HomeMy WebLinkAboutVillage Homesites PUD Phases 1-2 CUP with Relaxations, #Z-08074
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Lanette Windemaker, AICP, Contract Planner
SUBJECT: Village Homesites PUD Phases 1-2 CUP with Relaxations, #Z-08074
MEETING DATE: Monday, July 21, 2008
RECOMMENDATION: The City Commission approves application #Z-08074 with relaxations 1
through 4 and 8 through 11 approved as conditioned and relaxations 5, 6, 7 and 12 denied
subject to the conditions of approval and code provisions outlined in the Staff Report.
BACKGROUND: This is a CUP for a PUD preliminary plan application to develop ~ 17 acres
into 19 single household lots, one multi household lot, park, open spaces and trail system on
property legally described as Lots 3, 4, and Common Area #2, Village Boulevard Minor
Subdivision No. 344, located in the Northeast ¼ of Section 7, and Northwest ¼ of Section 8, T2S,
R6E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is located north of the
intersection of Village Downtown Boulevard and Village Crossing Way, and is zoned R-4
(Residential High Density District). This proposal is being review concurrently with the
preliminary plat application with one waiver. The applicant has requested PUD relaxations from the
following BMC sections:
1. 18.16.030.A, Lot Coverage; to allow lot coverage of up to 66 percent instead of the maximum
of 50 percent lot coverage;
2. 18.16.040.A, Lot Area; to allow a minimum lot area of 4,128 square feet instead of the
minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet;
3. 18.16.040.B, Lot Width; to allow a minimum lot width of 36 feet instead of the minimum lot
width of 50 feet;
4. 18.16.050, Yards, to allow a minimum 4 foot side yard setback instead of minimum 5 foot side
yard setback;
5. 18.16.050, Yards; to allow a 10 foot rear yard setback instead of minimum requirement of 20
feet with alley opening doors;
6. 18.44.010.A, Relation to Undeveloped Areas; to not extend Village Downtown Boulevard to
the property line;
7. 18.44.010.B, Relation to Developed Areas; to not provide for a continuation of Front Street;
8. 18.44.060.D, Level of Service Standards; to allow the East Main Street and North Broadway
Avenue intersection to operate at level of service less than “D”;
9. 18.50.060, Frontage; to allow park land to have no frontage on a street;
10. 18.50.060, Frontage; to not provide direct pedestrian access to all perimeters of the park;
11. 18.50.060, Frontage; to not provide land for the required off street parking for the park; and
12. 18.50.060, Frontage; to not construct or provide cash in lieu of the additional off street parking.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:
• Connection of Village Downtown Boulevard to Front Street (Relaxation #6: Section
18.44.010.A, Relation to Undeveloped Areas; to not extend Village Downtown Boulevard
to the property line).
Village Downtown Boulevard is a curved, ~1,300-foot cul-de-sac, which is an extension of East
Mendenhall Street at its intersection with North Broadway Avenue. In conjunction with the 5-lot
Broadway Boulevard Subdivision conditionally approved on July 22, 2002, a variance was granted
to not extend Village Downtown Boulevard to the southeast due to wetlands. A major subdivision
and a high-density site plan have been approved subsequent to the minor subdivision in 2002. With
approximately 112 dwelling units constructed or under construction, and 84 additional dwelling
units approved, it seems to be appropriate to address connectivity and public health and safety.
Village Downtown Boulevard should be improved to Front Street with Front Street improved to the
northwest. According to information received from MRL, the City of Bozeman’s Front Street right
of way is senior to the MRL easement. Some proponents of cul-de-sacs support them for safety
reasons. Review of literature has found that well-connected streets with plenty of foot traffic and
many highly visible dwellings provide the safest locations. The safest cul-de-sacs are short and
straight, with many highly visible dwellings, and have direct connectivity to through streets.
This relaxation does not provide for adequate vehicular circulation. This lack of adequate
interconnections to ensure a variety of alternatives for trip routing fails to maintain and enhance the
functionality of the transportation system. Therefore, this request is not in conformance to or
consistent with Goal 10.8.1 of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan as required by Section
18.34.090.1, BMC. In addition, this request does not comply with Section 18.34.100.3.e requiring
street improvements deemed necessary or Section 18.36.090.E.2.a(1) requiring developments to
comply with City requirements for streets.
This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #6 and Preliminary Plat condition
#18: The relaxation, from Section 18.44.010.A, Relation to Undeveloped Areas, to not extend
Village Downtown Boulevard to the property line shall NOT be granted. Village Downtown
Boulevard from the current terminus to Front Street, and Front Street from the extended Village
Downtown Boulevard to Broadway shall be constructed to city standard streets. The streets shall
be constructed or financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval. They shall be constructed
and installed prior to issuance of any building permits.
• Improvement of Front Street; (Relaxation #7: Section 18.44.010.B, Relation to Developed
Areas; to not provide for a continuation of Front Street).
See comments above.
This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #7 and Preliminary Plat condition
#18: The relaxation, from Section 18.44.010.B, Relation to Developed Areas, to not provide for a
continuation of Front Street shall NOT be granted. Village Downtown Boulevard from the current
terminus to Front Street, and Front Street from the extended Village Downtown Boulevard to
Broadway shall be constructed to city standard streets. The streets shall be constructed or
financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval. They shall be constructed and installed prior to
issuance of any building permits.
• Relaxation #5: Section 18.16.050, Yards; to allow a 10 foot rear yard setback instead of
minimum requirement of 20 feet with alley opening doors.
On numerous site visits to the Village Downtown Townhouses, vehicles have been observed
parking in front of the alley opening garage doors (in the 10-foot rear yard setback) and
encroaching into the alley. This situation can create an access dilemma for other residents and
service providers, and potentially an emergency access situation. Therefore this request is not in
2
3
compliance with Section 18.36.090.E.2.a(3) BMC, requiring all elements of the project to be
functional.
This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #5: The relaxation, from Section
18.16.050, Yards, to allow a 10 foot rear yard setback instead of minimum requirement of 20 feet
with alley opening doors shall NOT be granted. All vehicle entrances into garages shall be no
closer than 20 feet to the rear property line.
FISCAL EFFECTS: Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time, but will include increased
property tax revenues from new development, along with increased costs to deliver municipal
services to the property.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission.
CONTACT: Please email Lanette Windemaker at lwindemaker@bozeman.net if you have any
questions prior to the public hearing.
APPROVED BY: Andrew Epple, Planning Director
Chris Kukulski, City Manager
PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT # Z-08074
VILLAGE HOMESITES PUD PRELIMINARY PLAN PHASES 1 AND 2
Item: Zoning Application # Z-08074 ⎯ an application for the Conditional Use
Permit with relaxations for the Village Homesites Planned Unit
Development Preliminary Plan Phases 1 and 2 to allow a residential
development. The property, located north of the intersection of Village
Downtown Boulevard and Village Crossing Way, is legally described as
Lots 3, 4, and Common Area #2, Village Boulevard Minor Subdivision
No. 344, located in the Northeast ¼ of Section 7, and Northwest ¼ of
Section 8, T2S, R6E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana.
The property is zoned R-4 (Residential High Density District).
Owner/Applicant: The Village Investment Group, Inc., 101 East Main Street, Bozeman,
MT 59715.
Representative: C&H Engineering & Surveying, 1091 Stoneridge Drive, Bozeman, MT
59718.
Date/Time: Before the Design Review Board on Wednesday, May 28, 2008, at 5:30
p.m. in the second floor Conference Room at the Professional Building,
20 East Olive Street, Bozeman, Montana, and
Before the Bozeman City Commission on Monday, July 21, 2008, at 6:00
p.m. in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West
Main Street, Bozeman, Montana.
Report By: Lanette Windemaker, AICP; Contract Planner
Recommendation: Conditional Approval
PROJECT LOCATION
The property is located north of the intersection of Village Downtown Boulevard and Village
Crossing Way. The ~ 17 acre property is legally described Lots 3, 4, and Common Area #2, Village
Boulevard Minor Subdivision No. 344, located in the Northeast ¼ of Section 7, and Northwest ¼ of
Section 8, T2S, R6E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The property zoned R-4
(Residential High Density District). Please refer to the vicinity map on the following page.
PROPOSAL
Application has been made the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) with relaxations for the Village
Homesites Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan Phases 1 and 2, consisting of ~ 17
acres to be developed as a residential development. This proposal would allow 19 single household
lots, one multi household lot (existing Village Lofts building), park, open spaces and trail system.
This proposal is being review concurrently with the preliminary plat application.
The Design Review Board reviewed and commented on the Preliminary Plan on Wednesday, May
28, 2008. The City Commission reviewed the Conceptual Preapplication Plan at its April 23, 2007,
public meeting. The Village Townhouses PUD Preliminary Plan was granted condition approval on
August 18, 2003, and the Village Lofts PUD Preliminary Plan was granted conditional approval on
November 15, 2004.
The intent of Section 18.36 “Planned Unit Development” is to promote maximum flexibility and
innovation in the development of land and the design of development projects within the city. The
applicant is proposing relaxations from the city’s standards through the Planned Unit
Development process and therefore must demonstrate a plan that will produce an
environment, landscape quality and character superior to that produced under the existing
standards.
The applicant has requested the following relaxations:
1. Section 18.16.030.A, Lot Coverage. To allow lot coverage of up to 66 percent instead of the
maximum of 50 percent lot coverage. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan
condition #1: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.030.A, Lot Coverage, to allow lot coverage of
up to 66 percent instead of the maximum of 50 percent lot coverage shall be granted.
2. Section 18.16.040.A, Lot Area and Width. To allow a minimum lot area of 4,128 square feet
instead of the minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet. This relaxation is addressed by PUD
Preliminary Plan condition #2: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.040.A, Lot Area and Width,
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 2
to allow a minimum lot area of 4,128 square feet instead of the minimum lot area of 5,000
square feet shall be granted.
3. Section 18.16.040.B, Lot Area and Width. To allow a minimum lot width of 36 feet instead
of the minimum lot width of 50 feet. This relaxation was addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan
condition #3: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.040.B, Lot Area and Width, to allow a
minimum lot width of 36 feet instead of the minimum lot width of 50 feet shall be granted.
4. Section 18.16.050, Yards. To allow a minimum 4 foot side yard setback instead of
minimum 5 foot side yard setback. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan
condition #4: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.050, Yards, to allow a minimum 4 foot side
yard setback instead of minimum 5 foot side yard setback shall be granted.
5. Section 18.16.050, Yards. To allow a 10 foot rear yard setback instead of minimum
requirement of 20 feet with alley opening doors. This relaxation is addressed by PUD
Preliminary Plan condition #5: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.050, Yards, to allow a 10 foot
rear yard setback instead of minimum requirement of 20 feet with alley opening doors shall
NOT be granted. All vehicle entrances into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to the rear
property line.
6. Section 18.44.010.A, Relation to Undeveloped Areas. To not extend Village Downtown
Boulevard to the property line. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan
condition #6 and Preliminary Plat condition #18: The relaxation, from Section 18.44.010.A,
Relation to Undeveloped Areas, to not extend Village Downtown Boulevard to the property line
shall NOT be granted. Village Downtown Boulevard from the current terminus to Front Street,
and Front Street from the extended Village Downtown Boulevard to Broadway shall be
constructed to city standard streets. The streets shall be constructed or financially guaranteed
prior to final plat approval. They shall be constructed and installed prior to issuance of any
building permits.
7. Section 18.44.010.B, Relation to Developed Areas. To not provide for a continuation of
Front Street. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #7 and
Preliminary Plat condition #18: The relaxation, from Section 18.44.010.B, Relation to
Developed Areas, to not provide for a continuation of Front Street shall NOT be granted.
Village Downtown Boulevard from the current terminus to Front Street, and Front Street from
the extended Village Downtown Boulevard to Broadway shall be constructed to city standard
streets. The streets shall be constructed or financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval.
They shall be constructed and installed prior to issuance of any building permits.
8. Section 18.44.060.D, Level of Service Standards. To allow the East Main Street and North
Broadway Avenue intersection to operate at level of service less than “D”. This relaxation is
addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #8 and Preliminary Plat condition #19: The
relaxation, from Section 18.44.060.D, Level of Service Standards, to allow the East Main Street
and North Broadway Avenue intersection to operate at level of service less than “D” shall be
granted provided the warrant analysis that was completed 2006 shall either be updated or a
letter from the traffic engineer submitted that certifies he has reviewed current traffic data and
that the results of the warrant analysis are still accurate. If a signal is now warranted, it shall
be installed or financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval. Any required improvements
shall be installed and accepted prior to issuance of any building permits.
9. Section 18.50.060, Frontage. To allow park land to have no frontage on a street. This
relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #9: The relaxation, from Section
18.50.060, Frontage, to allow park land to have no frontage on a street shall be granted due to
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 3
site constraints including the railroad right-of-way, and the watercourse and floodplain. Signs
shall be installed at all public entrances to the park, with a larger park identification sign being
placed at the primary access to the park. All signage must comply with Parks Division
specifications.
10. Section 18.50.060, Frontage. To not provide the direct pedestrian access to all perimeters of
the park. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #10: The relaxation,
from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not provide the direct pedestrian access to all perimeters
of the park shall be granted due to the small size of this mini park. Direct pedestrian access shall
be provided as shown in the proposed park plan.
11. Section 18.50.060, Frontage. To not provide land for the required off street parking for the
park. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #11: The relaxation,
from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not provide land for the required off street parking for the
park shall be granted. The additional land as shown in the proposed plan shall be provided. The
applicant shall provide cash in lieu of the remaining additional land for a parking area based on
park perimeter (~ 760 feet) x 14 feet for ~ 10,640 square feet. As the perimeter of the park is
verified, this number shall be recalculated.
12. Section 18.50.060, Frontage. To not construct or provide cash in lieu for the additional off
street parking. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #12: The
relaxation, from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not construct or provide cash in lieu of the
additional off street parking shall NOT be granted. The applicant shall provide, in addition to
construction of the off street parking shown on the proposed plan, an equivalent dollar value of
non-parking improvements to the park or public trail corridor in lieu of construction of
additional parking.
The applicant has requested the following waiver with the Preliminary Plat application:
• Section 18.42.180.C.5, Provision of Affordable Housing. To designate 14 units in the Village
Lofts multi family development as Restricted Size Units. This waiver is addressed by
Preliminary Plat condition #1: The request for a waiver under Section 18.42.180.C.5, Provision
of Affordable Housing, to designate 14 units in the Village Lofts multi family development as
Restricted Size Dwelling Units in an affordable housing complex is approved subject to the
following conditions.
a. Given the net buildable area of the Village Homesites Subdivision Phases 1 and 2, including
Lot 3A, is ~ 216,456 square feet; a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the net buildable area is
~ 21,647 square feet.
b. Given the net buildable area of Lot 3A (Village Lofts) is ~ 112,325 square feet, and the 84
dwelling units constructed in the Village Lofts on Lot 3A was based on the net buildable area
of Lot 3A.
c. Given that 21,647 square feet is 19.28% of the net buildable area of Lot 3A (Village Lofts),
and 19.28% of the 84 units are 17 units. Therefore, the 14 units offered do not fulfill the
requirement of the BMC.
d. In addition to the designation of the 14 units in the Village Lofts on Lot 3A as Restricted Size
Units, two (2) single-household lots in Village Homesites Subdivision Phases 1 and 2 shall
be designated as Restricted Size Lots.
e. All lots /units so designated shall be subject to the total floor area ratio of Restricted Size
Units under Section 18.16.030. A note on the final plat/PUD plan shall indicate which lots /
units are reserved to meet the RSL requirement and subject to the RSU restrictions. The RSL
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 4
/ RSU designation shall be recorded on the individual lots / units in a manner that will
appear on a title search and include reference to the sunset provisions of Section 18.42.180.
ZONING DESIGNATION & LAND USES
The subject property is zoned R-4 (Residential High Density District). The intent of the R-4
residential district is to provide for high-density residential development through a variety of
housing types within the City with associated service functions. This will provide for a variety of
compatible housing types to serve the varying needs of the community’s residents. The net density,
as defined in Chapter 18.80, BMC, for new “R-4” developments shall be 8 dwellings per acre or
greater. The 19 single household lots in the Village Homesites project have a net density of 8
dwelling units per acre. The following land uses and zoning are adjacent to the subject property:
North: M-1 (Light Manufacturing); Industrial uses.
M-2 (Manufacturing and Industrial); Railroad right-of-way.
South: R-4 (Residential High Density); Village Lofts.
R-O (Residential Office); Village Townhouses.
East: M-1 (Light Manufacturing); Railroad right-of-way, wetlands.
West: M-1 (Light Manufacturing); Industrial uses.
ADOPTED GROWTH POLICY DESIGNATION
The property is currently designated as “Residential” in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. The
R-4 (Residential High Density District) zoning designation is consistent with the “Residential” land
use designation of the property.
Residential. This category designates places where the primary activity is urban density living
quarters. Other uses which complement residences are also acceptable such as parks, low intensity
home based occupations, fire stations, churches, and schools. The residential designation also
indicates that it is expected that development will occur within municipal boundaries which may
require annexation prior to development. The dwelling unit density expected within this
classification varies. It is expected that areas of higher density housing would be likely to be located
in proximity to commercial centers to facilitate the broadest range of feasible transportation options
for the greatest number of individuals and support businesses within commercial centers. Low
density areas should have an average minimum density of six units per net acre. Medium density
areas should have an average minimum density of twelve units per net acre. High density areas
should have an average minimum density of eighteen units per net acre. A variety of housing types
should be blended to achieve the desired density with large areas of single type housing being
discouraged. In limited instances the strong presence of constraints and natural features such as
floodplains may cause an area to be designated for development at a lower density than normally
expected within this classification.
All residential housing should be arranged with consideration given to the existing character of
adjacent development, any natural constraints such as steep slopes, and in a fashion which advances
the overall goals of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. The residential designation is intended to
provide the principal locations for additional housing within the Planning Area.
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 5
REVIEW CRITERIA & FINDINGS
The City of Bozeman Planning Office has reviewed the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) with
relaxations for the Village Homesites Planned Unit Development (PUD) Phases 1 and 2 Preliminary
Plan against the criteria set forth in Section 18.34.090, Section 18.34.100 and Chapter 18.36 of the
Bozeman Municipal Code. The findings outlined in this report include comments and recommended
conditions provided by the Development Review Committee (DRC) and Design Review Board
(DRB).
Section 18.34.090 “Site Plan and Master Site Plan Review Criteria”
In considering applications for site plan approval under this title, the Planning Director, City
Commission, DRC, and when appropriate, the ADR Staff, the DRB, the BABAB, the CAHAB or
WRB shall consider the following:
1. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy.
The development proposal is in conformance with the “Residential” land use designation in the
Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. Specific residential goals described in the Bozeman 2020
Community Plan include the following:
• Goal 4.9.1 Community Design–Create a community composed of neighborhoods designed
for human scale and compatibility in which services and amenities are convenient, visually
pleasing, and properly integrated and designed to encourage walking, cycling, and mass
transit use.
• Objective 2. Support the blending of housing types, sizes, and styles to encourage a wide
variety of housing within each neighborhood in order to encourage a mingling of social
and economic classes.
• Goal 5.7.1 Housing–Promote an adequate supply of safe housing that is diverse in type,
density, and location, with a special emphasis on maintaining neighborhood character and
stability.
The proposal is not in conformance to or consistent with the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan
relating to the following transportation goals.
• Goal 10.8.1. Transportation System–Maintain and enhance the functionality of the
transportation system.
• Objective 4. Ensure that adequate interconnections are made throughout the
transportation system to ensure a variety of alternatives for trip routing.
2. Conformance to this title, including the cessation of any current violations.
The final plan shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman Municipal
Code. 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.
a. Planned unit development landscaping plans shall meet or exceed the standards of Chapter
18.48, and shall demonstrate the provision of a minimum of 15 landscaping performance points.
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 6
b. In accordance with Section 18.36.090.E, all on-site open space provided for PUD performance
points shall be held by the property owners association for common use or have a public use
easement.
c. Per Section 18.36.090.E, the applicant shall document the provision of twenty performance
points. A table showing the computed PUD open space shall be included on the final plan.
d. Per Section 18.36.060, the applicant must submit seven (7) copies a Final PUD Plan within one
(1) year of preliminary approval containing all of the conditions, corrections and modifications
to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department.
e. The applicant shall submit with the application for Final Plan review and approval, a written
narrative stating how each of the conditions of preliminary plan approval has been satisfactorily
addressed, and shall include a digital copy (pdf) of the entire Final Plan submittal. This narrative
shall in sufficient detail to direct the reviewer to the appropriate plat, plan, sheet, note, covenant,
etc. in the submittal.
3. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances and regulations.
Staff has found the application in general compliance with all other applicable law, ordinances, and
regulations, and the applicant is required to provide copies of all applicable permits prior to Final
Site Plan approval.
4. Relationship of site plan elements to conditions both on and off the property.
With the conditions outlined herein and the conditions of subdivision approval, the elements of the
Village Homesites PUD plan including the land use patterns, circulation, and open space are
arranged in an appropriate manner for a residential development and would be compatible with the
conditions both on and off the property.
5. The impact of the proposal on the existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions.
With the conditions outlined herein and the conditions of subdivision approval, the PUD plan
mitigates the impact of the proposal on the existing and anticipated traffic. This is reflected in
conditions of approval for the preliminary plat as required by the City Engineer.
6. Pedestrian and vehicular ingress, egress and circulation.
Pedestrian circulation is provided throughout Phases 1 and 2 with sidewalks on streets and a trail
system through the project. The PUD plan includes access off of Village Downtown Boulevard. All
lots are provided with vehicular access either from local streets and/or alleys.
The applicant has requested the following relaxations that impact vehicular circulation:
• Relaxation #6: Section 18.44.010.A, Relation to Undeveloped Areas. To not extend Village
Downtown Boulevard to the property line. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan
condition #6 and Preliminary Plat condition #18: The relaxation, from Section 18.44.010.A,
Relation to Undeveloped Areas, to not extend Village Downtown Boulevard to the property line
shall NOT be granted. Village Downtown Boulevard from the current terminus to Front Street,
and Front Street from the extended Village Downtown Boulevard to Broadway shall be
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 7
constructed to city standard streets. The streets shall be constructed or financially guaranteed
prior to final plat approval. They shall be constructed and installed prior to issuance of any
building permits.
• Relaxation #7: Section 18.44.010.B, Relation to Developed Areas. To not provide for a
continuation of Front Street. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #7
and Preliminary Plat condition #18: The relaxation, from Section 18.44.010.B, Relation to
Developed Areas, to not provide for a continuation of Front Street shall NOT be granted.
Village Downtown Boulevard from the current terminus to Front Street, and Front Street from
the extended Village Downtown Boulevard to Broadway shall be constructed to city standard
streets. The streets shall be constructed or financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval.
They shall be constructed and installed prior to issuance of any building permits.
The relaxations requested by the applicant for the extension of Village Downtown Boulevard to
connect to Front Street and improvement of Front Street do not provide for adequate vehicular
circulation. This lack of adequate interconnections to ensure a variety of alternatives for trip routing
fails to maintain and enhance the functionality of the transportation system. Therefore, this request is
not in conformance with Goal 10.8.1. of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan and denial of these
relaxations is recommended.
In addition, the applicant has requested a third relaxation that impacts vehicular circulation:
• Relaxation #8: Section 18.44.060.D, Level of Service Standards. To allow the East Main Street
and North Broadway Avenue intersection to operate at level of service less than “D”. This
relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #8 and Preliminary Plat condition
#19: The relaxation, from Section 18.44.060.D, Level of Service Standards, to allow the East
Main Street and North Broadway Avenue intersection to operate at level of service less than
“D” shall be granted provided the warrant analysis that was completed 2006 shall either be
updated or a letter from the traffic engineer submitted that certifies he has reviewed current
traffic data and that the results of the warrant analysis are still accurate. If a signal is now
warranted, it shall be installed or financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval. Any
required improvements shall be installed and accepted prior to issuance of any building permits.
7. Landscaping, including the enhancement of buildings, the appearance of vehicular use,
open space and pedestrian areas, and the preservation or replacement of natural
vegetation.
Per Section 18.48.020, planned unit development landscaping plans shall meet or exceed the
standards of the landscaping regulations. Based on the Wetlands Review Board’s review of the
application, Planning Staff has recommended the following conditions addressing preservation of
natural vegetation:
• Plat Condition #5: Within a 50-foot buffer extending from the wetland boundary, measures
should be taken to protect existing trees. The final plat/plan submittal shall describe the
preservation measures being implemented to protect the existing trees.
• Plat Condition #6: No building shall be located within a 50-foot buffer extending from the
wetland boundary.
8. Open space.
Per Section 18.36.090.E, the applicant shall document the provision of twenty performance points.
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 8
A table showing the computed PUD open space shall be included on the final plan.
The applicant has requested the following relaxations that impact private open space on individual
lots:
• Relaxation #1: Section 18.16.030.A, Lot Coverage. To allow lot coverage of up to 66 percent
instead of the maximum of 50 percent lot coverage. This relaxation is addressed by PUD
Preliminary Plan condition #1: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.030.A, Lot Coverage, to allow
lot coverage of up to 66 percent instead of the maximum of 50 percent lot coverage shall be
granted.
• Relaxation #2: Section 18.16.040.A, Lot Area and Width. To allow a minimum lot area of 4,128
square feet instead of the minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet. This relaxation is addressed by
PUD Preliminary Plan condition #2: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.040.A, Lot Area and
Width, to allow a minimum lot area of 4,128 square feet instead of the minimum lot area of
5,000 square feet shall be granted.
• Relaxation #3: Section 18.16.040.B, Lot Area and Width. To allow a minimum lot width of 36
feet instead of the minimum lot width of 50 feet. This relaxation was addressed by PUD
Preliminary Plan condition #3: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.040.B, Lot Area and Width,
to allow a minimum lot width of 36 feet instead of the minimum lot width of 50 feet shall be
granted.
The applicant has requested the following relaxations that impact public open space (park land):
• Relaxation #9: Section 18.50.060, Frontage. To allow park land to have no frontage on a street.
This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #9: The relaxation, from
Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to allow park land to have no frontage on a street shall be granted
due to site constraints including the railroad right-of-way, and the watercourse and floodplain.
Signs shall be installed at all public entrances to the park, with a larger park identification sign
being placed at the primary access to the park. All signage must comply with Parks Division
specifications.
• Relaxation #10: Section 18.50.060, Frontage. To not provide the direct pedestrian access to all
perimeters of the park. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #10:
The relaxation, from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not provide the direct pedestrian access to
all perimeters of the park shall be granted due to the small size of this mini park. Direct
pedestrian access shall be provided as shown in the proposed park plan.
• Relaxation #11: Section 18.50.060, Frontage. To not provide land for the required off street
parking for the park. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #11: The
relaxation, from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not provide land for the required off street
parking for the park shall be granted. The additional land as shown in the proposed plan shall
be provided. The applicant shall provide cash in lieu of the remaining additional land for a
parking area based on park perimeter (~ 760 feet) x 14 feet for ~ 10,640 square feet. As the
perimeter of the park is verified, this number shall be recalculated.
• Relaxation #12: Section 18.50.060, Frontage. To not construct or provide cash in lieu for the
additional off street parking. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition
#12: The relaxation, from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not construct or provide cash in lieu
of the additional off street parking shall NOT be granted. The applicant shall provide, in
addition to construction of the off street parking shown on the proposed plan, an equivalent
dollar value of non-parking improvements to the park or public trail corridor in lieu of
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 9
construction of additional parking.
9. Building location and height.
Maximum building height for each residential district shall be as follows:
Residential Building Height Table
Maximum
Building
Height in
Feet
Roof Pitch in Feet R-4
Less than 3:12 34
3:12 or greater but less than 6:12 38
6:12 or greater but less than 9:12 42
Equal to or greater than 9:12 44
10. Setbacks.
Minimum yards required for the R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-O and RMH districts are:
1. Front yard:
a. Adjacent to arterial streets as designated in the Bozeman growth policy - 25
feet.
b. Adjacent to collector streets as designated in the Bozeman growth policy - 20
feet.
c. Adjacent to local streets - 15 feet.
2. Rear yard - 20 feet.
a. Adjacent to arterial streets as designated in the Bozeman growth policy - 25
feet.
3. Side yard - 5 feet, or 0 feet for interior walls of townhouses.
The applicant has requested the following relaxations of setbacks:
• Relaxation #4: Section 18.16.050, Yards. To allow a minimum 4 foot side yard setback instead
of minimum 5 foot side yard setback. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan
condition #4: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.050, Yards, to allow a minimum 4 foot side
yard setback instead of minimum 5 foot side yard setback shall be granted.
• Relaxation #5: Section 18.16.050, Yards. To allow a 10 foot rear yard setback instead of
minimum requirement of 20 feet with alley opening doors. This relaxation is addressed by PUD
Preliminary Plan condition #5: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.050, Yards, to allow a 10 foot
rear yard setback instead of minimum requirement of 20 feet with alley opening doors shall NOT
be granted. All vehicle entrances into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to the rear
property line.
On numerous site visits to the Village Downtown Townhouses, vehicles have been observed parking
in front of the alley opening garage doors (in the 10-foot rear yard setback) and encroaching into the
alley. This situation can create an access dilemma for other residents and service providers, and
potentially an emergency access situation.
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 10
11. Lighting.
The project will need to provide subdivision lighting in accordance with Section 18.42.150.C.
Subdivision lighting includes street lighting and pathway intersection lighting. Prior to final plan
and plat approval, staff will review lighting plans for conformance with the code.
12. Provisions for utilities, including efficient public services and facilities.
The project will need to provide utilities in accordance with the Bozeman Municipal Code. The
design reports for utilities have been submitted to the Engineering Department for review.
13. Site surface drainage and storm water control.
Storm water detention areas have been shown of the plan. The design report for storm water control
has been submitted to the Engineering Department for review.
14. Loading and unloading areas.
No applicable.
15. Grading.
Plans and specifications for utilities, roads and storm water control will have to address grading and
be submitted to the Engineering Department for review.
16. Signage.
Not applicable.
17. Screening.
Not applicable.
18. Overlay district provisions.
Not applicable.
19. Other related matters, including relevant comment from affected parties.
Not applicable.
20. If the development includes multiple lots that are interdependent for circulation or other
means of addressing requirements of this title, 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.
21. Compliance with Title 17 Chapter 2, BMC.
Not applicable, this application was submitted prior to August 15, 2007.
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 11
Section 18.34.100 “City Commission Consideration and Findings for Conditional Use Permits”
In addition to the review criteria outlined above, the City Commission shall, in approving a
conditional use permit, find favorably as follows:
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.
This Planned Unit Development application for a residential development includes a request for
numerous relaxations and waivers from the Municipal Code. Other than the relaxations noted and
the conditions recommended for approval, the site is generally adequate in size and topography to
accommodate the potential uses and related site improvements.
2. That the proposed use will have no material adverse effect upon the abutting property.
Village Homesites Phases 1 and 2 PUD is at the northeastern end of Village Downtown Boulevard.
It is bordered on two sides by railroad right-of-way. Therefore, it will generally have no material
adverse effect upon the abutting property.
3. That any additional conditions stated in the approval are deemed necessary to protect the
public health, safety and general welfare. Such conditions may include, but are not limited
to:
a. Regulation of use. Planning Staff has not recommended any additional conditions addressing
regulation of use.
b. Special yards, spaces and buffers. Based on the Wetlands Review Board’s review of the
application, Planning Staff has recommended the following conditions addressing special
landscaped yards and buffers to ensure that the wetlands area is buffered:
• Plat Condition #2: If required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the northwest boundary
of Wetland #1 shall be redelineated.
• Plat Condition #3: A scaled drawing identifying any nearby surface water occurrences;
including watercourses, wetlands, watercourse setbacks, floodplains, etc. shall be provided
to verify that all BMC requirements are met.
• Plat Condition #4: A scaled drawing showing the redelineation of Wetland #1 which
includes updated representative wetland boundaries and setbacks from those boundaries shall
be provided. On that map provide proposed site development including: infrastructure, trails
bridges, stormwater facilities and lot layout. Also show wetland or water features that occur
on immediately adjacent land to Village Homesites property – along any property boundary
where proposed development is planned.
• Plat Condition #5: Within a 50-foot buffer extending from the wetland boundary, measures
should be taken to protect existing trees. The final plat/plan submittal shall describe the
preservation measures being implemented to protect the existing trees.
• Plat Condition #6: No building shall be located within a 50-foot buffer extending from the
wetland boundary.
c. Special fences, solid fences and walls. Planning Staff has recommended the following condition
addressing special fences adjacent to open space and parks:
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 12
• Plan Condition #15: Fences located in the side or rear yard setback of properties adjacent to
any park or open space shall not exceed a maximum height of 4 feet, and shall be of an open
construction. This requirement shall be addressed and demonstrated in the Architectural
Review development guidelines in the covenants.
d. Surfacing of parking areas. Planning Staff has not recommended any additional conditions
addressing surfacing of parking areas.
e. Requiring street, service road or alley dedications and improvements or appropriate bonds. All
public streets will be dedicated and improved. The applicant has requested two relaxations that
are related to street improvements.
• Relaxation #6: Section 18.44.010.A, Relation to Undeveloped Areas. To not extend Village
Downtown Boulevard to the property line. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary
Plan condition #6 and Preliminary Plat condition #18: The relaxation, from Section
18.44.010.A, Relation to Undeveloped Areas, to not extend Village Downtown Boulevard to
the property line shall NOT be granted. Village Downtown Boulevard from the current
terminus to Front Street, and Front Street from the extended Village Downtown Boulevard to
Broadway shall be constructed to city standard streets. The streets shall be constructed or
financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval. They shall be constructed and installed
prior to issuance of any building permits.
• Relaxation #7: Section 18.44.010.B, Relation to Developed Areas. To not provide for a
continuation of Front Street. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition
#7 and Preliminary Plat condition #18: The relaxation, from Section 18.44.010.B, Relation
to Developed Areas, to not provide for a continuation of Front Street shall NOT be granted.
Village Downtown Boulevard from the current terminus to Front Street, and Front Street
from the extended Village Downtown Boulevard to Broadway shall be constructed to city
standard streets. The streets shall be constructed or financially guaranteed prior to final
plat approval. They shall be constructed and installed prior to issuance of any building
permits.
Village Downtown Boulevard is a curved, ~1,300-foot cul-de-sac, which is an extension of East
Mendenhall Street at its intersection with North Broadway Avenue. In conjunction with the 5-lot
Broadway Boulevard Subdivision conditionally approved on July 22, 2002, a variance was
granted to not extend Village Downtown Boulevard to the southeast due to wetlands. A major
subdivision and a high-density site plan have been approved subsequent to the minor subdivision
in 2002. With approximately 112 dwelling units constructed or under construction, and 84
additional dwelling units approved, it seems to be appropriate to address connectivity and public
health and safety. Village Downtown Boulevard should be improved to Front Street with Front
Street improved to the northwest. According to information received from MRL, the City of
Bozeman’s Front Street right of way is senior to the MRL easement. Some proponents of cul-de-
sacs support them for safety reasons. Review of literature has found that well-connected streets
with plenty of foot traffic and many highly visible dwellings provide the safest locations. The
safest cul-de-sacs are short and straight, with many highly visible dwellings, and have direct
connectivity to through streets.
These relaxations do not provide for adequate vehicular circulation. This lack of adequate
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 13
interconnections to ensure a variety of alternatives for trip routing fails to maintain and enhance
the functionality of the transportation system. These two relaxations are not in conformance with
Goal 10.8.1. of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan and denial is recommended.
In addition, the applicant has requested a third relaxation related to street improvements.
• Relaxation #8: Section 18.44.060.D, Level of Service Standards; to allow the East Main
Street and North Broadway Avenue intersection to operate at level of service less than “D”.
The relaxation, from Section 18.44.060.D, Level of Service Standards, to allow the East
Main Street and North Broadway Avenue intersection to operate at level of service less than
“D” shall be granted provided the warrant analysis that was completed 2006 shall either be
updated or a letter from the traffic engineer submitted that certifies he has reviewed current
traffic data and that the results of the warrant analysis are still accurate. If a signal is now
warranted, it shall be installed or financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval. Any
required improvements shall be installed and accepted prior to issuance of any building
permits.
f. Regulation of points of vehicular ingress and egress. Planning Staff has not recommended any
additional conditions regulating vehicular access points.
g. Regulation of signs. Planning Staff has not recommended any additional conditions addressing
signage.
h. Requiring maintenance of the grounds. Planning Staff has not recommended any additional
PUD conditions addressing maintenance. Because of the maintenance costs with mini parks, the
RPABSRC has recommended:
• Plat Condition #7. Due to the small size of this mini park, the property owner’s association
shall be responsible of maintenance of the dedicated park in perpetuity.
i. Regulation of noise, vibrations and odors. Planning Staff has not recommended any additional
conditions addressing noise, vibrations and odors.
j. Regulation of hours for certain activities. Planning Staff has not recommended any additional
conditions addressing regulation of hours for certain activities.
k. Time period within which the proposed use shall be developed The applicant must submit the
Final Site Plan within 1 year of City Commission approval, and must undertake development of
the project within 2 years of final site plan approval.
l. Duration of use. Conditional use permits run with the land, subject to application and adherence
to all special conditions of approval. Planning Staff has not recommended any additional
conditions addressing duration of use.
m. Requiring the dedication of access rights. It is a code provision that all rights of way be
dedicated.
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 14
n. Other such conditions as will make possible the development of the City in an orderly and
efficient manner. Any additional conditions stated in this approval are deemed necessary to
protect the public health, safety and general welfare, and comply with the Bozeman 2020 plan.
Chapter 18.36.090.E.2 “Planned Unit Development Design Objectives and Criteria”
In addition to the review criteria outlined for site plan and conditional use permit review, the City
Commission shall, in approving a planned unit development, find favorably as follows:
All Development
(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?
Due to the following two relaxations requested by the applicant, this development does not comply
with all City requirements for streets.
• Relaxation #6: Section 18.44.010.A, Relation to Undeveloped Areas. To not extend Village
Downtown Boulevard to the property line. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan
condition #6 and Preliminary Plat condition #18: The relaxation, from Section 18.44.010.A,
Relation to Undeveloped Areas, to not extend Village Downtown Boulevard to the property line
shall NOT be granted. Village Downtown Boulevard from the current terminus to Front Street,
and Front Street from the extended Village Downtown Boulevard to Broadway shall be
constructed to city standard streets. The streets shall be constructed or financially guaranteed
prior to final plat approval. They shall be constructed and installed prior to issuance of any
building permits.
• Relaxation #7: Section 18.44.010.B, Relation to Developed Areas. To not provide for a
continuation of Front Street. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #7
and Preliminary Plat condition #18: The relaxation, from Section 18.44.010.B, Relation to
Developed Areas, to not provide for a continuation of Front Street shall NOT be granted.
Village Downtown Boulevard from the current terminus to Front Street, and Front Street from
the extended Village Downtown Boulevard to Broadway shall be constructed to city standard
streets. The streets shall be constructed or financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval.
They shall be constructed and installed prior to issuance of any building permits.
Village Downtown Boulevard is a curved, ~1,300-foot cul-de-sac, which is an extension of East
Mendenhall Street at its intersection with North Broadway Avenue. In conjunction with the 5-lot
Broadway Boulevard Subdivision conditionally approved on July 22, 2002, a variance was granted
to not extend Village Downtown Boulevard to the southeast due to wetlands. A major subdivision
and a high-density site plan have been approved subsequent to the minor subdivision in 2002. With
approximately 112 dwelling units constructed or under construction, and 84 additional dwelling
units approved, it seems to be appropriate to address connectivity and public health and safety.
Village Downtown Boulevard should be improved to Front Street with Front Street improved to the
northwest. According to information received from MRL, the City of Bozeman’s Front Street right
of way is senior to the MRL easement. Some proponents of cul-de-sacs support them for safety
reasons. Review of literature has found that well-connected streets with plenty of foot traffic and
many highly visible dwellings provide the safest locations. The safest cul-de-sacs are short and
straight, with many highly visible dwellings, and have direct connectivity to through streets.
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 15
These relaxations do not provide for adequate vehicular ingress, egress and circulation. This lack of
adequate interconnections to ensure a variety of alternatives for trip routing fails to maintain and
enhance the functionality of the transportation system. These two relaxations are not in conformance
with the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, and denial is recommended.
In addition, the applicant has requested a third relaxation related to streets.
• Relaxation #8: Section 18.44.060.D, Level of Service Standards; to allow the East Main Street
and North Broadway Avenue intersection to operate at level of service less than “D”. The
relaxation, from Section 18.44.060.D, Level of Service Standards, to allow the East Main Street
and North Broadway Avenue intersection to operate at level of service less than “D” shall be
granted provided the warrant analysis that was completed 2006 shall either be updated or a
letter from the traffic engineer submitted that certifies he has reviewed current traffic data and
that the results of the warrant analysis are still accurate. If a signal is now warranted, it shall
be installed or financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval. Any required improvements
shall be installed and accepted prior to issuance of any building permits.
(2) Does the project preserve or replace existing natural vegetation?
The WRB has recommended a condition for protection of existing trees adjacent to the wetlands.
• Plat Condition #5: Within a 50-foot buffer extending from the wetland boundary, measures
should be taken to protect existing trees. The final plat/plan submittal shall describe the
preservation measures being implemented to protect the existing trees.
(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?
With the conditions outlined herein and the conditions of subdivision approval, the elements of the
PUD plan are designed to produce an efficient, functionally organized and cohesive planned unit
development. The applicant has requested one relaxation that has the potential to limit the efficiency
and functionality of the project. On numerous site visits to the Village Downtown Townhouses,
vehicles have been observed parking in front of the alley opening garage doors (in the 10-foot rear
yard setback) and encroaching into the alley. This situation can create an access dilemma for other
residents and service providers, and potentially an emergency access situation.
• Relaxation #5: Section 18.16.050, Yards. To allow a 10 foot rear yard setback instead of
minimum requirement of 20 feet with alley opening doors. This relaxation is addressed by PUD
Preliminary Plan condition #5: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.050, Yards, to allow a 10 foot
rear yard setback instead of minimum requirement of 20 feet with alley opening doors shall
NOT be granted. All vehicle entrances into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to the rear
property line.
(4) Does the design and arrangement of elements of the site plan (e.g. building construction,
orientation, and placement; transportation networks; selection and placement of landscape
materials; and/or use of renewable energy sources; etc.) contribute to the overall reduction of
energy use by the project?
The availability of internal pedestrian circulation created by sidewalks, pathways, and the trail
system, and the general proximity to the downtown contribute to the overall reduction of energy use
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 16
by the project. However, the lack of connectivity to Front Street, fails to provide alternative
vehicular traffic route which would contribute to the overall reduction of energy use by the project.
(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?
Within the PUD, the residential areas are generally designed for some level of privacy, with open
space between each individual residence.
(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 §18.50.020, BMC?
This proposal provides the required amount of park land, and the open space calculation documents
the required amount of open space. The applicant has requested four relaxations related to the design
and arrangement of the required park land.
• Relaxation #9: Section 18.50.060, Frontage; to allow park land to have no frontage on a street.
This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #9: The relaxation, from
Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to allow park land to have no frontage on a street shall be granted
due to site constraints including the railroad right-of-way, and the watercourse and floodplain.
Signs shall be installed at all public entrances to the park, with a larger park identification sign
being placed at the primary access to the park. All signage must comply with Parks Division
specifications.
• Relaxation #10: Section 18.50.060, Frontage; to not provide the direct pedestrian access to all
perimeters of the park. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #10:
The relaxation, from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not provide the direct pedestrian access to
all perimeters of the park shall be granted due to the small size of this mini park. Direct
pedestrian access shall be provided as shown in the proposed park plan.
• Relaxation #11: Section 18.50.060, Frontage; to not provide land for the required off street
parking for the park. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition #11: The
relaxation, from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not provide land for the required off street
parking for the park shall be granted. The additional land as shown in the proposed plan shall
be provided. The applicant shall provide cash in lieu of the remaining additional land for a
parking area based on park perimeter (~ 760 feet) x 14 feet for ~ 10,640 square feet. As the
perimeter of the park is verified, this number shall be recalculated.
• Relaxation #12: Section 18.50.060, Frontage; to not construct or provide cash in lieu for the
additional off street parking. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan condition
#12: The relaxation, from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not construct or provide cash in lieu
of the additional off street parking shall NOT be granted. The applicant shall provide, in
addition to construction of the off street parking shown on the proposed plan, an equivalent
dollar value of non-parking improvements to the park or public trail corridor in lieu of
construction of additional parking.
(7) Performance. All PUDs shall earn at least twenty performance points.
The code requires the applicant to demonstrate the achievement of at least 20 performance points.
The open space shall be landscaped by the applicant in a manner that shall meet or exceed the
standards of Chapter 18.48.
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 17
(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?
The design of the PUD is an isolated pad and does not provide integrated circulation patterns with
connections to all adjacent streets. This issue can be corrected with the extension of Village
Downtown Boulevard to connection with Front Street and the improvement of Front Street to the
west.
Residential Development
(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 Bozeman growth policy?
The 19 single household lots in the Village Homesites project have a net density of 8 dwelling units
per acre.
(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?
The project provides for a variety of outdoor areas, with both private yards and public spaces. The
applicant has requested several relaxations that limit the size of the private yards; however these
relaxations can be offset by house design and yard improvements (vegetation and fencing).
• Relaxation #1: Section 18.16.030.A, Lot Coverage. To allow lot coverage of up to 66 percent
instead of the maximum of 50 percent lot coverage. This relaxation is addressed by PUD
Preliminary Plan condition #1: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.030.A, Lot Coverage, to allow
lot coverage of up to 66 percent instead of the maximum of 50 percent lot coverage shall be
granted.
• Relaxation #2: Section 18.16.040.A, Lot Area and Width. To allow a minimum lot area of 4,128
square feet instead of the minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet. This relaxation is addressed by
PUD Preliminary Plan condition #2: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.040.A, Lot Area and
Width, to allow a minimum lot area of 4,128 square feet instead of the minimum lot area of
5,000 square feet shall be granted.
• Relaxation #3: Section 18.16.040.B, Lot Area and Width. To allow a minimum lot width of 36
feet instead of the minimum lot width of 50 feet. This relaxation was addressed by PUD
Preliminary Plan condition #3: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.040.B, Lot Area and Width,
to allow a minimum lot width of 36 feet instead of the minimum lot width of 50 feet shall be
granted.
• Relaxation #4: Section 18.16.050, Yards. To allow a minimum 4 foot side yard setback instead
of minimum 5 foot side yard setback. This relaxation is addressed by PUD Preliminary Plan
condition #4: The relaxation, from Section 18.16.050, Yards, to allow a minimum 4 foot side
yard setback instead of minimum 5 foot side yard setback shall be granted.
(3) Does the project provide for outdoor areas for use by persons living and working in the
development for active or passive recreational activities?
The project provides outdoor areas that include a mini park, pedestrian trail(s), as well as areas for
passive recreation including a wetlands area.
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 18
(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.
(5) Is the overall project designed to enhance the natural environment, conserve energy and to
provide efficient public services and facilities?
With the conditions outlined herein and the conditions of subdivision approval, the overall project is
designed to enhance the natural environment, conserve energy and to provide efficient public
services and facilities. The Engineering Department has evaluated the water and sewer plans.
However, without the conditions outlined herein and the conditions of subdivision approval
requiring the connection of Village Downtown Boulevard to Front Street and improvement of Front
Street, the overall project does not conserve energy to the extent possible or provide for efficient
public streets.
(6) Residential Density Bonus.
Not applicable.
(7) Limited Commercial.
Not applicable.
(8) Does the overall PUD recognize and, to the maximum extent possible, preserve and
promote the unique character of neighborhoods in the surrounding area?
The overall project is a residential development on the edge of downtown. The Bozeman 2020 plan
has designated this area for “Residential” land use. Due to the relative isolation of this project from
the neighborhoods in the surrounding area, this proposal preserves the unique character of those
neighborhoods.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The relaxation, from Section 18.16.030.A, Lot Coverage, to allow lot coverage of up to 66
percent instead of the maximum of 50 percent lot coverage shall be granted.
2. The relaxation, from Section 18.16.040.A, Lot Area and Width, to allow a minimum lot area of
4,128 square feet instead of the minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet shall be granted.
3. The relaxation, from Section 18.16.040.B, Lot Area and Width, to allow a minimum lot width of
36 feet instead of the minimum lot width of 50 feet shall be granted.
4. The relaxation, from Section 18.16.050, Yards, to allow a minimum 4 foot side yard setback
instead of minimum 5 foot side yard setback shall be granted.
5. The relaxation, from Section 18.16.050, Yards, to allow a 10 foot rear yard setback instead of
minimum requirement of 20 feet with alley opening doors shall NOT be granted. All vehicle
entrances into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to the rear property line.
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 19
6. The relaxation, from Section 18.44.010.A, Relation to Undeveloped Areas, to not extend Village
Downtown Boulevard to the property line shall NOT be granted. Village Downtown Boulevard
from the current terminus to Front Street, and Front Street from the extended Village Downtown
Boulevard to Broadway shall be constructed to city standard streets. The streets shall be
constructed or financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval. They shall be constructed and
installed prior to issuance of any building permits.
7. The relaxation, from Section 18.44.010.B, Relation to Developed Areas, to not provide for a
continuation of Front Street shall NOT be granted. Village Downtown Boulevard from the
current terminus to Front Street, and Front Street from the extended Village Downtown
Boulevard to Broadway shall be constructed to city standard streets. The streets shall be
constructed or financially guaranteed prior to final plat approval. They shall be constructed and
installed prior to issuance of any building permits.
8. The relaxation, from Section 18.44.060.D, Level of Service Standards, to allow the East Main
Street and North Broadway Avenue intersection to operate at level of service less than “D” shall
be granted if the updated warrant analysis certifies that the results of the warrant analysis are still
accurate. If a signal is now warranted, it shall be installed or financially guaranteed prior to final
plat approval. Any required improvements shall be installed and accepted prior to issuance of
any building permits.
9. The relaxation, from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to allow park land to have no frontage on a
street shall be granted due to site constraints including the railroad right-of-way, and the
watercourse and floodplain. Signs shall be installed at all public entrances to the park, with a
larger park identification sign being placed at the primary access to the park. All signage must
comply with Parks Division specifications.
10. The relaxation, from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not provide the direct pedestrian access to
all perimeters of the park shall be granted due to the small size of this mini park. Direct
pedestrian access shall be provided as shown in the proposed park plan.
11. The relaxation, from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not provide land for the required off street
parking for the park shall be granted. The additional land as shown in the proposed plan shall be
provided. The applicant shall provide cash in lieu of the remaining additional land for a parking
area based on park perimeter (~ 760 feet) x 14 feet for ~ 10,640 square feet. As the perimeter of
the park is verified, this number shall be recalculated.
12. The relaxation, from Section 18.50.060, Frontage, to not construct or provide cash in lieu of the
additional off street parking shall NOT be granted. The applicant shall provide, in addition to
construction of the off street parking shown on the proposed plan, an equivalent dollar value of
non-parking improvements to the park or public trail corridor in lieu of construction of
additional parking.
13. A modification to the Village Lofts Final PUD Plan to shall be reviewed and approved prior to
Village Homesites Final PUD Plan / Final Plat approval. This modification shall address all
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 20
aspects of the Final PUD Plan impacted by the Village Homesites; including but not limited to
the provision of required parking, and the fulfillment of performance points, open space and lot
coverage requirements. The lot line between Lot 3A and Lot 3B may be adjusted as needed to
meet BMC requirements.
14. Fences located in the side or rear yard setback of properties adjacent to any park or open space
shall not exceed a maximum height of 4 feet, and shall be of an open construction. This
requirement shall be addressed and demonstrated in the Architectural Review development
guidelines in the covenants.
15. The Architectural Review section shall include development guidelines. The development
guidelines shall include written and visual examples to demonstrate architectural guidelines.
16. The owner shall executed and submit the following documents prior to final plan approval:
a. A certification of completion and compliance stating that they understand any conditions
of approval and the submitted final site plans or master site plan have complied with any
conditions of approval or corrections to comply with code provisions per Section
18.34.130.B.
b. A statement of intent to construct according to the final site plan. Such statement shall
acknowledge that construction not in compliance with the approved final site plan may
result in delays of occupancy or costs to correct noncompliance per Section 18.34.130.C.
c. A certification that it is their intent to comply with the requirements of the Bozeman
Municipal Code and any conditions considered necessary by the approval body.
17. That the right to a use and occupancy permit shall be contingent upon the fulfillment of all
general and special conditions imposed by the conditional use permit procedure pursuant to
Section 18.34.100.C.1 of the Bozeman Municipal Code.
18. That all of the special 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 site plan approval or commencement of the conditional
use pursuant to Section 18.34.100.C.2 of the Bozeman Municipal Code.
19. The final site plan shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman
Municipal Code. 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.
CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Staff, the Bozeman Development Review Committee (DRC), Design Review Board
(DRB), and other boards, when appropriate, have reviewed application #Z-08074 a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) with relaxations for the Village Homesites Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Preliminary Plan against the criteria set forth in Section 18.34.090, Section 18.34.100 and Chapter
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 21
#Z-08074 Village Homesites CUP / PUD Preliminary Plan Staff Report 22
18.36 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. Based on the evaluation of said criteria and findings by the
Planning Staff, the application, with conditions, is found to be in general compliance with the
adopted Growth Policy and the City of Bozeman Municipal Code, and recommends conditional
approval of said application with relaxations 1 through 4 and 8 through 11 as conditioned;
relaxations 5, 6, 7 and 12 shall be denied subject to the conditions and code provisions outlined in
this staff report.
The Planning Staff has identified various code provisions that are not currently met by this
application. Some or all of these items are listed in the findings and conditions of this staff report.
The applicant must comply with all other provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code, which are
applicable to this project prior to receiving Final Site Plan, Final Plat or Building Permit approval.
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.
THE BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION SHALL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION ON THIS
APPLICATION FOR A CUP WITH RELAXATIONS FOR THE VILLAGE HOMESITES
PUD. ANY AGGRIEVED PERSON AS SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.66 OF THE
BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE MAY APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE CITY
COMMISSION.
Cc: The Village Investment Group, Inc., 101 East Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59715
C&H Engineering and Surveying, Inc., 1091 Stoneridge Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718
1
Design Review Board Minutes – May 28, 2008
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2008
MINUTES
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
Chairperson Pre Tem Pentecost called the meeting of the Design Review Board to order at 5:35
p.m. in the upstairs conference room of the Alfred Stiff Professional Building, 20 East Olive
Street, Bozeman, Montana and directed the secretary to record the attendance.
Members Present Staff Present
Mel Howe Brian Krueger, Associate Planner
Michael Pentecost Lanette Windemaker, Contract Planner
Bill Rea Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary
Visitors Present
Thomas Bitnar
John Dunlap
Clint Litle
Lowell Springer
Tom Milleson
Laura Darnberger
Tony Renslow
ITEM 2. MINUTES OF MAY 14, 2008.
The minutes of May 14, 2008 were continued to the next meeting of the DRB.
ITEM 3. CONSENT ITEMS
1. Buffalo Wild Wings CUP/COA/Minor Mods to PUD #Z-08095 (Krueger)
2047 West Oak Street
* A Conditional Use Permit with a Certificate of Appropriateness and minor
modifications to the Stoneridge Planned Unit Development to allow an all
beverage liquor license for on-premise consumption and the addition of
443 sq. ft. of outdoor seating with related site improvements.
INFORMAL MOTION: Mr. Rea moved, Mr. Howe seconded, to forward a recommendation
of approval to the BOA for Buffalo Wild Wings CUP/COA/Minor Mods to PUD #Z-08095 to
the Board of Adjustment. The informal motion carried 3-0.
ITEM 4. INFORMAL REVIEW
1. Villas @ West Winds Informal #I-08009 (Windemaker)
Northeast of the intersection of Oak Street and Davis Lane
* An Informal Application for advice and comment on the construction of a
96 unit, multi- and single- family senior development in the West Winds
Subdivision.
2
Design Review Board Minutes – May 28, 2008
John Dunlap, Clint Litle, and Lowell Springer joined the DRB. Contract Planner Lanette
Windemaker presented the Staff Report noting the location of the proposal and that it was a
portion of the senior living area. She noted Staff had seen discrepancies between the submittal
and the PUD conditions of approval requirements; she added that Staff was concerned with the
proposed lack of vehicular and pedestrian connectivity and some of the parking stalls were not
long enough. She noted the proposal was subject to the Workforce Housing Ordinance due to its
size.
Mr. Dunlap stated that the conditions of approval for the PUD, with regard to the connectivity of
Breeze Lane, were allowed in the PUD as submitted. Planner Windemaker responded a
relaxation for the design would need to be requested from the UDO and approved by the City
Commission. And the proposed alignment of Breeze Lane would have to be reviewed and
approved by the City Commission. Mr. Dunlap noted Breeze Lane was to be a private street to
allow for flexibility in design. Planner Windemaker responded the request would be beyond
flexibility and would require a relaxation from the UDO and City Commission approval. Mr.
Dunlap stated the reason they had relocated the street was to be able to tie into the pedestrian
connections on the site. He stated there needed to be a full access intersection near the location
of the fire station and Breeze Lane had been modified to allow for that access and still maintain
pedestrian connections to active uses and open spaces within the PUD. Mr. Dunlap directed the
DRB to a computer presentation of what was being proposed as a senior living development to
add a three dimensional view to what the DRB was reviewing. He stated he felt the open space,
pedestrian connectivity, and use of the site would be important to the individuals living in the
community; he noted the proposal would complete the senior living campus with the Bozeman
Village Senior Center development.
Mr. Litle stated he disagreed with Planning and Engineering Staff with regard to the connectivity
of Breeze Lane due to watercourse requirements, the widening of Davis Lane, and the right-turn
only requirements within the PUD. Mr. Litle responded the arterial and collector streets
bordering the development could provide the necessary connections. He stated the applicant
wanted a strong pedestrian access development. Mr. Springer stated he thought Mr. Dunlap and
Mr. Litle had come up with a thoughtful solution given the difficult access to the site; adding the
proposed layout of the Breeze Lane would serve as a traffic calming device. Mr. Dunlap added
it would not be only street frontage pedestrian connectivity (public sidewalk), but would also
give an element of internal landscaped connectivity and activity sites as well.
Mr. Howe stated the largest problem he saw was the connectivity of Breeze Lane and it was an
ordinance requirement that needed to be taken care of; he added he did not think the proposal
was ready for DRB review until the issue had been taken care of.
Mr. Rea agreed that the proposal was not ready for the DRB to see as presented and he agreed
with Staff regarding the connectivity of Breeze Lane. He stated this project had the design of a
gated community. He stated he had seen the most blatant case of proposed franchise architecture
with this submittal and cautioned against the use of franchise architecture. He stated he would
like to see better connectivity to the campus to the east of the site and suggested a mid-block
crossing might be an option; he added there should be a park connection at Davis Lane. He
suggested a community of this nature would want to have access to the public bus system and
suggested those features be included. He stated raised and marked crosswalks would be a great
way to achieve traffic calming instead of using a meandering street. He stated the site seemed
3
Design Review Board Minutes – May 28, 2008
incredibly claustrophobic and tight even though the densities were low in that area. He stated the
back façade with stockade fences was an undesirable face to present to the community and
would give the impression of a gated community or stockade.
Chairperson Pro Tem Pentecost stated he agreed with previous DRB comments and noted the
DRB could not comment on transportation and circulation but the issue would need to be
resolved at Planning Staff level.
2. Hastings Mods to Improve Common Signage Plan Informal #I-08010 (Skelton)
1531 - 1601 West Main Street
* An Informal Application for advice and comment on modifications to an
approved common signage plan for the Hastings Shopping Center Site
Plan.
Lowell Springer joined the DRB. Senior Planner David Skelton presented the Staff Memo
noting Planning Staff had been anticipating the requested improvements to the common signage
plan. He noted Staff has agreed to allow the tenants of Building B to submit an informal
application on the behalf of the landowner to consider the re-treatment of the rear façade (Main
Street) of Building B that would allow additional architectural features, awnings, lighting
fixtures, and Drivit detailing. He noted a Certificate of Appropriateness Application would need
to be submitted as part of a formal application and approved as the site was located within the
West Main Street Entryway Corridor Overlay District. He noted the rear façade was still a
service area and continues to function in that capacity. As a result, additional features would be
necessary as part of the C.O.A, but would be somewhat limited due to the nature of current
service areas. He suggested horizontal banding and additional colors that could be used to create
some type of backdrop for the proposed signage. He noted a backdrop is typically included in
the signage allowances, but a larger backdrop could be entertained as part of an architectural
feature to allow for better façade design. He noted Staff did not know if there would be future
modifications requested to the structure and/or site as a whole, but the current situation was what
was being dealt with at this time. He noted the owner of the development chose during site plan
for the entire project to limit the signage facing onto the interior of the site. As a result, the
common signage plan for this property does not include placement of any signs on the south
façade of this building.
Mr. Springer stated there had been some misunderstandings with regard to the site and its
orientation to Main Street with its grade being five feet lower than that of Main Street. He stated
he was supportive of any decisions the staff and DRB made to give the new tenants as many
allowances for signage as possible. He stated the offensive rear façade could be made better
with expanded metal and a piped steel gate that could make the service area more presentable.
He noted there would never be a normal street to site entrance unless the site was raised in grade
five feet.
Mr. Howe stated he agreed with Staff recommendations, but was wondering who was
responsible for the placement of the vinyl banners currently on the facade. Planner Skelton
responded Staff allowed the tenants to put up 30 day banners while the landowner and City were
addressing the completion of the remaining site improvements required with the project. This
would be in lieu of permanent signage to see in the interim an example of improvements to the
4
Design Review Board Minutes – May 28, 2008
façade that would be evident with the installation of signage. Mr. Howe stated he hoped the
issue could be resolved and come out fairly for the new tenants and the citizens of Bozeman.
Mr. Rea stated he loved the changes that had been made already; such as the institution of grass
and north façade improvements. He suggested the placement of a dark green band with signage
for the south façade and suggested Justin’s sign was a good example, but seemed too large. He
stated he would love to see a trellis or other unifying element below the EFIS grid at roughly the
same height as the awning which could contain additional lighting or hide the gas meters. He
stated he thought the signage had been proposed too low on the façade and it should be placed
within the EFIS grid. Mr. Springer suggested brick columns could be instituted on the south
façade and the rear doors could be recessed. Mr. Rea agreed columns could be an option.
Chairperson Pro Tem Pentecost stated Mr. Springer had touched on the design challenge of the
south façade and suggested working from the existing form. He stated the canopy could be
integrated into the signage and could be achieved through the use of color. He added it was
important the security door be considered carefully in the redesign.
ITEM 5. PROJECT REVIEW
1. Village Homesites Prel. Plan Ph. 1 & 2 PUD #Z-08074 (Windemaker)
Village Downtown Boulevard/Village Crossing Way
* A Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan to subdivide two lots into
20 lots for R-4 (Residential High Density District) development.
Michael Delaney, Tony Renslow, and Laura Darnberger joined the DRB. Contract Planner
Lanette Windemaker presented the Staff Report noting the proposed PUD would be reviewed by
the City Commission. She stated the applicant had requested 12 relaxations and explained those
requests. She stated Staff was not supportive of the requested 10 foot instead of 20 foot setback
relaxation request, Staff was not supportive of the parking relaxation request, and Staff was not
supportive of the requested road width relaxations. She stated some of the conditions in the Staff
Report would be pertinent only to the subdivision requirements and was not within the purview
of the DRB.
Mr. Renslow stated the goal had been to develop 19 single-family lots with similar architectural
guidelines to maintain continuity throughout the site. He directed the DRB to color renderings of
the proposed architectural style of the development that would stay in keeping with the Village
Downtown Subdivision design; he added the same materials and color palettes would be used,
but individual owners could apply for variances and the Village Investment Architectural Review
Board would need to review and approve those applications.
Mr. Rea asked how the applicant felt about Staff recommendations as presented in the Staff
Report. Mr. Delaney responded if Front Street was required to connect, the project would not be
pursued. He noted the wetlands delineation was reviewed and exhaustive studies had been done
to determine where the wetlands were. He noted he did not think the wetlands delineation
needed modified. Mr. Renslow added that the wetlands on the site are a sales point for the
development and there were many people attracted to those areas. He noted the traffic at Main
Street and Broadway Avenue was being updated to confirm that nothing had changed. Mr.
Delaney noted that parking where not allowed was being enforced. He stated if there was a fire,
there was easy access to the structures as proposed.
5
Design Review Board Minutes – May 28, 2008
Mr. Howe asked how someone was kept from building something that was different from what
was suggested. Mr. Delaney responded the design guidelines and architectural review committee
would require review of their plan prior to building permit submittal. Mr. Howe asked if some
sort of enforcement was in place. Mr. Delaney responded the HOA would enforce the design
guidelines adamantly.
Mr. Howe stated he thought the delineation, general idea, and style seemed like good choices and
would blend nicely with what exists. He stated he saw no reason to put Front Street through as
long as fire access was maintained in that location and he saw no problem with the requested
relaxation for a 10 foot setback instead of a 20 foot setback.
Mr. Rea stated he liked the new renderings better than what exists on the site as there would be
more texture. He suggested not including the proposed dual chimney design. He suggested
sustainability features be instituted in the proposal and that the scale of the buildings could be
brought down slightly. He stated he could not believe that Front Street had come back for
discussion; he noted he did not think it appropriate for Front Street to go through unless it was
for safety purposes. He stated he thought Bozeman had gotten “stoplight happy” and noted he
would hate to see a light installed at Main Street and Broadway Avenue. He stated he supported
Staff conditions as stated.
Chairperson Pro Tem Pentecost stated the proposal was great because the pattern language had
been carried through in a different and unique way. He stated he struggled with the proposed
twin chimney design and suggested accentuating a one chimney design; he noted two chimneys
would be very symmetrical. He stated he did not support Front Street going through as it would
be detrimental to the development and he was supportive of the requested relaxation to allow a
10 foot setback instead of a 20 foot setback and he was supportive of the current wetland
delineation. Mr. Rea and Mr. Howe concurred with Chairperson Pro Tem Pentecost with regard
to the wetland delineation.
2. First Security Bank SP/COA #Z-08068 (Bristor)
208 East Main Street (Continued from 5/14/08 to 6/11/08.)
* A Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the
partial demolition of the bank and rear parking area for a new bank and
parking lot design with related site improvements.
ITEM 6. PUBLIC COMMENT – (15 – 20 minutes)
{Limited to any public matter, within the jurisdiction of the Design Review
Board, not on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.}
There was no public available for comment at this time.
ITEM 7. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further comments from the DRB, the meeting was adjourned at 7:24 p.m.
________________________________
Michael Pentecost, Chairperson Pro Tem
City of Bozeman Design Review Board
Bozeman Recreation & Parks Advisory Board
P.O. Box 1230 · Bozeman, MT · 59771
Park Master Plan Review
PLANNER: Lanette Windemaker
FROM: Subdivision Review Committee
SUBJECT: Village Homesites
REVIEWED ON: May 9, 2008
COMMENTS:
• Developer is requesting 4 relaxations
o Park to have no street frontage
o Park to provide no direct pedestrian access to all perimeters
o Park not to provide land for required off street parking
o Developers asks to waive cash in lieu for additional off street parking
• Park is small (.72 acres, .57 required)
RECOMMENDATION:
• Due to the small size of the park, the subdivision review committee has no objection to
the first three relaxation requests, but feels that there is no reason to waive the cash in
lieu requirement. We suggest that cash in lieu be applied to park development, e.g.
park benches.
• As parks smaller than 1 acre create maintenance issues with the City Parks Department
(1 acre is the minimum size recommended in the PROST Plan), we suggest that park
maintenance be entrusted to the HOA in perpetuity and not subject to transfer to City
responsibility in the event of the creation of a Citywide Park Maintenance District.
FISCAL EFFECTS:
• The amount of cash in lieu is not known at this time.
Respectfully submitted,
Sandy Dodge, Chairman, RPAB
Report compiled on May 12, 2008