
• Complete streets: Streets designed for bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit.
With the complexity of features needed to create a walkable environment, no one site is likely to
provide all the needed elements. The additional density will help provide for element two with
potential for additional persons in the area.
The site has a Walk Score of 34, a Transit score of 7, and a Bike Score of 44. Average scores for
the city as a whole are out of 100: Walk Score 47; Transit Score 21; and Bike Score 62 These
values are provided by Walk Score, a private organization which presents information on real
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
89
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 33 of 34
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. This site is an infill development,
surrounded by existing residential uses with complimentary uses such as schools, parks, grocery
stores, and employment opportunities within a relatively short distance. There are no adopted
development standards relating to the walk score.
The proposed development is adjacent to Glen Lake Rotary Park and is approximately .16 miles
from Story Mill Park. The subdivision is adjacent to an existing commercial neighborhood to the
south. While some of the businesses are heavier commercial uses that may not provide daily
services, there is a close coffee shop, convenience store, meadery, brewery among other services
that will provide daily destinations to future residents of the Shady Glen Subdivision. In addition,
Story Mill Community Center is.16 miles away. A unique outcome of the design of the
subdivision is many of these amenities are closer to walk to than they are to drive due to the
emergency access that serves as a dual pedestrian access. This design will further the walkability
goal of the growth policy.
The proposed subdivision meets the following Bozeman Community Plan 2020 goals:
N-1.1 Promote housing diversity, including missing middle housing
N-1.10 Increase connectivity between parks and neighborhoods through continued trail and
sidewalk development. Prioritize closing gaps within the network.
N-1.11 Enable a gradual and predictable increase in density in developed area over time
N – 3.3 Encourage distribution of affordable housing units throughout the City with priority
given to locations near commercial, recreational, and transit assets.
N-3.8 Promote the development of “Missing Middle” housing (townhouses, multi-household)
APPENDIX B – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Background and Description
A preliminary plat application by the applicant, Bechtle Architects, 4515 Valley Commons Drive
201, Bozeman, MT 59718, representing the property owner Bridger Center LLC, Thomas
Murphy, 280 W Kagy Blvd Ste D-105 Bozeman, MT 59715.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
90
22294 Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Subdivision Page 34 of 34
APPENDIX C – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Notice was provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to the close of the public
comment period/City Commission public meeting per BMC 38.220.420, The public notice
period for this application is set to run from February 26 through March 21, 2023, with
publications in the legal advertisements section of the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on Sunday,
February 26, and Sunday, March 5, 2023. The applicant posted public notice on the subject
property on February 26, 2023. The applicant sent public notice to all landowners of record
within 200-feet of the subject property via first class mail, on February 24, 2023.
APPENDIX D – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Owner: Bridger Center LLC, Thomas Murphy, 280 W Kagy Blvd Ste D-105, Bozeman,
MT 59715
Applicant: Bechtle Architects, Nicole Boteilho, 4515 Valley Commons Drive 201, Bozeman,
MT 59718
Representative: Morrison Maierle, Mike Hickman, 2880 Technology Blvd, Bozeman, MT 59718
Report By: Lynn Hyde, Development Review Planner
FISCAL EFFECTS
No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by
this subdivision.
ATTACHMENTS
The full application and file of record can be viewed:
Application materials – Available through the Laserfiche archive, the full file is linked below.
https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=265045&dbid=0&repo=BOZEMAN as
well as digitally at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman,
MT 59715.
This project can be viewed on the Community Development Viewer interactive map directly
with this link:
https://gisweb.bozeman.net/Html5Viewer/?viewer=planning
Public Comment:
https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=273209&dbid=0&repo=BOZEMAN
Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, Application
22293
Findings of Fact and Order for Shady Glen Preliminary Planned Unit Development, Application
22293
DocuSign Envelope ID: 87BE4FE2-CACD-449E-A7DD-B73C16263E75
91