Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResidential Emphasis Mixed Use Zoning Code Amendment.pdf 1 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Brian Krueger, Associate Planner Tim McHarg, Planning Director Chris Kukulski, City Manager SUBJECT: Residential Emphasis Mixed Use (REMU) Zone Code Amendment Application #Z-09241 Work Session MEETING DATE: October 11, 2010 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Policy Discussion Item RECOMMENDATION: Consider the presented information and provide input on the development of the REMU zone and staff questions outlined in this report. An outline agenda (Attachment 1) formulated by both the applicant and staff for the meeting is provided and recommended for use during the meeting. BACKGROUND: RTR Holdings II, Randy Hecht, and Bob Emery represented by GGLO Seattle, WA and Intrinsik Architecture Bozeman, MT have requested that the City create a new zoning district to be called the Residential Emphasis Mixed Use (REMU) district. The proposal includes suggested language for intent, uses, setbacks, lot coverage and area, and special development standards. The new district would add a new chapter, 18.17 REMU to the Bozeman Municipal Code. This proposal is for new code language only; any proposal to implement the REMU district would first require a zone map amendment for a specific property. The Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Land Use Designation was created through the process to update the Bozeman Community Plan. The Bozeman Community Plan provides a land use description for the new category (Attachment 2). The general vision is for a zone that is primarily residential, dominated by housing, high density, walkable, supported by commercial uses, implemented at different scales, well connected to park and transportation infrastructure, and includes high quality urban design. The Community plan goes on to state that “The Residential Emphasis Mixed Use land use category does not have a directly corresponding zoning district which would allow the full expression of the range of land uses contemplated as of the writing of this plan.” Under State Law Section 76-2-304 MCA within the “Purposes of zoning” it states that zoning regulations must be made in accordance with a growth policy. The Residential Emphasis Mixed Use District could either be developed directly by the City, whether via through staff or a consultant, or an application for a zone code amendment could be submitted by a private party for the City to review. In this case we have the latter. 54 2 The applicants and their consultants contacted the City very early in the process, in order to involve City planning staff and to gain general support from the Planning Department to pursue the creation of the REMU zoning district. Informal meetings between the applicant’s consultants and staff begin in late 2008 and continued through 2009. The formal application for a zone code amendment was submitted December 16, 2009. The following summarizes the review process to date: Late 2008 and 2009 Occasional informal meetings and correspondence with City staff December 16, 2009 Formal application for zone code amendment submitted January 2010 Initial staff review and comment to the applicant. Applicant requests additional time to review comments and propose changes. March 5, 2010 Revised chapter language submitted by applicant. Staff and DRC review. Combined meeting of Planning Board and Zoning Commission planned. April/May 2010 Applicant defers public meetings and additional review in order to review comments and propose changes. June 29, 2010 Revised chapter language submitted by applicant. Continued staff review. August 17, 2010 Combined meeting of Planning Board and Zoning Commission September 7, 2010 Zoning Commission Public Hearing and recommendation October 11, 2010 City Commission work session The Planning Board reviewed the proposal through the lens of the growth policy at a combined meeting with the Zoning Commission and strongly supported the proposal as consistent with the land use description within the Community Plan and found that it maintained the standards and character of the City. The zoning district language has evolved as staff has reviewed the proposal and the applicant has responded to City and review board comments. The chapter has evolved into two current drafts, that of the City and the applicant. Both drafts were provided to the Zoning Commission for consideration and recommendation during their September 7, 2010 public hearing. These drafts are included as Attachments 3 and 4 to this report. The Zoning Commission recommendation for approval and comments for approval were based upon the City draft. Staff reports and minutes from Planning Board and Zoning Commission review can be found in Attachments 5-8. Staff, the applicant, and Zoning Commission acknowledge that the proposal is still evolving, as there are several items that still need further development and resolution prior to the district being presented in final ordinance form and prior to a final public hearing and formal Commission review. Though additional work needs to be completed prior to district approval, many key agreements have been made through the process in order to implement the zoning district: 1. A requirement for Master Site Plan or Planned Unit Developments for development applications over 10 acres in size. 2. Limitation of uses by size rather than regulation as conditional uses. 3. Land use mix: maximum 30% commercial. 4. Limitation of larger retail uses by number per 100 acres. 5. No land use concurrency requirements. 6. Regulation of commercial/mixed use buildings heights by stories not by feet. 55 3 UNRESOLVED ISSUES: The items that still need resolution prior to the district being presented in final ordinance form and prior to a final public hearing and formal Commission review are as follows: 1. Clarify the administration and tracking of the land use mix with a maximum 30% commercial. As one of the primary elements within the district, that of mixed uses, how is the required mix implemented on a project to project basis and administered over time with different property owners and projects? 2. Determine if specific street standards should be included within the zoning language or deferred to the City’s Transportation Plan. The applicant has proposed alternative street standards that could apply to streets within the REMU zone. The Engineering Department has opined that they would prefer that the standards be administered through the Transportation Plan with alternatives considered on a project to project basis. Planning Staff supports street section flexibility within the zone. 3. Determine if alleys should be required within the district. The potential for alleyway requirement provision had been included in the Growth Policy update as an objective that states the City should require alleys where feasible. The City could choose to require alleys with this zoning district. 4. Determine if convenience uses including drive-throughs should be permitted outright in the zone. Are drive in and drive through uses consistent with the REMU goals to create a primarily residential, dense, land use efficient, walkable, high quality urban environment? 5. Determine a regulatory approach for student/group congregate housing. This specific housing category is also yet to be legally defined. Providing a new form of housing for students or groups of individuals within the City is acknowledged as beneficial to the City. A definition of this new housing type must be carefully drafted to assure compliance with Federal Housing statutes. Depending on the final definition of this housing type other sections of the code related to parkland, openspace, and others may have to be altered to accommodate the new category. 6. Role of exhibits that demonstrate the standards of the zone. Visual examples of various lot layouts demonstrating the various housing and commercial standards of the zone can be beneficial to residents, users, and developers of the REMU District. The exhibits must be carefully scrutinized to assure compliance with all other code sections. The codification process will result in specific requirements for placement of exhibits within the ordinance. 7. Procedural implementation. As typical with the addition of significant changes to the Development Ordinance (Title 18 BMC) there is invariably an impact on many other chapters and sections within the code. This is due to the interrelated nature of many code standards and the current form of the code. Staff has identified the following sections that will need to be revised to accommodate the REMU district. The REMU district, if adopted in its current draft form would not legally function without modifications to the following sections: 18.54 Telecommunications Chapter, 18.40.030 Accessory Dwelling Units, 18.36 PUD Chapter, 18.52 Sign Chapter, 18.80 Definitions Chapter, and 18.50 Openspace/Parkland Chapter. The applicant has not drafted this language and it is anticipated that staff would commit resources to finalizing amendments to these sections with Commission support. At this time staff seeks feedback and direction from the Commission on the following questions: 56 4 1. Does the Commission agree with the Zoning Commission and Planning Board that the zone is being developed consistent with the vision in the Growth Policy? 2. Should staff begin work to develop final Code revisions in order to implement the REMU zone as indicated above? 3. Are there any specific areas of concern at this time regarding the proposed new REMU zone that staff and the applicant should analyze and resolve? 4. Would the Commission like to consider setting a date for a public hearing and vote to finalize the chapter and the other required concurrent code amendments? Attachments: Attachment 1 Proposed Work Session Agenda Attachment 2 REMU Land Use Description, Bozeman Community Plan Attachment 3 City Comment REMU District draft Attachment 4 Applicant’s proposed REMU District Draft Attachment 5 Combined Planning Board and Zoning Commission Staff Report Attachment 6 Minutes from Planning Board/Zoning Commission combined meeting August 17, 2010 Attachment 7 Staff Report Addendum to Zoning Commission Attachment 8 Zoning Commission meeting minutes September 7, 2010 Report compiled on: September 29, 2010 57 Outline for Commission Work Session on the Residential Emphasis Mixed Use District (REMU) 1. Introduction (5 minutes) a. Purpose of work session b. Applicant/consultants 2. Growth Policy history (5 minutes) a. REMU category creation b. Land Use description c. Locations on land use map 3. Process to date (5 minutes) a. Zone development history & timeline by applicant and staff b. Combined Zoning Commission and Planning Board meeting c. Zoning Commission recommendation 4. Applicant’s presentation (15 minutes) a. Vision of the zone b. Process and key decisions c. Goals moving forward 5. Present and discuss zone district drafts (20 minutes) a. Staff b. Applicant c. Identification of key differences and reasoning between drafts 6. Key agreements and remaining issues of chapter text development (10 minutes) a. Agreements i. Requirement for Master Site Plan or Planned Unit Development ii. Limitation of users by size rather than regulation as conditional uses iii. Land use mix : maximum 30% commercial iv. Limitation of larger retail uses by number per 100 acres v. No land use concurrency requirements vi. Regulation of commercial/mixed use heights by stories not by feet b. Remaining Issues i. Clarify administration and tracking of Land Use Mix ii. Street standards iii. Alleys iv. Convenience Use Drive-Through v. Regulatory approach to congregate/group/student housing 1. Definition of congregate/group/student housing vi. Role of exhibits vii. Procedural Implementation 7. Additional UDO revisions that are required to apply and implement REMU zone (5 minutes) a. 18.54 Telecommunications b. 18.40.030 Accessory Dwelling Units c. 18.36 PUD chapter (residential v. commercial PUD language) d. 18.52 Sign chapter e. 18.80 Definitions section for congregate/group/student housing f. 18.50 Open space/parkland requirements for the congregate housing if they are not considered individual dwelling units 8. Implementation process (5 minutes) a. Vote to create chapter/define REMU b. Annexation (if currently not in city)/Zone Map Amendment c. Subdivision d. Site Specific Development application 58 e. Final Site Plan/Final Plat f. Building Permits 9. Commission feedback and direction (15 minutes) a. Does the Commission agree with the Zoning Commission and Planning Board that the zone is being developed consistent with the vision in the Growth Policy? b. Should staff begin the work to develop UDO revisions in order to implement the REMU zone as indicated above? c. Are there any specific areas of concern at this time regarding the proposed new REMU zone that staff and the applicant should analyze and resolve? d. Set date and format of public hearing and vote to finalize the chapter. 59 60 61 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 1 of 18 9/3/2010 ATTACHMENT A CHAPTER 18.17 9-1-10 Edits RESIDENTIAL EMPHASIS MIXED-USE ZONING DISTRICT (REMU) 18.17.010 INTENT AND PURPOSE OF RESIDENTIAL EMPHASIS MIXED-USE ZONING DISTRICT The intent and purpose of the Residential Emphasis Mixed-Use (“REMU”) district is to establish areas within Bozeman that are mixed-use in character and to provide options for a variety of housing, employment, retail and neighborhood service opportunities within a new or existing neighborhood, while providing predictability to landowners and residents in uses and standards. There is a rebuttable presumption that the uses set forth for the district will be compatible both within the district and to adjoining zoning districts when the standards of Title 18 are met and any applicable conditions of approval have been satisfied. Additional requirements for development apply within overlay districts. All development is subject to §18.02.050, BMC. A. It is further the intent of this district to implement the principles of the adopted growth policy: Neighborhoods 1. Create self-sustaining neighborhoods that will lay the foundation for healthy lifestyles; 2. Support compact, walkable developments that promote balanced transportation options; 3. Have residential as the majority use with a range of densities; 4. Provide for a diverse array of commercial and civic uses supporting residential; 5. Have residential and commercial uses mixed vertically and/or horizontally; 6. Locate adjacent to residential neighborhoods that can sustain commercial uses within walking distance and a wider range of housing types; 7. Encourage developments that exhibit the physical design characteristics of vibrant, urban, and pedestrian-oriented complete streets; Sense of Place 8. Support or add to an existing neighborhood context; 9. Enhance an existing neighborhood’s sense of place and strive to make it more self- sustainable; 10. Encourage a new neighborhood commercial center(s) with a unique identity and strong sense of place; 11. Develop commercial and mixed-use areas that are safe, comfortable, and attractive to pedestrians; 12. Reinforce the principle of streets as public places that encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel, transit, on-street parking and physical elements of complete streets;. Natural Amenities 13. Preserve and integrate the natural amenities into the development; 14. Appropriately balance a hierarchy of both parks and public spaces that are within the neighborhood; Formatted: Font: Not Bold 62 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 2 of 18 9/3/2010 Centers 15. Group uses of property to create vibrant centers; 16. Where appropriate create a center within an existing neighborhood; 17. Facilitate proven, market driven projects to ensure both long and short-term financial viability; 18. Allow an appropriate blend of complimentary mixed land uses including, but not limited to, retail, offices, commercial services, restaurants, bars, hotels, recreation and civic uses, and housing, to create economic and social vitality; 19. Foster the master plan development into a mix of feasible, market driven uses; 20. Emphasize the need to serve the adjacent, local neighborhood and also the greater Bozeman area as well; 21. Maximize land use efficiency by encouraging shared use parking; Integration of Action 22. Support existing infrastructure that is within and adjacent to REMU zones; 23. Add to existing transportation and open space network, encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel; 24. Encourage master planned communities with thoughtful development; 25. Provide flexibility in the placement and design of new developments and redevelopment to anticipate changes in the marketplace; 26. Provide roadway and pedestrian connections to residential areas; 27. Facilitate development (land use mix, density and design) that supports public transit, where applicable; 28. Provide flexibility in phasing to help insure both long and short term financial viability of the project as a whole; Urban Density 29. Encourage efficient land use by facilitating, high-density, single or multi-story housing, commercial and retail development; 30. Provide transitions between high-traffic streets and adjacent residential neighborhoods; and Sustainability 31. Promote sustainable communities through careful planning. B. To accomplish in the intent of the district, the REMU district may be located within existing and established neighborhoods, or located in new undeveloped areas of the City. Implementation of certain regulations herein may be implemented with regard to the specific characteristics and location of a development site. REMU districts should be located adjacent to or near planned or existing residential development to enhance walking and bicycle use. 18.17.020 AUTHORIZED USES. A. Uses in the Residential Emphasis Mixed-Use district are depicted in the table below. Principal uses are indicated with a “P,” conditional uses are indicated with a “C,” accessory uses are indicated with an “A,” and uses which are not permitted within the district are indicated by a “-.” 63 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 3 of 18 9/3/2010 B. The uses listed are deliberately broad and some are given special definitions in Chapter 18.80, BMC. The intent of this method is to provide general guidance for uses while allowing the unique needs and circumstances of each proposal to be specifically addressed through the review process. Some uses are the subject of special regulations contained in Chapter 18.40, BMC. C. Uses Required and Limited 1. REMU districts are intended to be developed with a mix of uses that encourage a range of building types, scales, densities, and site configurations. 2. Developments are encouraged to include non-residential uses, especially commercial and neighborhood support services, mixed horizontally and/or vertically, to promote compact, walkable, and sustainable neighborhoods. 3. Non-residential uses shall not exceed 30 percent of the total gross building square footagearea of all uses within the a contiguously master plannedzoned area unless otherwise allowed in this section or , through a Master Site Plan or Planned Unit Development (PUD) review. The calculation shall be base upon the existing building square footage or that approved through a valid final site plan. 4. For the purposes of calculating the percentage of a use within the site development, the gross square foot floor area of building for each use shall be utilized. 5. Home-based businesses are not considered non-residential uses and shall not be limited by the provisions of the Section. 6. Non-residential uses intended for public benefit and shared public amenities shall not be limited by the provisions of this Section. These uses include, but are not limited to, schools, parks, community centers, city operated services, and structured parking facilities. D. Development Review Applications 1. To accomplish the intent of the district, the REMU district is anticipated to be located on sites ten acres or larger. Development review applications for sites in the REMU district greater than, or equal to, ten acres will be first subject to review as a Master Site Plan per Chapter 18.34; or as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) per 18.36, as determined by the applicant. 2. Project applications for subsequent project phases in compliance with an approved Master Site Plan or PUD may be reviewed as a Site Plan Review or Sketch Plan Review in accordance with Chapter 18.34. 3. All development review applications for sites property in the REMU district smaller than ten acres are subject to the standards in this chapter; and may be subject to review as a Master Site Plan per Chapter 18.34 by decision of the Planning Director, upon finding: a. The development application is for a site considered a major infill site, having a significant impact on an existing neighborhood; or may create a center within an existing neighborhood; b. The proposed development is located at an intersections deemed to have special significance; or c. The proposed development may have a significant impact on existing transportation and open space network, pedestrian and bicycle travel;or. c.d. The proposed development requires a multi-year approval and multiple phases for completion. 64 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 4 of 18 9/3/2010 65 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 5 of 18 9/3/2010 Table 17-1 TABLE OF USES MAXIMUM GROSS BUILDING AREA AUTHORIZED USES Accessory Dwelling Unit P Apartments and Apartment Buildings P Arts and Entertainment Center 12,000 sf P Assisted Living/Elderly Care Facilities P Automobile Fuel Sales C Automobile Parking Lot or Garage (public or private) P Automobile Washing Establishment C Banks and Other Financial Institutions P Bed & Breakfast P Business, Technical or Vocational School P Community Centers P Community Residential Facilities P Convenience Uses excluding drive-in and drive-through uses 5,000 sf PC Cooperative Household P Convenience Use Restaurant excluding drive-in and drive-through uses 5,000 sf P Daycare – family, group, or center P Essential Services (Type II) C Extended-Stay Lodgings 40,000 sf P Health and Exercise Establishments P Home-based Businesses (subject to 18.17.030.E only) P Hospitals C Hotel or Motel 40,000 sf P Laboratories, Research and Diagnostic 10,000 sf P Laundry Service Center P Light Goods Repair P Lodging Houses P Manufacturing (light and completely indoors) 5,000 sf P Museum P Medical and Dental Offices, Clinics and Centers P Meeting Hall P Offices P Other Buildings & Structures (typically accessory to permitted uses) A Personal and Convenience Services P Pet Grooming Shop P Printing Offices and Publishing Establishments 5,000 sf P Fraternity, Sorority or Lodge P 66 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 6 of 18 9/3/2010 Public Buildings P Refuse and Recycling Containers A Restaurants P Retail Uses less than or equal to 5,000sf 5,000 sf P 1 Retail Uses greater than 5,000sf and less than or equal to 12,000 sf 12,000 sf P 1, 2 Retail Uses greater than 12,000sf and less than or equal to 25,000sf 25,000 sf P 1, 3 Sales of Alcohol for On-Premise Consumption – No gaming allowed C Single household dwelling P Student Congregate Housing Facility P 4 Three- or four-household dwelling P Townhouses (five attached units or less) P Two-household dwelling P Veterinary Clinic C Wholesale Distributors With On-Premise Retail Outlets (providing warehousing is limited to commodities which are sold on the premises) 10,000 sf C Wholesale Establishments (ones that use samples, but do not stock on premises) 5,000 sf C Any Use, Except Adult Businesses and Casinos Approved as Part of a Planned Unit Development Subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.36, BMC. C 1 Excluding Adult Businesses as defined in Chapter §18.80.BMC. 2 Limited to no more than four structures per 100 acres of contiguous master planned developmentzoned area and subject to 18.17.020.C. 3 Limited to no more than two structures per 100 acres of contiguous master planned developmentzoned area and subject to 18.17.020.C. 4 StudentCongregate Housing Facility is defined as: “A living facility with five or more dwelling units for persons intended to be enrolled in an institution of higher learning. Student Housing Facilities are not limited to the restrictions for number of occupants defined in 18.80.1390, but must provide adequate parking and open space in accordance with this Title.” 18.17.030 SPECIAL STANDARDS A. The Special Standards set forth in this section are minimum standards for a development review application. Standards not specifically addressed by this section are subject to the standards set forth in this Title. B. When development in a REMU district uses the PUD process for land use approval, any combination of the following methods, in addition to the performance point criteria listed in 18.36.090 BMC, may earn performance points. 1. Designed to meet LEED-ND certification requirements (20 10points) 2. Inclusion of a Low Impact Development Plan (6 points) that includes the following: a. On-site stormwater treatment systems that exceed the requirements of BMC Title 14, Stormwater, including but not limited to: incorporating drainage methods and technologies that treat, detain and/or infiltrate stormwater as close as possible to the source of run-off and the use of natural drainage systems across sites, rather than underground closed-pipe systems to the extent feasible. Natural drainage systems reduce the negative impacts of stormwater runoff by redesigning residential streets Comment [BK1]: Move to 18.80 Definitions Chapter. Definition needs to be further developed to limit contradictions with definition of dwelling and household that currently exist in 18.80. The definition must be in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Housing Act. 67 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 7 of 18 9/3/2010 to take advantage of plants, trees, and soils to clean runoff and manage stormwater flows. Vegetated swales, stormwater cascades, and small wetland ponds allow soils to absorb water, slowing flows and filtering out many contaminants. b. The Low Impact Development Plan shall be integrated with the Snow Storage and Management Plan c. At least 75% of new planting should be chosen from the list of Drought Tolerant Plants & Xeriscaping in Montana (2010), produced by the Montana Nursery & Landscape Association, or approved/updated equivalent list approved by the City of Bozeman. Any species listed as noxious or invasive in Montana shall be avoided. d. Inclusion of weather-based irrigation controllers. e. Limitations in the Covenants or Design Guidelines on the amount and type of sod permitted for individual residential lots. 3. Sustainable Design and Construction (6 points) a. Covenants or Design Guidelines that include a commitment to design the majority of buildings to meet LEED certification requirements or approved equivalent certification approved by the City of Bozeman. Equivalent certification programs will also be considered during Preliminary PUD review. b. Energy use reduction. Residential Covenants or Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to build ENERGY STAR certified homes, which meet EPA guidelines that make them 20–30% more efficient than standard homes. Non-residential Covenants and Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to build and certify buildings that meet the EPA’s ENERGY STAR challenge, a program that applies to offices, schools, post offices, retail, banks, warehouses and residence halls, or approved equivalent program. Equivalent programs will also be considered during Preliminary PUD review. c. Water use reduction. Covenants or Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to use WaterSense certified products for all kitchen, bathroom and irrigation hardware. WaterSense is an EPA-sponsored partnership program that promotes water efficiency and expands the market for water-efficient products, programs, and practices. Equivalent programs will also be considered during Preliminary PUD review. d. Provision of solar, wind or other alternative energy sources or participation in an approved cash-in-lieu program. 4. Integrated and coordinated way-finding measures within overall project (4 points) 5. On-site recycling transfer station (4 points) 6. Public transportation bus station or enhanced covered bus stop (1 point per station or enhanced stop) 7. Streetscape Improvements (6 points): Streetscape design features that exceed the minimum street standards including street furniture, pedestrian lighting, low-impact development techniques, on-street parking standards, crosswalks, landscape and planting, way-finding, public art or other design elements. Such elements must be installed as part of the street infrastructure. C. Landscape and Planting Standards. Table 18.17-2 (below) lists the minimum number of points needed for landscape plan approval for development types within REMU districts. Table 17-2 68 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 8 of 18 9/3/2010 Development Type Lot With Residential Adjacency Lot Without Residential Adjacency Residential Small-Lot Single-Family N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Single-Family N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Townhouse 2 to 4 attached units N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Townhouse or Townhouse Cluster 5 or more attached units 23 23 Residential: Stacked Flats 2 to 4 attached units N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Stacked Flats 5 or more attached units 23 23 Mixed Use with Residential 15 15 Non Residential Projects 23 15 PUD 23 23 D. Street and Circulation Standards 1. The policies and standards of the City’s long-range transportation plan apply to REMU districts. New streets within REMU districts shall be complete streets that accommodate pedestrians, bicycles, buses, automobiles and wintertime snow storage, and work in concert with internal property accesses and adjacent development to create a connected and vibrant public realm. REMU street standards also include the following stipulations: a. Natural storm drainage systems are allowed within street ROWs. b. Boulevard strips and medians may incorporate natural drainage technologies. c. Buildings shall be oriented with front facades facing the street. d. Where this is not possible, a side facade may face the street, but at least 25% of its surface area must be transparent windows. The overall design of side facades should address the public nature of the street. e. Shared drive accesses shall be used to reduce the need for additional curb cuts, when feasible. f. On-street parking should shall be maximized wherever feasible. 2. The City’s long-range transportation plan street standards that are most commonly used for new streets in REMU districts are listed below. Additional modifications may be proposed, but must be approved by the City Commission through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 3. Collector Streets Collector streets in REMU districts serve development types that are primarily commercial, residential or mixed-use. Modifications allow each street type to be customized with pedestrian-friendly elements that are appropriate for mixed-use centers and corridors. a. Collector: 2-Lane Table 17-3 69 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 9 of 18 9/3/2010 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ – 14’ wide Boulevard strip 14’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 14’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed- use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Parking lane 8’-20’ wide Perpendicular or angled parking permitted. Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Pavement striping 1’ wide ROW 90’ wide b. Collector: 3-Lane Table 17-4 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ – 14’ wide Boulevard strip 14’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 14’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed-use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Parking lane not allowed Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Left turn lane 15’ wide Pavement striping 2’ wide overall ROW 90’ wide c. Collector: 3-Lane with Median Table 17-5 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ – 13’ wide Boulevard strip 7’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 7’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed-use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Parking lane 8’ -20’ wide Parallel or angled parking permitted Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Median/turn lane 14’ wide 8’ wide where left turn lanes are not required ROW 90’ wide 4. Local Streets Local streets within REMU districts primarily serve residential development that varies in type, scale and density. REMU encourages the provision of housing choices for a variety of different household sizes and incomes. Local streets may be alley-loaded or front- loaded. a. Local Street: 2-Lane, Residential Table 17-6 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright 70 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 10 of 18 9/3/2010 Sidewalk 5’ wide 5’ – 8.5’ wide Boulevard strip 8.5’ wide; street trees req. 5’ –8.5’ wide; allows variation of sidewalk and boulevard strip widths; street trees req. Parking lane 7’ wide Bike lane not required Drive lanes 8’ wide ROW 60’ wide b. Local Street: 2-Lane, Adjacent to Park Table 17-7 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide Boulevard strip 6.5’ wide; street trees req. 5’ – 6.5’ wide; street trees required Parking lane 7’ wide Bike lane not required Drive lanes 10’ wide 8’ –10’ wide ROW 60’ wide c. Front-Loaded Local Streets To ensure that front-loaded streets are community-oriented and pedestrian-friendly, adjacent buildings, garages and driveways must comply with the following specific standards of this Title. • 18.16.070 Residential Garages • 18.44.090.C.2.a Drive Access Requirements – Residential • 18.46.010.D Stacking of Off-Street Parking Spaces • 18.46.010.E No Parking Permitted in Required Front or Side Yards • 18.46.010.F Parking Permitted in Rear Yards 5. Woonerfs: Woonerfs, or streets where pedestrians and cyclists have priority over motorists, are encouraged on private drive accesses or properties in the REMU district. Woonerfs may be permitted on public local streets or alleys through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 6. Mews: Mews, or alleys lined with garages and living quarters above, are encouraged on private drive access or properties in the REMU district. Mews may be permitted on alleys through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 7. Shared Drive Accesses: Apply standards of 18.44.090.F (Shared Drive Access) and 18.80.2770 (Shared Access). 8. Alleys: Alleys are encouraged, but not required, in the REMU district unless otherwise approved through the subdivision variance or PUD process. a. Apply standards of 18.44.060.B (Street Improvement Standards - Alleys) where applicable. 71 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 11 of 18 9/3/2010 E. Standards for Specific Development Types. The following standards are to be considered in the review of Site Plandevelopment applications incorporating these development types. 1. Residential: Small-Lot Single-Household a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 1.5:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: 2500 sf min. Lot Width: 25’ min. c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. (zero lot line exception) • Allow “zero-lot line” development through shared use easements, zero lot line agreements or placement of buildings on one or bothnear one of the side lot lines. 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-8 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 3:12 or greater but less than 6:12 38 6:12 or greater but less than 9:12 40 Equal to or greater than 9:12 42 e. Garages Apply standards of 18.16.070 and 18.38.050 (except 18.38.050.H). f. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-3 district. 2. Residential: Single-Household a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 50% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 1:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width Area: 4000 sf min. Additional area for accessory dwelling unit: 800 sf min. 72 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 12 of 18 9/3/2010 Width: 40’ min. Width for accessory dwelling unit: 40’ min. c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 15’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. (zero lot line exception) • Allow “zero-lot line” development through shared use easements or placement of buildings on or near one of the side lot line. 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-9 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 3:12 or greater but less than 6:12 38 6:12 or greater but less than 9:12 40 Equal to or greater than 9:12 42 e. Garages Apply standards of 18.16.070 and 18.38.050 (except 18.38.050.H). f. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-3 district. g. Additional Notes 1. Single Household units may incorporate home-based businesses at the ground level with direct access from a public ROW or other accessible route. These commercial uses are exempt from off-street parking requirements. 2. Developments may include individual retail uses at the ground level no greater than 2,000sf in area, when located along the primary frontage. The first 2000 sf of any nonresidential use in this development type is exempt from off-street parking requirements. Parking lots for such uses shall not be permitted along primary frontages. Apply standards of section 18.46.040.D for Accessible parking spaces. 3. Residential: Townhouse/ Townhouse Cluster a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 2.5:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: no minimum lot area required 73 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 13 of 18 9/3/2010 Lot Width: 15.5’ min. c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 20’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard – 5’ min. or 0’ for interior walls of townhouses 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-10 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 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 e. Garages To ensure that townhouses contribute to a community-oriented, pedestrian-friendly streetscape, they must comply with the following specific standards of this Title. 1. 18.16.070 Residential Garages 2. 18.44.090.C.2.a Drive Access Requirements - Residential 3. 18.46.010.D Stacking of Off-Street Parking Spaces 4. 18.46.010.E No Parking Permitted in Required Front or Side Yards 5. 18.46.010.F Parking Permitted in Rear Yards f. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-4 district. g. Additional Notes 1. Portions of site development review applications within the REMU zone for attached multi-family developments should be urban in character and may be designed such that each dwelling unit has a ground level entry oriented to the public realm, and sharing one or more walls with another dwelling unit. 2. Such units should be broadly consistent in scale and level of architectural detail, but shall be designed to emphasize a distinction in individual dwelling units through form, massing, articulation, color and other architectural means. 3. Townhouse units may incorporate home-based businesses at the ground level with direct access from a public ROW or other accessible route. These commercial uses are exempt from off-street parking requirements. 4. Developments incorporating townhouse units may include individual retail uses at the ground level no greater than 2,000 sf in area, when located along the primary frontage. The first 2000 sf of any nonresidential use in this development 74 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 14 of 18 9/3/2010 type is exempt from off-street parking requirements. Parking lots for such uses shall not be permitted along primary street frontages. Apply standards of section 18.46.040.D for Accessible parking spaces. 4. Residential: Stacked Flats & Student Congregate Housing Facilities a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. or 100% if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking Floor Area: allowable FAR 4:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width: Lot Area: Apply standards of 18.16.040.A, Table 16-2 (Lot Area Table), or if a structured internal parking facility is provided, then required lot area may be reduced. by up to 50%. Lot Width: Apply standards of 18.16.040.B, Table 16-3 (Lot Width Table) c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. d. Building Height: 5 stories max. e. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-4 district. 5. Residential: Mixed Use (Residential over Commercial) a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. or 100% if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking Floor Area: apply standards 18.19.030.CThe minimum floor area requirements for each dwelling in all districts shall be that area required by the City’s International Building Code. All development shall provide a minimum floor area ratio of not less than 0.75. “Floor area ratio” is the ratio attained by dividing the gross square feet of building by gross land area of the lot(s) being redeveloped. A site plan for development may show future phases of buildings to be used to demonstrate compliance with the minimum floor area ration standard. and 18.19.030.D (FAR) b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: all new mixed use lots shall have a minimum area adequate to provide required setbacks (yards) and parking Lot Width: no minimum width for new mixed use lots c. Yards: 1. Minimum Yards. No minimum yards are required for the mixed-use district. Comment [BK2]: Add definition to 18.80. Comment [BK3]: Add definition to 18.80. 75 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 15 of 18 9/3/2010 Easements for utilities or other special standards may require buildings to be placed back from lot lines. 2. Maximum Setback. Buildings shall be oriented to the adjacent street(s). At least 50% of the total building frontage, which is oriented to the street, shall be placed within 10 feet of any minimum required separation from the property line. 3. Special Yard Requirements. All yards shall be subject to the provisions of §18.30.060 Design Criteria and Development Standards in Entryway Corridors, §18.38.060 Yard and Height Encroachments, Limitations and Exceptions, §18.42.100 Watercourse Setback, §18.44.100 Street Vision Triangle, and §18.48.100 General Maintenance, BMC, when applicable. d. Building Height: Min. height: 2 stories Max. height: Maximum building height shall be 55 feet except that maximum building height may be increased by up to but not more than an additional 25 feet when structured parking is provided.5 stories. e. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the UMU district. f. Special Parking Standards 1. Structured Parking Incentive. A floor area bonus of one square foot of nonresidential up to a total of 50% of the gross building area of all uses may be granted for each square foot of area of structured parking. 2. Parking for individual lots may be provided elsewhere within the district with a shared parking agreement, provided that the overall parking ratio for the district is comparable with documented parking ratios in developments of similar scale, intensity of use, population density, and scope. 3. Bicycle Parking. Covered bicycle parking shall be provided by all student congregate housing projects, commercial development, and mixed use development. The covered spaces shall be either 10 bicycle parking spaces or one-half of the total minimum bicycle parking whichever is less. g. Special Building Standards 1. Floor-to-Ceiling and Floor-to-Floor Heights a. All commercial space provided on the ground level shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 12 feet. b. Residential uses shall have no limit to floor-to-ceiling or floor-to-floor heights. 2. Buildings that contain commercial uses on the ground floor shall provide transparency along at least 50% percent of the linear length of the commercial façade. Transparency may be achieved with windows, building lobbies, building entrances, display windows, or windows affording views into retail, office, or lobby spaces. This requirement shall apply to both street fronts for buildings located on corner lots. 3. Parking structures shall not have more than one two-way vehicle entrance or two one-way vehicle entrances facing any public way. 50% of the ground floor linear frontage along the primary street must be retail, commercial, office, civic, residential, or live/work. 76 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 16 of 18 9/3/2010 4. Building encroachments are permitted in accordance with Section 18.38.060, subject to any and all applicable International Building Codes. 5. All projects in the REMU district are exempt from the Rear Yard Lot Coverage requirements of 18.38.050.H h. Special Lighting Standards: All building entrances, pathways, and other pedestrian areas shall be lit with pedestrian-scale lighting (e.g., wall mounted, sidewalk lamps, bollards, landscaping lighting, et cetera) that meet the requirements of Section 18.42.150. Alternative lighting meeting the intent of the design guidelines and other criteria of this Ttitle, may be approved through site development review. i. Natural Surveillance Standards: The proposed site layout, building, and landscape design promote natural surveillance of the area by employees, visitors, and residents. Physical features and activities should be oriented and designed in ways that maximize the ability to see throughout the site. For example, window placement, the use of front porches or stoops, use of low or see-through walls, and appropriate use of landscaping and lighting can promote natural surveillance. Sight-obscuring shrubs and walls should be avoided, except as necessary for buffering between commercial uses and lower density residential districts, and then shall be minimized. j. Public Space Standards: The REMU district is urban in nature. Public parks and recreational areas are likewise expected to be urban in nature. This may include elements such as plazas or other hardscaping, landscaping with planters and furniture. Such areas may be more concentrated in size and development than anticipated in a less urban setting. Public spaces shall be designed to facilitate distinct types of activities to encourage consistent human presence and activity. The requirements of this section shall give direction in the development of park plans and the application of the standards of Chapter 18.50, BMC. 1. Public spaces shall be designed to: a. Facilitate social interaction between and within groups; b. Provide safe, pleasant, clean and convenient sitting spaces adaptable to changing weather conditions; c. Be attractive to multiple age groups, d. Provide for multiple types of activities without conflicting; e. Support organized activities; f. Be visually distinctive and interesting; g. Interconnect with other public and private spaces; and h. Prioritize use by persons. 6. Nonresidential a. Structures for authorized non-residential activities uses are permitted in the REMU district and shall comply with the Intent and Purposes set forth in this chapter. Such uses in the REMU district are intended to provide neighborhood services and local employment, and complement existing and planned residential uses. Structures for nonresidential uses are subject to the following restrictions: b. The placement and building design of such structures should be integrated into an overall site development plan. c. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot coverage: 100% if parking requirements are met by shared or off-site parking facilities, or if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking. 77 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 17 of 18 9/3/2010 Floor Area: min. FAR 0.5:1 d. Lot Area and Width: 1. All newly created lots shall have a minimum area adequate to provide for required yards and parking. In the REMU district there is no minimum size for newly created lots. 2. There is no minimum width for newly created lots within the REMU district. e. Yards: 1. Minimum Yards. No minimum yards are required for the mixed-use district.nonresidential uses. Easements for utilities or other special standards may require buildings to be placed back from lot lines. 2. Maximum Setback. Buildings shall be oriented to the primary street. At least 50% of the total building frontage, which is oriented to the street, shall be placed within 10 feet of any minimum required separation from the property line. 3. Special Yard Requirements. All yards shall be subject to the provisions of §18.30.060 Design Criteria and Development Standards in Entryway Corridors, §18.38.060 Yard and Height Encroachments, Limitations and Exceptions, §18.42.100 Watercourse Setback, §18.44.100 Street Vision Triangle, and §18.48.100 General Maintenance,§18.48.050.C Parking Lot landscaping, 18.48.050.B Additional Screening Requirements, BMC, when applicable. f. Building Height: Min. height: 15’ measured from the building’s primary street frontage Max. height: 5 stories Single-story, single-use commercial buildings in compliance with all other standards of this chapter permitted. g. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the UMU district. h. Special Parking Standards: 1. Structured Parking Incentive. A floor area bonus of one square foot of nonresidential up to a total of 50% of the gross building area of all uses may be granted for each square foot of area of structured parking. 2. Parking for individual lots may be provided elsewhere within the district with a shared parking agreement, provided that the overall parking ratio for the district is comparable with documented parking ratios in developments of similar scale, intensity of use, population density, and scope. 3. Bicycle Parking. Covered bicycle parking shall be provided by all student housing projects, commercial development, and mixed use development. The covered spaces shall be either 10 bicycle parking spaces or one-half of the total minimum bicycle parking whichever is less. i. Special Building Standards: 1. Floor-to-Ceiling and Floor-to-Floor Heights a. All commercial space provided on the ground level shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 12 feet. b. Residential uses shall have no limit to floor-to-ceiling or floor-to-floor heights. 78 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 18 of 18 9/3/2010 2. Buildings that contain commercial uses on the ground floor shall provide transparency along at least 50% percent of the linear length of the building commercial façade. Transparency may be achieved with windows, building lobbies, building entrances, display windows, or windows affording views into retail, office, or lobby spaces. This requirement shall apply to both street fronts for buildings located on corner lots. 3. Parking structures shall not have more than one two-way vehicle entrance or two one-way vehicle entrances facing any public way. 50% of the ground floor linear frontage along a primary street must be retail, commercial, office, civic, residential, or live/work. 4. Building encroachments are permitted in accordance with Section 18.38.060, subject to any and all applicable International Building Codes. 5. All projects in the REMU district are exempt from the Rear Yard Lot Coverage requirements of 18.38.050.H j. Special Lighting Standards: All building entrances, pathways, and other pedestrian areas shall be lit with pedestrian-scale lighting that meet the requirements of Section 18.42.150. (e.g., wall mounted, sidewalk lamps, bollards, landscaping lighting, et cetera). Alternative lighting meeting the intent of the design guidelines and other criteria of this Ttitle, may be approved through site development review. k. Natural Surveillance Standards: The proposed site layout, building, and landscape design promote natural surveillance of the area by employees, visitors, and residents. Physical features and activities should be oriented and designed in ways that maximize the ability to see throughout the site. For example, window placement, the use of front porches or stoops, use of low or see-through walls, and appropriate use of landscaping and lighting can promote natural surveillance. Sight-obscuring shrubs and walls should be avoided, except as necessary for buffering between commercial uses and lower density residential districts, and then shall be minimized. j. Public Space Standards: The REMU district is urban in nature. Public parks and recreational areas are likewise expected to be urban in nature. This may include elements such as plazas or other hardscaping, landscaping with planters and furniture. Such areas may be more concentrated in size and development than anticipated in a less urban setting. Public spaces shall be designed to facilitate distinct types of activities to encourage consistent human presence and activity. The requirements of this section shall give direction in the development of park plans and the application of the standards of Chapter 18.50, BMC. 1. Public spaces shall be designed to: a. Facilitate social interaction between and within groups; b. Provide safe, pleasant, clean and convenient sitting spaces adaptable to changing weather conditions; c. Be attractive to multiple age groups, d. Provide for multiple types of activities without conflicting; e. Support organized activities; f. Be visually distinctive and interesting; g. Interconnect with other public and private spaces; and h. Prioritize use by persons. 79 80 81 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 1 of 17 9/29/2010 CHAPTER 18.17 RESIDENTIAL EMPHASIS MIXED-USE ZONING DISTRICT (REMU) 18.17.010 INTENT AND PURPOSE OF RESIDENTIAL EMPHASIS MIXED-USE ZONING DISTRICT The intent and purpose of the Residential Emphasis Mixed-Use (“REMU”) district is to establish areas within Bozeman that are mixed-use in character and to provide options for a variety of housing, employment, retail and neighborhood service opportunities within a new or existing neighborhood, while providing predictability to landowners and residents in uses and standards. There is a rebuttable presumption that the uses set forth for the district will be compatible both within the district and to adjoining zoning districts when the standards of Title 18 are met and any applicable conditions of approval have been satisfied. Additional requirements for development apply within overlay districts. All development is subject to §18.02.050, BMC. A. It is further the intent of this district to implement the principles of the adopted growth policy: Neighborhoods 1. Create self-sustaining neighborhoods that will lay the foundation for healthy lifestyles; 2. Support compact, walkable developments that promote balanced transportation options; 3. Have residential as the majority use with a range of densities; 4. Provide for a diverse array of commercial and civic uses supporting residential; 5. Have residential and commercial uses mixed vertically and/or horizontally; 6. Locate adjacent to residential neighborhoods that can sustain commercial uses within walking distance and a wider range of housing types; 7. Encourage developments that exhibit the physical design characteristics of vibrant, urban, and pedestrian-oriented complete streets; Sense of Place 8. Support or add to an existing neighborhood context; 9. Enhance an existing neighborhood’s sense of place and strive to make it more self- sustainable; 10. Encourage a new neighborhood commercial center(s) with a unique identity and strong sense of place; 11. Develop commercial and mixed-use areas that are safe, comfortable, and attractive to pedestrians; 12. Reinforce the principle of streets as public places that encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel, transit, on-street parking and physical elements of complete streets;. Natural Amenities 13. Preserve and integrate the natural amenities into the development; 14. Appropriately balance a hierarchy of both parks and public spaces that are within the neighborhood; 82 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 2 of 17 9/29/2010 Centers 15. Group uses of property to create vibrant centers 16. Where appropriate create a center within an existing neighborhood; 17. Facilitate proven, market driven projects to ensure both long and short-term financial viability; 18. Allow an appropriate blend of complimentary mixed land uses including, but not limited to, retail, offices, commercial services, restaurants, bars, hotels, recreation and civic uses, and housing, to create economic and social vitality; 19. Foster the master plan development into a mix of feasible, market driven uses; 20. Emphasize the need to serve the adjacent, local neighborhood and also the greater Bozeman area as well; 21. Maximize land use efficiency by encouraging shared use parking; Integration of Action 22. Support existing infrastructure that is within and adjacent to REMU zones; 23. Add to existing transportation and open space network, encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel; 24. Encourage master planned communities with thoughtful development; 25. Provide flexibility in the placement and design of new developments and redevelopment to anticipate changes in the marketplace; 26. Provide roadway and pedestrian connections to residential areas; 27. Facilitate development (land use mix, density and design) that supports public transit, where applicable; 28. Provide flexibility in phasing to help insure both long and short term financial viability of the project as a whole; Urban Density 29. Encourage efficient land use by facilitating, high-density, single or multi-story housing, commercial and retail development; 30. Provide transitions between high-traffic streets and adjacent residential neighborhoods and; Sustainability 31. Promote sustainable communities through careful planning. B. To accomplish in the intent of the district, the REMU district may be located within existing and established neighborhoods, or located in new undeveloped areas of the City. Implementation of certain regulations herein may be implemented with regard to the specific characteristics and location of a development site. REMU districts should be located adjacent to or near planned or existing residential development to enhance walking and bicycle use. 18.17.020 AUTHORIZED USES. A. Uses in the Residential Emphasis Mixed-Use district are depicted in the table below. Principal uses are indicated with a “P,” conditional uses are indicated with a “C,” accessory uses are indicated with an “A,” and uses which are not permitted within the district are indicated by a “-.” 83 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 3 of 17 9/29/2010 B. The uses listed are deliberately broad and some are given special definitions in Chapter 18.80, BMC. The intent of this method is to provide general guidance for uses while allowing the unique needs and circumstances of each proposal to be specifically addressed through the review process. Some uses are the subject of special regulations contained in Chapter 18.40, BMC. C. Uses Required and Limited 1. REMU districts are intended to be developed with a mix of uses that encourage a range of building types, scales, densities, and site configurations. 2. Developments are encouraged to include non-residential uses, especially commercial and neighborhood support services, mixed horizontally and/or vertically, to promote compact, walkable and sustainable neighborhoods. 3. Non-residential uses shall not exceed 30 percent of the total gross building area square footage of all uses within the master planned area unless otherwise allowed in this section, through a Master Site Plan or PUD review. 4. For the purposes of calculating the percentage of a use within the site developmentmaster planned area, the gross square foot floor area of building for each use shall be utilized. 5. Home-based businesses are not considered non-residential uses and shall not be limited by the provisions of the Section. 6. Non-residential uses intended for public benefit and shared public amenities shall not be limited by the provisions of this Section. These uses include, but are not limited to, schools, parks, community centers, city operated services and structured parking facilities. D. Development Review Applications 1. To accomplish the intent of the district, the REMU district is anticipated to be located on sites ten acres or larger. Development review applications for sites in the REMU district greater than, or equal to, ten acres will be first subject to review as a Master Site Plan per Chapter 18.34; or as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) per 18.36, as determined by the applicant. 2. Project applications for subsequent project phases in compliance with an approved Master Site Plan or PUD may be reviewed as a Site Plan Review or Sketch Plan Review in accordance with Chapter 18.34. 3. All development review applications for sites property in the REMU district smaller than ten acres are subject to the standards in this chapter; and may be subject to review as a Master Site Plan per Chapter 18.34 by decision of the Planning Director, upon finding: a. The development application is for a site considered a major infill site, having a significant impact on an existing neighborhood; or may create a center within an existing neighborhood; b. The proposed development is located at an intersections deemed to have special significance; or c. The proposed development may have a significant impact on existing transportation and open space network, pedestrian and bicycle travel; c.d. The proposed development requires a multi-year approval and multiple phases for completion.. 84 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 4 of 17 9/29/2010 Table 17-1 TABLE OF USES MAXIMUM GROSS BUILDING AREA AUTHORIZED USES Accessory Dwelling Unit P Apartments and Apartment Buildings P Arts and Entertainment Center 12,000 sf P Assisted Living/Elderly Care Facilities P Automobile Fuel Sales C Automobile Parking Lot or Garage (public or private) P Automobile Washing Establishment C Banks and Other Financial Institutions P Bed & Breakfast P Business, Technical or Vocational School P Community Centers P Community Residential Facilities P Convenience Uses 5,000 sf P Cooperative Household P Convenience Use Restaurant 5,000 sf P Daycare – family, group, or center P Essential Services (Type II) C Extended-Stay Lodgings 40,000 sf P Health and Exercise Establishments P Home-based Businesses (subject to 18.17.030.E only)P Hospitals C Hotel or Motel 40,000 sf P Laboratories, Research and Diagnostic 10,000 sf P Laundry Service Center P Light Goods Repair P Lodging Houses P Manufacturing (light and completely indoors) 5,000 sf P Museum P Medical and Dental Offices, Clinics and Centers P Meeting Hall P Offices P Other Buildings & Structures (typically accessory to permitted uses) A Personal and Convenience Services P Pet Grooming Shop P Printing Offices and Publishing Establishments 5,000 sf P Fraternity, Sorority or Lodge P 85 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 5 of 17 9/29/2010 Public Buildings P Refuse and Recycling Containers A Restaurants P Retail Uses less than or equal to 5,000sf 5,000 sf P 1 Retail Uses greater than 5,000sf and less than or equal to 12,000 sf 12,000 sf P 1, 2 Retail Uses greater than 12,000sf and less than or equal to 25,000sf 25,000 sf P 1, 3 Sales of Alcohol for On-Premise Consumption –No gaming allowed C Single household dwelling P Student Congregate Housing Facility P 4 Three- or four-household dwelling P Townhouses (five attached units or less)P Two-household dwelling P Veterinary Clinic C Wholesale Distributors With On-Premise Retail Outlets (providing warehousing is limited to commodities which are sold on the premises) 10,000 sf C Wholesale Establishments (ones that use samples, but do not stock on premises) 5,000 sf C Any Use, Except Adult Businesses and Casinos Approved as Part of a Planned Unit Development Subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.36, BMC. C 1 Excluding Adult Businesses as defined in Chapter §18.80.BMC. 2 Limited to no more than four structures per 100 acres of contiguous master planned development and subject to 18.17.020.C. 3 Limited to no more than two structures per 100 acres of contiguous master planned development and subject to 18.17.020.C. 4 Student Congregate Housing Facility is defined as: “A living facility with five or more dwelling units for persons intended to be enrolled in an institution of higher learning. Student Housing Facilities are not limited to the restrictions for number of occupants defined in 18.80.1390, but must provide adequate parking and open space in accordance with this Title.” 18.17.030 SPECIAL STANDARDS A. The Special Standards set forth in this section are minimum standards for a development review application. Standards not specifically addressed by this section are subject to the standards set forth in this Title. B. When development in a REMU district uses the PUD process for land use approval, any combination of the following methods, in addition to the performance point criteria listed in 18.36.090 BMC, may earn performance points. 1. Designed to meet LEED-ND certification requirementsand be conditionally approved or have pre-certification by the authority (20 points) 2. Inclusion of a Low Impact Development Plan (6 points) that includes the following: a. On-site stormwater treatment systems that exceed the requirements of BMC Title 14, Stormwater, including but not limited to: incorporating drainage methods and technologies that treat, detain and/or infiltrate stormwater as close as possible to the source of run-off and the use of natural drainage systems across sites, rather than underground closed-pipe systems to the extent feasible. Natural drainage systems reduce the negative impacts of stormwater runoff by redesigning residential streets to take advantage of plants, trees, and soils to clean runoff and manage stormwater 86 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 6 of 17 9/29/2010 flows. Vegetated swales, stormwater cascades, and small wetland ponds allow soils to absorb water, slowing flows and filtering out many contaminants. b. The Low Impact Development Plan shall be integrated with the Snow Storage and Management Plan c. At least 75% of new planting should be chosen from the list of Drought Tolerant Plants & Xeriscaping in Montana (2010), produced by the Montana Nursery & Landscape Association, or approved/updated equivalent list approved by the City of Bozeman. Any species listed as noxious or invasive in Montana shall be avoided. d. Inclusion of weather-based irrigation controllers. e. Limitations in the Covenants or Design Guidelines on the amount and type of sod permitted. for individual residential lots. 3. Sustainable Design and Construction (6 points) a. Covenants or Design Guidelines that include a commitment to design the majority of buildings to meet LEED certification requirements or approved equivalent certification approved by the City of Bozeman. Equivalent certification programs will also be considered during Preliminary PUD review.. b. Energy use reduction. Residential Covenants or Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to build ENERGY STAR certified homes, which meet EPA guidelines that make them 20–30% more efficient than standard homes. Non-residential Covenants and Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to build and certify buildings that meet the EPA’s ENERGY STAR challenge, a program that applies to offices, schools, post offices, retail, banks, warehouses and residence halls, or approved equivalent program. Equivalent programs will also be considered during Preliminary PUD review. c. Water use reduction. Covenants or Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to use WaterSense certified products for all kitchen, bathroom and irrigation hardware. WaterSense is an EPA-sponsored partnership program that promotes water efficiency and expands the market for water-efficient products, programs, and practices. Equivalent programs will also be considered during Preliminary PUD review. d. Provision of solar, wind or other alternative energy sources or participation in an approved cash-in-lieu program. 4. Integrated and coordinated way-finding measures within overall project (4 points) 5. On-site recycling transfer station (4 points) 6. Public transportation bus station or enhanced covered bus stop (1 point per station or enhanced stop) 7. Streetscape Improvements (6 points): Streetscape design features that exceed the minimum street standards including street furniture, pedestrian lighting, low-impact development techniques, on-street parking standards, crosswalks, landscape and planting, way-finding, public art or other design elements. Such elements must be installed as part of the street infrastructure. C. Landscape and Planting Standards. Table 18.17-2 (below) lists the minimum number of points needed for landscape plan approval for development types within REMU districts. Table 17-2 Development Type Lot With Residential Lot Without Residential 87 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 7 of 17 9/29/2010 Adjacency Adjacency Residential Small-Lot Single-Family N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Single-Family N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Townhouse 2 to 4 attached units N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Townhouse or Townhouse Cluster 5 or more attached units 23 23 Residential: Stacked Flats 2 to 4 attached units N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Stacked Flats 5 or more attached units 23 23 Mixed Use with Residential 15 15 Non Residential Projects 23 15 PUD 23 23 D. Street and Circulation Standards 1. The policies and standards of the City’s long-range transportation plan apply to REMU districts. New streets within REMU districts shall be complete streets that accommodate pedestrians, bicycles, buses, automobiles and wintertime snow storage, and work in concert with internal property accesses and adjacent development to create a connected and vibrant public realm. REMU street standards also include the following stipulations: a. Natural storm drainage systems are allowed within street ROWs. b. Boulevard strips and medians may incorporate natural drainage technologies. c. Buildings shall be oriented with front facades facing the street. d. Where this is not possible, a side facade may face the street, but at least 25% of its surface area must be transparent windows. The overall design of side facades should address the public nature of the street. e. Shared drive accesses shall be used to reduce the need for additional curb cuts, when feasible. f. On-street parking should be maximized wherever feasible. 2. The City’s long-range transportation plan street standards that are most commonly used for new streets in REMU districts are listed below. Additional modifications may be proposed, but must be approved by the City Commission through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 3. Collector Streets Collector streets in REMU districts serve development types that are primarily commercial, residential or mixed-use. Modifications allow each street type to be customized with pedestrian-friendly elements that are appropriate for mixed-use centers and corridors. a. Collector: 2-Lane Table 17-3 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright 88 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 8 of 17 9/29/2010 Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ –14’ wide Boulevard strip 14’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 14’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed- use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Parking lane 8’-20’ wide Perpendicular or angled parking permitted. Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Pavement striping 1’ wide ROW 90’ wide b. Collector: 3-Lane Table 17-4 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ –14’ wide Boulevard strip 14’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 14’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed-use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Parking lane not allowed Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Left turn lane 15’ wide Pavement striping 2’ wide overall ROW 90’ wide c. Collector: 3-Lane with Median Table 17-5 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ –13’ wide Boulevard strip 7’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 7’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed-use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Parking lane 8’ -20’ wide Parallel or angled parking permitted Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Median/turn lane 14’ wide 8’ wide where left turn lanes are not required ROW 90’ wide 4. Local Streets Local streets within REMU districts primarily serve residential development that varies in type, scale and density. REMU encourages the provision of housing choices for a variety of different household sizes and incomes. Local streets may be alley-loaded or front- loaded. a. Local Street: 2-Lane, Residential Table 17-6 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 5’ wide 5’ –8.5’ wide 89 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 9 of 17 9/29/2010 Boulevard strip 8.5’ wide; street trees req. 5’ –8.5’ wide; allows variation of sidewalk and boulevard strip widths; street trees req. Parking lane 7’ wide Bike lane not required Drive lanes 8’ wide ROW 60’ wide b. Local Street: 2-Lane, Adjacent to Park Table 17-7 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide Boulevard strip 6.5’ wide; street trees req. 5’ –6.5’ wide; street trees required Parking lane 7’ wide Bike lane not required Drive lanes 10’ wide 8’ –10’ wide ROW 60’ wide c. Front-Loaded Local Streets To ensure that front-loaded streets are community-oriented and pedestrian-friendly, adjacent buildings, garages and driveways must comply with the following specific standards of this Title. • 18.16.070 Residential Garages • 18.44.090.C.2.a Drive Access Requirements – Residential • 18.46.010.D Stacking of Off-Street Parking Spaces • 18.46.010.E No Parking Permitted in Required Front or Side Yards • 18.46.010.F Parking Permitted in Rear Yards 5. Woonerfs: Woonerfs, or streets where pedestrians and cyclists have priority over motorists, are encouraged on private drive accesses or properties in the REMU district. Woonerfs may be permitted on public local streets or alleys through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 6. Mews: Mews, or alleys lined with garages and living quarters above, are encouraged on private drive access or properties in the REMU district. Mews may be permitted on alleys through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 7. Shared Drive Accesses: Apply standards of 18.44.090.F (Shared Drive Access) and 18.80.2770 (Shared Access). 8. Alleys: Alleys are encouraged, but not required, in the REMU district. a. Apply standards of 18.44.060.B (Street Improvement Standards - Alleys) where applicable. E. Standards for Specific Development Types. The following standards are to be considered in the review of Site Plandevelopment applications incorporating these development types. 90 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 10 of 17 9/29/2010 1. Residential: Small-Lot Single-Household a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 1.5:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: 2500 sf min. Lot Width: 25’ min. c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. (zero lot line exception) • Allow “zero-lot line” development through shared use easements, zero lot line agreements or placement of buildings on one or both near one of the side lot lines. 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-8 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 3:12 or greater but less than 6:12 38 6:12 or greater but less than 9:12 40 Equal to or greater than 9:12 42 e. Garages Apply standards of 18.16.070 and 18.38.050 (except 18.38.050.H). f. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-3 district. 2. Residential: Single-Household a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 50% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 1:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width Area: 4000 sf min. Additional area for accessory dwelling unit: 800 sf min. Width: 40’ min. Width for accessory dwelling unit: 40’ min. 91 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 11 of 17 9/29/2010 c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 15’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. (zero lot line exception) • Allow “zero-lot line” development through shared use easements or placement of buildings on or near one of the side lot line. 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-9 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 3:12 or greater but less than 6:12 38 6:12 or greater but less than 9:12 40 Equal to or greater than 9:12 42 e. Garages Apply standards of 18.16.070 and 18.38.050 (except 18.38.050.H). f. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-3 district. g. Additional Notes 1. Single Household units may incorporate home-based businesses at the ground level with direct access from a public ROW or other accessible route. These commercial uses are exempt from off-street parking requirements. 2. Developments may include individual retail uses at the ground level no greater than 2,000sf in area, when located along the primary frontage. The first 2000 sf of any nonresidential use in this development type is exempt from off-street parking requirements. Parking lots for such uses shall not be permitted along primary frontages. Apply standards of section 18.46.040.D for accessible parking spaces. 3. Residential: Townhouse/ Townhouse Cluster a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 2.5:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: no minimum lot area required Lot Width: 15.5’ min. c. Yards 92 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 12 of 17 9/29/2010 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 20’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard – 5’ min. or 0’ for interior walls of townhouses 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-10 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 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 e. Garages To ensure that townhouses contribute to a community-oriented, pedestrian-friendly streetscape, they must comply with the following specific standards of this Title. 1. 18.16.070 Residential Garages 2. 18.44.090.C.2.a Drive Access Requirements - Residential 3. 18.46.010.D Stacking of Off-Street Parking Spaces 4. 18.46.010.E No Parking Permitted in Required Front or Side Yards 5. 18.46.010.F Parking Permitted in Rear Yards f. Signagef. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-4 district. g. Additional Notes 1. Portions of site development review applications within the REMU zone for attached multi-family developments should be urban in character and may be designed such that each dwelling unit has a ground level entry oriented to the public realm, and sharing one or more walls with another dwelling unit. 2. Such units should be broadly consistent in scale and level of architectural detail, but shall be designed to emphasize a distinction in individual dwelling units through form, massing, articulation, color and other architectural means. 3. Townhouse units may incorporate home-based businesses at the ground level with direct access from a public ROW or other accessible route. These commercial uses are exempt from off-street parking requirements. 4. Developments incorporating townhouse units may include individual retail uses at the ground level no greater than 2,000 sf in area, when located along the primary frontage. The first 2000 sf of any nonresidential use in this development type is exempt from off-street parking requirements. Parking lots for such uses shall not be permitted along primary street frontages. Apply standards of section 18.46.040.D for accessible parking spaces. 93 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 13 of 17 9/29/2010 4. Residential: Stacked Flats & Student Congregate Housing Facilities a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. or 100% if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking Floor Area: allowable FAR 4:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width: Lot Area: Apply standards of 18.16.040.A, Table 16-2 (Lot Area Table), or if a structured internal parking facility is provided, then required lot area may be reduced . by up to 50%. Lot Width: Apply standards of 18.16.040.B, Table 16-3 (Lot Width Table) c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. d. Building Height: 5 stories max. e. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-4 district. 5. Residential: Mixed Use (Residential over Commercial) a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. or 100% if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking Floor Area: The minimum floor area requirements for each dwelling in all districts shall be that area required by the City’s International Building Code. All vertical mixed use development shall provide a minimum floor area ratio of not less than 0.75. “Floor area ratio” is the ratio attained by dividing the gross square feet of building by gross land area of the lot(s) being redeveloped. A site plan for development may show future phases of buildings to be used to demonstrate compliance with the minimum floor area ratio standardapply standards 18.19.030.C and 18.19.030.D (FAR) b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: all new mixed use lots shall have a minimum area adequate to provide required setbacks (yards) and parking Lot Width: no minimum width for new mixed use lots c. Yards: 1. Minimum Yards. No minimum yards are required for the mixed-use district. Easements for utilities or other special standards may require buildings to be placed back from lot lines. 94 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 14 of 17 9/29/2010 2. Maximum Setback. Buildings shall be oriented to the adjacent street. At least 50% of the total building frontage, which is oriented to the street, shall be placed within 10 feet of any minimum required separation from the property line. 3. Special Yard Requirements. All yards shall be subject to the provisions of §18.30.060 Design Criteria and Development Standards in Entryway Corridors, §18.38.060 Yard and Height Encroachments, Limitations and Exceptions, §18.42.100 Watercourse Setback, §18.44.100 Street Vision Triangle, and §18.48.100 General Maintenance, BMC, when applicable. d. Building Height: Min. height: 2 stories Max. height: Maximum building height shall be 55 feet except that maximum building height may be increased by up to but not more than an additional 25 feet when structured parking is provided.5 stories e. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the UMU district. f. Special Parking Standards 1. Structured Parking Incentive. A floor area bonus of one square foot of nonresidential up to a total of 50% of the gross building area of all uses may be granted for each square foot of area of structured parking. 2. Parking for individual lots may be provided elsewhere within the district with a shared parking agreement, provided that the overall parking ratio for the district is comparable with documented parking ratios in developments of similar scale, intensity of use, population density, and scope. 3. Bicycle Parking. Covered bicycle parking shall be provided by all student congregate housing projects, commercial development, and mixed use development. The covered spaces shall be either 10 bicycle parking spaces or one-half of the total minimum bicycle parking whichever is less. g. Special Building Standards 1. Floor-to-Ceiling and Floor-to-Floor Heights a. All commercial space provided on the ground level shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 12 feet. b. Residential uses shall have no limit to floor-to-ceiling or floor-to-floor heights. 2. Buildings that contain commercial uses on the ground floor shall provide transparency along at least 50% percent of the linear length of the commercial façade. Transparency may be achieved with windows, building lobbies, building entrances, display windows, or windows affording views into retail, office, or lobby spaces. This requirement shall apply to both street fronts for buildings located on corner lots. 3. Parking structures shall not have more than one two-way vehicle entrance or two one-way vehicle entrances facing any public way. 50% of the ground floor linear frontage along the primary street must be retail, commercial, office, civic, residential, or live/work. 4. Building encroachments are permitted in accordance with Section 18.38.060, subject to any and all applicable International Building Codes. 95 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 15 of 17 9/29/2010 5. All projects in the REMU district are exempt from the Rear Yard Lot Coverage requirements of 18.38.050.H h. Special Lighting Standards: All building entrances, pathways, and other pedestrian areas shall be lit with pedestrian-scale lighting (e.g., wall mounted, sidewalk lamps, bollards, landscaping lighting, et cetera). that meet the requirements of Section 18.42.150. Alternative lighting meeting the intent of the design guidelines and other criteria of this Ttitle, may be approved through site development review. i. Natural Surveillance Standards: The proposed site layout, building, and landscape design promote natural surveillance of the area by employees, visitors, and residents. Physical features and activities should be oriented and designed in ways that maximize the ability to see throughout the site. For example, window placement, the use of front porches or stoops, use of low or see-through walls, and appropriate use of landscaping and lighting can promote natural surveillance. Sight-obscuring shrubs and walls should be avoided, except as necessary for buffering between commercial uses and lower density residential districts, and then shall be minimized. j. Public Space Standards: The REMU district is urban in nature. Public parks and recreational areas are likewise expected to be urban in nature. This may include elements such as plazas or other hardscaping, landscaping with planters and furniture. Such areas may be more concentrated in size and development than anticipated in a less urban setting. Public spaces shall be designed to facilitate distinct types of activities to encourage consistent human presence and activity. The requirements of this section shall give direction in the development of park plans and the application of the standards of Chapter 18.50, BMC. 1. Public spaces shall be designed to: a. Facilitate social interaction between and within groups; b. Provide safe, pleasant, clean and convenient sitting spaces adaptable to changing weather conditions; c. Be attractive to multiple age groups, d. Provide for multiple types of activities without conflicting; e. Support organized activities; f. Be visually distinctive and interesting; g. Interconnect with other public and private spaces; and h. Prioritize use by persons. 6. Nonresidential a. Structures for authorized non-residential activities uses are permitted in the REMU district and shall comply with the Intent and Purposes set forth in this chapter. Such uses in the REMU district are intended to provide neighborhood services and local employment, and complement existing and planned residential uses. Structures for nonresidential uses are subject to the following restrictions: b. The placement and building design of such structures should be integrated into an overall site development plan. c. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot coverage: 100% if parking requirements are met by shared or off-site parking facilities, or if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking. Floor Area: min. FAR 0.5:1 96 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 16 of 17 9/29/2010 d. Lot Area and Width: 1. All newly created lots shall have a minimum area adequate to provide for required yards and parking. In the REMU district there is no minimum size for newly created lots. 2. There is no minimum width for newly created lots within the REMU district. e. Yards: 1. Minimum Yards. No minimum yards are required for the mixed-use districtnonresidential uses. Easements for utilities or other special standards may require buildings to be placed back from lot lines. 2. Maximum Setback. Buildings shall be oriented to the primary street. At least 50% of the total building frontage, which is oriented to the street, shall be placed within 10 feet of any minimum required separation from the property line. 3. Special Yard Requirements. All yards shall be subject to the provisions of §18.30.060 Design Criteria and Development Standards in Entryway Corridors, §18.38.060 Yard and Height Encroachments, Limitations and Exceptions, §18.42.100 Watercourse Setback, §18.44.100 Street Vision Triangle, and §18.48.100 General Maintenance, §18.48.050.C Parking Lot landscaping, 18.48.050.B Additional Screening Requirements, BMC, when applicable. f. Building Height: Min. height: 15’ measured from the building’s primary street frontage Max. height: 5 stories Single-story, single-use commercial buildings in compliance with all other standards of this chapter permitted. g. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the UMU district. h. Special Parking Standards: 1. Structured Parking Incentive. A floor area bonus of one square foot of nonresidential up to a total of 50% of the gross building area of all uses may be granted for each square foot of area of structured parking. 2. Parking for individual lots may be provided elsewhere within the district with a shared parking agreement, provided that the overall parking ratio for the district is comparable with documented parking ratios in developments of similar scale, intensity of use, population density, and scope. 3. Bicycle Parking. Covered bicycle parking shall be provided by all student housing projects, commercial development, and mixed use development. The covered spaces shall be either 10 bicycle parking spaces or one-half of the total minimum bicycle parking whichever is less. i. Special Building Standards: 1. Floor-to-Ceiling and Floor-to-Floor Heights a. All commercial space provided on the ground level shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 12 feet. b. Residential uses shall have no limit to floor-to-ceiling or floor-to-floor heights. 2. Buildings that contain commercial uses on the ground floor shall provide 97 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 17 of 17 9/29/2010 transparency along at least 50% percent of the linear length of the commercial building façade fronting a public street. Transparency may be achieved with windows, building lobbies, building entrances, display windows, or windows affording views into retail, office, or lobby spaces. This requirement shall apply to both street fronts for buildings located on corner lots. 3. Parking structures shall not have more than one two-way vehicle entrance or two one-way vehicle entrances facing any public way. 50% of the ground floor linear frontage along a primary street must be retail, commercial, office, civic, residential, or live/work. 4. Building encroachments are permitted in accordance with Section 18.38.060, subject to any and all applicable International Building Codes. 5. All projects in the REMU district are exempt from the Rear Yard Lot Coverage requirements of 18.38.050.H j. Special Lighting Standards: All building entrances, pathways, and other pedestrian areas shall be lit with pedestrian-scale lighting that meet the requirements of Section 18.42.150 (e.g., wall mounted, sidewalk lamps, bollards, landscaping lighting, et cetera). Alternative lighting meeting the intent of the design guidelines and other criteria of this Ttitle, may be approved through site development review. k. Natural Surveillance Standards: The proposed site layout, building, and landscape design promote natural surveillance of the area by employees, visitors, and residents. Physical features and activities should be oriented and designed in ways that maximize the ability to see throughout the site. For example, window placement, the use of front porches or stoops, use of low or see-through walls, and appropriate use of landscaping and lighting can promote natural surveillance. Sight-obscuring shrubs and walls should be avoided, except as necessary for buffering between commercial uses and lower density residential districts, and then shall be minimized. j. Public Space Standards: The REMU district is urban in nature. Public parks and recreational areas are likewise expected to be urban in nature. This may include elements such as plazas or other hardscaping, landscaping with planters and furniture. Such areas may be more concentrated in size and development than anticipated in a less urban setting. Public spaces shall be designed to facilitate distinct types of activities to encourage consistent human presence and activity. The requirements of this section shall give direction in the development of park plans and the application of the standards of Chapter 18.50, BMC. 1. Public spaces shall be designed to: a. Facilitate social interaction between and within groups; b. Provide safe, pleasant, clean and convenient sitting spaces adaptable to changing weather conditions; c. Be attractive to multiple age groups, d. Provide for multiple types of activities without conflicting; e. Support organized activities; f. Be visually distinctive and interesting; g. Interconnect with other public and private spaces; and h. Prioritize use by persons. 98 STAFF REPORT RESIDENTIAL EMPHASIS MIXED USE ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT FILE NO. #Z-09241 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 1 Item: Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment Application #Z- 9241. To revise local development regulations to create a new zoning Residential Emphasis Mixed Use district with defined intent, uses, setbacks, lot coverage, building height, and special development standards. Applicant: RTR Holdings II 67 Village Drive Suite 206 Belgrade, MT 59714 Representatives: Intrinsik Architecture 111 North Tracy Avenue Bozeman, MT 59715 GGLO 1301 First Avenue Suite 301 Seattle, WA 98101 Date: Before the Bozeman Zoning Commission and Planning Board on Tuesday, August 17, 2010, at 7 p.m. in the City Commission Meeting Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Avenue Report By: Brian Krueger, Associate Planner Recommendation: Consider the Application; Conduct a Public Hearing, and Begin Discussion on the Text Amendment ____________________________________________________________________________________ PROJECT LOCATION The proposed edits are applicable throughout the legal boundaries of the City of Bozeman as a modification to the overall development regulations. At this time there is not an individual property to which this application applies. Any future application of the proposed district would be required to propose a zone map amendment. IN THE CASE OF PROTEST AGAINST THESE CHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF EITHER OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED CHANGE; OR THOSE LOTS 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A PROPOSED CHANGE, SUCH AMENDMENT MAY NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT UPON A FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. 99 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 2 PROPOSAL RTR Holdings II represented by GGLO Seattle, WA and Intrinsik Architecture Bozeman, MT have requested that the City create a new zoning district to be called the Residential Emphasis Mixed Use district. The proposal includes suggested language for intent, uses, setbacks, lot coverage and area, and special development standards. Based on the findings and conclusions presented herein, Staff finds some merit with the proposal. Staff finds some revisions are necessary to fit the district within the overall planning and regulatory program of the City. In evaluating any proposal of this nature certain questions must be addressed. The response to these questions is contained within the required statutory review criteria evaluated below and in the comments on Attachment A. The attachment is a copy of the proposal. Questions 1. What failing of the current program is the proposal intended to correct, or if there is not a failing, what material advantage does the new proposal offer to justify the adoption? 2. What is the fundamental nature of the uses described in the proposal? 3. What distinguishes the proposal from other elements of the Unified development Ordinance? 4. Does it provide new opportunities, add new requirements, or do both? Question 1. What failing of the current program is the proposal intended to correct, or if there is not a failing, what material advantage does the new proposal offer to justify the adoption? The application was submitted to address a new land use designation that was created with the adoption of the most recent revision to the community’s growth policy, the Bozeman Community Plan. This application to create the Residential Emphasis Mixed Use (REMU) zoning district is in direct response to the Residential Emphasis Mixed Use land use designation and corollary land use description that was added to the Bozeman Community Plan. The City could have created this zoning district through its own processes or a private applicant could propose language for the new district for the City to consider. In this case, we have the latter. The applicant for this new zoning district is also the property owner for one of the larger tracts of Residential Emphasis Mixed Use designated land located on the south side of the City. Mixed uses is not a new concept in Bozeman planning, but with the adoption of the revised Bozeman Community Plan, a stronger commitment to expanding mixed uses in Commercial Districts and now with REMU, residential districts, was made. The applicant’s proposal has potential to be a useful addition to the regulatory structure within the code to allow a more diverse, intensive, dense, and compact residential district. As described below under Review Criteria 1, the City has incorporated into its planning and land use regulations general land use principles of center based development, urban density, mixed use, neighborhoods, and sustainability. These principles appear well fitted to the proposal. The character of the new REMU developing areas may be shaped to a higher degree than those currently in place. The use of the proposed regulations, with some modifications and further clarification as shown in the attached and edited document, may provide an appropriate tool to develop these new mixed use residential neighborhoods. 100 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 3 Question 2. What is the fundamental nature of the uses described in the proposal? The proposed list of uses for the new district is intensive for a district that is to be primarily residential, although the applicant has approached the list of uses in new way for a zoning district within the City. First, under a section entitled “Uses Required and Limited” the proposal includes a general limitation on the total percentage of non-residential uses. A 30 percent maximum of the total gross building area of uses is proposed unless otherwise allow through various processes. Questions arise as to when and how this would be administered at the project level and tracked over a long period of time. As to the table of uses that is typically used to allow and restrict uses within a district, the proposal adds a new restriction to the table limiting the total gross square footage of the more intensive uses. The theory behind this practice is to allow a broader range of uses while restricting the potential impacts of the uses by size rather than by not allowing those uses or by requiring a conditional use permit for uses that have the potential to have larger impacts on the neighborhood. This becomes an important discussion when the district in question is, by definition, first a dense residential district where the potential for conflicts between commercial and residential uses can be high. When comparing the uses of the proposed REMU district and the other commercial and mixed use districts within the City, the proposal is arguably higher in intensity that that envisioned within the Bozeman Community Plan. The proposal is much closer to uses allowed in the City’s Community Business B-2 District, than those allowed under the Neighborhood Business B-1 District that has for a long time been the district considered most compatible adjacent to residential neighborhoods. To add complexity to this issue, the City’s commercial districts have historically not been “integrated” into residential neighborhoods. The B-1 and B-2 districts have historically been centered at intersections of higher capacity streets or located along the City’s commercial corridor arterial streets: Main Street, 7th Avenue, and 19th Avenue. In the REMU district one could have intensive commercial lots directly adjacent to residential development. A comparison of uses between the proposed for the REMU district and the City’s B-1, B-2, B-3, and UMU districts is located in Attachment B. Question 3. What distinguishes the proposal from other elements of the Unified development Ordinance? The uses in the district, setbacks, and other basic standards are a combination of those seen in residential and commercials districts. There are some standards listed that Staff recommends be removed, clarified and/or modified. These edits/comments are shown in Attachment A. The edits would create a greater distinction between the proposal and the existing UMU and B-2 districts. The special development standards described in the proposal for micro and small lot residential uses would be new to the code. Staff does find some contradictions with existing standards and has provided comment on those sections and provisions that may cause difficulty at the time of development review for a building permit or other proposal. See Attachment A for more in depth comments. The proposal offers new and innovative ways to meet Planned Unit Development (PUD) performance points. This would add addition options for PUD’s within REMU that more closely correlate to the goals and objectives in the Bozeman Community Plan. There continue to be some questions as to how these points would be administered. See discussion on Growth Policy conformance below and Attachment A. 101 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 4 The proposal eliminates or modifies many standards that would typically apply to other zones to enable more intensive, dense and compact development. The question arises as to whether more new specific design guidelines and/or new design related standards will need to be required to mitigate for development of this type. Question 4. Does it provide new opportunities, add new requirements, or do both? The proposal does provide the possibility of a more intensive development within a residential neighborhood. The proposal also incorporates a substantial number of specialized review criteria through the development guidelines. These may be duplicative of standards already in place within the Code. The proposal has the potential to expand the area where these standards are applied. The current proposal is primarily permissive, authorizing mixed use with an increased emphasis on vertical and horizontal intensity of development. To be truly successful some mandatory elements are expected to be necessary. These include ratios of uses to ensure that a diversity of activities and uses is provided; minimum size of district to ensure adequate intensity of use to establish synergy between uses; deliberate coordination between uses rather than just allowing development to happen; and location of the district in the community in concert with Bozeman’s growth policy. REVIEW CRITERIA Planning Staff has evaluated the proposed amendment with respect to the required criteria set forth in state statute in Section 76-2-304, MCA, presented as follows. A summary of staff’s evaluation follows in the discussion below. A positive response for all criteria is not required for approval. 1. Is the new zoning designed in accordance with the growth policy? There are two parts to the analysis of this criterion. First, is the proposal in conformance with the general and secondary principles advanced by the Bozeman Community Plan (2007 Plan). Second, how does the proposal correspond with the land use mapping and corresponding descriptions of each land use category? Part 1. General Principles/Secondary Principles. Yes/Neutral. The Bozeman Community Plan describes seven core principles regarding land use in Section 3.2 of the plan. These themes are: Neighborhoods, Sense of Place, Natural Amenities, Centers, Integration of Action, Urban Density, and Sustainability. As shown in the selections below, the idea of carefully site aggregated residential mixed use development with a comparatively high intensity of development is supported. This support is not without limits. Staff comments follow each theme. “Neighborhoods. There is strong public support for the preservation of existing neighborhoods and new development being part of a larger whole, rather than just anonymous subdivisions. This idea includes the strengthening and support of existing neighborhoods through adequate infrastructure maintenance and other actions. As the population of Bozeman grows, it is harder to keep the same “small town” feel because residents cannot be on familiar terms with everyone. The neighborhood unit helps provide 102 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 5 the sense of familiarity and intimacy which can be lacking in larger communities. The neighborhood commercial/activity center and local parks provide opportunities to casually interact with other nearby residents. Not all neighborhoods are of equal size or character.” The proposed district presents a new vision for the overall development pattern of an area zoned REMU or a neighborhood that would emerge there. The broad list of uses and lack of definition for how the commercial uses would relate to the residential uses causes some staff concern. The district does describe ways in which the zone would strengthen and support the existing neighborhoods in the area. Within the intent statement of the district it states “encourage developments that exhibit the physical design characteristics of vibrant, urban, and pedestrian oriented streets with pedestrian amenities.” The proposal would allow this type of development, but could also allow the type of development that the City has seen traditionally. “Sense of Place. The second idea builds on those of Centers and Neighborhoods. Part of the appeal of Bozeman is its distinct character. A portion of this character comes from the natural setting of the town. Bozeman’s character includes the sense of place created by constructed landmarks such as Downtown and MSU. Preserving Bozeman as a unique place rather than Anywhere, USA is important. This concept was strongly supported throughout the public outreach process. The existing Downtown business core was the overwhelming choice for the location which best represented the “heart” of Bozeman. The preservation and strengthening of the unique features and built environment which give a sense of place is important for Bozeman’s individual identity to continue in the future. Incorporating community and architectural design features which provide organization and landmarks, such as parks and commercial centers, in new development will help to anchor and extend this sense of place as Bozeman grows. The sense of place will be strengthened through development which fills in existing gaps in the City and helps to reinforce the compact pattern of historic Bozeman.” It is difficult to envision a sense of place for the overall development pattern of an area zoned REMU. The application includes some pictures both on the cover and summary pages in the narrative for the amendment. The sense of place articulated through the perspective drawings does not represent the true range of uses and types of development that the district would enable if adopted as proposed. The list of uses for the district ranges from a single household residential detached home to 40,000 square foot Hotel and 25,000 square foot retail uses (MID box uses) without specific definition on how the uses will relate to each other. There is no precedent in the City for such broad ranging uses both in intensity and size. The district does provide a requirement for master planning and PUD processes that will assure the City has additional input into the development review process for new REMU developments. This process at the plan review level will help to refine what a REMU neighborhood is, what that built environment looks like, and how it functions with such a broad range of uses. “Urban Density. Although a wide range of commercial and housing styles, types, and densities are provided in Bozeman, not every option is provided. Bozeman is a city, and the housing densities are not those of the rural areas of Gallatin County. Fundamental to the efficient and cost-effective provision of urban services, multi- modal transportation oriented development, and a compact development pattern is a 103 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 6 concentration of persons and activities. Density of development must also be balanced against community character, parks and open spaces, and the housing choices of citizens. Quality site and architectural design will materially affect the success and acceptability of urban density and scale of development.” The application proposes to be a district to be composed of a broad range of residential uses. Under the use table, a range of residential units from a sole single family detached dwelling to a five story apartment building could be constructed in the zone. The zone includes a proposed requirement to limit non residential uses to a maximum 30% of the gross building area of all uses, subject to some exceptions. Over time, there is no guarantee that the residential development would be constructed as planned or vice versa if the housing is constructed first. Staff recommends a revision to this requirement that would add a “concurrency” component to require that a percentage of residential be constructed along with any commercial development. Centers. Strengthen a pattern of community development oriented on centers. A corollary principle is for compact development. Commercial activities in mutually reinforcing centralized areas provide: · Increased business synergy. · Greater convenience for people with shorter travel distances to a wide range of businesses · The opportunity to accomplish several tasks with a single trip. · Facilitates the use of transportation alternatives to single occupant motor vehicles, with a corresponding reduction in traffic and road congestion and air quality impacts. · Enables greater access to employment, services, and recreation with a reduced dependence on the automobile · Greater efficiencies in delivery of public services, · Corresponding cost savings in both personal and commercial applications. As described in the Land Use Category Description for REMU, which is discussed in further detail later in this report, the purpose of the REMU designation is not to create an additional large commercial node within the City. The REMU designation envisions an urban housing dominated zone that is appropriate near commercial centers. The REMU neighborhood itself would play a supporting role to a larger commercial node or community resource (school) within an area. Sustainability. Providing for the needs of today’s residents and visitors should be done in a manner that does not jeopardize the quality of life, including the natural environment, of future residents. Careful community design and thoughtful development can serve the community well both now and in the future. Sustainability is a holistic issue and should be interwoven through the City’s operations and regulations. Sustainability is a newer concept within the Bozeman Community Plan. Within the land use chapter and many other chapters of the plan, sustainability has become a pervasive principle that is to be “interwoven” through the City’s regulations. Staff anticipates sustainable principles to become a much larger part of the regulatory structure of the City. This zoning district is the first proposed 104 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 7 since the adoption of the latest version of the Community Plan. Staff notes the integration of sustainable standards within the proposal. Low Impact Development (LID) principles, building energy efficiency, LEED neighborhood design, public transit facilities, recycling facilities, etc. are all strategies embraced in the Community Plan that are allowable in the zone. These are not mandatory standards, but are included as options. Drawing on the seven basic ideas discussed above, the following principles were used to prepare the land use designations, policies, and map within the Community Plan: • Development should be based on neighborhoods, including commercial neighborhoods. • Neighborhoods should have easily identified centers and edges. • Neighborhoods should be reasonably compact and serve a variety of housing needs. • Transportation systems should support the desired land use pattern and be interconnected multi-modal networks (e.g. bicycles, pedestrian, transit, automobiles or other vehicles) rather than focusing solely on automobiles. • A diverse mix of activities should occur within proximity to each other, but not necessarily have everything happening everywhere. • Urban design should integrate multi-modal transportation, open spaces, land use activity, and quality of life. • Open spaces, including parks, trails, and other gathering places, should be in convenient locations. • Development should be integrated into neighborhoods and the larger community rather than as a series of unconnected stand alone projects. • A variety of housing and employment opportunities is important. • Land development should be compatible with and further other community goals. • Land use designations must respond to a broad range of factors, including natural constraints, economic constraints, and other community priorities. • The needs of new and existing development must coexist and remain in balance. • Infill development and redevelopment which encourages the efficient utilization of land and existing infrastructure systems is preferred. • Future development patterns should not be detrimental to the existing community, with special attention to be given to the support of the existing Historic Core and Downtown of the community. Secondary Principles. Other policies within the Community Plan that are applicable to this district discussion: Goal C-1 Human Scale and compatibility—Create a community composed of neighborhoods designed for the human scale and compatibility in which the streets and buildings are properly sized within their context, services and amenities are convenient, visually pleasing, and properly integrated. Objective C-1.4: Achieve an environment through urban design that maintains and enhances the City’s visual qualities within neighborhood, community, and regional commercial areas. Goal C-2 Community Circulation—Create a circulation system both vehicular and pedestrian that is fully connected, integrated and designed for ease of use. 105 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 8 Objective-2.3 Require alleys in all new development both commercial and residential where feasible. Objective C-2.5 Explore and encourage innovative parking solutions for both residential and commercial project including parking best practices, expanded parking districts, cash in lieu of parking and design guidelines for structured parking. Goal C-3 Neighborhood Design – New neighborhoods shall be pedestrian oriented, contain a variety of housing types and densities, contain parks and other public spaces, have a commercial center and defined boundaries. Objective C-3.3 Establish minimum residential densities in new and redeveloping residential areas. Objective C-3.5: Integrate a wide variety of open lands, such as parks, trails, squares, greens, playing fields, natural areas, orchards and gardens, greenways, and other outdoor spaces into neighborhoods. Objective C-4.2: All new residential buildings should be designed to emphasize the visually interesting features of the building, as seen from the public street and sidewalk. The visual impact of garage doors, driveways, and other off-street parking will be minimized and mitigated. Objective C-4.3: Ensure the development of new residential structures that are aesthetically pleasing through urban design. Objective C-4.5: Investigate expanding form based zoning as a design review strategy for the City. Goal C-5: Public Landscaping and Architecture— Enhance the urban appearance and environment through the use of architectural excellence, landscaping, trees and open space. Objective C-5.2: Encourage inclusion of plazas and other urban design features as public areas within developments. Objective C-5.3: Continue to develop the design guidelines to encourage innovative landscaping including urban hardscapes, public art, plazas, roof gardens, green walls, and other features to emphasize the urban qualities of individual projects. Objective C-5.4: Continue to develop the design guidelines to provide direction to naturalizing stormwater systems and integrating them into the landscape as an amenity. Objective C-6.1: Continue to develop the design guidelines to encourage the treatment of stormwater on site with an aesthetic and integrated approach utilizing Low Impact Development principles. Provide incentives for innovation. Objective C-6.2: Continue to develop the design guidelines to provide direction for the integration of site based power generation (solar, wind, geothermal, etc.) in both commercial and residential projects. 106 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 9 Goal H-1: Promote an adequate supply of safe, quality housing that is diverse in type, density, cost, and location with an emphasis on maintaining neighborhood character and stability. Goal H-2: Promote the creation of housing which advances the seven guiding land use principles of Chapter 3 (Provided above). Objective H2.2 - Promote energy efficiency and incorporation of sustainable features in new and existing housing. Objective H3.3. – Promote the development of a wide variety of housing types, designs, and costs to meet the wide range of residential needs of Bozeman residents. Objective AC-1.3: Incorporate community arts and culture displays in public parks, buildings, recreational facilities and public service facilities. Objective AC-1.4: Provide clear and concise City standards and requirements that encourage art and culture displays and events in private development. Objective E-2.2: Protect, restore, and enhance riparian corridors and floodplain areas to protect the chemical, biological, and physical quality of water resources. Objective E-2.3: Ensure that land uses in areas characterized by a high water table and/or aquifer recharge zone will not contaminate water resources. Objective E-3.2-: Encourage sustainable development and building practices. Goal R-1: Provide for accessible, desirable, and adequately maintained public parks, open spaces, trail systems, and recreational facilities for residents of the community. Objective R-1.5: Connect the community using trails. Objective R-1.6: Ensure that parkland’s size, location, suitability, and development promote usability. Goal T-2: Ensure that a variety of travel options exist which allow safe, logical, and balanced transportation choices. Objective T-2.1: For the purposes of transportation and land use planning and development, non- motorized travel options and networks shall be of equal importance and consideration as motorized travel options. This balance shall ensure that a variety of travel opportunities are available which do not require the use of automobiles for local trips. Objective T-2.2: Review and revise parking requirements to ensure provision of parking consistent with other goals of this plan to support commercial and residential activities in the downtown and other areas. 107 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 10 Objective T-2.3: Reduce the negative health and physical impacts of the automobile by coordinating transportation policies to support land use decisions that can decrease the number and length of automobile trips. When considering automobile impacts maintain awareness of all the costs of transportation. Goal T-4: Pathways–Establish and maintain an integrated system of transportation and recreational pathways, including streets, bicycle and pedestrian trails, neighborhood parks, green belts and open space. Objective T-4.3: Review, revise, and update trail/pathway standards to reflect the various types and uses of trails and other non-motorized travel ways. Objective T-4.4: Continue to improve the existing pedestrian network to increase American’s with Disabilities Act compliance. The long term intent is full accessibility throughout the community transportation system. Give highest priority to those improvements that will provide the greatest access to community centers of activity. Part 2. Land Use Description. Neutral. State law requires that municipal zoning be in conformance with an adopted growth policy. This includes by as matters of policy and land use mapping. Section 3.4 and 3.5 of the Bozeman Community Plan describes the future land use map and the definition of the different categories of uses depicted. The map depicts distinctions between land uses. This is consistent with the principle of mixed use where a diverse mix of activities should occur within proximity to each other, but not necessarily have everything happening everywhere. When considering the standards proposed for the REMU district we must consider the description of the land use category that has been provided as a basis for the zone: “Residential Emphasis Mixed Use. The Residential Mixed-Use category promotes neighborhoods with supporting services that are substantially dominated by housing. A diversity of residential housing types should be built on the majority of any area within this category. Housing choice for a variety of households is desired and can include attached and small detached single- household dwellings, apartments, and live-work units. Residences should be included on the upper floors of buildings with ground floor commercial uses. Variation in building massing, height, and other design characteristics should contribute to a complete and interesting streetscape and may be larger than in the Residential category. Secondary supporting uses, such as retail, offices, and civic uses, are permitted at the ground floor. All uses should complement existing and planned residential uses. Non-residential uses are expected to be pedestrian oriented and emphasize the human scale with modulation as needed in larger structures. Stand alone, large, non-residential uses are discouraged. Non-residential spaces should provide an interesting pedestrian experience with quality urban design for buildings, sites, and open spaces. This category is implemented at different scales. The details of implementing 108 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 11 standards will vary with the scale. The category is appropriate near commercial centers and larger areas should have access on collector and arterial streets. Multi- household higher density urban development is expected. Any development within this category should have a well integrated transportation and open space network which encourages pedestrian activity and provides ready access within and to adjacent development.” Staff finds multiple elements within the land use designation for Residential Emphasis Mixed Use area that are questionable with the proposed zoning or raise questions about the original intent of the district: “The Residential Mixed-Use category promotes neighborhoods with supporting services that are substantially dominated by housing.” The proposed district recommends a 70/30 mix of housing to commercial. This is generally consistent with the vision provided here. There are some questions as to how the overall percentages will be tracked and if there should be a concurrency requirement. See Attachment A comments. “Residences should be included on the upper floors of buildings with ground floor commercial uses.” Although this is possible in the proposal as written, there are no mandatory provisions to provide residences on the upper floors of buildings. There are no requirements within the district for mandatory vertical mixing of uses. “Secondary supporting uses, such as retail, offices, and civic uses, are permitted at the ground floor.” This language seems to suggest that most commercial uses in the district would be secondary and supporting of residential use. As this sentence is written it suggests that commercial uses would mostly only be allowed in mixed use buildings on the ground floor, with residential uses on the upper floors. “Stand alone, large, non-residential uses are discouraged.” The proposal permits multiple, large, stand alone, non-residential uses. “Variation in building massing, height, and other design characteristics should contribute to a complete and interesting streetscape and may be larger than in the Residential category…. Non-residential uses are expected to be pedestrian oriented and emphasize the human scale with modulation as needed in larger structures.” The land use description for REMU includes language that suggests the need for urban design guidelines for this district. Only in areas of the City where the Entryway Corridor Overlay District 109 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 12 and REMU overlap would the City’s Design Objectives Plan (DOP) apply. The DOP is the City’s defacto urban design manual for commercial areas outside of the Downtown Core. The guidelines are explicitly focused on commercial development and are typically focused on a suburban development pattern e.g. single story commercial uses and mitigating broad surface parking fields. The urban design requirements for the REMU district, as envisioned in the land use designation description, would address a more urban landscape with both residential and commercial uses, urban public spaces, and building design guidelines more focused on multi-story buildings and the human scale. Transitions zones and buffering between the more intensive commercial uses and residential would also be a core component of design guidelines in the REMU district. The proposal does not include well developed design requirements for commercial uses in REMU. 2. Is the new zoning designed to lessen congestion in the streets? Yes, the proposed district enables a diversity of mutually supportive uses and development standards which encourage higher density development. This residential/commercial proximity will encourage walking and cycling uses which will lessen vehicle use and thereby any street congestion. A land use pattern that incorporates a mix of uses supports less congestion by enabling shorter vehicle trips, shared destination trips, and maximizes the efficiency of walking or cycling. The realization of these benefits is enhanced by location of uses in proximity to residential uses enabling access without circulation onto adjacent principal arterial streets. Placement of this district must be carefully integrated with the community’s transportation system, including transit. 3. Will the new zoning promote health and general welfare? Neutral. The proximity of development will likely encourage walking and cycling. Physical exercise is a proven contributor to health. The district may support development of neighborhood districts which would help create a sense of unique place within the City which supports community identity which advances general welfare. There is no guarantee that such an outcome will occur. The mixing of intensive commercial uses and residential development has the potential to cause conflicts between uses without specific requirements to mitigate the potential impacts of commercial uses. 4. Will the new zoning secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers? Yes. The proposed creates a mechanism for developing certain land uses. The physical construction must comply with building codes and other requirements to protect from physical hazards. Similar combinations of uses and the necessary infrastructure to protect from hazards have been considered during the creation of the development standards which will apply. 5. Will the new zoning provide adequate light and air? Neutral. The proposed district does encourage buildings taller than typically constructed in Bozeman at this time. The proposal does allow small setbacks which can intensify development density. The proposal allows a wide range of buildings heights with little requirement for transitions between 110 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 13 buildings. Residential development within the district is subject to open space and parkland requirements of Section 18.34.090, BMC. The proposal encourages creation of common open spaces. Building Code requirements will ensure adequate building interior ventilation. 6. Will the new zoning prevent overcrowding of land? Yes. This criterion is intended to prevent a disparity between the intensity of development and the infrastructure needed to avoid detrimental or unsafe consequences of that development. There are various standards and review procedures used by the City to avoid such negative outcomes. Examples of standards are for sewer flow capacity, traffic congestion levels of service, and availability of fire fighting water. Examples of review procedures is the site plan review process and associated criteria of Chapter 18.34, BMC and building codes. So long as adequate services can be provided to meet demands of development the land will not be overcrowded. 7. Will the new zoning avoid the undue concentration of population? Neutral. Opinions of what constitutes “undue” concentration of population are highly individualized. The proposed district will allow a higher intensity of use than normally seen. Building codes and similar development standards will ensure that the negative effects of concentrated population are mitigated. 8. Will the new zoning facilitate the adequate provisions of transportation, water, sewer, schools, parks, fire, police, and other public requirements? Yes. Standards ensuring adequate provision of needed infrastructure and public safety will still be applicable. Title 18 of the Bozeman Municipal Code includes additional standards to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. There are various standards and review procedures used by the City to avoid negative outcomes. Examples of standards are for sewer flow capacity, traffic congestion levels of service, availability water, parkland standards, transit, etc. 9. Does the new zoning give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? Neutral. The proposal seeks to create a new district in the regulations. Therefore there is no current location to specifically evaluate for character as there would be with an individual zone map amendment. Any future application of the new district will be required to make that specific evaluation. If applied as recommended by Staff, the basic planning level analysis will have been conducted to determine that the district is placed correctly. As stated above in the Growth Policy criterion it is difficult to envision a sense of place for the overall development pattern of an area zoned REMU. The application includes some pictures both on the cover and summary pages in the narrative for the amendment. The sense of place articulated through the perspective drawings does not represent the true range of uses and types of development that the district would enable if adopted as proposed. The list of uses for the district ranges from a single household residential detached home to 40,000 square foot Hotel and 25,000 square foot retail uses (MID box uses) without specific definition on how the uses will relate to each other. There is no precedent in the City for such broad ranging uses both in intensity and size. The district does provide a requirement for master planning and PUD 111 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 14 processes that will assure the City has additional input into the development review process for new REMU developments. This process at the plan review level will help to refine what a REMU neighborhood is, what that built environment looks like, and how it functions with such a broad range of uses. 10. Does the new zoning give reasonable consideration to the peculiar suitability of the district for particular uses? Neutral. The combination of uses allowed in the proposed district is very similar to the B-2 district. The policy question at hand is whether this is appropriate with the amount of urban design regulation currently within the proposal or whether the uses in this district should be more supporting and B-1 in nature. The uses appear likely to be mutually beneficial if there are adequate design standards to integrate the more intensive uses within a residentially dominated neighborhood. The City does have additional review processes such as subdivision review, site plan review, and Planned Unit Development review through which to further review and regulate development within the zone. The question becomes as to whether the additional criteria within these processes would be adequate to mitigate the adjacent development of vastly disparate uses in terms of size, intensity, and potential for impacts. 11. Was the new zoning adopted with a view of conserving the value of buildings? Neutral. The current proposal is not being applied to a specific location. This zoning district is not likely to be placed on a location with existing buildings. 12. Does the new zoning encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality? Neutral. The proposed changes do not modify the zoning map. If the new district were to be placed on the REMU designated areas as recommended, it would be consistent with this criterion and the Community Plan. Placement outside of the current planned areas would be counter to this criterion. The City maintains an inventory of land uses and zoned areas for the city area. This proposal would need to be incorporated into that inventory to ensure that land remains available for all the necessary functions within the City. PUBLIC COMMENT No public comment has been received as of this writing. Any written comment will be forwarded at the public hearings. Conclusion Pursuant to Section 76-2-304, Montana Codes Annotated, the Zoning Commission and Planning Board shall review the Unified Development Ordinance text amendment application to determine if the proposed zoning change meets the requirements of the Adopted Growth Policy, state statute, and other adopted state laws and local ordinances. The Zoning Commission and Planning Board shall act to recommend approval or denial of the Unified Development Ordinance text amendment. The recommendation of the Bozeman Zoning Commission and Planning Board will be forwarded to the 112 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 15 Bozeman City Commission for consideration a future public hearing. The City Commission will make the final decision on the application. Attachments: Attachment A – Edited proposal Attachment B – Comparison of uses in the UMU, B-1, B-2, B-3 and REMU proposal Report Sent To: RTR Holdings, 67 Village Drive, Suite 206 Belgrade, MT 59714 Bob Emery 3522 Clay Street San Francisco CA 94118 Randy Hecht 22 Turtle Rock Court Tiburon CA 94920 Intrinsik Architecture 111 North Tracy Avenue Bozeman, MT 59715 GGLO 1301 First Avenue, Suite 301 Seattle, WA 98101 113 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 1 of 17 8/12/2010 ATTACHMENT A CHAPTER 18.17 RESIDENTIAL EMPHASIS MIXED-USE ZONING DISTRICT (REMU) 18.17.010 INTENT AND PURPOSE OF RESIDENTIAL EMPHASIS MIXED-USE ZONING DISTRICT The intent and purpose of the Residential Emphasis Mixed-Use (“REMU”) district is to establish areas within Bozeman that are mixed-use in character and to provide options for a variety of housing, employment, retail and neighborhood service opportunities within a new or existing neighborhood, while providing predictability to landowners and residents in uses and standards. Additional requirements for development apply within overlay districts. All development is subject to §18.02.050, BMC. A. It is further the intent of this district to implement the principles of the adopted growth policy: Neighborhoods 1. Create self-sustaining neighborhoods that will lay the foundation for healthy lifestyles; 2. Support compact, walkable developments that promote balanced transportation options; 3. Have residential as the majority use with a range of densities; 4. Provide for a diverse array of commercial and civic uses supporting residential; 5. Have residential and commercial uses mixed vertically and/or horizontally; 6. Locate adjacent to residential neighborhoods that can sustain commercial uses within walking distance and a wider range of housing types; 7. Encourage developments that exhibit the physical design characteristics of vibrant, urban, and pedestrian-oriented complete streets; Sense of Place 8. Support or add to an existing neighborhood context; 9. Enhance an existing neighborhood’s sense of place and strive to make it more self- sustainable; 10. Encourage a new neighborhood commercial center(s) with a unique identity and strong sense of place; 11. Develop commercial and mixed-use areas that are safe, comfortable, and attractive to pedestrians; 12. Reinforce the principle of streets as public places that encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel, transit, on-street parking and physical elements of complete streets. Natural Amenities 13. Preserve and integrate the natural amenities into the development; 14. Appropriately balance a hierarchy of both parks and public spaces that are within the neighborhood; 114 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 2 of 17 8/12/2010 Centers 15. Group uses of property to create vibrant centers 16. Where appropriate create a center within an existing neighborhood; 17. Facilitate proven, market driven projects to ensure both long and short-term financial viability; 18. Allow an appropriate blend of complimentary mixed land uses including, but not limited to, retail, offices, commercial services, restaurants, bars, hotels, recreation and civic uses, and housing, to create economic and social vitality; 19. Foster the master plan development into a mix of feasible, market driven uses; 20. Emphasize the need to serve the adjacent, local neighborhood and also the greater Bozeman area as well; 21. Maximize land use efficiency by encouraging shared use parking; Integration of Action 22. Support existing infrastructure that is within and adjacent to REMU zones; 23. Add to existing transportation and open space network, encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel; 24. Encourage master planned communities with thoughtful development; 25. Provide flexibility in the placement and design of new developments and redevelopment to anticipate changes in the marketplace; 26. Provide roadway and pedestrian connections to residential areas; 27. Facilitate development (land use mix, density and design) that supports public transit, where applicable; 28. Provide flexibility in phasing to help insure both long and short term financial viability of the project as a whole; Urban Density 29. Encourage efficient land use by facilitating, high-density, single or multi-story housing, commercial and retail development; 30. Provide transitions between high-traffic streets and adjacent residential neighborhoods; Sustainability 31. Promote sustainable communities through careful planning. B. To accomplish in the intent of the district, the REMU district may be located within existing and established neighborhoods, or located in new undeveloped areas of the City. Implementation of certain regulations herein may be implemented with regard to the specific characteristics and location of a development site. REMU districts should be located adjacent to or near planned or existing residential development to enhance walking and bicycle use. 18.17.020 AUTHORIZED USES. A. Uses in the Residential Emphasis Mixed-Use district are depicted in the table below. Principal uses are indicated with a “P,” conditional uses are indicated with a “C,” accessory uses are indicated with an “A,” and uses which are not permitted within the district are indicated by a “-.” 115 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 3 of 17 8/12/2010 B. The uses listed are deliberately broad and some are given special definitions in Chapter 18.80, BMC. The intent of this method is to provide general guidance for uses while allowing the unique needs and circumstances of each proposal to be specifically addressed through the review process. Some uses are the subject of special regulations contained in Chapter 18.40, BMC. C. Uses Required and Limited 1. REMU districts are intended to be developed with a mix of uses that encourage a range of building types scales, densities and site configurations. 2. Developments are encouraged to include non-residential uses, especially commercial and neighborhood support services, mixed horizontally and/or vertically, to promote compact, walkable and sustainable neighborhoods. 3. Non-residential uses shall not exceed 30 percent of the total existing gross building area of all uses with current and valid final site plan approval within the master planned area unless otherwise allowed in this section, through a Master Site Plan or PUD review. 4. For the purposes of calculating the percentage of a use within the site development, the gross square foot floor area of building for each use shall be utilized. 5. Home-based businesses are not considered non-residential uses and shall not be limited by the provisions of the Section. 6. Non-residential uses intended for public benefit and shared public amenities shall not be limited by the provisions of this Section. These uses include, but are not limited to, schools, parks, community centers, city operated services and structured parking facilities. D. Development Review Applications 1. To accomplish the intent of the district, the REMU district is anticipated to be located on sites ten acres or larger. Development review applications for sites in the REMU district greater than, or equal to, ten acres will be first subject to review as a Master Site Plan per Chapter 18.34; or as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) per 18.36, as determined by the applicant. 2. Project applications for subsequent project phases in compliance with an approved Master Site Plan or PUD may be reviewed as a Site Plan Review or Sketch Plan Review in accordance with Chapter 18.34. 3. All development review applications for sites property in the REMU district smaller than ten acres are subject to the standards in this chapter; and may be subject to review as a Master Site Plan per Chapter 18.34 by decision of the Planning Director, upon finding: a. The development application is for a site considered a major infill site, having a significant impact on an existing neighborhood; or may create a center within an existing neighborhood; b. The proposed development is located at an intersections deemed to have special significance; or c. The proposed development may have a significant impact on existing transportation and open space network, pedestrian and bicycle travel. Comment [BK1]: Add the word Existing. This would add a concurrency requirement to construct residential with any phase. Comment [BK2]: The questions arises as to how the percentage is calculated. Based upon constructed units? Planned units? Units with building permits First come first served based upon final site plan date etc. 116 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 4 of 17 8/12/2010 Table 17-1 TABLE OF USES MAXIMUM GROSS BUILDING AREA AUTHORIZED USES Accessory Dwelling Unit P Apartments and Apartment Buildings P Arts and Entertainment Center 12,000 sf P Assisted Living/Elderly Care Facilities P Automobile Fuel Sales C Automobile Parking Lot or Garage (public or private) P Automobile Washing Establishment C Banks and Other Financial Institutions P Bed & Breakfast P Business, Technical or Vocational School P Community Centers P Community Residential Facilities P Convenience Uses excluding drive-in and drive-through uses 5,000 sf PC Cooperative Household P Convenience Use Restaurant excluding drive-in and drive-through uses 5,000 sf P Daycare – family, group, or center P Essential Services (Type II) C Extended-Stay Lodgings 40,000 sf P Health and Exercise Establishments P Home-based Businesses (subject to 18.17.030.E only) P Hospitals C Hotel or Motel 40,000 sf P Laboratories, Research and Diagnostic 10,000 sf P Laundry Service Center P Light Goods Repair P Lodging Houses P Manufacturing (light and completely indoors) 5,000 sf P Museum P Medical and Dental Offices, Clinics and Centers P Meeting Hall P Offices P Other Buildings & Structures (typically accessory to permitted uses) A Personal and Convenience Services P Pet Grooming Shop P Printing Offices and Publishing Establishments 5,000 sf P Fraternity, Sorority or Lodge P Comment [BK3]: Within the definitions chapter 18.80 this includes automotive repair. Need to clarify. Comment [BK4]: 18.80 definition includes conflict with retail motor fuel language. Could include drive through uses which staff does not support in this zone 117 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 5 of 17 8/12/2010 Public Buildings P Refuse and Recycling Containers A Restaurants P Retail Uses less than 5,000sf 5,000 sf P 1 Retail Uses greater than 5,000sf and less than or equal to 12,000 sf 12,000 sf P 1, 2 Retail Uses greater than 12,000sf and less than or equal to 25,000sf 25,000 sf P 1, 3 Sales of Alcohol for On-Premise Consumption – No gaming allowed C Single household dwelling P Student Housing Facility P 4 Three- or four-household dwelling P Townhouses (five attached units or less) P Two-household dwelling P Veterinary Clinic C Wholesale Distributors With On-Premise Retail Outlets (providing warehousing is limited to commodities which are sold on the premises) 10,000 sf C Wholesale Establishments (ones that use samples, but do not stock on premises) 5,000 sf C Any Use, Except Adult Businesses and Casinos Approved as Part of a Planned Unit Development Subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.36, BMC. C 1 Excluding Adult Businesses as defined in Chapter §18.80.BMC. 2 Limited to no more than four structures per 100 acres of contiguous master planned development and subject to 18.17.020.C. 3 Limited to no more than two structures per 100 acres of contiguous master planned development and subject to 18.17.020.C. 4 Student Housing Facility is defined as: “A living facility with five or more dwelling units for persons intended to be enrolled in an institution of higher learning. Student Housing Facilities are not limited to the restrictions for number of occupants defined in 18.80.1390, but must provide adequate parking and open space in accordance with this Title.” 18.17.030 SPECIAL STANDARDS A. The Special Standards set forth in this section are minimum standards for a development review application. Standards not specifically addressed by this section are subject to the standards set forth in this Title. B. When development in a REMU district uses the PUD process for land use approval, any combination of the following methods, in addition to the performance point criteria listed in 18.36.090 BMC, may earn performance points. 1. Designed to meet LEED-ND certification requirements (20 10points) 2. Inclusion of a Low Impact Development Plan (6 points) that includes the following: a. On-site stormwater treatment systems that exceed the requirements of BMC Title 14, Stormwater, including but not limited to: incorporating drainage methods and technologies that treat, detain and/or infiltrate stormwater as close as possible to the source of run-off and the use of natural drainage systems across sites, rather than underground closed-pipe systems to the extent feasible. Natural drainage systems reduce the negative impacts of stormwater runoff by redesigning residential streets to take advantage of plants, trees, and soils to clean runoff and manage stormwater flows. Vegetated swales, stormwater cascades, and small wetland ponds allow soils to absorb water, slowing flows and filtering out many contaminants. Comment [BK5]: Need to clarify than none are allowed under a certain parcel size. Need to clarify that it applies to those currently approved under a final site plan approval? Comment [BK6]: Move to 18.80 Definitions Chapter. Comment [BK7]: How would the City verify this? Comment [BK8]: Clarify that it would apply to the entire development/site/masterplanned area. 118 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 6 of 17 8/12/2010 b. The Low Impact Development Plan shall be integrated with the Snow Storage and Management Plan c. At least 75% of new planting should be chosen from the list of Drought Tolerant Plants & Xeriscaping in Montana (2010), produced by the Montana Nursery & Landscape Association, or approved/updated equivalent list approved by the City of Bozeman. Any species listed as noxious or invasive in Montana shall be avoided. d. Inclusion of weather-based irrigation controllers. e. Limitations in the Covenants or Design Guidelines on the amount and type of sod permitted for individual residential lots. 3. Sustainable Design and Construction (6 points) a. Covenants or Design Guidelines that include a commitment to design the majority of buildings to meet LEED certification requirements. b. Energy use reduction. Residential Covenants or Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to build ENERGY STAR certified homes, which meet EPA guidelines that make them 20–30% more efficient than standard homes. Non-residential Covenants and Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to build and certify buildings that meet the EPA’s ENERGY STAR challenge, a program that applies to offices, schools, post offices, retail, banks, warehouses and residence halls, or approved equivalent program. Equivalent programs will also be considered during Preliminary PUD review. c. Water use reduction. Covenants or Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to use WaterSense certified products for all kitchen, bathroom and irrigation hardware. WaterSense is an EPA-sponsored partnership program that promotes water efficiency and expands the market for water-efficient products, programs, and practices. Equivalent programs will also be considered during Preliminary PUD review. d. Provision of solar, wind or other alternative energy sources or participation in an approved cash-in-lieu program. 4. Integrated and coordinated way-finding measures within overall project (4 points) 5. On-site recycling transfer station (4 points) 6. Public transportation bus station or enhanced covered bus stop (1 point per station or enhanced stop) 7. Streetscape Improvements (6 points): Streetscape design features that exceed the minimum street standards including street furniture, pedestrian lighting, low-impact development techniques, on-street parking standards, crosswalks, landscape and planting, way-finding, public art or other design elements. Such elements must be installed as part of the street infrastructure. C. Landscape and Planting Standards. Table 18.17-2 (below) lists the minimum number of points needed for landscape plan approval for development types within REMU districts. Table 17-2 Development Type Lot With Residential Adjacency Lot Without Residential Adjacency Residential Small-Lot Single-Family N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Single-Family N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Comment [BK9]: How does this relate to the new 2009 Energy Code that was just adopted by the City? Comment [BK10]: Consistent with the requirements of the signage chapter. How much? Entire district? Comment [BK11]: Long term maintenance for these streets needs to be clarified. Private streets with dedicated public easement only? 119 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 7 of 17 8/12/2010 Residential: Townhouse 2 to 4 attached units N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Townhouse or Townhouse Cluster 5 or more attached units 23 23 Residential: Stacked Flats 2 to 4 attached units N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Stacked Flats 5 or more attached units 23 23 Mixed Use with Residential 15 15 Non Residential Projects 23 15 PUD 23 23 D. Street and Circulation Standards 1. The policies and standards of the City’s long-range transportation plan apply to REMU districts. New streets within REMU districts shall be complete streets that accommodate pedestrians, bicycles, buses, automobiles and wintertime snow storage, and work in concert with internal property accesses and adjacent development to create a connected and vibrant public realm. REMU street standards also include the following stipulations: a. Natural storm drainage systems are allowed within street ROWs. b. Boulevard strips and medians may incorporate natural drainage technologies. c. Buildings shall be oriented with front facades facing the street. d. Where this is not possible, a side facade may face the street, but at least 25% of its surface area must be windows. The overall design of side facades should address the public nature of the street. e. Shared drive accesses shall be used to reduce the need for additional curb cuts, when feasible. f. On-street parking should shall be maximized wherever feasible. 2. The City’s long-range transportation plan street standards that are most commonly used for new streets in REMU districts are listed below. Additional modifications may be proposed, but must be approved by the City Commission through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 3. Collector Streets Collector streets in REMU districts serve development types that are primarily commercial, residential or mixed-use. Modifications allow each street type to be customized with pedestrian-friendly elements that are appropriate for mixed-use centers and corridors. a. Collector: 2-Lane Table 17-3 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ – 14’ wide Boulevard strip 14’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 14’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed- use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Comment [BK12]: Less for homes or differentiate between commercial and residential? DOP requires 30% for street frontage. 120 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 8 of 17 8/12/2010 Parking lane 8’-20’ wide Perpendicular or angled parking permitted. Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Pavement striping 1’ wide ROW 90’ wide b. Collector: 3-Lane Table 17-4 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ – 14’ wide Boulevard strip 14’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 14’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed-use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Parking lane not allowed Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Left turn lane 15’ wide Pavement striping 2’ wide overall ROW 90’ wide c. Collector: 3-Lane with Median Table 17-5 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ – 13’ wide Boulevard strip 7’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 7’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed-use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Parking lane 8’ -20’ wide Parallel or angled parking permitted Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Median/turn lane 14’ wide 8’ wide where left turn lanes are not required ROW 90’ wide 4. Local Streets Local streets within REMU districts primarily serve residential development that varies in type, scale and density. REMU encourages the provision of housing choices for a variety of different household sizes and incomes. Local streets may be alley-loaded or front- loaded. a. Local Street: 2-Lane, Residential Table 17-6 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 5’ wide 5’ – 8.5’ wide Boulevard strip 8.5’ wide; street trees req. 5’ –8.5’ wide; allows variation of sidewalk and boulevard strip widths; street trees req. Parking lane 7’ wide Bike lane not required 121 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 9 of 17 8/12/2010 Drive lanes 8’ wide ROW 60’ wide b. Local Street: 2-Lane, Adjacent to Park Table 17-7 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide Boulevard strip 6.5’ wide; street trees req. 5’ –6.5’ wide; street trees required Parking lane 7’ wide Bike lane not required Drive lanes 10’ wide 8’ – 10’ wide ROW 60’ wide c. Front-Loaded Local Streets To ensure that front-loaded streets are community-oriented and pedestrian-friendly, adjacent buildings, garages and driveways must comply with the following specific standards of this Title. • 18.16.070 Residential Garages • 18.44.090.C.2.a Drive Access Requirements – Residential • 18.46.010.D Stacking of Off-Street Parking Spaces • 18.46.010.E No Parking Permitted in Required Front or Side Yards • 18.46.010.F Parking Permitted in Rear Yards 5. Woonerfs: Woonerfs, or streets where pedestrians and cyclists have priority over motorists, are encouraged on private drive accesses or properties in the REMU district. Woonerfs may be permitted on public local streets or alleys through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 6. Mews: Mews, or alleys lined with garages and living quarters above, are encouraged on private drive access or properties in the REMU district. Mews may be permitted on alleys through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 7. Shared Drive Accesses: Apply standards of 18.44.090.F (Shared Drive Access) and 18.80.2770 (Shared Access). 8. Alleys: Alleys are encouraged, but not required, in the REMU district. a. Apply standards of 18.44.060.B (Street Improvement Standards - Alleys) where applicable. E. Standards for Specific Development Types. The following standards are to be considered in the review of Site Plandevelopment applications incorporating these development types. 1. Residential: Small-Lot Single-Household a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 1.5:1, also apply 18.16.030.B Comment [BK13]: Consider 26’ minimum in residential areas. Comment [BK14]: Alleys should be required but should be able to be both public and private. Private alleys work better for larger lot commercial development. Definition in 18.80 only allows for public alleys. Further work needed. Comment [BK15]: Residential alleys at a minimum should be mandatory. Comment [BK16]: Not possible with required setbacks and utility easements? 122 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 10 of 17 8/12/2010 b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: 2500 sf min. Lot Width: 25’ min. c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. (zero lot line exception) • Allow “zero-lot line” development through shared use easements or placement of buildings on or near one of the side lot lines. 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-8 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 3:12 or greater but less than 6:12 38 6:12 or greater but less than 9:12 40 Equal to or greater than 9:12 42 e. Garages Apply standards of 18.16.070 and 18.38.050 (except 18.38.050.H). f. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-3 district. 2. Residential: Single-Household a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 50% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 1:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width Area: 4000 sf min. Additional area for accessory dwelling unit: 800 sf min. Width: 40’ min. Width for accessory dwelling unit: 40’ min. c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 123 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 11 of 17 8/12/2010 2. Rear yard: 15’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. (zero lot line exception) • Allow “zero-lot line” development through shared use easements or placement of buildings on or near one of the side lot line. 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-9 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 3:12 or greater but less than 6:12 38 6:12 or greater but less than 9:12 40 Equal to or greater than 9:12 42 e. Garages Apply standards of 18.16.070 and 18.38.050 (except 18.38.050.H). f. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-3 district. g. Additional Notes 1. Single Household units may incorporate home-based businesses at the ground level with direct access from a public ROW or other accessible route. These commercial uses are exempt from off-street parking requirements. 2. Developments may include individual retail uses at the ground level no greater than 2,000sf in area, when located along the primary frontage. The first 2000 sf of any nonresidential use in this development type is exempt from off-street parking requirements. Parking lots for such uses shall not be permitted along primary frontages. 3. Residential: Townhouse/ Townhouse Cluster a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 2.5:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: no minimum lot area required Lot Width: 15.5’ min. c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 20’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. Comment [BK17]: Clarify that double frontage lots are discouraged. Require alley access. 124 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 12 of 17 8/12/2010 • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard – 5’ min. or 0’ for interior walls of townhouses 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-10 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 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 e. Garages To ensure that townhouses contribute to a community-oriented, pedestrian-friendly streetscape, they must comply with the following specific standards of this Title. 1. 18.16.070 Residential Garages 2. 18.44.090.C.2.a Drive Access Requirements - Residential 3. 18.46.010.D Stacking of Off-Street Parking Spaces 4. 18.46.010.E No Parking Permitted in Required Front or Side Yards 5. 18.46.010.F Parking Permitted in Rear Yards f. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-4 district. g. Additional Notes 1. Portions of site development review applications within the REMU zone for attached multi-family developments should be urban in character and may be designed such that each dwelling unit has a ground level entry oriented to the public realm, and sharing one or more walls with another dwelling unit. 2. Such units should be broadly consistent in scale and level of architectural detail, but shall be designed to emphasize a distinction in individual dwelling units through form, massing, articulation, color and other architectural means. 3. Townhouse units may incorporate home-based businesses at the ground level with direct access from a public ROW or other accessible route. These commercial uses are exempt from off-street parking requirements. 4. Developments incorporating townhouse units may include individual retail uses at the ground level no greater than 2,000 sf in area, when located along the primary frontage. The first 2000 sf of any nonresidential use in this development type is exempt from off-street parking requirements. Parking lots for such uses shall not be permitted along primary street frontages. 4. Residential: Stacked Flats & Student Housing Facilities a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. or 100% if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking Floor Area: allowable FAR 4:1, also apply 18.16.030.B Comment [BK18]: How does ADA requirements apply? 125 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 13 of 17 8/12/2010 b. Lot Area and Width: Lot Area: Apply standards of 18.16.040.A, Table 16-2 (Lot Area Table), or if a structured internal parking facility is provided, then required lot area may be reduced. by up to 50%. Lot Width: Apply standards of 18.16.040.B, Table 16-3 (Lot Width Table) c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. d. Building Height: 5 stories max. e. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-4 district. 5. Residential: Mixed Use (Residential over Commercial) a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. or 100% if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking Floor Area: apply standards 18.19.030.C and 18.19.030.D (FAR) b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: all new mixed use lots shall have a minimum area adequate to provide required setbacks (yards) and parking Lot Width: no minimum width for new mixed use lots c. Yards: 1. Minimum Yards. No minimum yards are required for the mixed-use district. Easements for utilities or other special standards may require buildings to be placed back from lot lines. 2. Maximum Setback. Buildings shall be oriented to the adjacent street. At least 50% of the total building frontage, which is oriented to the street, shall be placed within 10 feet of any minimum required separation from the property line. 3. Special Yard Requirements. All yards shall be subject to the provisions of §18.30.060 Design Criteria and Development Standards in Entryway Corridors, §18.38.060 Yard and Height Encroachments, Limitations and Exceptions, §18.42.100 Watercourse Setback, §18.44.100 Street Vision Triangle, and §18.48.100 General Maintenance, BMC, when applicable. d. Building Height: Min. height: 2 stories Max. height: Maximum building height shall be 55 feet except that maximum building height may be increased by up to but not more than an additional 25 feet when structured parking is provided. 126 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 14 of 17 8/12/2010 e. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the UMU district. f. Special Parking Standards 1. Structured Parking Incentive. A floor area bonus of one square foot of nonresidential up to a total of 50% of the gross building area of all uses may be granted for each square foot of area of structured parking. 2. Parking for individual lots may be provided elsewhere within the district with a shared parking agreement, provided that the overall parking ratio for the district is comparable with documented parking ratios in developments of similar scale, intensity of use, population density, and scope. 3. Bicycle Parking. Covered bicycle parking shall be provided by all student housing projects, commercial development, and mixed use development. The covered spaces shall be either 10 bicycle parking spaces or one-half of the total minimum bicycle parking whichever is less. g. Special Building Standards 1. Floor-to-Ceiling and Floor-to-Floor Heights a. All commercial space provided on the ground level shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 12 feet. b. Residential uses shall have no limit to floor-to-ceiling or floor-to-floor heights. 2. Buildings that contain commercial uses on the ground floor shall provide transparency along at least 50% percent of the linear length of the commercial façade. Transparency may be achieved with windows, building lobbies, building entrances, display windows, or windows affording views into retail, office, or lobby spaces. This requirement shall apply to both street fronts for buildings located on corner lots. 3. Parking structures shall not have more than one two-way vehicle entrance or two one-way vehicle entrances facing any public way. 50% of the ground floor linear frontage along the primary street must be retail, commercial, office, civic, residential, or live/work. 4. Building encroachments are permitted in accordance with Section 18.38.060, subject to any and all applicable International Building Codes. 5. All projects in the REMU district are exempt from the Rear Yard Lot Coverage requirements of 18.38.050.H h. Special Lighting Standards: All building entrances, pathways, and other pedestrian areas shall be lit with pedestrian-scale lighting (e.g., wall mounted, sidewalk lamps, bollards, landscaping lighting, et cetera). Alternative lighting meeting the intent of the design guidelines and other criteria of this title, may be approved through site development review. i. Natural Surveillance Standards: The proposed site layout, building, and landscape design promote natural surveillance of the area by employees, visitors, and residents. Physical features and activities should be oriented and designed in ways that maximize the ability to see throughout the site. For example, window placement, the use of front porches or stoops, use of low or see-through walls, and appropriate use of landscaping and lighting can promote natural surveillance. Sight-obscuring shrubs Comment [BK19]: Add language for a formal parking plan to be submitted. Who will manage? 127 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 15 of 17 8/12/2010 and walls should be avoided, except as necessary for buffering between commercial uses and lower density residential districts, and then shall be minimized. j. Public Space Standards: The REMU district is urban in nature. Public parks and recreational areas are likewise expected to be urban in nature. This may include elements such as plazas or other hardscaping, landscaping with planters and furniture. Such areas may be more concentrated in size and development than anticipated in a less urban setting. Public spaces shall be designed to facilitate distinct types of activities to encourage consistent human presence and activity. The requirements of this section shall give direction in the development of park plans and the application of the standards of Chapter 18.50, BMC. 1. Public spaces shall be designed to: a. Facilitate social interaction between and within groups; b. Provide safe, pleasant, clean and convenient sitting spaces adaptable to changing weather conditions; c. Be attractive to multiple age groups, d. Provide for multiple types of activities without conflicting; e. Support organized activities; f. Be visually distinctive and interesting; g. Interconnect with other public and private spaces; and h. Prioritize use by persons. 6. Nonresidential a. Structures for authorized non-residential activities are permitted in the REMU district and shall comply with the Intent and Purposes set forth in this chapter. Such uses in the REMU district are intended to provide neighborhood services and local employment, and complement existing and planned residential uses. Structures for nonresidential uses are subject to the following restrictions: b. The placement and building design of such structures should be integrated into an overall site development plan. c. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot coverage: 100% if parking requirements are met by shared or off-site parking facilities, or if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking. Floor Area: min. FAR 0.5:1 d. Lot Area and Width: 1. All newly created lots shall have a minimum area adequate to provide for required yards and parking. In the REMU district there is no minimum size for newly created lots. 2. There is no minimum width for newly created lots within the REMU district. e. Yards: 1. Minimum Yards. No minimum yards are required for the mixed-use district. Easements for utilities or other special standards may require buildings to be placed back from lot lines. 2. Maximum Setback. Buildings shall be oriented to the primary street. At least 50% of the total building frontage, which is oriented to the street, shall be placed within 10 feet of any minimum required separation from the property line. Comment [BK20]: This is not a mixed use district. What about yards for buffering and screeing. How do you accommodate the required parking lot landscaping. Would like to see more development here to have buildings placed on corners and place the parking to the side or rear of the building. 128 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 16 of 17 8/12/2010 3. Special Yard Requirements. All yards shall be subject to the provisions of §18.30.060 Design Criteria and Development Standards in Entryway Corridors, §18.38.060 Yard and Height Encroachments, Limitations and Exceptions, §18.42.100 Watercourse Setback, §18.44.100 Street Vision Triangle, and §18.48.100 General Maintenance, BMC, when applicable. f. Building Height: Min. height: 15’ measured from the building’s primary street frontage Max. height: 5 stories Single-story, single-use commercial buildings in compliance with all other standards of this chapter permitted. g. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the UMU district. h. Special Parking Standards: 1. Structured Parking Incentive. A floor area bonus of one square foot of nonresidential up to a total of 50% of the gross building area of all uses may be granted for each square foot of area of structured parking. 2. Parking for individual lots may be provided elsewhere within the district with a shared parking agreement, provided that the overall parking ratio for the district is comparable with documented parking ratios in developments of similar scale, intensity of use, population density, and scope. 3. Bicycle Parking. Covered bicycle parking shall be provided by all student housing projects, commercial development, and mixed use development. The covered spaces shall be either 10 bicycle parking spaces or one-half of the total minimum bicycle parking whichever is less. i. Special Building Standards: 1. Floor-to-Ceiling and Floor-to-Floor Heights a. All commercial space provided on the ground level shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 12 feet. b. Residential uses shall have no limit to floor-to-ceiling or floor-to-floor heights. 2. Buildings that contain commercial uses on the ground floor shall provide transparency along at least 50% percent of the linear length of the commercial façade. Transparency may be achieved with windows, building lobbies, building entrances, display windows, or windows affording views into retail, office, or lobby spaces. This requirement shall apply to both street fronts for buildings located on corner lots. 3. Parking structures shall not have more than one two-way vehicle entrance or two one-way vehicle entrances facing any public way. 50% of the ground floor linear frontage along a primary street must be retail, commercial, office, civic, residential, or live/work. 4. Building encroachments are permitted in accordance with Section 18.38.060, subject to any and all applicable International Building Codes. 5. All projects in the REMU district are exempt from the Rear Yard Lot Coverage requirements of 18.38.050.H j. Special Lighting Standards: All building entrances, pathways, and other pedestrian Comment [BK21]: Further define commercial façade? 129 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 17 of 17 8/12/2010 areas shall be lit with pedestrian-scale lighting (e.g., wall mounted, sidewalk lamps, bollards, landscaping lighting, et cetera). Alternative lighting meeting the intent of the design guidelines and other criteria of this title, may be approved through site development review. k. Natural Surveillance Standards: The proposed site layout, building, and landscape design promote natural surveillance of the area by employees, visitors, and residents. Physical features and activities should be oriented and designed in ways that maximize the ability to see throughout the site. For example, window placement, the use of front porches or stoops, use of low or see-through walls, and appropriate use of landscaping and lighting can promote natural surveillance. Sight-obscuring shrubs and walls should be avoided, except as necessary for buffering between commercial uses and lower density residential districts, and then shall be minimized. j. Public Space Standards: The REMU district is urban in nature. Public parks and recreational areas are likewise expected to be urban in nature. This may include elements such as plazas or other hardscaping, landscaping with planters and furniture. Such areas may be more concentrated in size and development than anticipated in a less urban setting. Public spaces shall be designed to facilitate distinct types of activities to encourage consistent human presence and activity. The requirements of this section shall give direction in the development of park plans and the application of the standards of Chapter 18.50, BMC. 1. Public spaces shall be designed to: a. Facilitate social interaction between and within groups; b. Provide safe, pleasant, clean and convenient sitting spaces adaptable to changing weather conditions; c. Be attractive to multiple age groups, d. Provide for multiple types of activities without conflicting; e. Support organized activities; f. Be visually distinctive and interesting; g. Interconnect with other public and private spaces; and h. Prioritize use by persons. 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 ATTACHMENT B COMPARISON OF USES IN EXISTING UMU (URBAN MIXED USE), B-1, B-2, B-3 DISTRICTS AND THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL EMHASIS MIXED USE DISTRICT (REMU) 18.18.020 AUTHORIZED USES A. Uses in the various commercial districts are depicted in the table below. Principal uses are indicated with a “P”, conditional uses are indicated with a “C”, accessory uses are indicated with an “A”, and uses which are not permitted within the district are indicated by a “-”. A particular proposed development or use may fall under more than one listed category with different review processes. In such cases, the more stringent review process shall apply. B. The uses listed are deliberately broad and some are given special definitions in Chapter 18.80, BMC. The intent of this method is to provide general guidance for uses while allowing the unique needs and circumstances of each proposal to be specifically addressed through the review process. Some uses are the subject of special regulations contained in Chapter 18.40, BMC. C. Additional uses for telecommunications are established in Chapter 18.54, BMC. Table 18-1 Table of Commercial Uses Authorized Uses UMU B-1 B-2 B-3 REMU* Ambulance Service P - P P - Apartments and Apartment buildings, as defined in this title P P P 1/C P 3 P Arts and entertainment center, as defined in this title P P P P P 12,000 s.f. limit Assisted living/elderly care facilities P - C - P Automobile fuel sales or repair, as defined in this title C C C C - Automobile fuel sales - - - - C Automobile parking lot or garage (public or private) P P P P P Automobile washing establishment C C P C C Banks and other financial institutions P P P P P Business, technical or vocational school P - C P 3 P Bus terminals C - C C - Community centers P C P P 3 P Convenience uses C C P C P 5,000 s.f. limit Community Residential Facility - - - - P Convenience use restaurant P P P P - Cooperative Household - - - - P Day care centers - P P P P 141 Table of Commercial Uses Authorized Uses UMU B-1 B-2 B-3 REMU* Essential services (Type I) - P P P - Essential services (Type II) C - C C C Extended- stay lodgings P - P P P 40,000 s.f. limit Food processing facilities - - C - - Frozen food storage and locker rental - - P - - Health and exercise establishments - P 1/C P P P Home-based Businesses (subject to 18.17.030.E only) - - - - P Hospitals P - P C C Hotel or motel P - P P P 40,000 s.f. limit Laboratories, research and diagnostic P - P P 3 P 40,000 s.f. limit Laundry, dry cleaning P - C C P Light goods repair, as defined in this title P - C A P Lodging houses P - C C 3 P Manufacturing, light and completely indoors P - C - P 5,000 s.f. limit Mortuary C - C C - Museum P - C C P Medical and dental clinics P P 1/C P P P Meeting hall P - P P P Offices, as defined in this title P P 1/C P P 3 P Other buildings and structures typically accessory to permitted uses A A A A A Parking facilities P P P P3 - Personal and convenience services, as defined in this title P P P P P Pet grooming shop P P P P P Printing offices and publishing establishments C - - C P 5,000 s.f. limit Private club, fraternity, sorority or lodge P - P P P Public buildings P P P P P Refuse and recycling containers A A A A A Research laboratories P - P P P 142 Table of Commercial Uses Authorized Uses UMU B-1 B-2 B-3 REMU* Restaurants P P P P P Retail uses, as defined in this title P 6 P 2 P 2 P 2 - Retail Uses less than 5,000s.f. - - - - P excluding adult businesses Retail Uses greater than 5,000s.f. and less than or equal to 12,000 s.f. - - - - P no more than 4 per 100 acres of contiguous development Retail Uses greater than 12,000s.f. and less than or equal to 25,000 s.f. - - - - P no more than 2 per 100 acres of contiguous development Retail, large scale C - P - - Sales of alcohol for on-premise consumption C no gaming allowed C C C C no gaming allowed Single household dwelling - - - - P Student Housing Facility - - - - P Three-or four-household dwelling - - - - P Townhouses (five attached units or less) - - - - P Two-household dwelling - - - - P Sign paint shops (not including neon sign fabrication) C - P C - Upholstery shops (excluding on site upholstery service for cars, boats, trailers, trucks and other motorized vehicles requiring overnight storage) P - P P 3 - Veterinary clinic P - C - C Wholesale distributors with on-premise retail outlets, providing warehousing is limited to commodities which are sold on the premises P - C - P 10,000 square foot limit Wholesale establishments that use samples, but do not stock on premises P - P P P 5,000 square foot limit Any use, except adult businesses and casinos approved as part of a planned unit development subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.36, BMC C C C C C Notes: 1When located on the second or subsequent floor. 2Excluding adult businesses, and large scale retail, as they are defined in Chapter 18.80, BMC. 3Except on ground floor in the core area as defined in this chapter. 4Private arts instruction shall only be on the second or subsequent floor in the core area as defined in this chapter. 5On the ground floor in the core area as defined in this chapter. 143 6Excluding adult business and large scale retail. Proposal Notes: * REMU does include a proposed restriction on the overall commercial square footage to limit non-residential uses to no more than 30 percent of the total gross building area of all uses within the master planned area. 144 1 Planning Board Minutes – August 17, 2010 JOINT MEETING PLANNING BOARD/ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 17, 2010 ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. and ordered the Recording Secretary to take attendance. Zoning Commission Members Present: Nathan Minnick Nick Lieb Ed Sypinski Zoning Commission City Commission Liaison Chris Mehl Zoning Commission Members Absent: JP Pomnichowski Planning Board Members Present: Trever McSpadden Ed Sypinski Chris Budeski Bill Quinn Jeff Krauss Eugene Graf, IV Jodi Leone Planning Board Members Absent: Erik Henyon, President Brian Caldwell, Vice President Staff Present: Brian Krueger, Associate Planner Allyson Bristor, Associate Planner Doug Riley, Associate Planner Chris Saunders, Interim Planning Director Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary Guests Present: Susan Riggs Rob Pertzborn John Tabaracci Sid DeBarathy George Hecht Sean Canady Brit Fontenot 145 2 Planning Board Minutes – August 17, 2010 ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (0-15 MINUTES) {Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Zoning Commission/Planning Board and not scheduled on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.} Seeing there was no public comment forthcoming, Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick closed this portion of the meeting. ITEM 3. ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 7, 2010 MOTION: Mr. Sypinski moved, Mr. Lieb seconded, to approve the Zoning Commission minutes of July 7, 2010 as presented. The motion carried 3-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick, Mr. Sypinski, and Mr. Lieb. Those voting nay being none. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF JULY 7, 2010 MOTION: Mr. Budeski moved, Mr. Sypinski seconded, to approve the Planning Board minutes of July 7, 2010 as presented. The motion carried 7-0. Those voting aye being President Pro Tem Quinn, Mr. Krauss, Ms. Leone, Mr. McSpadden, Mr. Budeski, Mr. Sypinski, and Mr. Graf. Those voting nay being none. ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW 1. Zone Map Amendment Application #Z-10157 – (N.W.E. East Gallatin Substation) A Zone Map Amendment requested by the owner/applicant, Northwestern Energy, 40 East Broadway, Butte, MT 59701, requesting to change the urban zoning designation of R-S (Residential Suburban) to M-1 (Light Manufacturing District) on 7.713 acres for property legally described as Tract in NW ¼, SW ¼, T2S, R5E, Sec. 5, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana and located at 130 Bohart Lane. (Riley) Associate Planner Doug Riley presented the Staff Report noting the proposal was for a Zone Map Amendment to an existing substation site. He directed the Commission to an aerial photo of the site and noted adjacent uses. He stated Staff and the applicant agreed that the current zoning designation was a long ago mapping error. He stated Staff was supportive of the proposal as it was a cleanup item and noted there had been no public comment forthcoming. He stated he would be available to answer any questions. Mr. Sypinski asked how long the substation had been located on the site. Planner Riley responded it had been 20 years plus. John Tabaracci, Attorney representing Northwestern, addressed the Zoning Commission. He stated he and the applicant were visiting about how long the substation had been in that location; they had concluded it had been prior to 1970. He stated they believed the original zoning of R-S had been platted in error and should have been designated M-1. He stated the applicant was comfortable with the contingencies as outlined by Staff. Mr. Lieb asked if the applicant had plans to increase the substation in size. Mr. Tabaracci responded it may be increased in size in the future, but had been removed from the 2010 budget so the date was uncertain. Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick opened the item for public comment. Seeing none forthcoming, the public comment period was closed. MOTION: Mr. Sypinski moved, Mr. Lieb seconded, to forward a recommendation of approval to the City 146 3 Planning Board Minutes – August 17, 2010 Commission for Zone Map Amendment Application #Z-10157 with Staff conditions. Mr. Sypinski stated he found the proposal met all twelve of the Zoning Commission review criteria. Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick and Mr. Lieb concurred. The motion carried 3-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick, Mr. Sypinski, and Mr. Lieb. Those voting nay being none. 2. Zone Map Amendment Application #Z-10164 – (JBL) A Zone Map Amendment requested by the owner JBL, LLC, c/o Jerry Locati, 1007 E. Main Street, Suite 202, Bozeman, MT 59715 and representative C&H Engineering, 1091 Stoneridge Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718, and requesting a change in municipal zoning designation from “M- 1” (Light Manufacturing District) to “B-2” (Community Business District) for 43,996 square feet of land for property legally described as That part of Lot 2A-1A, Amended Plat of Lot 2A-1, Amended Plat C-23-A14, Northern Pacific Addition to the City of Bozeman and Open Space 14, The Village Downtown P.U.D. Subdivision, according to the plat thereof, on file and of record in the office of the Clerk and Recorder, Gallatin County, Montana, and located in the NE ¼, Sec. 7, T2S, R6E, P.M.M, Gallatin County, Montana and located south of the Village Downtown Subdivision and north of East Main Street. (Bristor) Associate Planner Allyson Bristor presented the Staff Report noting the location of the site and the size of the parcel. She stated the existing zoning was M-1 and the proposal was to allow a change to a B-2 zoning designation. She directed the Zoning Commission to photos of the site and noted there was an elevation change (drop off) to the north along the perimeter of the Village Downtown subdivision. She stated Staff found the proposal in compliance with the Growth Policy as well as with the Zoning Map Amendment review criteria. She stated no public comment had been received and she would be available to answer questions. Mr. Sypinski stated that, according to the Staff Report, the proposed zoning would be M-1, but the Growth Policy land use map designated the site as public park/open space into which M-1 did not fit. Planner Bristor responded the site was not within the public park/open space land use designation, but the adjacent trail had been depicted as such on the land use map. Interim Director Saunders responded the zoning designation and land use designation were two different maps and the City Commission had made a number of changes to the future land use map during their review and prior to adoption. Mr. Lieb asked why the zoning was proposed to be changed from open space to M-1. Interim Director Saunders responded that planned land uses in the area had previously changed over several decades and the zoning designation and the Land Use Designation had been amended to reflect those changes; the zoning map and parcels did not exactly match up and the ZMA would improve the match between zoning and planning designations. He added a single zoning district would be easier for the landowner to develop and would match the same zoning designation on the balance of their property. Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick opened the item for public comment. Seeing none forthcoming, the public comment period was closed. Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick stated he felt the proposed zoning would be more appropriate, met the 12 review criteria of the Zoning Commission, and conformed to the Growth Policy. Mr. Lieb concurred. Mr. Sypinski stated he was concerned with certain aspects of the proposal and listed those items; he added he 147 4 Planning Board Minutes – August 17, 2010 was overall supportive of the proposal and felt it met most of the review criteria. MOTION: Mr. Sypinski moved, Mr. Lieb seconded, to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Commission for Zone Map Amendment Application #Z-10164 with Staff conditions. The motion carried 3-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick, Mr. Sypinski, and Mr. Lieb. Those voting nay being none. (PB/ZC JOINT DISCUSSION – ZONING COMMISSION PRESIDING) 3. Zone Code Amendment Application #Z-09241 – (Residential Emphasis Mixed Use) A Zone Code Amendment requested by the applicant, RTR Holdings II and representatives Intrinsik Architecture and GGLO, and requesting to establish a Residential Emphasis Mixed Use zoning district designation within the City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. (Krueger) WORK SESSION A. STAFF PRESENTATION TO JOINT PB/ZC Associate Planner Brian Krueger presented the Staff Report noting he was in attendance to present an amendment to Title 18 of the zoning ordinance. He stated the proposal was to create an entire new chapter of the ordinance which would be similar to the Urban Mixed Use District adoption. He stated it would only be implemented if a Zone Map Amendment was applied for by the City. He stated the process creating the district had begun in 2009 and noted mixed use had been anticipated. He stated that either the City or private applicant could bring the application forward. He stated the applicant had begun informal discussions with the Planning Department and had begun working on drafts while the formal application hadn’t been submitted until December 2009. He stated comments had been provided to the applicant and there had been a lot of back and forth discussions with modifications made by the applicant in response to Staff comments. He stated they had originally intended the application be reviewed in April or May, but scheduling issues had prevented those dates. He stated the long term land use designation had been created in response to what the community believed to be gaps in the existing program; supportive of mixed use, urban development, etc., but the zoning designations to allow those types of developments were not currently in place. Jeff Krauss joined the Planning Board and Zoning Commission. Planner Krueger directed the Planning Board/Zoning Commission’s attention to a description of the proposed zoning designation. He stated specific land use descriptions in the growth policy had been distilled down for the proposal and the future land use map designated future locations where the REMU zoning might occur. He stated a description had been provided for every category and would be used to implement the ordinance. He stated the language was wide range and could be interpreted in different ways; he directed the review agencies to specific language included in the document indicating residential development and how it was to be implemented. He stated the language proposed would include reference to the implementation of the Growth Policy and the Zoning Ordinance. He stated someone could submit a Growth Policy Amendment application and request the REMU designation at other locations in Bozeman; he noted the locations of some of those properties that could potentially be zoned REMU. He stated Staff had to envision what the zoning might look like on the ground and how it might function in each location. He stated the layout of the chapter was similar to the existing ordinance in that it contained the intent of the district, principal and conditional uses, and development standards that were specific to styles of uses. He stated there wasn’t much different from any other district in organization other than commercial and residential uses were mixed; he noted the 148 5 Planning Board Minutes – August 17, 2010 difference in existing and the proposed zoning district was that the REMU included a range of uses, 70% residential development/30% commercial development, small lot housing, student housing, use restrictions based on square footage, PUD/Master Plan requirements, height regulation based on stories instead of number of feet, and the limiting of retail uses. Planner Krueger stated the REMU would allow a student housing facility sharing common kitchen and bathroom areas while still allowing privacy; the applicant had devised a restriction on the maximum size to provide a limit on the potential total number of rooms or parking spaces for that type of use. He stated there was a requirement to go through a PUD or Master Plan process which would apply to projects over ten acres; which would provide the second phase of design review and give the City more authority to review the design and functionality of the development. He stated retail uses would have an overall limit on how many could occur in a certain area; that number would be calculated at the early stages of the development of the site. He stated the proposal was straight forward but there were questions that needed to be answered. Planner Krueger stated it was a policy question as to whether or not the proposal fit in with the Growth Policy designation and asked the Planning Board/Zoning Commission for advice and comment; Staff was seeking input on whether or not enough checks and balances had been put in place. He stated there was a question as to whether or not the zoning would be suitable for Bozeman though he thought it was a matter of becoming comfortable with the zoning and how the specific uses would fit together. He stated sites less than 10 acres should also be considered; Staff did not want to place unnecessary restrictions on sites smaller than 10 acres. He stated the end result was to forward a draft to the City Commission once the larger policy issues were resolved. He noted there had been one letter of public comment in support of the proposal. He stated Staff would be available to research any questions from the Board/Commission members as was consistent with the approach Staff had made to the adoption of the UMU zoning district. He read comments from another agency to the Zoning Commission/Planning Board; he quoted that “complexity with compatibility” was how the mixed use district had been described. He stated the proposed text spoke to the current times and the future of Bozeman. B. APPLICANT PRESENTATION TO JOINT PB/ZC Susan Riggs, Intrinsik Architecture, addressed the Planning Board and Zoning Commission. She introduced fellow applicants Rob Pertzborn, Intrinsik Architecture, Sean Canady, GGLO, and George Hecht owner. She stated the new land use designation had been created with the adoption of the Growth Policy and had been positioned in three areas within the City. She stated vertical and horizontal mixed uses had been included and had been balanced with open spaces, transportation facilities, pedestrian amenities, etc. She stated the official amendment had been submitted to the Planning Department in December of 2009; the applicant thought the proposal had enough teeth to be implemented in the City and would be implemented on a project specific basis. Mr. Canady stated he was a principal with GGLO, based in Seattle, and had a substantial amount of experience with mixed use developments; they had learned from their successes and failures over the last two and a half decades. He stated an authentic neighborhood was really about people and would need to accommodate various demographics; the mixed use neighborhood would need to be flexible and evolve over time. He stated the neighborhood would need to be viewed as a more complicated system; the City’s goals implied emphasis on housing types as well as a range of support uses that would be critical to making the neighborhood authentic. He stated it would be important to have a structured framework due to the long term nature of mixed use neighborhoods based on a number of factors. He directed the Planning Board and Zoning Commission to an example of what a REMU might look like on the ground and noted the locations of various uses including horizontal mixed uses. He noted the inclusion of open space and natural landscaped features that would become an essential part of the character of the neighborhood; the development should 149 6 Planning Board Minutes – August 17, 2010 meet the varied demographic demands. He stated design of the retail buildings would need to be planned to accommodate various uses over time as well as incorporate different modes of travel to the site. He stated the design of the streets would draw people to the site; a mixed use neighborhood would be a place for people to work, study, or play within their own neighborhood. He stated the range of development types allowed and encouraged in the proposed REMU district included residential uses with a variety of different lot sizes – both small and large single-family houses. He stated houses were encouraged to be developed around parks and open spaces to be integrated within the overall open space plan. He stated the design of the duplexes had been encouraged to be designed as single family household structures to maintain the character of the REMU district. He stated residential flats had also been included and could be designed in a number of different styles but should be designed to contribute to the open space or park areas. He stated student housing had been included in variations, but special care would need to be given to maintaining positive relations with adjacent uses. He stated retail uses would be essential in supporting the residential aspects of the proposal and would need to change and adapt to the future uses on the site. He stated his team had worked closely with Staff over the last several months and asked the Zoning Commission to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Commission; he added they believed the proposal was in keeping with the intent of the Growth Policy REMU land use designation. He stated he would be available for any questions. C. PB/ZC QUESTIONS OF STAFF/APPLICANT Mr. Budeski stated he really liked the concept of the proposal and he thought it was a natural progression for development. He asked if someone applied for 10 acres or more would they have the option of a Master Plan or PUD. Planner Krueger responded the way the REMU had been proposed would allow either option. Mr. Budeski asked if there had been thought about extending the approval of Master Plans beyond five years as the mixed use developments might take 10 years to develop. Planner Krueger responded a PUD allowed a relaxation to extend the approval and the Planning Director could extend the Master Plan approval administratively; Staff had investigated methods by which allowances for longer development time frames could be made with future amendments. He added if the district were adopted, the same changes would be made for that section of the code. Mr. Budeski responded some sites could take more than five years if the code changed radically after the approval time; he suggested he would like to see the PUD performance standards adhered to in the ordinance. He stated he was concerned with the ratio of 70% residential to 30% residential development; he thought it would be too restrictive. He stated he was alright with commercial development before residential development had been begun. Mr. Sypinski asked if there would be consistency with residential and commercial being built at the same time or if one would be built before the other; he was concerned it would be a cookie cutter development and left undeveloped for too long. Mr. Krauss asked how phasing of the development would be handled. Mr. Hecht stated they had strong interest from the university to provide student housing to the community and they would likely begin with the student housing phase. Mr. Canady added the PUD or Master Site Plan process which would include a long time phasing plan which would allow for key commercial anchors to be established. Mr. Krauss asked what the key commercial development would be in this area that would be different from other areas. Mr. Canady responded a drug store might be the commercial anchor; and the phasing flexibility would be handled with either the PUD or Master Site Plan review process. Mr. Hecht responded there was no plan specific to along 19th Avenue. Ms. Riggs responded there would be no casinos or adult stores and directed the Planning Board and Zoning Commission to the list of allowable uses as proposed; she added the language was intended to be general. Mr. Krauss asked if the “no zoning” zoning designation was what was being proposed. Ms. Riggs responded the uses were specifically outlined so it wasn’t considered “no zoning”, but would be more flexible. Mr. Krauss stated quality was somewhat ensured with the current exclusionary zoning while the proposed REMU would have fewer standards. Ms. Riggs referred Mr. Krauss to the design standards within the proposed REMU and noted how specific and restrictive the section would be; a Master Site Plan or PUD would formalize design guidelines after the ordinance outlined the framework. Mr. Krauss stated the REMU 150 7 Planning Board Minutes – August 17, 2010 was not dissimilar from what was occurring in Bozeman already and asked how the REMU would be significantly different from what was currently required. Ms. Riggs responded the proposal did not preclude larger lots. President Pro Tem Quinn stated he liked the new zoning district and he thought the community was looking forward to the designation after the Growth Policy had been adopted. He stated increased density would be a key; the minimum sizes referenced in the REMU might also work within a smaller, infill area within the City. He stated he thought the proposal was a step forward and what had been sought with the adoption of the Community Plan. Mr. Lieb asked Mr. Canady if he had created any mixed use district in a community the size of Bozeman. Mr. Canady responded their firm had done projects in similar projects with similarly scaled neighborhoods indicated as the larger site on the land use map and cited examples. Mr. Lieb asked what potential problems there could be if the REMU was adopted such as drains on infrastructure. Mr. Canady responded the developments would occur over time to allow the City time for implementation of services and facilities; he added that many of the regulatory elements were minimum requirements. Mr. Sypinski stated the ordinance indicated that stand alone, non-residential uses would be discouraged and asked for clarification. Planner Krueger responded the language had been included from the Growth Policy regarding larger scale retail uses and there would be an upper limit to how much could be developed. Mr. Sypinski stated he was concerned with restricting the height in stories as someone could design a 100 foot, five story building. Mr. Canady responded that often the building code requirements would set the maximum limit while allowing the design and creativity that would be possible with a maximum number of stories; he added monetary constraints would also limit the heights of structures. Ms. Leone asked if Mr. Canady had found the projects were more successful near retail development. Mr. Canady responded they were more successful. Ms. Leone noted that River Rock Subdivision in Belgrade was similarly designed and the commercial components were struggling. Mr. Canady responded that the types of residential development would be critical for the community; there would be a range of housing product type included in the REMU with enough of a range of commercial sites. Planner Krueger added that even though the districts are underlying REMU, it isn’t to say the parcel in Baxter Meadows will be zoned as such in that specific location; implementation will require analysis of existing, site specific conditions. Mr. Mehl stated the proposal could end up with anomalies; he suggested free standing uses could be allowed at the time. He asked what the fire chief thought of a great number of 5 story buildings near the university and if the fire station could handle those structures. Planner Krueger responded all the specific site analysis was handled at the project review level through the Development Review Committee (Chapter 18.14). Interim Director Saunders added there was specific language regarding public safety and a determination would be made at the Staff level whether or not the proposal will pass the Site Plan review process; the PUD process would get a more detailed review while site plan review would be more detailed yet. Mr. Mehl asked if there was anything stopping him from essentially creating an R-4 development. Planner Krueger responded the commercial allowance would not disallow development of the entire property under the R-4 zoning designation. Mr. Mehl asked if Planner Krueger thought there should be commercial development within the district. Planner Krueger responded he thought commercial should be part of the whole development though not necessarily within each phase. Mr. Mehl asked if a stampede of developers would want the greater flexibility of the REMU zoning. Planner Krueger responded the Growth Policy and intent statement specifically described what the district should be; the City would have the ability to review what was being proposed at several different levels and architectural development guidelines would apply. Interim Director Saunders added that R-3 and R-4 districts allowed fairly broad types of development and he didn’t think the REMU was so radically different from other residential zoning districts as to cause a rush of requests to 151 8 Planning Board Minutes – August 17, 2010 rezone. Mr. Budeski stated it would be a good idea to have a Master Site Plan or PUD Plan; developers would need to be told that long term developments, if properly laid out and designed, would be allowed in Bozeman. Mr. Lieb asked if the zoning would allow for more intensive uses. Interim Director Saunders responded the district would allow more intensity of uses. He added in R-4 there was no limit of number of units inside of a building, but there was a limit to the number of units per acre. Mr. Lieb asked if the proposed REMU had been drafted from a different community and if Staff or the applicant had provided the document. Mr. Canady responded the applicant and his team had drafted the document and had used examples from other communities; he added he did not believe the strict 70%-30% phasing should be required as commercial developments were constructed in a different timeline than residential developments. Mr. Krauss stated he did not know if other residents within the City would be using the site and if there would be adequate parking; he added River Rock Subdivision was not working and was similar to the REMU development. He stated he was not concerned with the proposed height restriction. He stated he saw the development as relief for the MSU area where the density had been increased by increasing the number of ADU’s. He stated well designed MSU student and Staff housing would benefit the community; he encouraged the applicant to consider the option of staff housing in addition to the student housing. He stated he was supportive of the development with no requirement for the concurrency and was supportive of the proposal in general. Mr.Graf stated he concurred with Mr. Krauss that the concurrence of the development of the property should be disregarded; he stated he was concerned with the special standards naming a specific green program and added he did not think LEED should be specified within the document to avoid promoting one specific organization. Ms. Riggs responded PUD points could be earned in the ordinance but would not be appropriate for the REMU district; potential ways for options for green points had been suggested but not required. Mr. Graf responded he did not think it appropriate to select specific businesses that could stand to make money from the suggestion. Ms. Riggs responded the language could be modified. Interim Director Saunders responded there were methods in place to allow for adjustments in design. He stated in any zoning district in any zoning program there were knowable quantities as there were specific requirements; the REMU would be a risk tradeoff with a greater opportunity for development but greater opportunity for problems. Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick asked if Staff thought the current proposal could be adopted by Staff as written. Planner Krueger responded the consensus of the Planning Board and Zoning Commission had made him more comfortable with the proposal, but he thought there might be some issues that could be clarified or amended; he added there might be additional amendments at the City Commission hearing. Chairperson Minnick suggested he would be more comfortable opening and continuing the item to the next meeting of the Zoning Commission on September 7, 2010. Mr. Sypinski concurred with Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick. A. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS ON GROWTH POLICY COMPLIANCE President Pro Tem Quinn suggested the Planning Board formulate a motion for recommendation to the Zoning Commission, Staff, and City Commission. 152 9 Planning Board Minutes – August 17, 2010 MOTION: Mr. Krauss moved, Mr. Budeski seconded, to forward a recommendation to the Zoning Commission, Planning Department Staff, and the City Commission that yes – the proposal is consistent with the land use description within the Community Plan, yes – the proposal appears to contain enough checks and balances to accommodate the broad range of uses and to mitigate potential conflicts between uses while maintaining the standards and character suitable to Bozeman, and no – there should not be a requirement to ensure residential units are constructed if commercial square footage is being constructed. Mr. Sypinski asked for clarification of allowing the City to be stuck with a commercial development within an undeveloped residential area. Mr. Krauss responded he could see either jeopardy (commercial or residential construction with undeveloped lots) but he recognized that there were preventative measures in place throughout the PUD or Master Plan review process. He stated the 70-30 split was already being attempted through the Planning Department and existing zoning districts. Mr. Lieb added the Zoning Commission reviewed applications based on 12 review criteria and would need more time to review the proposal. Mr. McSpadden stated that eventually the REMU would have to be tried; they were largely market driven developments and the onus would be on the developer to make a good development; he added that he thought the proposal was a great test in the south university location. Mr. Sypinski clarified that he was in support of and in favor of the REMU and the Community Plan; intentions were good, but he was looking at the proposal with regard to possible concerns that could arise. The motion carried 6-1. Those voting aye being President Pro Tem Quinn, Mr. Krauss, Ms. Leone, Mr. McSpadden, Mr. Budeski, and Mr. Graf. Those voting nay being Mr. Sypinski. MOTION: Mr. Sypinski moved, Mr. Lieb seconded, to open and continue the item to the next meeting of the Zoning Commission on September 7, 2010. The motion carried 3-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Pro Tem Minnick, Mr. Sypinski, and Mr. Lieb. Those voting nay being none. PROJECT REVIEW B. ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING (PUBLIC COMMENT) No public comment was forthcoming. ITEM 5. NEW BUSINESS No items were forthcoming. ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT The joint meeting of the Zoning Commission and Planning Board was adjourned at 9:39 p.m. _______________________________________ _______________________________________ Nathan Minnick, Chairperson Pro Tem Chris Saunders, Interim Planning Director Zoning Commission Dept. of Planning & Community Development City of Bozeman City of Bozeman __________________________________ Bill Quinn, President Pro Tem 153 STAFF REPORT ADDENDUM RESIDENTIAL EMPHASIS MIXED USE ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT FILE NO. #Z-09241 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 1 Item: Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment Application #Z- 9241. To revise local development regulations to create a new zoning Residential Emphasis Mixed Use district with defined intent, uses, setbacks, lot coverage, building height, and special development standards. Applicant: RTR Holdings II 67 Village Drive Suite 206 Belgrade, MT 59714 Representatives: Intrinsik Architecture 111 North Tracy Avenue Bozeman, MT 59715 GGLO 1301 First Avenue Suite 301 Seattle, WA 98101 Date: Before the Bozeman Zoning Commission on Tuesday, September 7, 2010, at 7 p.m. in the City Commission Meeting Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Avenue Report By: Brian Krueger, Associate Planner Recommendation: Approval of Attached Draft Chapter ____________________________________________________________________________________ REVIEW CRITERIA Planning Staff has evaluated the proposed amendment with respect to the required criteria set forth in state statute in Section 76-2-304, MCA, presented as follows. A summary of staff’s evaluation follows in the discussion below. A positive response for all criteria is not required for approval. 1. Is the new zoning designed in accordance with the growth policy? There are two parts to the analysis of this criterion. First, is the proposal in conformance with the general and secondary principles advanced by the Bozeman Community Plan (2007 Plan). Second, how does the proposal correspond with the land use mapping and corresponding descriptions of each land use category? Part 1. General Principles/Secondary Principles. Yes. The Bozeman Community Plan describes seven core principles regarding land use in Section 3.2 of the plan. 155 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 2 These themes are: Neighborhoods, Sense of Place, Natural Amenities, Centers, Integration of Action, Urban Density, and Sustainability. As shown in the selections below, the idea of carefully site aggregated residential mixed use development with a comparatively high intensity of development is supported. This support is not without limits. Staff comments follow each theme. “Neighborhoods. There is strong public support for the preservation of existing neighborhoods and new development being part of a larger whole, rather than just anonymous subdivisions. This idea includes the strengthening and support of existing neighborhoods through adequate infrastructure maintenance and other actions. As the population of Bozeman grows, it is harder to keep the same “small town” feel because residents cannot be on familiar terms with everyone. The neighborhood unit helps provide the sense of familiarity and intimacy which can be lacking in larger communities. The neighborhood commercial/activity center and local parks provide opportunities to casually interact with other nearby residents. Not all neighborhoods are of equal size or character.” The proposed district represents a new vision for the overall development pattern of an area zoned REMU or a neighborhood that would emerge there. The proposed district does describe ways in which the zone would strengthen and support the existing neighborhoods in the area. The regulations promote the neighborhood unit integrated with commercial uses. Parkland and commercial uses are both anticipated within the REMU district. The new zone, including new and innovative standards, will promote development that has a generally more urban and intense character that is inherent in mixed use neighborhoods. “Sense of Place. The second idea builds on those of Centers and Neighborhoods. Part of the appeal of Bozeman is its distinct character. A portion of this character comes from the natural setting of the town. Bozeman’s character includes the sense of place created by constructed landmarks such as Downtown and MSU. Preserving Bozeman as a unique place rather than Anywhere, USA is important. This concept was strongly supported throughout the public outreach process. The existing Downtown business core was the overwhelming choice for the location which best represented the “heart” of Bozeman. The preservation and strengthening of the unique features and built environment which give a sense of place is important for Bozeman’s individual identity to continue in the future. Incorporating community and architectural design features which provide organization and landmarks, such as parks and commercial centers, in new development will help to anchor and extend this sense of place as Bozeman grows. The sense of place will be strengthened through development which fills in existing gaps in the City and helps to reinforce the compact pattern of historic Bozeman.” The proposal will enable a wide range of potential outcomes for the sense of place in those areas zoned REMU. Some REMU areas may develop more intensely than others depending upon the final locations and context of REMU zoned property. The wide array of housing and uses available within the zoning district will allow each REMU zoned property to complement the existing development pattern, create a unique sense of place as a mixed use neighborhood, and mimic the historic development pattern that emerged in the City’s downtown core. The district provides a requirement for mandatory master site planning and planned unit 156 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 3 development review that will assure the City has additional input into the development review process for new REMU developments. This process at the plan review level will help to refine what a REMU neighborhood is, what that built environment looks like, and how it functions with a range of uses. “Urban Density. Although a wide range of commercial and housing styles, types, and densities are provided in Bozeman, not every option is provided. Bozeman is a city, and the housing densities are not those of the rural areas of Gallatin County. Fundamental to the efficient and cost-effective provision of urban services, multi- modal transportation oriented development, and a compact development pattern is a concentration of persons and activities. Density of development must also be balanced against community character, parks and open spaces, and the housing choices of citizens. Quality site and architectural design will materially affect the success and acceptability of urban density and scale of development.” The proposed district is to be composed of a broad range of residential uses. Under the use table, a range of residential units from a one-story, single family, detached dwelling to a five-story apartment building could be constructed in the zone. The zone includes a proposed requirement to limit non residential uses to a maximum 30% of the gross building area of all uses, subject to some exceptions. Although no minimum density is proposed for the zone it is anticipated to be constructed overall at medium and high densities. Quality site and architectural design will be a part of the requirement for any master site plan or planned unit development application in the REMU district. Centers. Strengthen a pattern of community development oriented on centers. A corollary principle is for compact development. Commercial activities in mutually reinforcing centralized areas provide: · Increased business synergy. · Greater convenience for people with shorter travel distances to a wide range of businesses · The opportunity to accomplish several tasks with a single trip. · Facilitates the use of transportation alternatives to single occupant motor vehicles, with a corresponding reduction in traffic and road congestion and air quality impacts. · Enables greater access to employment, services, and recreation with a reduced dependence on the automobile · Greater efficiencies in delivery of public services, · Corresponding cost savings in both personal and commercial applications. As described in the Land Use Category Description for REMU, which is discussed in further detail later in this report, the purpose of the REMU designation is not to create an additional large commercial node within the City. The REMU designation envisions an urban housing dominated zone that is appropriate near commercial centers. The REMU neighborhood itself would play a supporting role to a larger commercial node or community resource (school) within an area. Integrating commercial uses within a residential neighborhood, as envisioned in the REMU zone, would increase business synergy, provide greater convenience for people, create opportunities to accomplish 157 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 4 several tasks with a single trip and provide greater access to employment, services, and recreation with a reduced dependence on the automobile. Sustainability. Providing for the needs of today’s residents and visitors should be done in a manner that does not jeopardize the quality of life, including the natural environment, of future residents. Careful community design and thoughtful development can serve the community well both now and in the future. Sustainability is a holistic issue and should be interwoven through the City’s operations and regulations. Sustainability is a newer concept within the Bozeman Community Plan. Within the land use chapter and many other chapters of the plan, sustainability has become a pervasive principle that is to be “interwoven” through the City’s regulations. Staff anticipates sustainable principles to become a much larger part of the regulatory structure of the City. This zoning district is the first proposed since the adoption of the latest version of the Community Plan. Staff notes the integration of sustainable standards within the proposal. Low Impact Development (LID) principles, building energy efficiency, LEED neighborhood design, public transit facilities, recycling facilities, etc. are all strategies embraced in the Community Plan that are allowable in the zone. These are not mandatory standards, but are included as options. Drawing on the seven basic ideas discussed above, the following principles were used to prepare the land use designations, policies, and map within the Community Plan: • Development should be based on neighborhoods, including commercial neighborhoods. • Neighborhoods should have easily identified centers and edges. • Neighborhoods should be reasonably compact and serve a variety of housing needs. • Transportation systems should support the desired land use pattern and be interconnected multi-modal networks (e.g. bicycles, pedestrian, transit, automobiles or other vehicles) rather than focusing solely on automobiles. • A diverse mix of activities should occur within proximity to each other, but not necessarily have everything happening everywhere. • Urban design should integrate multi-modal transportation, open spaces, land use activity, and quality of life. • Open spaces, including parks, trails, and other gathering places, should be in convenient locations. • Development should be integrated into neighborhoods and the larger community rather than as a series of unconnected stand alone projects. • A variety of housing and employment opportunities is important. • Land development should be compatible with and further other community goals. • Land use designations must respond to a broad range of factors, including natural constraints, economic constraints, and other community priorities. • The needs of new and existing development must coexist and remain in balance. • Infill development and redevelopment which encourages the efficient utilization of land and existing infrastructure systems is preferred. • Future development patterns should not be detrimental to the existing community, with special attention to be given to the support of the existing Historic Core and Downtown of the community. 158 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 5 Secondary Principles. Other policies within the Community Plan that are applicable to this district discussion: Goal C-1 Human Scale and compatibility—Create a community composed of neighborhoods designed for the human scale and compatibility in which the streets and buildings are properly sized within their context, services and amenities are convenient, visually pleasing, and properly integrated. Objective C-1.4: Achieve an environment through urban design that maintains and enhances the City’s visual qualities within neighborhood, community, and regional commercial areas. Goal C-2 Community Circulation—Create a circulation system both vehicular and pedestrian that is fully connected, integrated and designed for ease of use. Objective-2.3 Require alleys in all new development both commercial and residential where feasible. Objective C-2.5 Explore and encourage innovative parking solutions for both residential and commercial project including parking best practices, expanded parking districts, cash in lieu of parking and design guidelines for structured parking. Goal C-3 Neighborhood Design – New neighborhoods shall be pedestrian oriented, contain a variety of housing types and densities, contain parks and other public spaces, have a commercial center and defined boundaries. Objective C-3.3 Establish minimum residential densities in new and redeveloping residential areas. Objective C-3.5: Integrate a wide variety of open lands, such as parks, trails, squares, greens, playing fields, natural areas, orchards and gardens, greenways, and other outdoor spaces into neighborhoods. Objective C-4.2: All new residential buildings should be designed to emphasize the visually interesting features of the building, as seen from the public street and sidewalk. The visual impact of garage doors, driveways, and other off-street parking will be minimized and mitigated. Objective C-4.3: Ensure the development of new residential structures that are aesthetically pleasing through urban design. Objective C-4.5: Investigate expanding form based zoning as a design review strategy for the City. Goal C-5: Public Landscaping and Architecture— Enhance the urban appearance and environment through the use of architectural excellence, landscaping, trees and open space. Objective C-5.2: Encourage inclusion of plazas and other urban design features as public areas within developments. Objective C-5.3: Continue to develop the design guidelines to encourage innovative landscaping including urban hardscapes, public art, plazas, roof gardens, green walls, and other features to 159 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 6 emphasize the urban qualities of individual projects. Objective C-5.4: Continue to develop the design guidelines to provide direction to naturalizing stormwater systems and integrating them into the landscape as an amenity. Objective C-6.1: Continue to develop the design guidelines to encourage the treatment of stormwater on site with an aesthetic and integrated approach utilizing Low Impact Development principles. Provide incentives for innovation. Objective C-6.2: Continue to develop the design guidelines to provide direction for the integration of site based power generation (solar, wind, geothermal, etc.) in both commercial and residential projects. Goal H-1: Promote an adequate supply of safe, quality housing that is diverse in type, density, cost, and location with an emphasis on maintaining neighborhood character and stability. Goal H-2: Promote the creation of housing which advances the seven guiding land use principles of Chapter 3 (Provided above). Objective H2.2 - Promote energy efficiency and incorporation of sustainable features in new and existing housing. Objective H3.3. – Promote the development of a wide variety of housing types, designs, and costs to meet the wide range of residential needs of Bozeman residents. Objective AC-1.3: Incorporate community arts and culture displays in public parks, buildings, recreational facilities and public service facilities. Objective AC-1.4: Provide clear and concise City standards and requirements that encourage art and culture displays and events in private development. Objective E-2.2: Protect, restore, and enhance riparian corridors and floodplain areas to protect the chemical, biological, and physical quality of water resources. Objective E-2.3: Ensure that land uses in areas characterized by a high water table and/or aquifer recharge zone will not contaminate water resources. Objective E-3.2-: Encourage sustainable development and building practices. Goal R-1: Provide for accessible, desirable, and adequately maintained public parks, open spaces, trail systems, and recreational facilities for residents of the community. Objective R-1.5: Connect the community using trails. Objective R-1.6: Ensure that parkland’s size, location, suitability, and development promote usability. 160 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 7 Goal T-2: Ensure that a variety of travel options exist which allow safe, logical, and balanced transportation choices. Objective T-2.1: For the purposes of transportation and land use planning and development, non- motorized travel options and networks shall be of equal importance and consideration as motorized travel options. This balance shall ensure that a variety of travel opportunities are available which do not require the use of automobiles for local trips. Objective T-2.2: Review and revise parking requirements to ensure provision of parking consistent with other goals of this plan to support commercial and residential activities in the downtown and other areas. Objective T-2.3: Reduce the negative health and physical impacts of the automobile by coordinating transportation policies to support land use decisions that can decrease the number and length of automobile trips. When considering automobile impacts maintain awareness of all the costs of transportation. Goal T-4: Pathways–Establish and maintain an integrated system of transportation and recreational pathways, including streets, bicycle and pedestrian trails, neighborhood parks, green belts and open space. Objective T-4.3: Review, revise, and update trail/pathway standards to reflect the various types and uses of trails and other non-motorized travel ways. Objective T-4.4: Continue to improve the existing pedestrian network to increase American’s with Disabilities Act compliance. The long term intent is full accessibility throughout the community transportation system. Give highest priority to those improvements that will provide the greatest access to community centers of activity. Part 2. Land Use Description. Yes. State law requires that municipal zoning be in conformance with an adopted growth policy. This includes by as matters of policy and land use mapping. Section 3.4 and 3.5 of the Bozeman Community Plan describes the future land use map and the definition of the different categories of uses depicted. The map depicts distinctions between land uses. This is consistent with the principle of mixed use where a diverse mix of activities should occur within proximity to each other, but not necessarily have everything happening everywhere. When considering the standards proposed for the REMU district we must consider the description of the land use category that has been provided as a basis for the zone: “Residential Emphasis Mixed Use. The Residential Mixed-Use category promotes neighborhoods with supporting services that are substantially dominated by housing. A diversity of residential housing types should be built on the majority of any area within this category. Housing choice for a variety of households is desired and can include attached and small detached single- household dwellings, apartments, and live-work units. Residences should be included on the upper floors of buildings with ground floor commercial uses. 161 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 8 Variation in building massing, height, and other design characteristics should contribute to a complete and interesting streetscape and may be larger than in the Residential category. Secondary supporting uses, such as retail, offices, and civic uses, are permitted at the ground floor. All uses should complement existing and planned residential uses. Non-residential uses are expected to be pedestrian oriented and emphasize the human scale with modulation as needed in larger structures. Stand alone, large, non-residential uses are discouraged. Non-residential spaces should provide an interesting pedestrian experience with quality urban design for buildings, sites, and open spaces. This category is implemented at different scales. The details of implementing standards will vary with the scale. The category is appropriate near commercial centers and larger areas should have access on collector and arterial streets. Multi- household higher density urban development is expected. Any development within this category should have a well integrated transportation and open space network which encourages pedestrian activity and provides ready access within and to adjacent development.” Staff finds multiple elements within the land use designation for Residential Emphasis Mixed Use where the proposed zoning complies with the original intent of the district: “The Residential Mixed-Use category promotes neighborhoods with supporting services that are substantially dominated by housing.” The proposed district recommends a 70/30 mix of housing to commercial. This is generally consistent with the vision provided in the land use designation. “Residences should be included on the upper floors of buildings with ground floor commercial uses.” Residential units are allowed on the upper floors of buildings with ground floor commercial uses. There are no mandatory provisions to provide residences on the upper floors of buildings. There are no requirements within the district for mandatory vertical mixing of uses. “Secondary supporting uses, such as retail, offices, and civic uses, are permitted at the ground floor.” Retail, offices, civic uses among others are permitted on the ground floor of buildings throughout the zone. “Stand alone, large, non-residential uses are discouraged.” The proposal permits multiple, large, stand alone, non-residential uses. There are limitations presented on size and numbers of residential buildings that could be constructed. 162 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 9 “Variation in building massing, height, and other design characteristics should contribute to a complete and interesting streetscape and may be larger than in the Residential category…. Non-residential uses are expected to be pedestrian oriented and emphasize the human scale with modulation as needed in larger structures.” Building massing, height, streetscapes, and pedestrian amenities are all disciplines that will be addressed with additional development review in the zone. The proposed zone includes intent statements and other guidelines that promote the goals listed in the land use description. Further review of master site plans and planned unit developments for projects within the REMU zone will be at the detailed level at which these urban design disciplines can be implemented. 2. Is the new zoning designed to lessen congestion in the streets? Yes. The proposed district enables a diversity of mutually supportive uses and development standards which encourage higher density development. The residential/commercial proximity will encourage walking and cycling uses which will lessen vehicle use and thereby any street congestion. A land use pattern that incorporates a mix of uses supports less congestion by enabling shorter vehicle trips, shared destination trips, and maximizes the efficiency of walking or cycling. The realization of these benefits is enhanced by location of uses in proximity to residential uses enabling access without circulation onto adjacent principal arterial streets. Placement of this district must be carefully integrated with the community’s transportation system, including transit. 3. Will the new zoning promote health and general welfare? Yes. The proximity of development will likely encourage walking and cycling. Physical exercise is a proven contributor to health. The district supports development of neighborhood districts with a unique sense of place within the City advancing the general welfare of the community. 4. Will the new zoning secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers? Yes. The proposal creates a mechanism for developing certain land uses. Future physical construction must comply with building codes and other requirements to protect from physical hazards. Similar combinations of uses and the necessary infrastructure to protect from hazards have been considered during the creation of the development standards which will apply. Any future proposals on property zoned REMU will also be subject to additional provisions within Title 18 that have been specifically created to assure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers. 5. Will the new zoning provide adequate light and air? Neutral. The proposed district does encourage buildings taller than typically constructed in Bozeman at this time. The proposal does allow small setbacks which can intensify development density. The proposal allows a wide range of buildings heights with little requirement for transitions between 163 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 10 buildings. Residential development within the district is subject to open space and parkland requirements of Section 18.34.090, BMC. The proposal encourages creation of common open spaces. Building Code requirements will ensure adequate building interior ventilation. 6. Will the new zoning prevent overcrowding of land? Yes. This criterion is intended to prevent a disparity between the intensity of development and the infrastructure needed to avoid detrimental or unsafe consequences of that development. There are various standards and review procedures used by the City to avoid such negative outcomes. Examples of standards are for sewer flow capacity, traffic congestion levels of service, and availability of fire fighting water. Examples of review procedures is the site plan review process and associated criteria of Chapter 18.34, BMC and building codes. So long as adequate services can be provided to meet demands of development the land will not be overcrowded. 7. Will the new zoning avoid the undue concentration of population? Neutral. Opinions of what constitutes “undue” concentration of population are highly individualized. The proposed district will allow a higher intensity of use than normally seen. Building codes and similar development standards will ensure that the negative effects of concentrated population are mitigated. 8. Will the new zoning facilitate the adequate provisions of transportation, water, sewer, schools, parks, fire, police, and other public requirements? Yes. Standards ensuring adequate provision of needed infrastructure and public safety will still be applicable. Title 18 of the Bozeman Municipal Code includes additional standards to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. There are various standards and review procedures used by the City to avoid negative outcomes. Examples of standards are for sewer flow capacity, traffic congestion levels of service, availability water, parkland standards, transit, etc. 9. Does the new zoning give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? Neutral. The proposal seeks to create a new district in the regulations. Therefore there is no current location to specifically evaluate for character as there would be with an individual zone map amendment. Any future application of the new district will be required to make that specific evaluation. If applied as recommended by Staff, the basic planning level analysis will have been conducted to determine that the district is placed correctly. As stated above in the growth policy conformance criteria review, the proposal will enable a wide range of potential outcomes for the sense of place in those areas zoned REMU. Some REMU areas may develop more intensely than others depending upon the final locations and context of REMU zoned property. The wide array of housing and uses available within the zoning district will allow each REMU zoned property to complement the existing development pattern and to install a sense of place as a mixed use neighborhood which was the historic development pattern in the City’s core. The district provides a requirement for mandatory master site planning and planned unit development review that will assure the City has additional input into the development review process for new REMU developments. This 164 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 11 process at the plan review level will help to refine what a REMU neighborhood is, what that built environment looks like, and how it functions with a range of uses. 10. Does the new zoning give reasonable consideration to the peculiar suitability of the district for particular uses? Neutral. The wide combination of uses allowed in the proposed district is very similar to a combination of the R-1-R-4 districts with the B-2 district. The uses appear likely to be mutually beneficial with adequate standards to integrate the more intensive uses within a residentially dominated neighborhood. The has additional review processes such as subdivision review, site plan review, and planned unit development review through which to further review and regulate development within the zone. 11. Was the new zoning adopted with a view of conserving the value of buildings? Neutral. The current proposal is not being applied to a specific location. This zoning district is not likely to be placed on a location with existing buildings. 12. Does the new zoning encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality? Neutral. The proposed changes do not modify the zoning map. If the new district were to be placed on the REMU designated areas as recommended, it would be consistent with this criterion and the Community Plan. Placement outside of the current planned areas would be counter to this criterion. The City maintains an inventory of land uses and zoned areas for the city area. This proposal would need to be incorporated into that inventory to ensure that land remains available for all the necessary functions within the City. PUBLIC COMMENT No public comment has been received as of this writing. Any written comment will be forwarded at the public hearings. Conclusion Pursuant to Section 76-2-304, Montana Codes Annotated, the Zoning Commission shall review the Unified Development Ordinance text amendment application to determine if the proposed zoning change meets the requirements of the Adopted Growth Policy, state statute, and other adopted state laws and local ordinances. The Zoning Commission shall act to recommend approval or denial of the Unified Development Ordinance text amendment. The recommendation of the Bozeman Zoning Commission will be forwarded to the Bozeman City Commission for consideration a future public hearing. The City Commission will make the final decision on the application. Attachments: Attachment A – Edited proposal 9-1-10 Attachment B – Comparison of uses in the UMU, B-1, B-2, B-3 and REMU proposal 165 #Z-09241 Residential Emphasis Mixed Use Zone Code Text Amendment Staff Report 12 Report Sent To: RTR Holdings, 67 Village Drive, Suite 206 Belgrade, MT 59714 Bob Emery 3522 Clay Street San Francisco CA 94118 Randy Hecht 22 Turtle Rock Court Tiburon CA 94920 Intrinsik Architecture 111 North Tracy Avenue Bozeman, MT 59715 GGLO 1301 First Avenue, Suite 301 Seattle, WA 98101 166 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 1 of 18 9/3/2010 ATTACHMENT A CHAPTER 18.17 9-1-10 Edits RESIDENTIAL EMPHASIS MIXED-USE ZONING DISTRICT (REMU) 18.17.010 INTENT AND PURPOSE OF RESIDENTIAL EMPHASIS MIXED-USE ZONING DISTRICT The intent and purpose of the Residential Emphasis Mixed-Use (“REMU”) district is to establish areas within Bozeman that are mixed-use in character and to provide options for a variety of housing, employment, retail and neighborhood service opportunities within a new or existing neighborhood, while providing predictability to landowners and residents in uses and standards. There is a rebuttable presumption that the uses set forth for the district will be compatible both within the district and to adjoining zoning districts when the standards of Title 18 are met and any applicable conditions of approval have been satisfied. Additional requirements for development apply within overlay districts. All development is subject to §18.02.050, BMC. A. It is further the intent of this district to implement the principles of the adopted growth policy: Neighborhoods 1. Create self-sustaining neighborhoods that will lay the foundation for healthy lifestyles; 2. Support compact, walkable developments that promote balanced transportation options; 3. Have residential as the majority use with a range of densities; 4. Provide for a diverse array of commercial and civic uses supporting residential; 5. Have residential and commercial uses mixed vertically and/or horizontally; 6. Locate adjacent to residential neighborhoods that can sustain commercial uses within walking distance and a wider range of housing types; 7. Encourage developments that exhibit the physical design characteristics of vibrant, urban, and pedestrian-oriented complete streets; Sense of Place 8. Support or add to an existing neighborhood context; 9. Enhance an existing neighborhood’s sense of place and strive to make it more self- sustainable; 10. Encourage a new neighborhood commercial center(s) with a unique identity and strong sense of place; 11. Develop commercial and mixed-use areas that are safe, comfortable, and attractive to pedestrians; 12. Reinforce the principle of streets as public places that encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel, transit, on-street parking and physical elements of complete streets;. Natural Amenities 13. Preserve and integrate the natural amenities into the development; 14. Appropriately balance a hierarchy of both parks and public spaces that are within the neighborhood; Formatted: Font: Not Bold 167 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 2 of 18 9/3/2010 Centers 15. Group uses of property to create vibrant centers; 16. Where appropriate create a center within an existing neighborhood; 17. Facilitate proven, market driven projects to ensure both long and short-term financial viability; 18. Allow an appropriate blend of complimentary mixed land uses including, but not limited to, retail, offices, commercial services, restaurants, bars, hotels, recreation and civic uses, and housing, to create economic and social vitality; 19. Foster the master plan development into a mix of feasible, market driven uses; 20. Emphasize the need to serve the adjacent, local neighborhood and also the greater Bozeman area as well; 21. Maximize land use efficiency by encouraging shared use parking; Integration of Action 22. Support existing infrastructure that is within and adjacent to REMU zones; 23. Add to existing transportation and open space network, encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel; 24. Encourage master planned communities with thoughtful development; 25. Provide flexibility in the placement and design of new developments and redevelopment to anticipate changes in the marketplace; 26. Provide roadway and pedestrian connections to residential areas; 27. Facilitate development (land use mix, density and design) that supports public transit, where applicable; 28. Provide flexibility in phasing to help insure both long and short term financial viability of the project as a whole; Urban Density 29. Encourage efficient land use by facilitating, high-density, single or multi-story housing, commercial and retail development; 30. Provide transitions between high-traffic streets and adjacent residential neighborhoods; and Sustainability 31. Promote sustainable communities through careful planning. B. To accomplish in the intent of the district, the REMU district may be located within existing and established neighborhoods, or located in new undeveloped areas of the City. Implementation of certain regulations herein may be implemented with regard to the specific characteristics and location of a development site. REMU districts should be located adjacent to or near planned or existing residential development to enhance walking and bicycle use. 18.17.020 AUTHORIZED USES. A. Uses in the Residential Emphasis Mixed-Use district are depicted in the table below. Principal uses are indicated with a “P,” conditional uses are indicated with a “C,” accessory uses are indicated with an “A,” and uses which are not permitted within the district are indicated by a “-.” 168 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 3 of 18 9/3/2010 B. The uses listed are deliberately broad and some are given special definitions in Chapter 18.80, BMC. The intent of this method is to provide general guidance for uses while allowing the unique needs and circumstances of each proposal to be specifically addressed through the review process. Some uses are the subject of special regulations contained in Chapter 18.40, BMC. C. Uses Required and Limited 1. REMU districts are intended to be developed with a mix of uses that encourage a range of building types, scales, densities, and site configurations. 2. Developments are encouraged to include non-residential uses, especially commercial and neighborhood support services, mixed horizontally and/or vertically, to promote compact, walkable, and sustainable neighborhoods. 3. Non-residential uses shall not exceed 30 percent of the total gross building square footagearea of all uses within the a contiguously master plannedzoned area unless otherwise allowed in this section or , through a Master Site Plan or Planned Unit Development (PUD) review. The calculation shall be base upon the existing building square footage or that approved through a valid final site plan. 4. For the purposes of calculating the percentage of a use within the site development, the gross square foot floor area of building for each use shall be utilized. 5. Home-based businesses are not considered non-residential uses and shall not be limited by the provisions of the Section. 6. Non-residential uses intended for public benefit and shared public amenities shall not be limited by the provisions of this Section. These uses include, but are not limited to, schools, parks, community centers, city operated services, and structured parking facilities. D. Development Review Applications 1. To accomplish the intent of the district, the REMU district is anticipated to be located on sites ten acres or larger. Development review applications for sites in the REMU district greater than, or equal to, ten acres will be first subject to review as a Master Site Plan per Chapter 18.34; or as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) per 18.36, as determined by the applicant. 2. Project applications for subsequent project phases in compliance with an approved Master Site Plan or PUD may be reviewed as a Site Plan Review or Sketch Plan Review in accordance with Chapter 18.34. 3. All development review applications for sites property in the REMU district smaller than ten acres are subject to the standards in this chapter; and may be subject to review as a Master Site Plan per Chapter 18.34 by decision of the Planning Director, upon finding: a. The development application is for a site considered a major infill site, having a significant impact on an existing neighborhood; or may create a center within an existing neighborhood; b. The proposed development is located at an intersections deemed to have special significance; or c. The proposed development may have a significant impact on existing transportation and open space network, pedestrian and bicycle travel;or. c.d. The proposed development requires a multi-year approval and multiple phases for completion. 169 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 4 of 18 9/3/2010 170 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 5 of 18 9/3/2010 Table 17-1 TABLE OF USES MAXIMUM GROSS BUILDING AREA AUTHORIZED USES Accessory Dwelling Unit P Apartments and Apartment Buildings P Arts and Entertainment Center 12,000 sf P Assisted Living/Elderly Care Facilities P Automobile Fuel Sales C Automobile Parking Lot or Garage (public or private) P Automobile Washing Establishment C Banks and Other Financial Institutions P Bed & Breakfast P Business, Technical or Vocational School P Community Centers P Community Residential Facilities P Convenience Uses excluding drive-in and drive-through uses 5,000 sf PC Cooperative Household P Convenience Use Restaurant excluding drive-in and drive-through uses 5,000 sf P Daycare – family, group, or center P Essential Services (Type II) C Extended-Stay Lodgings 40,000 sf P Health and Exercise Establishments P Home-based Businesses (subject to 18.17.030.E only) P Hospitals C Hotel or Motel 40,000 sf P Laboratories, Research and Diagnostic 10,000 sf P Laundry Service Center P Light Goods Repair P Lodging Houses P Manufacturing (light and completely indoors) 5,000 sf P Museum P Medical and Dental Offices, Clinics and Centers P Meeting Hall P Offices P Other Buildings & Structures (typically accessory to permitted uses) A Personal and Convenience Services P Pet Grooming Shop P Printing Offices and Publishing Establishments 5,000 sf P Fraternity, Sorority or Lodge P 171 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 6 of 18 9/3/2010 Public Buildings P Refuse and Recycling Containers A Restaurants P Retail Uses less than or equal to 5,000sf 5,000 sf P 1 Retail Uses greater than 5,000sf and less than or equal to 12,000 sf 12,000 sf P 1, 2 Retail Uses greater than 12,000sf and less than or equal to 25,000sf 25,000 sf P 1, 3 Sales of Alcohol for On-Premise Consumption – No gaming allowed C Single household dwelling P Student Congregate Housing Facility P 4 Three- or four-household dwelling P Townhouses (five attached units or less) P Two-household dwelling P Veterinary Clinic C Wholesale Distributors With On-Premise Retail Outlets (providing warehousing is limited to commodities which are sold on the premises) 10,000 sf C Wholesale Establishments (ones that use samples, but do not stock on premises) 5,000 sf C Any Use, Except Adult Businesses and Casinos Approved as Part of a Planned Unit Development Subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.36, BMC. C 1 Excluding Adult Businesses as defined in Chapter §18.80.BMC. 2 Limited to no more than four structures per 100 acres of contiguous master planned developmentzoned area and subject to 18.17.020.C. 3 Limited to no more than two structures per 100 acres of contiguous master planned developmentzoned area and subject to 18.17.020.C. 4 StudentCongregate Housing Facility is defined as: “A living facility with five or more dwelling units for persons intended to be enrolled in an institution of higher learning. Student Housing Facilities are not limited to the restrictions for number of occupants defined in 18.80.1390, but must provide adequate parking and open space in accordance with this Title.” 18.17.030 SPECIAL STANDARDS A. The Special Standards set forth in this section are minimum standards for a development review application. Standards not specifically addressed by this section are subject to the standards set forth in this Title. B. When development in a REMU district uses the PUD process for land use approval, any combination of the following methods, in addition to the performance point criteria listed in 18.36.090 BMC, may earn performance points. 1. Designed to meet LEED-ND certification requirements (20 10points) 2. Inclusion of a Low Impact Development Plan (6 points) that includes the following: a. On-site stormwater treatment systems that exceed the requirements of BMC Title 14, Stormwater, including but not limited to: incorporating drainage methods and technologies that treat, detain and/or infiltrate stormwater as close as possible to the source of run-off and the use of natural drainage systems across sites, rather than underground closed-pipe systems to the extent feasible. Natural drainage systems reduce the negative impacts of stormwater runoff by redesigning residential streets Comment [BK1]: Move to 18.80 Definitions Chapter. Definition needs to be further developed to limit contradictions with definition of dwelling and household that currently exist in 18.80. The definition must be in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Housing Act. 172 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 7 of 18 9/3/2010 to take advantage of plants, trees, and soils to clean runoff and manage stormwater flows. Vegetated swales, stormwater cascades, and small wetland ponds allow soils to absorb water, slowing flows and filtering out many contaminants. b. The Low Impact Development Plan shall be integrated with the Snow Storage and Management Plan c. At least 75% of new planting should be chosen from the list of Drought Tolerant Plants & Xeriscaping in Montana (2010), produced by the Montana Nursery & Landscape Association, or approved/updated equivalent list approved by the City of Bozeman. Any species listed as noxious or invasive in Montana shall be avoided. d. Inclusion of weather-based irrigation controllers. e. Limitations in the Covenants or Design Guidelines on the amount and type of sod permitted for individual residential lots. 3. Sustainable Design and Construction (6 points) a. Covenants or Design Guidelines that include a commitment to design the majority of buildings to meet LEED certification requirements or approved equivalent certification approved by the City of Bozeman. Equivalent certification programs will also be considered during Preliminary PUD review. b. Energy use reduction. Residential Covenants or Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to build ENERGY STAR certified homes, which meet EPA guidelines that make them 20–30% more efficient than standard homes. Non-residential Covenants and Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to build and certify buildings that meet the EPA’s ENERGY STAR challenge, a program that applies to offices, schools, post offices, retail, banks, warehouses and residence halls, or approved equivalent program. Equivalent programs will also be considered during Preliminary PUD review. c. Water use reduction. Covenants or Design Guidelines shall include a commitment to use WaterSense certified products for all kitchen, bathroom and irrigation hardware. WaterSense is an EPA-sponsored partnership program that promotes water efficiency and expands the market for water-efficient products, programs, and practices. Equivalent programs will also be considered during Preliminary PUD review. d. Provision of solar, wind or other alternative energy sources or participation in an approved cash-in-lieu program. 4. Integrated and coordinated way-finding measures within overall project (4 points) 5. On-site recycling transfer station (4 points) 6. Public transportation bus station or enhanced covered bus stop (1 point per station or enhanced stop) 7. Streetscape Improvements (6 points): Streetscape design features that exceed the minimum street standards including street furniture, pedestrian lighting, low-impact development techniques, on-street parking standards, crosswalks, landscape and planting, way-finding, public art or other design elements. Such elements must be installed as part of the street infrastructure. C. Landscape and Planting Standards. Table 18.17-2 (below) lists the minimum number of points needed for landscape plan approval for development types within REMU districts. Table 17-2 173 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 8 of 18 9/3/2010 Development Type Lot With Residential Adjacency Lot Without Residential Adjacency Residential Small-Lot Single-Family N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Single-Family N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Townhouse 2 to 4 attached units N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Townhouse or Townhouse Cluster 5 or more attached units 23 23 Residential: Stacked Flats 2 to 4 attached units N/A per 18.48.020.B N/A per 18.48.020.B Residential: Stacked Flats 5 or more attached units 23 23 Mixed Use with Residential 15 15 Non Residential Projects 23 15 PUD 23 23 D. Street and Circulation Standards 1. The policies and standards of the City’s long-range transportation plan apply to REMU districts. New streets within REMU districts shall be complete streets that accommodate pedestrians, bicycles, buses, automobiles and wintertime snow storage, and work in concert with internal property accesses and adjacent development to create a connected and vibrant public realm. REMU street standards also include the following stipulations: a. Natural storm drainage systems are allowed within street ROWs. b. Boulevard strips and medians may incorporate natural drainage technologies. c. Buildings shall be oriented with front facades facing the street. d. Where this is not possible, a side facade may face the street, but at least 25% of its surface area must be transparent windows. The overall design of side facades should address the public nature of the street. e. Shared drive accesses shall be used to reduce the need for additional curb cuts, when feasible. f. On-street parking should shall be maximized wherever feasible. 2. The City’s long-range transportation plan street standards that are most commonly used for new streets in REMU districts are listed below. Additional modifications may be proposed, but must be approved by the City Commission through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 3. Collector Streets Collector streets in REMU districts serve development types that are primarily commercial, residential or mixed-use. Modifications allow each street type to be customized with pedestrian-friendly elements that are appropriate for mixed-use centers and corridors. a. Collector: 2-Lane Table 17-3 174 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 9 of 18 9/3/2010 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ – 14’ wide Boulevard strip 14’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 14’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed- use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Parking lane 8’-20’ wide Perpendicular or angled parking permitted. Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Pavement striping 1’ wide ROW 90’ wide b. Collector: 3-Lane Table 17-4 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ – 14’ wide Boulevard strip 14’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 14’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed-use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Parking lane not allowed Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Left turn lane 15’ wide Pavement striping 2’ wide overall ROW 90’ wide c. Collector: 3-Lane with Median Table 17-5 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide 6’ – 13’ wide Boulevard strip 7’ wide; street trees req. 5’ - 7’ wide; may be eliminated in mixed-use centers or commercial clusters; street trees required Parking lane 8’ -20’ wide Parallel or angled parking permitted Bike lane 5’ wide Drive lanes 10’ wide Median/turn lane 14’ wide 8’ wide where left turn lanes are not required ROW 90’ wide 4. Local Streets Local streets within REMU districts primarily serve residential development that varies in type, scale and density. REMU encourages the provision of housing choices for a variety of different household sizes and incomes. Local streets may be alley-loaded or front- loaded. a. Local Street: 2-Lane, Residential Table 17-6 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright 175 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 10 of 18 9/3/2010 Sidewalk 5’ wide 5’ – 8.5’ wide Boulevard strip 8.5’ wide; street trees req. 5’ –8.5’ wide; allows variation of sidewalk and boulevard strip widths; street trees req. Parking lane 7’ wide Bike lane not required Drive lanes 8’ wide ROW 60’ wide b. Local Street: 2-Lane, Adjacent to Park Table 17-7 Features Baseline Modifications allowed outright Sidewalk 6’ wide Boulevard strip 6.5’ wide; street trees req. 5’ – 6.5’ wide; street trees required Parking lane 7’ wide Bike lane not required Drive lanes 10’ wide 8’ –10’ wide ROW 60’ wide c. Front-Loaded Local Streets To ensure that front-loaded streets are community-oriented and pedestrian-friendly, adjacent buildings, garages and driveways must comply with the following specific standards of this Title. • 18.16.070 Residential Garages • 18.44.090.C.2.a Drive Access Requirements – Residential • 18.46.010.D Stacking of Off-Street Parking Spaces • 18.46.010.E No Parking Permitted in Required Front or Side Yards • 18.46.010.F Parking Permitted in Rear Yards 5. Woonerfs: Woonerfs, or streets where pedestrians and cyclists have priority over motorists, are encouraged on private drive accesses or properties in the REMU district. Woonerfs may be permitted on public local streets or alleys through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 6. Mews: Mews, or alleys lined with garages and living quarters above, are encouraged on private drive access or properties in the REMU district. Mews may be permitted on alleys through the subdivision variance or PUD process. 7. Shared Drive Accesses: Apply standards of 18.44.090.F (Shared Drive Access) and 18.80.2770 (Shared Access). 8. Alleys: Alleys are encouraged, but not required, in the REMU district unless otherwise approved through the subdivision variance or PUD process. a. Apply standards of 18.44.060.B (Street Improvement Standards - Alleys) where applicable. 176 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 11 of 18 9/3/2010 E. Standards for Specific Development Types. The following standards are to be considered in the review of Site Plandevelopment applications incorporating these development types. 1. Residential: Small-Lot Single-Household a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 1.5:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: 2500 sf min. Lot Width: 25’ min. c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. (zero lot line exception) • Allow “zero-lot line” development through shared use easements, zero lot line agreements or placement of buildings on one or bothnear one of the side lot lines. 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-8 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 3:12 or greater but less than 6:12 38 6:12 or greater but less than 9:12 40 Equal to or greater than 9:12 42 e. Garages Apply standards of 18.16.070 and 18.38.050 (except 18.38.050.H). f. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-3 district. 2. Residential: Single-Household a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 50% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 1:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width Area: 4000 sf min. Additional area for accessory dwelling unit: 800 sf min. 177 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 12 of 18 9/3/2010 Width: 40’ min. Width for accessory dwelling unit: 40’ min. c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 15’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. (zero lot line exception) • Allow “zero-lot line” development through shared use easements or placement of buildings on or near one of the side lot line. 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-9 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 3:12 or greater but less than 6:12 38 6:12 or greater but less than 9:12 40 Equal to or greater than 9:12 42 e. Garages Apply standards of 18.16.070 and 18.38.050 (except 18.38.050.H). f. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-3 district. g. Additional Notes 1. Single Household units may incorporate home-based businesses at the ground level with direct access from a public ROW or other accessible route. These commercial uses are exempt from off-street parking requirements. 2. Developments may include individual retail uses at the ground level no greater than 2,000sf in area, when located along the primary frontage. The first 2000 sf of any nonresidential use in this development type is exempt from off-street parking requirements. Parking lots for such uses shall not be permitted along primary frontages. Apply standards of section 18.46.040.D for Accessible parking spaces. 3. Residential: Townhouse/ Townhouse Cluster a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. Floor Area: allowable FAR 2.5:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: no minimum lot area required 178 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 13 of 18 9/3/2010 Lot Width: 15.5’ min. c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 20’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard – 5’ min. or 0’ for interior walls of townhouses 4. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20 feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this title. d. Building Height Table 17-10 Residential Building Height Table Roof Pitch Maximum Building Height in Feet Less than 3:12 35 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 e. Garages To ensure that townhouses contribute to a community-oriented, pedestrian-friendly streetscape, they must comply with the following specific standards of this Title. 1. 18.16.070 Residential Garages 2. 18.44.090.C.2.a Drive Access Requirements - Residential 3. 18.46.010.D Stacking of Off-Street Parking Spaces 4. 18.46.010.E No Parking Permitted in Required Front or Side Yards 5. 18.46.010.F Parking Permitted in Rear Yards f. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-4 district. g. Additional Notes 1. Portions of site development review applications within the REMU zone for attached multi-family developments should be urban in character and may be designed such that each dwelling unit has a ground level entry oriented to the public realm, and sharing one or more walls with another dwelling unit. 2. Such units should be broadly consistent in scale and level of architectural detail, but shall be designed to emphasize a distinction in individual dwelling units through form, massing, articulation, color and other architectural means. 3. Townhouse units may incorporate home-based businesses at the ground level with direct access from a public ROW or other accessible route. These commercial uses are exempt from off-street parking requirements. 4. Developments incorporating townhouse units may include individual retail uses at the ground level no greater than 2,000 sf in area, when located along the primary frontage. The first 2000 sf of any nonresidential use in this development 179 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 14 of 18 9/3/2010 type is exempt from off-street parking requirements. Parking lots for such uses shall not be permitted along primary street frontages. Apply standards of section 18.46.040.D for Accessible parking spaces. 4. Residential: Stacked Flats & Student Congregate Housing Facilities a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. or 100% if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking Floor Area: allowable FAR 4:1, also apply 18.16.030.B b. Lot Area and Width: Lot Area: Apply standards of 18.16.040.A, Table 16-2 (Lot Area Table), or if a structured internal parking facility is provided, then required lot area may be reduced. by up to 50%. Lot Width: Apply standards of 18.16.040.B, Table 16-3 (Lot Width Table) c. Yards 1. Front yard: • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. • Adjacent to collector streets: 15’min. - 20’ max. • Adjacent to local streets: 10’ min. - 15’ max. 2. Rear yard: 10’ min. • Adjacent to arterial streets: 25’ min. 3. Side yard: 5’ min. d. Building Height: 5 stories max. e. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the R-4 district. 5. Residential: Mixed Use (Residential over Commercial) a. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot Coverage: 75% max. or 100% if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking Floor Area: apply standards 18.19.030.CThe minimum floor area requirements for each dwelling in all districts shall be that area required by the City’s International Building Code. All development shall provide a minimum floor area ratio of not less than 0.75. “Floor area ratio” is the ratio attained by dividing the gross square feet of building by gross land area of the lot(s) being redeveloped. A site plan for development may show future phases of buildings to be used to demonstrate compliance with the minimum floor area ration standard. and 18.19.030.D (FAR) b. Lot Area and Width Lot Area: all new mixed use lots shall have a minimum area adequate to provide required setbacks (yards) and parking Lot Width: no minimum width for new mixed use lots c. Yards: 1. Minimum Yards. No minimum yards are required for the mixed-use district. Comment [BK2]: Add definition to 18.80. Comment [BK3]: Add definition to 18.80. 180 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 15 of 18 9/3/2010 Easements for utilities or other special standards may require buildings to be placed back from lot lines. 2. Maximum Setback. Buildings shall be oriented to the adjacent street(s). At least 50% of the total building frontage, which is oriented to the street, shall be placed within 10 feet of any minimum required separation from the property line. 3. Special Yard Requirements. All yards shall be subject to the provisions of §18.30.060 Design Criteria and Development Standards in Entryway Corridors, §18.38.060 Yard and Height Encroachments, Limitations and Exceptions, §18.42.100 Watercourse Setback, §18.44.100 Street Vision Triangle, and §18.48.100 General Maintenance, BMC, when applicable. d. Building Height: Min. height: 2 stories Max. height: Maximum building height shall be 55 feet except that maximum building height may be increased by up to but not more than an additional 25 feet when structured parking is provided.5 stories. e. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the UMU district. f. Special Parking Standards 1. Structured Parking Incentive. A floor area bonus of one square foot of nonresidential up to a total of 50% of the gross building area of all uses may be granted for each square foot of area of structured parking. 2. Parking for individual lots may be provided elsewhere within the district with a shared parking agreement, provided that the overall parking ratio for the district is comparable with documented parking ratios in developments of similar scale, intensity of use, population density, and scope. 3. Bicycle Parking. Covered bicycle parking shall be provided by all student congregate housing projects, commercial development, and mixed use development. The covered spaces shall be either 10 bicycle parking spaces or one-half of the total minimum bicycle parking whichever is less. g. Special Building Standards 1. Floor-to-Ceiling and Floor-to-Floor Heights a. All commercial space provided on the ground level shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 12 feet. b. Residential uses shall have no limit to floor-to-ceiling or floor-to-floor heights. 2. Buildings that contain commercial uses on the ground floor shall provide transparency along at least 50% percent of the linear length of the commercial façade. Transparency may be achieved with windows, building lobbies, building entrances, display windows, or windows affording views into retail, office, or lobby spaces. This requirement shall apply to both street fronts for buildings located on corner lots. 3. Parking structures shall not have more than one two-way vehicle entrance or two one-way vehicle entrances facing any public way. 50% of the ground floor linear frontage along the primary street must be retail, commercial, office, civic, residential, or live/work. 181 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 16 of 18 9/3/2010 4. Building encroachments are permitted in accordance with Section 18.38.060, subject to any and all applicable International Building Codes. 5. All projects in the REMU district are exempt from the Rear Yard Lot Coverage requirements of 18.38.050.H h. Special Lighting Standards: All building entrances, pathways, and other pedestrian areas shall be lit with pedestrian-scale lighting (e.g., wall mounted, sidewalk lamps, bollards, landscaping lighting, et cetera) that meet the requirements of Section 18.42.150. Alternative lighting meeting the intent of the design guidelines and other criteria of this Ttitle, may be approved through site development review. i. Natural Surveillance Standards: The proposed site layout, building, and landscape design promote natural surveillance of the area by employees, visitors, and residents. Physical features and activities should be oriented and designed in ways that maximize the ability to see throughout the site. For example, window placement, the use of front porches or stoops, use of low or see-through walls, and appropriate use of landscaping and lighting can promote natural surveillance. Sight-obscuring shrubs and walls should be avoided, except as necessary for buffering between commercial uses and lower density residential districts, and then shall be minimized. j. Public Space Standards: The REMU district is urban in nature. Public parks and recreational areas are likewise expected to be urban in nature. This may include elements such as plazas or other hardscaping, landscaping with planters and furniture. Such areas may be more concentrated in size and development than anticipated in a less urban setting. Public spaces shall be designed to facilitate distinct types of activities to encourage consistent human presence and activity. The requirements of this section shall give direction in the development of park plans and the application of the standards of Chapter 18.50, BMC. 1. Public spaces shall be designed to: a. Facilitate social interaction between and within groups; b. Provide safe, pleasant, clean and convenient sitting spaces adaptable to changing weather conditions; c. Be attractive to multiple age groups, d. Provide for multiple types of activities without conflicting; e. Support organized activities; f. Be visually distinctive and interesting; g. Interconnect with other public and private spaces; and h. Prioritize use by persons. 6. Nonresidential a. Structures for authorized non-residential activities uses are permitted in the REMU district and shall comply with the Intent and Purposes set forth in this chapter. Such uses in the REMU district are intended to provide neighborhood services and local employment, and complement existing and planned residential uses. Structures for nonresidential uses are subject to the following restrictions: b. The placement and building design of such structures should be integrated into an overall site development plan. c. Lot Coverage and Floor Area Lot coverage: 100% if parking requirements are met by shared or off-site parking facilities, or if a structured parking facility is provided that accommodates all required parking. 182 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 17 of 18 9/3/2010 Floor Area: min. FAR 0.5:1 d. Lot Area and Width: 1. All newly created lots shall have a minimum area adequate to provide for required yards and parking. In the REMU district there is no minimum size for newly created lots. 2. There is no minimum width for newly created lots within the REMU district. e. Yards: 1. Minimum Yards. No minimum yards are required for the mixed-use district.nonresidential uses. Easements for utilities or other special standards may require buildings to be placed back from lot lines. 2. Maximum Setback. Buildings shall be oriented to the primary street. At least 50% of the total building frontage, which is oriented to the street, shall be placed within 10 feet of any minimum required separation from the property line. 3. Special Yard Requirements. All yards shall be subject to the provisions of §18.30.060 Design Criteria and Development Standards in Entryway Corridors, §18.38.060 Yard and Height Encroachments, Limitations and Exceptions, §18.42.100 Watercourse Setback, §18.44.100 Street Vision Triangle, and §18.48.100 General Maintenance,§18.48.050.C Parking Lot landscaping, 18.48.050.B Additional Screening Requirements, BMC, when applicable. f. Building Height: Min. height: 15’ measured from the building’s primary street frontage Max. height: 5 stories Single-story, single-use commercial buildings in compliance with all other standards of this chapter permitted. g. Signage Apply standards of Chapter 18.52 with the same requirements as the UMU district. h. Special Parking Standards: 1. Structured Parking Incentive. A floor area bonus of one square foot of nonresidential up to a total of 50% of the gross building area of all uses may be granted for each square foot of area of structured parking. 2. Parking for individual lots may be provided elsewhere within the district with a shared parking agreement, provided that the overall parking ratio for the district is comparable with documented parking ratios in developments of similar scale, intensity of use, population density, and scope. 3. Bicycle Parking. Covered bicycle parking shall be provided by all student housing projects, commercial development, and mixed use development. The covered spaces shall be either 10 bicycle parking spaces or one-half of the total minimum bicycle parking whichever is less. i. Special Building Standards: 1. Floor-to-Ceiling and Floor-to-Floor Heights a. All commercial space provided on the ground level shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 12 feet. b. Residential uses shall have no limit to floor-to-ceiling or floor-to-floor heights. 183 Ordinances # __: Effective ___ 2010 18 of 18 9/3/2010 2. Buildings that contain commercial uses on the ground floor shall provide transparency along at least 50% percent of the linear length of the building commercial façade. Transparency may be achieved with windows, building lobbies, building entrances, display windows, or windows affording views into retail, office, or lobby spaces. This requirement shall apply to both street fronts for buildings located on corner lots. 3. Parking structures shall not have more than one two-way vehicle entrance or two one-way vehicle entrances facing any public way. 50% of the ground floor linear frontage along a primary street must be retail, commercial, office, civic, residential, or live/work. 4. Building encroachments are permitted in accordance with Section 18.38.060, subject to any and all applicable International Building Codes. 5. All projects in the REMU district are exempt from the Rear Yard Lot Coverage requirements of 18.38.050.H j. Special Lighting Standards: All building entrances, pathways, and other pedestrian areas shall be lit with pedestrian-scale lighting that meet the requirements of Section 18.42.150. (e.g., wall mounted, sidewalk lamps, bollards, landscaping lighting, et cetera). Alternative lighting meeting the intent of the design guidelines and other criteria of this Ttitle, may be approved through site development review. k. Natural Surveillance Standards: The proposed site layout, building, and landscape design promote natural surveillance of the area by employees, visitors, and residents. Physical features and activities should be oriented and designed in ways that maximize the ability to see throughout the site. For example, window placement, the use of front porches or stoops, use of low or see-through walls, and appropriate use of landscaping and lighting can promote natural surveillance. Sight-obscuring shrubs and walls should be avoided, except as necessary for buffering between commercial uses and lower density residential districts, and then shall be minimized. j. Public Space Standards: The REMU district is urban in nature. Public parks and recreational areas are likewise expected to be urban in nature. This may include elements such as plazas or other hardscaping, landscaping with planters and furniture. Such areas may be more concentrated in size and development than anticipated in a less urban setting. Public spaces shall be designed to facilitate distinct types of activities to encourage consistent human presence and activity. The requirements of this section shall give direction in the development of park plans and the application of the standards of Chapter 18.50, BMC. 1. Public spaces shall be designed to: a. Facilitate social interaction between and within groups; b. Provide safe, pleasant, clean and convenient sitting spaces adaptable to changing weather conditions; c. Be attractive to multiple age groups, d. Provide for multiple types of activities without conflicting; e. Support organized activities; f. Be visually distinctive and interesting; g. Interconnect with other public and private spaces; and h. Prioritize use by persons. 184 ATTACHMENT B COMPARISON OF USES IN EXISTING UMU (URBAN MIXED USE), B-1, B-2, B-3 DISTRICTS AND THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL EMHASIS MIXED USE DISTRICT (REMU) 18.18.020 AUTHORIZED USES A. Uses in the various commercial districts are depicted in the table below. Principal uses are indicated with a “P”, conditional uses are indicated with a “C”, accessory uses are indicated with an “A”, and uses which are not permitted within the district are indicated by a “-”. A particular proposed development or use may fall under more than one listed category with different review processes. In such cases, the more stringent review process shall apply. B. The uses listed are deliberately broad and some are given special definitions in Chapter 18.80, BMC. The intent of this method is to provide general guidance for uses while allowing the unique needs and circumstances of each proposal to be specifically addressed through the review process. Some uses are the subject of special regulations contained in Chapter 18.40, BMC. C. Additional uses for telecommunications are established in Chapter 18.54, BMC. Table 18-1 Table of Commercial Uses Authorized Uses UMU B-1 B-2 B-3 REMU* Ambulance Service P - P P - Apartments and Apartment buildings, as defined in this title P P P 1/C P 3 P Arts and entertainment center, as defined in this title P P P P P 12,000 s.f. limit Assisted living/elderly care facilities P - C - P Automobile fuel sales or repair, as defined in this title C C C C - Automobile fuel sales - - - - C Automobile parking lot or garage (public or private) P P P P P Automobile washing establishment C C P C C Banks and other financial institutions P P P P P Business, technical or vocational school P - C P 3 P Bus terminals C - C C - Community centers P C P P 3 P Convenience uses C C P C P 5,000 s.f. limit Community Residential Facility - - - - P Convenience use restaurant P P P P - Cooperative Household - - - - P Day care centers - P P P P 185 Table of Commercial Uses Authorized Uses UMU B-1 B-2 B-3 REMU* Essential services (Type I) - P P P - Essential services (Type II) C - C C C Extended- stay lodgings P - P P P 40,000 s.f. limit Food processing facilities - - C - - Frozen food storage and locker rental - - P - - Health and exercise establishments - P 1/C P P P Home-based Businesses (subject to 18.17.030.E only) - - - - P Hospitals P - P C C Hotel or motel P - P P P 40,000 s.f. limit Laboratories, research and diagnostic P - P P 3 P 40,000 s.f. limit Laundry, dry cleaning P - C C P Light goods repair, as defined in this title P - C A P Lodging houses P - C C 3 P Manufacturing, light and completely indoors P - C - P 5,000 s.f. limit Mortuary C - C C - Museum P - C C P Medical and dental clinics P P 1/C P P P Meeting hall P - P P P Offices, as defined in this title P P 1/C P P 3 P Other buildings and structures typically accessory to permitted uses A A A A A Parking facilities P P P P3 - Personal and convenience services, as defined in this title P P P P P Pet grooming shop P P P P P Printing offices and publishing establishments C - - C P 5,000 s.f. limit Private club, fraternity, sorority or lodge P - P P P Public buildings P P P P P Refuse and recycling containers A A A A A Research laboratories P - P P P 186 Table of Commercial Uses Authorized Uses UMU B-1 B-2 B-3 REMU* Restaurants P P P P P Retail uses, as defined in this title P 6 P 2 P 2 P 2 - Retail Uses less than 5,000s.f. - - - - P excluding adult businesses Retail Uses greater than 5,000s.f. and less than or equal to 12,000 s.f. - - - - P no more than 4 per 100 acres of contiguous development Retail Uses greater than 12,000s.f. and less than or equal to 25,000 s.f. - - - - P no more than 2 per 100 acres of contiguous development Retail, large scale C - P - - Sales of alcohol for on-premise consumption C no gaming allowed C C C C no gaming allowed Single household dwelling - - - - P Student Housing Facility - - - - P Three-or four-household dwelling - - - - P Townhouses (five attached units or less) - - - - P Two-household dwelling - - - - P Sign paint shops (not including neon sign fabrication) C - P C - Upholstery shops (excluding on site upholstery service for cars, boats, trailers, trucks and other motorized vehicles requiring overnight storage) P - P P 3 - Veterinary clinic P - C - C Wholesale distributors with on-premise retail outlets, providing warehousing is limited to commodities which are sold on the premises P - C - P 10,000 square foot limit Wholesale establishments that use samples, but do not stock on premises P - P P P 5,000 square foot limit Any use, except adult businesses and casinos approved as part of a planned unit development subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.36, BMC C C C C C Notes: 1When located on the second or subsequent floor. 2Excluding adult businesses, and large scale retail, as they are defined in Chapter 18.80, BMC. 3Except on ground floor in the core area as defined in this chapter. 4Private arts instruction shall only be on the second or subsequent floor in the core area as defined in this chapter. 5On the ground floor in the core area as defined in this chapter. 187 6Excluding adult business and large scale retail. Proposal Notes: * REMU does include a proposed restriction on the overall commercial square footage to limit non-residential uses to no more than 30 percent of the total gross building area of all uses within the master planned area. 188 Zoning Commission Minutes – September 7, 2010 1 ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2010 ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Pomnichowski called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. and ordered the Recording Secretary to take attendance. Members Present: Nathan Minnick JP Pomnichowski Ed Sypinski City Commission Liaison Chris Mehl Members Absent: Nick Lieb Staff Present: Brian Krueger, Associate Planner Tim McHarg, Planning Director Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning Director Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary Guests Present: Rob Pertzborn Bob Emery George Hecht Sean Canady ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (0-15 MINUTES) {Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Zoning Commission and not scheduled on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.} Seeing there was no public comment forthcoming, Chairperson Pomnichowski closed this portion of the meeting. ITEM 3. MINUTES OF AUGUST 17, 2010 MOTION: Mr. Sypinski moved, Vice Chairperson Minnick seconded, to approve the minutes of August 17, 2010 as presented. The motion carried 3-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Pomnichowski, Mr. Sypinski, and Vice Chairperson Minnick. Those voting nay being none. ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW 189 Zoning Commission Minutes – September 7, 2010 2 1. Zone Code Amendment Application #Z-09241 – (Residential Emphasis Mixed Use) A Zone Code Amendment requested by the applicant, RTR Holdings II and representatives Intrinsik Architecture and GGLO, and requesting to establish a Residential Emphasis Mixed Use zoning district designation within the City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. (Krueger) (Continued from 8/17/10.) Associate Planner Brian Krueger presented the Staff Report noting the proposal had been opened and continued from the combined meeting of the Zoning Commission and Planning Board on August 17, 2010. He stated there had been quite a bit of discussion with the Planning Board and he had provided a Staff Report addendum to address some of the concerns voiced previously. He stated Staff had included additional technical input to the proposed language and that new language had been forwarded to the Zoning Commission. He stated he wasn’t prepared to walk through the entire chapter, but would touch on some of the proposed edits; he noted changes were in strikethrough format with proposed changes underlined. He stated he expected the chapter to evolve through City Commission review, but the Zoning Commission had been given a draft that may be recommended to the City Commission. He stated there a broad list of uses proposed for the zoning designation with a 70 percent residential to 30 percent commercial ratio for the development. He stated a new type of housing would be administered in the form of a group housing model. He stated the size restriction would be in place of the Conditional Use Permit process for certain uses. He stated a requirement for a Master Site Plan or Planned Unit Development had been proposed for projects 10 acres or over in size. He stated height would be regulated in stories instead of a specific height number. He stated retail uses of a certain size would be limited to certain numbers per 100 acres, which was another way to limit the impact of commercial development within a residential neighborhood. Planner Krueger stated the requirement to administer restrictions on commercial development based on a 70-30 percentage was unique. He stated the requirement to maintain the residential/commercial percentage balance (concurrency requirement) throughout the development had been removed and would instead be a calculated requirement for a contiguous zoned area. He stated the calculation would be made and administered based upon uses existing or those entitled via the by the Final Site Plan process; any initial application would be required to maintain a 70-30 balance while the second project or PUD would be reviewed to continuously maintain the balance. Planner Krueger stated the second section regarding the requirement for a Master Site Plan or PUD included an intent statement for the District and noted the language could be construed as a restriction on a minimum size for rezoning a REMU area; the language was intended to provide additional review criteria for those properties 10 acres or larger in size. He stated the Master Site Planning process was being proposed due to an administrative determination that a site plan approval is only for one year, plus an additional one year extension possible. Master Site Plans allowed a minimum five year entitlement with extensions. He stated Staff was more methodical about reviewing phased developments with the Master Site Plan or Planned Unit Development proposal. 190 Zoning Commission Minutes – September 7, 2010 3 Planner Krueger clarified the current definition of a convenience use which included automotive fuel sales; without a differentiation in convenience uses proposed in the chapter, Staff recommended requiring them as Conditional Uses. He stated Staff had determined drive-in/ drive-through uses were not consistent with the land use designation or the intent of the zoning district and recommended they not be allowed. He stated the format for calling out specific uses or further restrictions had been included as footnotes in the proposed language; limiting types of uses to a certain land area. He stated some additional language might need to be included to help in the management of smaller properties; would smaller properties be allowed some of the uses larger properties would be allowed? Staff had suggested the language “zoned area” be included in this section. He stated the definition of student housing had been proposed and the City was hesitant to restrict housing to a certain class of people; Staff suggested the language “congregate” replace “student” housing. Planner Krueger stated the mixed use provision in the code for building height was inconsistent with regard to building height. He stated a narrative should be included instead of a citation to another section of the ordinance. He stated other sections of the code would be impacted and would require amendments to reflect the REMU code; ADU, PUD, Telecommunications, Signs, Definitions, and Parks/Open Space. He stated signage had been addressed through reference points to standards from other zoning districts. He stated assistance from the applicant would be required to form a definition of congregate housing and additional work would need to be done if the definition of a household needed to be revised. He stated the administration of parkland/open space requirements would be difficult in that student housing may not be considered dwelling units. He stated one letter of public comment had been received from the University in support of the proposal. He stated there was a possibility that if substantial changes were made to the ordinance, they would be presented to the Zoning Commission at a future time. He stated Staff was supportive of the proposal with Staff edits and recommendations of approval. Mr. Sypinski directed the Zoning Commission to the areas identified by the City for potential REMU zoning and asked if all three areas were 10 acres or larger in size. Planner Krueger responded they were not all ten acres in size. Mr. Sypinski asked if the REMU was indicating the parcels would need to be at least ten acres. Planner Krueger responded a ZMA could be requested for a parcel less than 10 acres though the units per acres lent itself to a larger site. Mr. Sypinski stated the definition of household was at odds with the current proposal for student housing and added he was concerned how student housing in particular would affect adjacent neighborhoods; would they have an adverse affect. Planner Krueger responded the code allowed for different types of uses though the location of any of the uses allowable on the site would be subject to review and approval through the Master Site Plan or PUD process for any REMU development over 10 acres. He added student housing could be allowed anywhere that it fit within a specific type of development. Mr. Mehl asked Planner Krueger for clarification of contiguous planning areas; wouldn’t all REMU be contiguous. Planner Krueger responded contiguous had been included for emphasis. Mr. Mehl asked if the proposal in first would have more flexibility. Planner Krueger responded the mix of uses would still be required though the first development might have the opportunity to develop larger retail developments; the development of the first could potentially impact the 191 Zoning Commission Minutes – September 7, 2010 4 second development. Mr. Mehl asked why sketch plan review had been stricken. Planner Krueger responded sketch plan review had traditionally only been done for smaller commercial and residential building permit reviews; the complexity of infrastructure would demand site plan review. Mr. Mehl stated the street and circulation standards had been modified from “should” to “shall” and asked for clarification. Planner Krueger stated that buffering the sidewalk from the travel lane by angled or parallel parking would be based on the cross sections available from the Transportation Plan; where possible Planning Staff would like to see more on street parking. Mr. Mehl suggested strong encouragement would, in his opinion, include “should”; “shall made him nervous. Planner Krueger responded different styles of parking had been proposed and it was very permissive. He stated the alleyway requirement provision had been included in the Growth Policy as an objective to require alleys where feasible which would be determined at the project level. If the REMU provision included “should” or “where feasible” language it might result in alleys being created. He stated it would more likely result in arguments with Staff as to what would be feasible. He added the zone was primarily residential and pedestrian in form; the applicant had proposed very small lot sizes and alley loaded garages would be more accommodating to those sites. He added there was always an “out” for the applicant to request a relaxation from including alleys in the development. Chairperson Pomnichowski asked for clarification of the project being noticed. Planner Krueger responded the proposal had been noticed in the newspaper and posted publicly within the City offices; he added the zoning could only be implemented through a ZCA for a specific site. Chairperson Pomnichowski commended Planner Krueger on his Staff Report; she stated the minutes of the last meeting were excellent, had brought her up to speed quickly, and thanked the Recording Secretary. Chairperson Pomnichowski suggested a couple modifications to current ordinance could accomplish the same result as what was being proposed. Planner Krueger responded the uses listed in the Growth Policy were not necessarily appropriate for the allowed zoning designations. Chairperson Pomnichowski stated the B-2 commercial zoning designation was similar to what was being proposed; she asked what could not be accomplished with other types of zoning. Planner Krueger responded the REMU district had been expressly anticipated to work with the new land use designation; the intensity of use would be predominantly residential and would include restrictions on the total number of commercial uses allowed. He cited hotels were allowed in the REMU district, but only up to 40,000 square feet in size, which would be half of the size of the hotels allowed elsewhere in town. Chairperson Pomnichowski stated the definition of cooperative household had not been included. Planner Krueger responded the definition was already included in the UDO, was distinctly different from student housing, and did not allow student housing within that definition. Planner Krueger responded the definition would need to be resolved prior to formal review by the City Commission. Chairperson Pomnichowski stated she was concerned with two of the criteria the ZC must find to be met. She stated the provision to allow for phased development of the site was a concern as the City had current issues with the installation of infrastructure. Planner Krueger responded any plan review would require the installation or financial guarantee of improvements. Chairperson Pomnichowski clarified that the Master Site Plan or PUD process would be applied to properties 192 Zoning Commission Minutes – September 7, 2010 5 over 10 acres in size. Planner Krueger responded the applicant had proposed those processes to allow the City the ability to provide input on the proposed design and layout as well as administer the 70-30 balance. Chairperson Pomnichowski stated a PUD or Master Site Plan would go through DRC review and then be approved by the City Commission without being seen by the PB, ZC, or DRB. Planner Krueger responded that any of those types of development would follow the same requirements from the code and would be reviewed by the necessary agencies. Chairperson Pomnichowski asked if the Transportation Plan standards were being adhered to. Planner Krueger responded the applicant had proposed flexibility in street design standards though the City Engineering Department might have issues with those designs that would be identified during project review. Chairperson Pomnichowski asked for the reference to standard rights of way. Planner Krueger responded the UDO did not specifically call out the provision but instead referenced the Transportation Plan; the standards were not included in the proposed chapter. Chairperson Pomnichowski asked if the minimum lot width would be 25 feet. Planner Krueger responded the 25 foot lot width was still included. Chairperson Pomnichowski asked the minimum width for townhouse lots. Planner Krueger responded the minimum standard for a townhouse lot would be 15 feet. Rob Pertzborn, Intrinsik Architecture, addressed the Zoning Commission. He introduced Sean Canady, Randy Hecht, and Bob Emery. Mr. Canady thanked Planner Krueger for his thoughtful review and dialog regarding the proposed ordinance. He stated the applicant had agreed to many of Staff’s proposed amendments but there were a few items that would need to be clarified. He stated there was not an endorsement for concurrency of the commercial/residential balance; the premise of giving the City a more detailed level of input had been the intent for the requirement of a Master Site Plan or PUD as opposed to allowing property owners to develop their ten acres with commercial structures leaving the next property owner with the residential requirement – he suggested the 70-30 split be applied to each REMU proposal. He stated designs had been executed to incorporate a drive thru which worked well on similar sites; he added he did not think all convenience uses should be listed as Conditional Uses and suggested auto fuel sales facilities had been expressly called out as a Conditional Use. He stated the intent was to create a customized and tailored process that would allow the City to provide input and requiring alleys would contradict the intent of recognizing the realities of site constraints including slopes, waterways, and open spaces; he thought alleys should be encouraged but not required. Mr. Canady stated the applicant had incorporated many of Staff’s responses and they supported the on street parking principal where feasible. Mr. Mehl stated the language regarding the parking included “shall” instead of “should” as Staff’s recommendation had indicated and asked for clarification if the applicant was amenable to Staff recommendations why those changes had not been made. Mr. Canady responded the language was under discussion, but the overall principal of the language remained intact. Mr. Mehl asked how a drive through would fit into the context of a mixed use neighborhood. Mr. Canady responded a drive through could be instituted with design of the sidewalk, integration of landscaping, street frontage, etc.; it might be difficult, but did not need to be prohibited. Mr. Mehl stated there was very little possibility of public input in past years, but in recent years there had been a lot of public participation; he asked how there would be more responsibility and flexibility with less public input. Mr. Canady responded he would defer to Staff and the City 193 Zoning Commission Minutes – September 7, 2010 6 Commission. Chairperson Pomnichowski opened the public comment period of the meeting. Seeing none forthcoming, the public comment period was closed. Mr. Sypinski stated that one of the areas of compromise could be to differentiate between a fast food drive thru and a drive in such as the one in Livingston. He stated his main concern was to encourage public participation. He stated he felt the proposal was in compliance and compatible with the Growth Policy; encouraging market flexibility, design flexibility, and growth. He stated the definition of student housing concerned him. He stated he felt the proposal was in keeping with the 12 review criteria as set forth in the UDO. Chairperson Pomnichowski reiterated that any application under review by the ZC had to comply with the 12 review criteria as set forth in the UDO. She listed those criteria and noted she had a concern with congestion in the streets due to the proposed variations in the street standards. She stated the unrestricted heights might require sprinkling of the structures and noted the applicant would have to work with the Fire and Building Departments for those requirements. She stated the character of the district would be unique and she felt there would be conflicts due to the mixed character of the district. She stated there were no existing buildings on the sites, but the applicant could not adversely affect neighboring uses. The City Commission knows it is expected that the ZC forward a recommendation of approval, but she does not expect the document in its current form to be adopted; she wants street standards specified and honored. She suggested there should be more clarification on the language “contiguously zoned area” or “contiguously zoned REMU” area, or a specific application. She stated the “Residential Emphasis” indicated that a drive thru would not be appropriate for the REMU zoning designation she stated she agreed with Staff. She suggested greater population and uses would require more accesses and suggested alleys should be discussed further. She stated she was pained to vote for the proposal when it suggested a Master Site Plan or PUD would be the only review processes available; there was not an opportunity for public comment and suggested insertion of a public hearing or advisory board requirement into the PUD process or a subdivision review instead of Master Site Plan or PUD. She stated her greatest reservation was the lack of public participation and suggested the flexibility and innovation would be lost without public involvement. She stated she was supportive of the proposal with the described Staff and Zoning Commission member changes and noted she expected the document to be modified prior to final adoption. MOTION: Mr. Sypinski moved, Mr. Minnick seconded, to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Commission for Zone Code Amendment Application #Z-09241 with Staff conditions of approval and recommended language amendments suggested by the Zoning Commission. Mr. Sypinski clarified that Zoning Commission recommendations had been included in the motion for approval. Chairperson Pomnichowski and Vice Chairperson Minnick concurred. The motion carried 3-0. ITEM 5. NEW BUSINESS 194 Zoning Commission Minutes – September 7, 2010 7 There was no new business forthcoming. ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT The Zoning Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:58 p.m. ___________________________________ _______________________________________ JP Pomnichowski, Chairperson Tim McHarg, Planning Director Zoning Commission Dept. of Planning & Community Development City of Bozeman City of Bozeman 195