HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-2011 Work Plan Update and Development of 2011
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Chris Kukulski, City Manager
SUBJECT: 2010 – 11 Work Plan Update & development of 2011/12 goals.
MEETING DATE: January 24, 2011
RECOMMENDATION: Please review the 2010/11 Work Plan update as a tool to help set
goals for 2011/12.
BACKGROUND: The attached work plan update has been prepared to track the
organizations progress since its adoption on February 22, 2010. The update provides a status
report on each item identified in the previous year. This report will assist us in setting priorities
for 2011 and 2012. Because this is a “year end” report and intend to set priorities for the
upcoming 24 month period, I did not provide a one page summary. As requested in my
December annual review, you will begin receiving brief monthly reports in March 2011.
In addition to the attached work plan update, staff is consolidating the existing adopted plans by
providing each executive summary and the corresponding implementation goals. This document
will also help in setting the 2011/12 priorities. Thousands of hours of community volunteer and
staff time have been spent developing and implementing these plans. Therefore, they serve as a
road map that we regularly refer back to when setting priorities.
The most successful process will result in policy goals that are focused and easy to understand.
The fewer number of items identified as priorities, the more focus the organization can be on
accomplishing those that are identified. The more focus you have on policy development the
greater impact the Commission will have on the services the city provides.
26
FISCAL EFFECTS: A tremendous amount of resources are being utilized throughout
the organization to accomplish the work plan in addition to running the day to day services we
provide to our citizens. Therefore, the adopted priorities have a significant impact on how and
where public resources are expended.
ALTERNATIVES: As determined by the Commission.
27
1
City of Bozeman
Adopted 2010 - 2011 Work Plan (2/22/10)
January 13, 2011 Update
New Policy Initiatives
1. Enhance Downtown Development Opportunities
a) Utilize the federal HUD grant for the blast site – Natalie Meyer
· Construction completion scheduled for late 2011.
· Engineering is coordinating the alley reconstruction with the F & H construction project.
The goal is to complete the upgrades in the 2011 construction season.
b) Conduct a "Full cost & benefit study: social, economic & traffic considerations for one-way
conversion to 2-way, shared lanes, streetscape improvements and truck route
modifications" as recommended by the Downtown Plan – Rick Hixson
· The project is on hold until funding is found. (total est. $250k, $100k from downtown TIF)
· The scope of work has been completed and approved by TCC and the City Commission.
c) Increase residential density in the B-3 district – Brian Krueger
· Completed research on similar jurisdictions (cities) that have created incentive programs for their historic downtowns.
· Reduced parking requirements have been implemented. Expanded inclusions for open space and landscaping requirements for residential projects including, urban common amenities
(e.g. plazas or roof decks) and certain private patios and green roof decks.
d) Implement the remaining parking recommendations identified in the downtown plan and
review and update for the Downtown Parking SID/Cash-in-lieu program. – Allyson Bristor
and Paul Burns
· Revisions to the Unified Development Code were adopted January 30, 2010. As a result, no
additional parking spaces were required for several development projects approved in 2010.
· Western Transportation Institute is conducting a downtown parking study. Final drafts are
under review with a final report scheduled for late February. Any changes called for in the report will be vetted by the parking commission and staff considering the Downtown Parking SID/Cash-in-lieu program.
2. Reform the development review process without decreasing quality – Chris Saunders & Rick
Hixson
a) Increase the Planning Director and City Engineer’s responsibilities to make administrative
approvals of projects as recommended in the Community Plan. - Chris Saunders & Rick
Hixson.
· We have completed an index of the current City Commission, Board of Adjustment, and Planning Director approval authorities, and have made recommendations to the planning board for their review and consideration.
28
2
· UDO amendments provisionally adopted on 12/13/10 to allow Directors/City Engineer to
make exceptions to extension of utilities and LOS standards; and remove street light
standards from the UDO making variances unnecessary. Amendments to Design Standards
will be completed prior to the final adoption of the ordinance.
b) Amend the Sign Code – Vickie Hasler and Brian Krueger
· Staff will schedule public hearings on the revised Sign Codes sections in March 2011.
c) Review DRB & DRC review procedures – Dave Skelton – COMPLETED (ongoing)
· The planning review process has been effectively coordinated between planning, building
and engineering. Resulting in reduced review time of at least two weeks.
d) Improve coordination between planning, engineering and building – Keri Thorpe, Rick
Hixson and Bob Risk – COMPLETED (ongoing)
3. Economic Development
a) Hire the Economic Development Ombudsman – COMPLETED
b) Work as a catalyst to bring the Chamber, Prospera, MSU and the City together – Chris
Kukulski, Brit Fontenot
· The approved the 2011 priority and recommendations were adopted on January 3, 2011 (see
attached matrix).
· Google postponed their Google Fiber project winner announcements until early 2011.
c) Increase salability of lots, final plat extensions, infrastructure guarantees – Dave Skelton
· Two roundtable discussions have taken place with local professionals, lenders, developers
and other community leaders involved in the development industry. Their primary outcome
is their support for Development Agreement enabling legislation (LC 784)
d) Support the Economic Development Council (EDC) - Brit Fontenot
· Brit and the assistant clerk provide support staff to the EDC.
e) Partner with MSU and all community stakeholders to develop a two-year college - City
Commission
· Resolution 4308 providing up to 1.5 mills of support in FY 2011, 2012 & 2013 was approved
on January 10, 2010.
4. Develop a plan to address deferred infrastructure maintenance – Rick Hixson
An analysis of water and sewer pipes has been conducted to determine how many lineal feet need to be replaced each year to catch up within approx. 20 years. Now that this has been calculated, we will analyze the effects this would have on utility rates and assessments.
29
3
a) Water Distribution System – the facility plan identifies 54,506 lineal feet (LF) of existing
water mains that are undersized and need to be replaced at a cost of $11,768,253 and
53,661 LF of undersized water mains that need to be upgraded to meet fire flows on a max
day at a cost of $11,659,652. (Engineers)
If we replace 5,300 lineal feet of water pipe per year it would take approx. 22 years to complete
the 116,138 lineal feet of old and undersized mains shown in the facility plan. Based on our
most recent three bids of $200/ft we would need to invest approx. $1,060,000 per year.
b) Sewer Collection System - improvements were identified in the 1998 Facility Plan. The
2005 Plan recommended lines be TV inspected to determine the greatest need. The
projects identified in the 1998 Plan continue to be completed, but as annual televising
continues, other more urgent projects may be identified and completed. (Engineers)
If we slip lined 7,200 lineal feet of sewer pipe per year it would take approximately 20 years to
complete the work identified in the facility plan. At our current cost this would need to invest
approximately $1,000,000 in annual slip lining.
c) Street System - there are currently 27 miles of city streets which are in need of overlay
treatments and 25 miles of streets which are in need of chip sealing. At our current rate of
investment it would take us approximately 18 years to overlay the streets which need
treatments if no further deterioration of the remaining streets took place. The street
system includes the curbs and street related storm water. (Engineers)
· The adopted budget for the Street Maintenance District includes a “10% over 5 years Plan”
to begin tackling curb replacements.
· The 2% increase will replace approximately 1 block or 650 feet of curb annually.
· Engineering is designing a curb replacement project for Church and South Wilson to be funded with Urban Funds.
· Staff is seeking funding options for South 8th so the street/curb/gutters/median can be replaced after the water main is replaced this summer/fall. We may be discussing the option
of another Transportation General Obligation Bond with the Commission soon. ADA
sidewalk curb repair/installation is proposed with CTEP funding.
d) Sidewalks. §12.20.035 BMC requires abutting owners to repair sidewalks, which the
engineering dept oversees. §12.20.060 BMC provides the City Commission with the
authority to order a sidewalk or curb to be constructed. (Engineers)
· $73,000 of ADA pedestrian ramps and $37,000 of Sidewalks were replaced utilizing our
HB645 Local Infrastructure Grant.
· CTEP College-Huffine Pathway is under construction
· CTEP priority list included filling several gaps in the sidewalk system for CTEP availability.
e) Facilities. Implement recommendations contained within Facility Condition Index Plans –
James Goehrung
· We are implementing the Facility Index report.
30
4
f) Police Station & Municipal Courts - Develop a plan to replace our municipal courts and
police station – Chuck Winn & Chief Price
· The master plan draft was completed and presented on December 8th to the city and county.
No additional progress at this time.
· The adopted budget includes $20,000 for participation in the County’s Master Plan process
for the Law & Justice site.
5. Determine future of Mandeville Farm & Story Mansion
a) Utilize the Economic Development Council to make recommendations regarding
Mandeville Farm, preliminary plat expires April 2011 – Chris Kukulski, Brit Fontenot
· Enabling legislation for Development Agreements could be utilized to extend the life of our preliminary plat.
· The Mandeville Farm preliminary plat was extended to April 2012 as recommended by the EDC and staff.
b) Develop a transition plan for the Story Mansion based on the December 8, 2008 approved
motion. - City Commission
· “Authorize the City Manager to sign the Award of Bid to R & R Taylor Construction as the
General Contractor/Construction Manager in the amount of $1,071,242 as authorized by
the 2008-2009 budgets and direct staff to bring back the necessary budget amendment
from the General Fund not to exceed $391,222 to be paid back within 24 months either
through fundraising or by selling the mansion starting on January 1 of 2011 (originally
stated 2010 but he clarified later on in discussion).”
· This item is scheduled for the February 7, 2011 commission meeting.
2nd Tier New Initiatives
1) Initiate ballot amendments for the 2010 election - City Commission – COMPLETED
2) Develop a policy that determines when specialty event insurance is required: Parades? Events
on public land? Facility rentals?
· The amended ordinance 1798, regulating public assembly and parade permits is scheduled for
commission review on January 31, 2011.
· The parks and recreation department is providing facility rental customers with information on insurance and a list of possible resources to obtain it. We are still currently following the City’s
code on this. We have not drafted the revised policy yet.
31
5
Ongoing Priorities
City Attorney Office
1. Complete Code Codification
The final proofs of Bozeman Municipal Code were delivered to the city by Municipal Code
Corporation on 12/31/10. Our goal is to complete the next phase of the legal and department review
over the next six weeks and anticipate bringing the code to the Commission in May.
2. Write language as required in the city charter for the 2010 ballot – COMPLETED
3. Close out CALA - receive reimbursement from Pacific – COMPLETED
4. Develop a contract routing/review policy
An initial draft has been sent out for staff review
5. Develop a program to track criminal case data regarding the number of convictions, pleas, and
acquittals for each charge
Updates to the Just Ware software were approved in the preliminary budget; our Senior Legal
Assistant completed a week long training in Just Ware.
6. Rewrite Title 2, BMC - Organizational Structure
Some of this will be included with the codification update other more comprehensive changes will
be proposed after codification is complete.
7. Amend Commission Rules of Procedure
A work session was held with the Commission in December. We expect to be back to the
Commission in February.
8. Abate Bridger View Trailer Park and Story Mill nuisances
Communications from American Bank indicate that if they are successful in obtaining the property
safety improvements will be pursued.
9. Clarify liability coverage for boards
A letter to MMIA has been drafted and needs additional work by legal before it is sent.
32
6
10. Amend ordinances related to the N7URB powers and review other URB/TIF boards for
codification
This project will be included in the codification and DBID extension. While certain provision will be included in codification to address major revisions to the URB/TIF board changes will need to be a
standalone project.
11. Work with Ethics Board RE: Changes to Code of Ethics for Conflict of Interests
· Ethics training for 2011 is underway.
· The Ethics Handbook has been approved and distributed.
· Amendment to the ethics code need to be discussed with the ethics board when it is reconstituted
(we currently only have one board member).
City Manager's Office
1. Complete the recruitment and selection of a new Police Chief and Planning and Community
Development Director and integrate into the leadership team - COMPLETED
· Chief Price started June 30, 2010.
· Planning Director, Tim McHarg started August 15, 2010.
· The integration is ongoing
2. Complete an in depth analysis of the criminal justice process including law enforcement, the
prosecution and public defender offices and the City's two Municipal Courts.
· The new police chief and prosecutor have started within the past six months.
3. Enhance and expand partnerships with MSU
· January 10, 2011 the City Commission committed up to 1.5 mills in FY 2011, 2012 and 2013 to
Gallatin College programs
· Over the past 30 days several critical meeting have taken place regarding the advancement of
Tech Ranch and the Technology Park. The meetings have included strong representation from
MSU, the city and private employers. These meeting will culminate in Commission actions over
the next 60 days.
4. Initiate legislative changes in the 2011 session
· Local option tax - 100% for property tax relief
· Issues related to electronic document retention
· Reform DUI laws - review fines
· Permissive medical levy and Health Savings Accounts
· Impact of State-funded public defender system
· Protect entitlement share program
· Enabling legislation for Development Agreements House Bill LC784 .
5. Update the Americans with Disabilities Act 1992 Transition Plan
· IT has spent considerable amounts of resources on the city web site to come into ADA compliance and offer training to staff to maintain compliance.
33
7
6. Complete analysis of leash free park trial after 1st year of implementation – COMPLETED
· The update was provided on October 4, 2010.
Finance Department
1. Successful financing of Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) project - COMPLETED
· On December 14, we closed on what is likely to be the last State Revolving Fund loan for the project at 3.75%.
· All other grants are in place, moving forward as planned.
2. Update water & sewer rate studies for FY11- FY15.
· A draft water rate study has been completed.
· Sewer rates were analyzed in the issuance Loan H; FY11 sewer rates are sufficient for issuance, without advance adoption of FY12 rate increase.
3. Develop direct and indirect cost allocations/charges for all City grants
· Winter 2011.
4. Update of existing Impact Fee Studies
· Planning has received five responses to the RFP.
5. Successful financing of Water Treatment Plant (WTP) project
· We have submitted the application for the Water Treatment Plant’s State Revolving Loans and
continue to participate in project funding meetings (via conference call) with MDEQ and MDNRC ($41M).
· Appropriations Request Submitted for Federal FY2011.
6. Resolve lighting district issues
· The Cleveland/Willson Lighting Districts replacement has been one large lighting district issue
resolved thanks to the Public Works Director and the Assistant City Manager; Finance is looking
to scheduling out improvements and contact property owners in another district in the area to
upgrade fixtures for energy efficiency.
7. Complete Community Climate Action Plan
· The draft Community Climate Action Plan has been completed and is under review. This plan
includes the green house gas emissions inventory. The final draft should be completed by
February 10, 2011.
· The Commission and Task Force held a joint meeting on November 29, 2010, the next joint
meeting is scheduled for January 18.
8. Update Municipal Climate Action Plan
· Formed a City Sustainability Team focused on improving efficiencies within city operations.
The team has developed a city-wide recycling guide and reformed waste collection procedures to
increase recycling and reduce plastic bag waste.
· Collaborated with Gradient Systems, a local utility tracking business, to establish an automated
energy tracking system for: gas, electric, water, sewer, fuel, waste, recycling, and greenhouse gas
emissions. The software will be delivered by March 2011.
34
8
· In regards to transportation, we have established an anti-idling ordinance for city vehicles, a
green bike program for employees, changed nearly 100% of our traffic lights to LEDs, and the
Commission provided $40,000 to support Streamline.
· Coordinating with Sustainable Planning Solutions to develop a Community Climate Action Plan
and participating in MSU’s planning process to develop a Climate Action Plan for the campus.
· Received a grant to establish a school district-wide recycling and recycling education program.
Recycling bins and totes have been distributed to each school. The education component will be
completed by June 2011.
9. Contract for a Solid Waste/Recycling Rate study
· The Request for Proposals/Qualifications was developed by the Public Works Director, and is
advertised.
Fire Department
1. Complete Insurance Services Organization (ISO) re-rating analysis
The Fire Department ISO rating committee completed their review and sent a completed packet to
ISO in October 2010. ISO has scheduled their on-site review of the City’s fire suppression systems
for April 25, 2011. We hope to receive our rating by late 2011.
2. Conduct audit of fees for Building Division and Fire Inspection Services
Human Resources Director
1. Implement reorganization of HR department to include employee recruitment and selection,
benefits, payroll and training. · The second round of recruitment for the HR Director closes on January 21, 2011. Prothman will conduct “skype” interviews with 8 – 12 semi-finalists and recommend finalist for the city to interview in early February.
· The audit is complete. A ‘non-material’ issue was identified regarding the accrual of vacation
time for individuals on leave without pay. It was related to the payroll software and how salaried employees’ benefits are loaded in the software. Steps have been taken to correct the issue.
3. Complete rewrite of the Employee Handbook
This is on hold until our new HR Director is on board.
4. Develop employee training program for all mandated training · An online ethics course has been developed by MSU School of Local Government and is being utilized to accomplish our training requirement for 2011. · Additional sexual harassment prevention training is scheduled for February 2011 for those who missed last years.
· Interest Based Bargaining (IBB) trainings were held in November and December. IBB facilitation training with the Teamsters is scheduled for January 31 and MPEA on February 2.
35
9
5. Audit of qualifying dependents for group health insurance - COMPLETED
During open enrollments in December, 2010, Payroll Officer Terry Clark made sure all employees with spouses/dependents covered on the City’s health insurance completed the City’s new Employee Declaration of Dependent Status form.
6. Analysis of health insurance in base continuation for retirement purposes. COMPLETED
We have adopted Plan Choice for a majority of City employees dealing with the connection between health insurance and retirement.
IT Director
1. Resolve software communication conflicts between the courts, legal, PD and finance
We are continuing to work with the state, police, legal department, and courts to merge data needs for a “one stop shop” for accessing information with all the departments involved. Progress has
been made, finalizing new forms for testing ground.
2. Create a City-wide policy for preserving documents for litigation and electronic discovery
Continuing to gather State and Federal policies to ensure all bases are covered.
3. Continue developing the web site to provide information to the public.
The new site has been rolled out; however we are still adjusting layouts and pages for folks which may take some time.
Library
1. Resolve pedestrian access/parking concerns such as snow removal at the Library
2. Complete Library staffing study to determine future needs related to expanded library hours,
technology, and maintenance needs
3. Host Montana Library Association Conference in April 2010 - COMPLETED
Bozeman successfully hosted the conference in April
4. Continue to work with the City on South Wallace Avenue development/ Library interface
5. Complete master plan for Library grounds
We started a Library Grounds Master Plan Committee, consisting of Courtney Kramer, Paula
Beswick, Dan McCarthy, Carole Brennan, Thom White, Judy Mathre, Brit Fontenot, and Alice, met on Friday, June 4.
36
10
Parks, Recreation & Cemetery Department
1. Complete CTEP College/Huffine Pathway project Work has ceased for the winter. Pathway has been completed in all areas where there were no walks
or pathways. Sections remaining are from 11th and College to 23rd. Work is planned to resume the
first of April.
2. Replacement of filter system and ADA chairlift at Bogert Pool
Work is being done to complete the design of the Bogert Filter system. ADA chairlift has been
purchased and will be installed in the spring.
3. Replacement of natatorium lighting at Swim Center
· Replacement of Natatorium Lighting (FY10-11) Contracts for the lighting and main pump have been approved by commission and awarded. Work will be done during spring break in March.
· The ADA chairlift has been installed.
4. Identify future CTEP projects
The list of projects for FY12 and FY13 have been presented to the Commission and approved. Ron will make application to CTEP in Helena for CTEP approval. Each project that is undertaken will
come back before the commission for approval of expenditure once preliminary costs are obtained.
5. Complete Cemetery Master Plan
Work is continuing with Cemetery Board, Staff, and Lowell Springer’s volunteer services.
6. Complete analysis of a Parks Maintenance District or other funding sources - MSU intern
· Intern Randy Wall is planning to present a policy recommendation to the Commission for a park
maintenance district in the spring of 2011 his draft report has been submitted.
· Mr. Wall is compiling an inventory of all park lands and trails, including all dedicated parkland maintained by Home Owners Associations (HOA). We are also determining a cost per square
foot and acre for maintenance. This information, along with the number of businesses and
households, will be used to determine how much the Parks budget would need to be increased to maintain the additional land, as well as how much that would cost each household and business in an SID.
7. Support community efforts to enhance Bozeman Creek as an asset throughout our parks and
open spaces.
· The recommendation from Downtown plan is to direct any cash-in-lieu of park funds from
downtown development to this purpose.
· Modify Creekside Park (citizen request) Bozeman Creek Enhancement Committee is hosting a public meeting/workshop on Feb. 9 at the County Commission room from 6:30 to 8:30 pm. The
meeting is intended to:
· Inform participants about the project and progress to date
· Improve our understanding of issues, opportunities, and public sentiment
· Broaden project ownership, and
· Refine project direction.
37
11
Planning & Community Development Department
Also see attached Planning Report for Q1 FY11
1. Complete Impact Fee Study Updates (water, sewer, streets, fire) – Chris Saunders
· This task has been included in the adopted 2010-2011 budget.
· Five proposals have been received in response to our RFP for Study Updates
2. Regulate the location of medical marijuana dispensaries – COMPLETED
· Final adoption of Ordinance 1786 has occurred and it took effect on August 26, 2010.
3. Amend UDO to address the timing of installation of sidewalks and address improvement
warranties, BCP Implementation Policy 2, 4, 12c, 15, 66, 70-72, 74, 84 – Dave Skelton
As a policy, two-year extensions are being granted in the interim for the completion of subdivision
sidewalks where the majority of the subdivision lots and/or blocks have not been sold and dwellings
constructed, and where key pedestrian connections are being installed where necessary. A code
amendment to this effect is being drafted.
4. Amend Casino Ordinance - Allyson Bristor
5. Update the Historic Structures Inventory – BCP Implementation Policy 4, 9, 11a, 16b, 21a, 24
– Courtney Kramer
· The Planning Department is analyzing modifications to the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District to determine alternatives for creating new historic districts and for addressing
development of properties outside of existing or new historic districts.
· The historic preservation advisory board will be completing an update of the inventory.
6. Update the fee schedule for the Planning Department - BCP Implementation Policy 2, 80 –
Doug Riley
Mike Delaney has provided an in depth analysis for our consideration, complete with comparative
data and personal advise and perspective. This data has been sent to the Urban Land Institute and
International Planning Association for their comments and advice. This priority will be evaluated
after the New Initiatives #2 is completed.
7. Implement TIF District plans – BCP Implementation Policy 16, 19, 44 – Keri Thorpe
Each plan is being implemented with coordination between each TIF Board, planning and
engineering.
Police Department
1. Complete implementation of electronic ticketing and reporting system to include police,
records, prosecution and municipal courts
Progress continues with the form development. All forms are with the vendor and they are being produced. On December 20th they produced a written project timeline with targeted benchmarks.
Completed forms should be back for internal testing in mid-January. Progress continues to be slow
on the vendor end but we are moving forward and prodding them as we go. My hope is May for full
rollout, their “worst case” timeline puts it at about June 15th.
38
12
2. Create a traffic division
No specific change in status. Increased dedicated traffic enforcement in support of the holiday emphasis on impaired drivers will continue through Jan 1.
3. Build and improve community/PD relations through the development and implementation of
new programs consistent with community policing
The 2nd Citizen Police Academy has been completed with 28 people graduating on November 10th.
Excellent reviews from all involved.
We have begun using citizen representatives as part of our hiring and promotion process. CPA graduate used in new hire panels in November and Assistant Superintenent of BSD as part of the Lieutenant promotion panel.
Continue our involvement with Inter-Neighborhood Council and the individual neighborhoods.
Attend all meetings possible to provide information, answer questions and address any problems that
may come up.
The officers adopted a needy family at Christmas and provided gifts and food for their holiday
season. Uniformed officers and members of their families delivered the gifts and spent some
evening time with the mother and her five children.
4. Recruit, hire and train a full staff of officers who exemplify the department’s code of conduct
and oath of office
Our newest officer was sworn in on December 17th bringing our sworn strength to 59 officers. This
is the highest level ever reached by the Bozeman Police Department and brings us to within six of our authorized strength of 65.
Our recruit officers that started in September graduated from the academy on December 10th. The
officers performed very well and between them, they were awarded five of the eight awards given out during the ceremony. There are continuing in the Field Training Program and are doing very well.
Hiring panels were conducted in November and we were able to identify four solid candidates and
they have accepted conditional offers of employment. The background investigations are continuing
with final hiring decisions expected in January.
5. Participate in County Master Plan process to identify future police and court facility at Law
and Justice Center
The master plan draft was completed and presented on December 8th. No additional progress at this time.
39
13
6. Adopt an ordinance requiring all drivers to use hands-free devices while using their cellular
phones and to prohibit texting while driving
Language for a hands-free ordinance was offered by representatives of the Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee in early December. Additionally, I provided a memo with key research to the
Commission for their review on December 14th.
Public Services Department
1. Manage Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) expansion ($54M) - anticipated completion of
Phase I is January 2012 – Bob Murray/Tom Adams
The project continues to be on-budget. Both contractors (Williams Bros. and McAlvain) have fallen
somewhat behind their predicted time schedules; however, both continued to show steady progress
the past three months. Based upon the Contractor’s most recent pay requests, Morrison and Maierle
currently estimates the following percent completion for each of our three project elements:
Project Element Contract Amount Paid to Date Estimated Percent Completion
Main Project $36,450,815 $26,609,095 73 % complete
Lab/Admin Bldg. $ 1,680,000 $ 571,200 34 % complete
Digester/Dewatering $ 5,298,965 $ 1,377,730 26 % complete
· Milestone Dates:
o May 26, 2011 – BNR bioreactors at Substantial Completion and ready for commissioning.
o December 25, 2011 – BNR bioreactors fully operational.
· The project contingency (all 3 projects) is $2,417,330.
2. Complete design and award construction bid for the new Water Treatment Plant ($40.7M,
April 2011) – Bob Murray
· Neighborhood meeting held week of 12/6. Some concerns about design of building. Design
team and staff are reviewing what might be done to address some issues, including lowering roof
pitch/height, landscaping and berming, while recognizing that the form of the building needs to address the function within the building. Another neighborhood meeting will be held in January. 90% design by mid February.
· Pilot testing, pre-design and membrane procurement have been completed.
3. Complete Vehicle Maintenance/HRDC facility on time and within budget – James Goehrung
Temporary occupancy issued last week with a punch list of items to correct. Vehicle Maintenance and HRDC have moved in and are operating out of the facility. Ribbon cutting is set for Feb. 2
40
14
4. Complete shops complex remodel within budget – James Goehrung
An architect is preparing documents for bidding and construction purposes, with work to take place in the spring of 2011. Many repairs/improvements are being completed by in-house staff.
5. Identify funding for, and install energy recovery system at the WRF if 100% funding can be
obtained – Natalie Meyer
The Omnibus Bill has $750,000 for this project, but the bill has an uphill battle in both the Senate and the House. If we receive the money, we might be able to leverage additional funds through
Northwestern Energy’s USB grant program. If the engine unit is housed within a building (that will
need to be constructed) that overall cost is estimated in the range of $1.5 to $1.8 million. If located
outside, our consulting engineer believes that working creatively with Tom, we can probably get the system installed closer to the $1.0 million mark.
6. Involve Commission in critical decisions regarding Sourdough/Mystic Lake Dam - Brian
Heaston
In follow up to November Commission work session, Staff is developing an Integrated Water
Resource Plan that will: 1) define the need for action, document why we need to identify other water
sources; develop a demand forecasting model that shows current and future water use and how long
we have to plan for new sources; 2) ID planning issues that surround prospective new sources of
supply; and 3) develop a work plan to ID tasks, costs, time, critical path, who will perform the tasks (in-house or contract), budget, and develop a public involvement plan and prepare capital funding strategy beyond planning and permitting costs. Commission will be involved in each step.
Rick purchased 83 acre feet of water rights over the past several months. Share holders in the
reservoir company have offered to sell the city 90 acre feet of water rights. This purchase would
take more resources than we have available in our cash in lieu fund. We need to consider developing a reliable source of funds to purchase water rights from share holders who are willing to
sell.
Implement water conservation plan
· The toilet rebate program continues. Over 500 applications have been processed.
· Tiered water rates are in place and we expect them to be re-studied during the upcoming water
rate study.
· We plan on expanding the rebate program to include smart irrigation controllers (i.e. evapo-transpiration controllers).
· Investigating a resolution stating that all new City building projects use Water Sense and Energy
Star labeled products.
Review Development Plan (Phase 1, to be completed July 2010)
Complete Forest Management Plan. Coordinate with USFS Bozeman Municipal Watershed
Management Plan. – Brian Heaston
· Our plan is done and we continue to touch base with USFS and DNRC. We have determined
that it is not a good time, financially, to spend money in the watershed for fuels reduction,
especially with the latest appeal of the USFS Environmental Assessment.
· The USFS presentation was made to Commission in April 2010. The record of Decision (ROD) was appealed. We have no money in the CIP or budget for this work.
41
15
7. Complete design of College Street from 19th to Main Street and Intersection – Brian Heaston We meet with MDT 12/21 to discuss getting this project started. We have adequate Urban Funds
and Street Impact Fee Funds to complete the project, and the Omnibus Bill also has $750,000 for
this project.
8. Develop and implement a long term plan to manage the Bozeman Solvent Site – Rick Hixson
DEQ, the consultant and Rick Hixson are conducting monthly meetings to oversee the project. The
DEQ has committed the ROD (record of decision) by July 2011.
9. Assist other city departments with contract review/oversight and project development Following are some of the more recent projects:
· Streets and Engineering assisted County Roads with the replacement of Ice Pond Bridge.
· North Rouse impound lot plan
· Waste oil containment vessel at new vehicle maintenance shop
· Foundation design for fire prop at lower yards
· TIF projects
· Parks projects & CTEP
· Vehicle Maintenance building
· Fire training facility
· Downtown HUD Grant
· City hall rain garden and others
10. Identify areas of the current Backflow Protection Ordinance that are not/cannot be enforced –
John Alston
· We continue to make progress. Covered Wagon Mobile Home Park was recently given two years to install a backflow protection device at their meter pit.
Additional Potential Issues
· Creation of a storm water utility
· Buy Local Initiative
· Alley Clean-up
· Demolition by neglect ordinance
· Identify city exemptions to rules in Code and UDO
42
Community
Corresponding Implementation Goals
43
Chapter 16: Implementation Intent and Background
CHAPTER 16
Implementation
Goals without actions are but wishes. Action is required to achieve
the quality of life and community character sought in this plan.
16.1 Intent and Background
Bozeman takes action to shape change and pursue its goals. The
implementation tools to be prepared or refined for this plan will
affect the location, timing, and configuration of land use
development, alter the desirability of developing in a specific area,
and affect the City’s ability to respond to other opportunities.
Implementation tools can be regulatory or non-regulatory. Many
implementation tools share elements of both types. Regulatory
tools establish some kind of standard with which development,
new or old, must comply with. These include regulations
governing zoning, subdivision, facility standards for functions such
as transportation, and regulations of flood plains and wetlands. All
tools of this type are intended to protect and enhance the public
health, safety, and welfare by avoiding or mitigating some
detrimental circumstance or action. Appendix I, discusses in more
detail the scope and purposes of these tools.
Non-regulatory tools are based on the allocation of efforts and
resources, e.g. the annual City budget that commits the City’s
financial and technical resources to activities and projects. Other
similar tools are facility planning and capital budgeting which
indicate where certain facilities, such as sewers, should be installed;
comprehensive planning to gather public input and determine
priorities and goals for the community; and the pursuit of grants
and cooperative funding with private partners to support activities
such as the arts or the provision of low income housing.
Implementation tools of this type are intended to protect and
enhance the public health, safety and welfare by positive actions to
direct or influence future circumstances.
In the development of either type of implementation tool a variety
of interests, duties, rights, circumstances, and resource availability
must be balanced.
Bozeman Community Plan Page 16-1
Implementation
Principles
· Clarity
· Effectiveness
· Consistency
· Conciseness
· Predictability
· Fairness
· Compliance with law
· Advance community
goals
City Street Department closing a gap in
the pedestrian network by constructing a
section of sidewalk. Summer 2008.
44
‐ ‐
Implementation Action Plan Chapter 16: Implementation
16.2 Implementation Action Plan
After the planning process has been completed someone must
undertake the necessary actions to turn visions into realities. There
are many implementation tools, which the City and its citizens can
utilize to carry out their community goals. Some of the individual
implementation policies that will make this happen are very broad
and apply to the majority of the identified goals and objectives.
Others are more targeted. Beyond the implementation policies
presented in this action plan there will be many specific actions to
be performed by the City. Not all of these individual actions are
not listed here.
The City will carry out this growth policy using several practices, as
briefly described below. Private actions will also play a key role in
implementing the Plan.
· Policy Decisions
Bozeman will carry out most of the policies in this growth
policy during day to day policy decisions—those made by the
City Staff, Planning Board, Board of Adjustments, and City
Commission. The Plan will guide such policy decisions that
will occur throughout the life of the Plan.
· Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) Revisions
Part of carrying out this growth policy will revolve around
making the municipal code consistent with the intent of this
Plan. The community will need to revise its development
regulations to ensure consistency with the goals and policies of
the growth policy. For example, a review of requirements for
on-site parking may identify desirable changes which will in
turn affect land use patterns, environmental quality, and public
health.
· Programs or Detailed Planning Efforts
This growth policy establishes a foundation for programs as
well as more detailed plans. For example, a neighborhood plan
for Downtown and an Economic Development plan now
underway were both initiated through the growth policy.
Programs have varying levels of priority, depending on the
issues involved. Consequently, the City will initiate them at
different intervals. Programs often provide the organizational
structure to carry out routine City operations such as street
maintenance. Detailed planning also includes the preparation
of facility plans.
Implementation Action
Types
· Policy Decisions;
· Bozeman Municipal
Code (BMC) Revisions;
· Programs or Detailed
Planning;
· Intergovernmental
Coordination; and
· Funding Mechanisms.
The Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
is an example of a detailed planning
project.
Page 16-2 Bozeman Community Plan
45
Chapter 16: Implementation Implementation Action Plan
· Intergovernmental Coordination
A number of the recommendations will be best achieved
through new or amended Intergovernmental Agreements
between Bozeman and other governmental entities, including
Gallatin County. Once established, the agreements continue to
be operative for as long as the agreements intend.
Coordination of operations and practices between government
departments is also important and encouraged.
· Funding Mechanisms
Bozeman has a longstanding policy to provide the maximum
level of services, to the most citizens, in the most cost effective
manner, with due consideration given to all costs – economic,
fiscal, environmental, and social. In doing so, the city limits
on-going expenditures to a level that can be supported with
current revenues, uses one-time dollars to fund capital assets
or other non-recurring expenditures, and annually adopts a 5-
year capital improvements plan for construction and
maintenance of large city assets. User fees and charges are
used, as opposed to general taxes, when distinct beneficiary
populations or interest groups can be identified; they are more
equitable, since only those who use the service must pay,
thereby eliminating the subsidy provided by nonusers to users,
which is inherent in general tax financing. The City also uses
public/private partnerships, intergovernmental transfers, and
private grants when available.
Table 16-1 presents the implementation policies and actions,
identifies which chapter they initially apply to, what type of action
is needed, what partners may assist with these policies, and what
priority they carry. Where a single policy may interact with other
policies, the policy number is repeated in italics at the end of the
related policy.
Specific actions are indicated with the following codes:
(Pol) Policy Decisions;
(BMC) Bozeman Municipal Code Revisions;
(PDP) Programs or Detailed Planning;
(IGC) Intergovernmental Coordination; and
(Fund) Funding Mechanisms.
The priority column lists time frames within which the
implementation should be undertaken. Some items are on-going
actions. A few items show an initial task with follow-up on-going
effort.
Extending the Gallagator Trail to
connect to the new library and Lindley
Park is an example of City funding of a
project which carries out goals of the
growth policy.
Bozeman Community Plan Page 16-3
46
Implementation Action Plan Chapter 16: Implementation
(1) Immediate, generally within 1-2 years of plan adoption.
(2) Mid-Term, generally within 3-5 years of plan adoption.
(3) Long-term, generally more than five years or longer after plan
adoption or after mid-term actions are completed.
(O) On-going, (i.e., that occur continually) are also listed in the
table.
Implementation of some items may depend upon available
funding.
Table 16-1 Implementation Policies and Actions
Policy/Action Action
Type
Priority
Chapter 1 Introduction
1) The Bozeman Community Plan is the guiding policy and Pol O
decision-making tool for decisions made by elected, appointed,
and administrative officials.
a. The Bozeman Community Plan shall guide all capital
facilities planning and construction, which shall further the
Pol, PDP,
Fund
O
community vision described in the Bozeman Community Plan.
b. Review, and revise as necessary, all municipal ordinances to BMC 1
comply with and advance the goals, objectives, and community
vision of the Bozeman Community Plan.
2) Ensure that municipal ordinances provide for adequate BMC 1
mitigation of identified development impacts. 4, 70, 86
a. Review and evaluate for effectiveness, and as necessary PDP O
modify, each City program or policy at least every five years.
3) Research and implement incentives and regulations and Pol, Fund 2, O
publicize existing incentives, in accordance with the Bozeman
Community Plan, that encourage development within the City
of Bozeman. 10, 14, 75, 81
a. Continue to support the annual Beautification and Historic PDP O
Preservation awards and the public recognition and community
pride it encourages.
b. Continue provision of high quality and cost effective public PDP, Fund O
services.
4) Ensure that development procedures and requirements are BMC O
predictable, clear, timely, and effective while ensuring
adequate review of community and environmental impacts. 2,
9, 10, 15, 17, 25, 66
5) Provide opportunities for meaningful public outreach and
involvement in the preparation of all Bozeman Community
BMC, Pol,
PDP
1,O
Plan implementation tools. 12, 16, 22, 47, 57, 58, 66, 75, 80,
81, 86, 88-90
Page 16-4 Bozeman Community Plan
47
Chapter 16: Implementation Implementation Action Plan
Policy/Action
a. Continue to develop means of information exchange with the
public.
Action
Type
PDP
Priority
O
Chapter 2 Addressing Growth and Change
Chapter 3 Land Use
6) Ensure an adequate land base dedicated to the commercial
functions of neighborhood commercial centers so that
businesses reinforce each other, provide a wide range of
services, and are easily accessible to neighborhood residents
and workers.
a. Update the municipal land use inventory annually to track the
size and development of the City.
b. Work to refine the inventory system to better address
commercial and mixed use properties.
7) Encourage coordinated neighborhood design efforts among
separate development parcels. 9
8) Support creativity in design which integrates with adjacent
uses.
a. Facilitate and encourage innovative and context sensitive
community design.
b. Ensure the zoning regulations facilitate the development of
multi-use buildings and projects that combine residential and
non-residential uses including live/work opportunities.
9) Encourage infill and redevelopment which is respectful of its
context. 4, 7, 21, 28, 61, 62
a. Investigate graphical design guidelines to provide guidance
in transitions and building placement and provide a common
language for evaluation of projects.
b. Investigate expansion of the design review programs and
form based development standards to all site plans.
10) Ensure the City’s regulatory structure is supportive of the
principles and desired development characteristics contained in
this plan. 3, 4, 9, 12, 15, 17, 25, 27, 57, 86
a. Investigate revisions to parking standards and policies to
adequately address real needs while minimizing impacts.
b. Investigate revisions to the PUD process.
c. Review and revise as needed the City’s land use regulations
to advance the goals, objectives, and policies of the Bozeman
Community Plan, including detailed neighborhood plans.
d. Revise the zoning map to conform to the changes in the
future land use map.
11) Continue programs which support adaptive reuse,
reinvestment, and continued functional and aesthetic viability
Pol
PDP
PDP
PDP
PDP
BMC, PDP
BMC, PDP
PDP
BMC
BMC
BMC
BMC
BMC
BMC
PDP
O
1
3
O
O
2
1, O
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
O
Page 16-5 Bozeman Community Plan
48
Implementation Action Plan Chapter 16: Implementation
Policy/Action
of the Historic Core. 22
a. Update the historic structures inventory.
b. Continue adequate infrastructure maintenance.
c. Continue support of multi-modal and shared transportation
facilities.
12) Include sustainability as a component of development review
standards. 5, 10, 22, 26-27, 31, 47, 53, 57
a. Require adequate on-site storm water detention/retention and
treatment in conjunction with development to reduce runoff,
reduce flood peaks, prevent stream scouring, flooding, and
water contamination.
b. Adopt Low Impact Development standards as part of land
use regulations.
c. Continue support for multi-modal transportation, land use
efficiency, and other sustainable practices.
d. Continue protection of significant natural resources.
e. Support and participated in education on sustainable
development practices.
f. Provide outreach and training on sustainable development
practices which are included in City standards.
13) Encourage greater awareness and understanding of the
interrelationships of economic, environmental, and community
issues, e.g., the “triple bottom line.” 66, 85
14) Coordinate City actions so that adequate infrastructure is made
available to support the land use principles in the Bozeman
Community Plan. 3, 75, 76
a. Construct adequate water treatment and storage facilities to
meet regulatory requirements and maintain capacity for urban
growth.
b. Pursue annexation of the areas which are wholly surrounded
by the City.
c. Investigate options for developing funding support for
annexation for restricted income owners of surrounded parcels
or which do not have potential for significant further
development.
15) Ensure development review includes coordination with
community character, parks, recreation, open space, and trails,
and other subjects of this plan. 4, 5, 10, 69, 86
Action
Type
PDP, Fund
PDP, Fund
Pol, Fund
BMC
BMC
BMC
BMC, Pol,
PDP
BMC, Pol,
PDP
PDP
PDP
Pol, PDP
PDP
PDP, Fund
Pol
Pol, Fund
BMC, PDP
Priority
1
O
O
1
O
1
1
1
O
O
O
O
2
1
1
O
Chapter 4 Community Quality
16) Review and update regulations as necessary so that clear and
effective standards are provided. 4, 5, 86
BMC, PDP 1,3
Page 16-6 Bozeman Community Plan
49
Chapter 16: Implementation Implementation Action Plan
Policy/Action
a. Use illustrated urban design guidelines to encourage
functional, human scale, and attractive development.
b. Continue and improve implementation of the successful
Neighborhood Conservation Overlay and Historic Preservation
Program.
c. Prepare an Affirmative Maintenance ordinance to protect
safety and avoid blight.
d. Revise existing development design review programs to
further include and define objective review criteria and provide
illustration of principles.
e. Consider the further integration of form based zoning
standards into the City’s development regulations.
f. Continue and improve implementation of the successful
Entryway Overlay program.
17) Review of all non-residential development within Bozeman
should include illustrated design review guidelines.
18) Recognize the inclusive nature of community quality and its
many relationships to Bozeman’s physical setting and
community activities.
19) Recognize the value of diversity of architectural and landscape
design in establishing a sense of place. 9, 28
20) Recognize the community value of unifying architectural
patterns and responsiveness to surrounding community
elements. 9, 28
Chapter 5 Historic Preservation
Action
Type
PDP
PDP
BMC
BMC, PDP
PDP
PDP
PDP, BMC
PDP
PDP
PDP
Priority
O
O
1
1
2
2
1
O
O
O
21) Establish and continue cooperative efforts to protect, enhance,
and maintain a vibrant historic fabric in the community. 9, 11
a. Use and publicize incentives, such as, but not limited to,
public infrastructure funding support and tax abatement, to
encourage commercial and residential development or
redevelopment of identified infill areas, including brownfields
and the Historic Core.
b. Create a program for regular updates of the historic structures
inventory.
c. Establish public/private partnerships to complete hazard/risk
analyses of historic sites and properties and neighborhoods to
determine vulnerability and recommend and implement
appropriate mitigation.
22) Pursue regulatory revisions which support protection of
historic resources. 3, 4, 5, 11, 86
a. Encourage the state to adopt building codes that are
responsive to the unique circumstances of older buildings and
provide training about such codes.
Pol, PDP,
IGC
PDP
PDP, Fund
PDP
BMC, IGC
Pol
O
O
1
O
1, 3
2
Page 16-7 Bozeman Community Plan
50
Implementation Action Plan Chapter 16: Implementation
Policy/Action Action
Type
Priority
b. Investigate establishment of an Architectural Review
Commission/Committee.
PDP, BMC 2
c. Amend COA application process to reflect major and minor
alterations.
BMC, PDP 1
d. Consider amending the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District boundaries.
BMC 2
23) Strive to educate citizens regarding the history of Bozeman. PDP O
a. Prepare and present walking tours of historic areas. PDP O
b. Web portal for property owner research. PDP 2
c. Community seminars/workshops for preservation. PDP 2
d. Continue the annual Historic Preservation awards. PDP O
e. Create a historic preservation newsletter. PDP 1
f. Seek recognition as a historic community. PDP 1
g. Create a preservation certification process/seal of approval
for contractors, builders and architects who work within the
City of Bozeman
PDP 2
h. Create seminar for architects for American Institute of PDP 2
Architects credits.
24) Promote heritage tourism programs and efforts. PDP, Fund O
Chapter 6 Housing
25) Support development of affordable housing consistent with
other community priorities. 4, 12, 13, 66, 67, 69, 70, 80, 84, 86
Pol, BMC,
Fund, IGC
O
a. Continue regular funding of the City’s affordable housing
fund.
Fund O
b. Pursue public/private partnerships and grant opportunities for
creation of affordable housing.
Fund, PDP O
c. Conduct an affordable housing needs assessment at least
every five years.
Fund, PDP 2
26) When considering housing costs, a whole cost approach shall
be used to include effects of transportation, utilities, and other
on-going costs which affect the service life costs and benefits
of a residence. 12, 25
Pol, PDP 1, O
27) Encourage and support residential development which utilizes
sustainable development practices in both the near and long
terms. 10, 12, 18
Pol 2
28) Recognize that the meaning of community is broad and
neighborhoods are also diverse in character, size, and other
characteristics. 19, 20
Pol, BMC O, 2
a. Review and revise as needed standards to infill development,
redevelopment, and new development to provide clear guidance
and mitigation of objective problems.
PDP, BMC 1
29) Encourage incorporation of universal design and visitability Pol O
Page 16-8 Bozeman Community Plan
51
Chapter 16: Implementation Implementation Action Plan
Policy/Action Action Priority
Type
features in the development of new homes to allow for aging in
place and other needs to be met. 30
30) Encourage development of housing which provides service Pol O
through its resident’s full life cycle and has access to diverse
services for many ages of resident. 9, 29, 70, 71
31) Recognize the effect that location of a residence has on its long Pol, Fund O
term affordability and environmental impact.
32) Avoid standards and actions which encourage exclusionary Pol, BMC O, 1
zoning while ensuring that adequate standards are met to
address needs for public services and community integration.
10, 26
33) Establish public/private partnerships to complete preservation IGC, Pol O
risk analyses of existing affordable housing properties and
neighborhoods to determine vulnerability to their continued
existence and recommend and implement appropriate
mitigation. Ensure that municipal ordinances provide for
adequate mitigation of identified development impacts on
existing affordable housing. 41
34) Support public and/or private efforts, use and publicize Pol O
incentives, such as, but not limited to, public infrastructure
funding support and tax abatement, to encourage preservation
of existing manufactured (mobile) home parks. 3, 26
35) Revise and amend R-MH Single-Household Manufactured BMC 1
Home District regulations and ordinances.
36) Track manufactured housing in the Land Inventory system and PDP O
specify manufactured housing in the affordable housing needs
assessment and strategic plan.
37) Research incentives and regulations and publicize existing BMC, Pol 2
incentives, in accordance with the Growth plan, that encourage
development of affordable home ownership opportunities for
residents earning 30-80% of the area median income. 3
38) Encourage a variety of living designs for communities that PDP O
promote affordable, long term home ownership for very-low,
low and moderate income residents, including but not limited
to cooperatives, land trusts, manufactured home parks, resident
owned communities, or non-traditional neighborhood designs.
39) Revise and amend ordinances as needed to facilitate and BMC 2
encourage development of innovative community models for
affordable home ownership. 2, 26, 86
40) Pursue legislative changes as needed to advance the goals, Pol 3
objectives, and community vision of affordable housing in the
Bozeman Growth Plan.
41) Promote innovative measures and programs to increase options Pol, PDP 2
for affordable home ownership. Support private and/or public
efforts to create resident-owned affordable housing
Page 16-9 Bozeman Community Plan
52
Implementation Action Plan Chapter 16: Implementation
Policy/Action
communities. 33
42) Recognize the diverse character of community and support a
broad application of the definitions of neighborhood.
Chapter 7 Arts and Culture
Action
Type
Pol
Priority
1
43) Encourage coordination between the City and arts and culture
organizations in the community.
a. Support the preparation and implementation of a Bozeman
Arts and Culture plan. The plan should address funding,
facilities, access, event scheduling, arts education and outreach,
and expanding arts opportunities.
b. Support, facilitate, and expand community arts and cultural
events such as the Sweet Pea Festival, Christmas Stroll, Lunch
on the Lawn, Gallatin County Fair, and the Winter Fair.
c. Appoint a City staff liaison/contact for arts and culture issues.
d. Encourage City advisory boards to secure grants to improve
community beautification and cultural heritage and
opportunities through the establishment of public art and
cultural information.
e. Encourage City advisory boards to include recognition of
community arts and culture projects in their award ceremonies
as appropriate.
f. Include consideration of functionality for public displays of
art, performing art productions, and cultural arts events in the
development and operations of City owned properties.
44) Promote Downtown as a cultural center in Bozeman through
support of art in public places, including visual, literary, and
performing arts on both public and private property. 3, 56
45) Encourage education about the arts and culture opportunities in
Bozeman.
a. Maintain and build upon the existing geographic information
system public art layer to create a walking tour map of private
and public art displays in the Bozeman community.
b. Participate in educational workshops and discussion panels to
celebrate the community’s cultural arts.
46) Encourage private development to include art in their projects.
IGC
Pol
PDP
PDP
PDP, Fund
PDP
PDP
Fund, Pol
Pol
PDP, Fund
PDP
Pol, BMC
O
1
O
1
O
O
1
O
O
O
O
O
Chapter 8 Economic Development
47) Prepare and implement a community plan element for
economic development which considers a broad view of the
City’s economy, long term fiscal, social, and physical health,
and community character. 4, 5, 12, 80
48) Maintain and enhance as needed relationships with the
Prospera Business Network, Chamber of Commerce, and other
groups to promote Bozeman as a good place to live and work,
Pol, Fund
Pol, Fund
1, O
O
Page 16-10 Bozeman Community Plan
53
Chapter 16: Implementation Implementation Action Plan
Policy/Action Action Priority
Type
as well as start, grow, and attract businesses that advance the
goals and objectives of the Bozeman Community Plan.
49) Support the creation and expansion of local businesses. 3, 77, Pol, Fund, O
80 PDP
a. Support those segments of Bozeman's economy related to PDP, Fund O
agriculture by encouraging the development of local value-
added processes.
b. Support the creation and continuation of local markets such Pol, PDP O
as the Farmer's Market for local products.
c. Support the production of specialty and organic crops in PDP O
close proximity to urban areas by allowing small-scale
agriculture as a home-based business, expanding the Farmer's
Market, and so forth.
d. Support development of local markets and suppliers of PDP O
finished goods and services.
e. Encourage utilization of MSU’s technology transfer and PDP O
technical assistance in starting and growing local businesses.
f. Recognize the breadth of economic activity in Bozeman and Pol O
its reach throughout the nation and world. Encourage further
development of this basic employment.
e. Maintain and seek to expand resources available through the Fund 1, O
City’s revolving loan fund and urban renewal districts.
f. Support efforts to expand the range of online, evening, Pol O
weekend, and other educational offerings for residents who
seek to increase their earning potential
g. Increase awareness of existing economic and other benefits Pol, PDP O
of and further develop incentives for locating and operating
benefits within City limits.
50) Encourage and support development of a diverse employment Pol, PDP, O
base. 3, 4, 78 Fund
51) Help advance Montana State University's education and IGC O
research missions and further the goals and objectives of the
Bozeman Community Plan through internship and partnership
opportunities with the City and contracts for services such as
the Community Design Center and Geographic Information
and Analysis Center.
52) Encourage the creation of primary jobs and workforce training. IGC, Fund O
53) Recognize sustainability as a component of economic Pol, PDP, O
development. 12 IGC
54) Employ efficient cost management for public services by PDP, Fund O
utilizing facility planning, capital improvements programming,
and user/cost connectivity practices. 3, 75, 77, 80, 85
55) Recognize that adequate public services have a substantial PDP, BMC, O
Page 16-11 Bozeman Community Plan
54
Implementation Action Plan Chapter 16: Implementation
Policy/Action
impact on desirability of the community for economic
activities. 3, 77, 78, 80
a. Continue to follow the financial and facility planning
principles practiced by the City.
56) Build upon Bozeman’s arts, public events, and recreation
facilities in stimulating economic activity. 44, 46
Action
Type
IGC
Pol, PDP
Pol
Priority
O
O
Chapter 9 Environmental Quality and Critical Lands
57) Require adequate public safety lighting while respecting the
community desire for a dark sky. 5, 10, 12
a. Review and revise City’s lighting regulations as needed.
58) Pursue cooperative efforts in education and regulatory
protection. 5, 87
a. Work with the Gallatin Solid Waste District, Gallatin Local
Water Quality District, Gallatin County, and local water quality
groups to organize, promote, fund, and hold at least annually an
e-waste and household hazardous waste disposal event and
work to develop a permanent household hazardous waste
disposal facility.
b. Identify and implement effective measures and programs to
protect critical lands and other environmentally sensitive areas.
c. Prepare and adopt a grading ordinance to reduce erosion and
sedimentation and to protect air and water quality.
d. Cooperate with regional jurisdictions to provide Wildland
Urban Interface education, and encourage Firewise
development.
59) Protect and rehabilitate those watercourses and wetlands on
City property and encourage similar actions for private
property. 3, 12, 67
a. Prepare and implement a weed control plan, in concert with
other governmental and non-governmental groups, which
includes mapping, management strategies and techniques, and
education.
60) Take wildlife movement into account in designing culverts and
other road crossing in coordination with MDT.
61) Support the preservation of agricultural lands and activities in
Gallatin County. 9, 89, 90, 91
62) Recognize the habitat and agricultural lands protection effect
of quality urban development and encourage infrastructure
which supports it. 3, 9, 31, 75, 77
63) Encourage recycling, water conservation, and similar resource
actions to support sustainable behavior. 12, 21, 22
a. Conduct outreach & education to maximize public
participation in both publicly sponsored and private recycling
programs
PDP, BMC
BMC
IGC, BMC
IGC
IGC, BMC,
PDP
BMC
IGC
Fund, PDP
PDP, IGC
PDP, IGC
IGC
PDP, Pol
PDP, Fund
PDP
2, O
1
O
O
2, O
1
O
O
2
O
O
O
O
O
Page 16-12 Bozeman Community Plan
55
Chapter 16: Implementation Implementation Action Plan
Policy/Action
b. Conduct outreach and education regarding water
conservation, reclamation, and reuse.
64) Encourage development within Bozeman as a means of
lessening development impacts and reducing resource
consumption. 3, 31, 62
65) Implement the City’s climate action plan.
66) Ensure regulations are effective in addressing the concerns
which originated them. 4, 5, 10-13
67) Maintain natural resource protection standards. 12, 79
68) Work with the Gallatin National Forest and Gallatin County on
watershed protection efforts including forest management, use
plans, and related infrastructure. 5, 86
Action
Type
PDP, Fund
Pol, PDP,
IGC
PDP, Fund
BMC, PDP
BMC
IGC
Priority
O
O
O
O
O
O
Chapter 10 Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails
69) Protect and preserve open spaces or other significant properties
to advance the goals and objectives of the Bozeman
Community Plan and the Parks, Recreation, Open Space and
Trails Plan. 15, 70
a. Develop and implement reliable and adequate funding
mechanisms for the acquisition, development, and maintenance
of urban parks, recreation trails, and public open spaces,
including, but not limited to, a park maintenance district,
general funds, and parkland dedications.
b. Participate in and support public/private partnerships to
support open space goals.
c. Work with neighboring jurisdictions and land owners to
create and connect trails and corridors.
d. Work with Gallatin County, School District Number 7, and
other entities to jointly fund, develop, and maintain parks and
recreation facilities.
e. Coordinate with landowners to assemble and site community
parks which are centrally located and easily accessible to
increase and maximize recreational possibilities.
f. Develop City-sponsored trail maps and information, and
provide signage for trail parking and trail facilities to encourage
trail usage.
PDP, Fund
Fund, IGC
PDP
IGC, PDP
IGC
PDP
PDP, Fund
O
2
1
O
O
O
2
Chapter 11 Transportation
70) Provide for pedestrian and bicycle networks, and related
improvements such as bridges and crosswalks, to connect
employment centers; public spaces and services, such as parks,
schools, libraries; and other destinations. 2, 4, 10, 12, 67, 74
a. Require the dedication and development of non-motorized
transportation facilities in conjunction with development.
b. Prepare and adopt standards for design, construction, and
PDP, IGC,
Fund
PDP
PDP, BMC
O
O
2
Page 16-13 Bozeman Community Plan
56
Implementation Action Plan Chapter 16: Implementation
Policy/Action
maintenance for pedestrian and bicycle transportation
improvements versus recreational facilities.
c. Provide for non-motorized transportation facility
maintenance through the City's normal budgeting and
programming for transportation system maintenance.
d. Continue the existing sidewalk and curb ramp installation,
repair, and replacement program.
71) Using existing programs and practices, work to fill gaps in the
vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle networks. 10, 74
a. Work with the Safe Routes to Schools program to provide
safe walking routes to neighborhood schools.
72) Pursue practices which maximize the efficiency of the
transportation systems. 2- 4, 9, 10, 70, 71
a. Work with major employers and other significant trip
generators to identify and implement transportation demand
management actions, including telecommuting, off-peak time
shipping, ride sharing, and others.
b. Utilize best management practices in transportation system
maintenance to facilitate non-motorized transportation, preserve
air and water quality, extend facility service life, and protect
City resources.
c. Actively pursue traffic signal interconnection and
coordination to facilitate traffic flow and reduce vehicle
emissions.
73) Maintain the function of the City’s major street network, while
continuing to develop an inter-connected street system
supportive of multiple modes of travel in the urbanizing area.
a. Work with local interest groups to teach bicycle safety and
etiquette to all age groups.
b. Expand community outreach addressing transportation issues
and education.
74) Carry out the multi-modal transportation emphasis of the long
range transportation plan. 70, 71
a. Adopt and implement a complete streets policy to provide for
safe and convenient multi-modal transportation.
Action
Type
Fund
PDP
PDP
PDP, Fund
PDP, IGC,
Pol
PDP
PDP
Fund, IGC
PDP, Fund
PDP, Fund
PDP
PDP,
Funds
Pol, Fund,
IGC
Priority
1
1
O
O
O
1, O
O
1
O
1, O
1, O
O
1
Chapter 12 Public Service and Facilities
75) Prepare, adopt, and implement the facility plans for major City
functions. 1, 3, 5 ,54
76) Collect data and prepare maps and reports as part of regular
City operations on items of identified community concern,
such as crime, parks, wetlands, and housing, to facilitate the
equitable evaluation of community impacts of development.
When possible seek cooperative ventures with public and
private parties to increase the usefulness of the data collected.
PDP, Fund
PDP, Fund
O
O
Page 16-14 Bozeman Community Plan
57
Chapter 16: Implementation Implementation Action Plan
Policy/Action Action Priority
Type
a. Create benchmarks for city functions to enable monitoring of PDP, Pol 2
program effectiveness and progress towards meeting the goals
of the Bozeman Community Plan.
b. Update the 1997 Critical Lands Study and integrate with the PDP, Fund 3
City’s GIS system and other data providers.
c. Continue to develop web based and other electronic means to PDP O
make public information available in useful formats and at
convenient times for the public.
77) Actively manage public facilities for effectiveness and PDP O
efficiency. 5, 49, 54, 55
a. Continue to update and follow facility plans to ensure that PDP, Fund O
orderly development can be supported by infrastructure
facilities.
b. Prepare, adopt, and implement facility and strategic plans for PDP O
all City services which shall evaluate current conditions, future
needs, alternatives, and recommend a preferred course of
action.
78) Work with public and private agencies to ensure that adequate IGC O
services are provided throughout the community and that no
areas of the community are neglected. 5, 76
79) Support the protection and development of the urban forest. 67 PDP O
a. Continue, promote, and expand as needed the City's existing PDP O
cost share tree planting program.
b. Update and maintain a tree inventory system and incorporate PDP, Fund 2, O
it into the City GIS system, including information on trimming,
removal, planting, and tree health status.
c. Prepare and implement a comprehensive urban forest master Pol, PDP 3
plan addressing planting, maintenance, and replacement needs.
80) The City shall balance the needs of existing and future Pol, PDP O
development so that the cost of public facilities and services is
assigned on a fair, proportionate, and equitable basis to the
user that requires them. 5, 10, 47, 49, 55
a. As provided for in state law, seek to establish joint funding Pol, Fund 1, O
mechanisms so that non-City residents participate in the
construction and support of City services and facilities that they
use.
b. Continue the City's impact fee program as allowed by law. PDP O
c. Continue to follow the financial principles adopted in the PDP O
2009 budget.
81) Implement facility and strategic plans and capital expenditures PDP, Pol O
in support of infill, a compact urban form and the land use
pattern, goals, and objectives of the Bozeman Community
Plan.
Page 16-15 Bozeman Community Plan
58
Implementation Action Plan Chapter 16: Implementation
Policy/Action
a. Develop adequate surface raw water storage to allow the
continued development within the City of Bozeman.
82) Pursue adequate emergency services personnel, facilities, and
equipment to provide levels of service in compliance with
local, state, and national standards.
83) Work with private utilities to appropriately site facilities and
establish standards for installation, including where appropriate
relocation of existing service lines underground. 47, 49, 50, 55
a. Work to develop a map which is the equivalent of the major
street network for the private utilities providing service in
Bozeman.
b. Revise utility regulations for placement and character to
encourage renewable energy and other sustainability matters.
84) Maintain public health and safety as a primary focus of
municipal and cooperative operations.
a. Consider utilization of health impact assessments as a
coordinating tool for assessment of proposed actions.
b. Maintain the City’s requirement of infrastructure
concurrency with development.
85) Utilize life-cycle costing rather than present day cost when
purchasing or constructing major items. 54
Chapter 13 Disaster and Emergency Preparedness and
Response
Action
Type
PDP, Fund,
Pol
PDP, Fund
PDP
PDP
BMC
Pol
Pol, BMC
Pol, BMC
Pol, PDP
Priority
3
O
2, O
2
1
O
2
O
1, O
86) Prepare and enforce regulations which require identification
and mitigation of hazards during the development process. 1-5,
10, 22, 66
a. Update the National Flood Insurance Program maps as new
information becomes available and seek state and federal
assistance in keeping the base data current.
b. Revise regulations to include wildland/urban interface
protection and hazard mitigation.
c. Consider the cumulative effects of development on the
expansion or control of public hazards.
87) Encourage and facilitate community education regarding local
hazards and what can be done to minimize, prepare, respond,
and recover from them. 5, 58
a. Encourage personal and business preparation activities by
community groups.
b. Encourage property owners in the wildand/urban interface to
practice Firewise principles.
88) Work with community partners to effectively address hazard
identification, prevention, response and recovery. 5, 68, 89-91
a. Continue public/private coordination, such as the Unified
BMC, PDP
PDP, Fund
BMC
BMC, Pol,
PDP
PDP
PDP
PDP
IGC
PDP
2, O
O
1
2
O
O
1, O
O
O
Page 16-16 Bozeman Community Plan
59
Chapter 16: Implementation Implementation Action Plan
Policy/Action
Health Command system, to facilitate response to health
emergencies.
b. Actively participate in common response programs such as
fire mutual aid.
Chapter 14 Regional Coordination and Cooperation
Action
Type
PDP
Priority
O
89) Establish strong working relationships between City officials
and staff and representatives of other governmental or non-
governmental service providers through regularly scheduled
meetings or other means. 5, 88
90) Cooperate with other jurisdictions and agencies to effectively
address areas of mutual interest. 5, 84, 88
a. Continue to support and participate in existing cooperative
intergovernmental groups such as the Transportation
Coordinating Committee, Gallatin City-County Board of
Health, and the Gallatin Valley Roundtable.
b. Establish inter-local agreements to address areas of common
concerns and issues.
c. Provide assistance to other communities by sharing materials,
knowledge, and training opportunities with elected officials and
community volunteers.
d. Partner with governmental and non-governmental groups
such as law enforcement, schools, MSU, Board of Health,
Bicycle Advisory Board, and the Pedestrian and Traffic Safety
Committee, to establish an ongoing pedestrian and bicycle
awareness and safety education program.
e. Coordinate land use policies with Gallatin County so that
properties within the planning area are annexed prior to
development where urban services can be provided.
f. Coordinate acquisition of right-of-way so that streets can be
logically connected and developed in accordance with the
transportation plan.
g. Work with MDT to enhance entryways into the community
91) Support coordinated planning throughout the Gallatin Valley.
61, 62
a. Support establishment of a regional planning coordinating
committee based on the model of the Transportation
Coordinating Committee to address planning issues with
regional impacts.
b. Continue cooperation and coordination with the Gallatin
County Planning Board to support policies and programs that
encourage development within municipalities and establish
clearly defined urban growth areas.
c. Cooperate with School District Number 7 on the siting and
IGC
IGC, Fund
IGC
IGC
IGC
IGC
IGC, Pol
IGC
IGC, Fund
IGC
Pol, IGC
Pol, PDP,
IGC
Pol, IGC
O
O
O
1,2
O
O
O
O
3
O
2
O
O
Page 16-17 Bozeman Community Plan
60
Implementation Action Plan Chapter 16: Implementation
Policy/Action Action
Type
Priority
redevelopment of neighborhood-based schools that will support
and integrate with the land use pattern of the Bozeman
Community Plan.
d. Work with the Montana Department of Transportation and
Gallatin County to develop coordinated public right-of-way
landscaping guidelines, including desired tree and grass species
and maintenance.
IGC 2
e. Coordinate with the Gallatin County Planning Department
and Planning Board to identify agricultural lands within the
area designated Present Rural in this plan where long-term,
sustained agricultural production should be supported. Identify
potential strategies for supporting agriculture on these lands and
integrating them with future development.
IGC 2
Chapter 15 Subdivision Review
Chapter 16 Implementation
Chapter 17 Review and Amendment
92) Establish a schedule for regular review of publicly and
privately initiated amendments.
Pol 1
93) Only approve amendments which benefit the community as a
whole, rather than a few individuals.
Pol O
Page 16-18 Bozeman Community Plan
61
Downtown
Corresponding Implementation Goals
62
Prepared for the Downtown Bozeman Partnership and City of Bozeman
December 14, 2009
DOWNTOWN
BOZEMAN
IMPROVEMENT
PLAN
63
Acknowledgements
CONSULTING TEAM:LMN ARCHITECTS
Walt Niehoff
Mark Hinshaw
Mike Kimelberg
Sarah Durkee
LELAND CONSULTING GROUP
Dave Leland
Chris Zahas
Brian Vanneman
TD & H ENGINEERING
Dave Crawford
HIGH PLAINS ARCHITECTS
Randy Hafer
PREPARED FOR:
Downtown Bozeman Partnership and the City of Bozeman
AS DIRECTED BY:
Downtown Plan Advisory Committee
Bobby Bear Allyson Bristor
Eric Bryson Paul Burns
Brian Caldwell Ileana Indreland
Chris Naumann Chris Saunders
WITH ASSITANCE FROM:
Downtown Business Improvement District
Mike Basile Dan Himsworth
Eric Bowman Ileana Indreland
Mike Grant Buck Taylor
Downtown Bozeman Association
Tim Christiansen Babs Noelle
Coco Douma Sally Rue
Drew Ingraham Kate Wiggins
Catherine Langlas
Downtown Tax Increment Finance District
Bobby Bear Vonda Laird
Peter Bertelsen Bob Lashaway
Thail Davis Bill Stoddart
Bozeman Parking Commission
Pam Bryan Chris Naumann
Lisa Danzl-Scott Chris Pope
Tammy Hauer Steve Schnee
BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION:
Sean Becker Eric Bryson
Kaaren Jacobson Jeff Krauss
Jeff Rupp
64
3
Table of Contents
Introduction
INTENT 4
RELATIONSHIP TO PREVIOUS PLANS 5
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOCUS 6
ISSUES 10
OPPORTUNITIES 10
GUIDING PRINCIPLES 12
Strategies
CREATE DISTINCT DISTRICTS 14
BUILD HOUSING 18
CREATE A NETWORK OF OPEN SPACES 22
TAME THE TRAFFIC 28
CREATE A UNIQUE PLACE 30
STRENGTHEN DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES 34
ADOPT A CODE UNIQUE TO DOWNTOWN 38
EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP AND PARTNERING 40
MOVE TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE CITY CENTER 42
NEXT STEPS 44
65
4
Introduction
INTENT
This Downtown Improvement Plan is intended to guide decisions by
public bodies, private businesses, and non-profit organizations for
at least ten years to come. It provides a solid framework to move
forward and solidify downtown Bozeman’s place in the community
and the region.
Over the past twenty years, Bozeman has spent considerable re-
sources and energy making its downtown healthy, vibrant and
strong. The six to eight blocks along Main Street, with its wide array
of shops, services, high quality restaurants, coffee houses, and pre-
cious architecture is looked upon with envy by many communities.
However, other parts of downtown Bozeman outside of Main Street
are not performing as well as such areas in other, similar communi-
ties. Downtown still retains a locally-owned hardware store, drug
store, and grocery store – businesses that have long ago departed
downtowns in many smaller and mid-sized towns.
Often a major impediment in many communities is a lack of leader-
ship. This not the case with downtown Bozeman where it is quite
evident from merchants who care deeply about how their business
is perceived, from property owners who have invested in renova-
tions and new construction, and from residents who continue to
view downtown as their “shared” neighborhood. Just walking along
the sidewalks of Main Street immediately evokes the authenticity of
a genuine, close-knit town with the attributes of sociability, individual
energy, and even quirkiness. The imprint of many hands and minds
is palpable.
Throughout the country it has been increasingly difficult for small,
local-serving businesses to operate in this age of online shopping
and big-box stores. While downtown Bozeman has a tremendous
group of these types of businesses, they can’t help but be affected
by seasonal cycles, the changing expectations and behaviors of
consumers, and the current economic downturn.
Downtowns like Bozeman’s used to be well supported when single
family houses contained six people. Now they typically contain half
that number, or less. All thriving downtowns depend upon a solid
presence of residential density in close proximity – ideally within
walking distance. Fortunately, downtowns all over the country have
been seeing an influx of two demographic groups – people in their
twenties and people in their sixties – who wish to live close to arts,
entertainment, interesting shops and restaurants, and an active
“street life.” These groups are fueling a demand for condominiums,
row houses, lofts, flats, cottages, and many other forms of denser
housing around the edges of commercial cores.
The result is a place that everyone can enjoy immensely – existing
residents, new residents, shoppers, and visitors. Infill development
can be designed sensitively so that the long-standing character,
scale and craft of the established townscape can be maintained.
This requires policies, codes, design standards, incentives, and
public investments – as well as creative partnerships. Many of the
strategies recommended by the plan will need additional analysis
and stakeholder direction in advance of implementation. Specific
development examples and opportunity sights are meant demon-
strate potential sites, scales and locations, and are in no way meant
to be prescriptive.
Downtown Plan Area
Boundary
66
5
RELATIONSHIP TO PREVIOUS PLANS
Downtown Bozeman has been the subject of numerous plans over
the last 30 years, the most recent being the 1998 Downtown Im-
provement Plan, also known as the MAKERS Plan. Many of the
recommendations in this plan have been completed; numerous ob-
jectives remain unaccomplished yet are still relevant. While the 2009
Downtown Improvement Plan takes a broader view and suggests
some fundamental restructuring of codes, policies, and operating
procedures, the MAKERS Plan should still be referenced regarding
additional physical improvements and the overall urban design of
the downtown district. Unlike the MAKERS Plan, the 2009 Down-
town Improvement Plan, once adopted by the City Commission, will
BOZEMAN COMMUNITY
PLAN VISION STATEMENT
“Bozeman’s unique identity,
characterized by its natural
surroundings, its historic and
cultural resources, and its
downtown, which is the heart
and center of the community,
is preserved and enhanced.”
Source: Bozeman Community Plan,
Chapter 1, Addressing Growth &
Change, pg 2.
have legal status as a guiding document for downtown development
as a part of the Bozeman Community Plan, the City’s growth policy.
All of the recommendations contained in this plan are realistic. But
in some cases, they will require more analysis of options and tech-
niques. They may also require that various stakeholders, particularly
City departments, view downtown a bit differently than in the past.
This means applying different criteria than what might be found in
typical manuals or regulations. The planning team firmly believes that
downtown Bozeman is unique and that its vital importance to the city
should be recognized in a deliberate, focused collection of efforts and
actions to make it a dynamic and sustainable community center.
Downtown Plan Area
Boundary
67
6
Introduction
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOCUS
Too many downtown plans either under-perform, fall far short of
their objectives, or outright fail. However well intentioned, many
simply do not match the expectations so enthusiastically supported
during the planning process. Why? The reasons can be many, but
there are some fundamental principles that should be followed if
a plan is to become successful. First and foremost, revitalizing a
downtown is a highly competitive business. There is always some-
one, another city, a developer, or a combination thereof that wants
to steal the energy that might otherwise go downtown—pulling
shoppers, potential downtown residents, office tenants, and more.
And, as with any business, to be successful it needs to be led, it
needs to be championed, managed, staffed, capitalized, marketed,
operated, and quite simply treated like the competitive business
that it is. The plan is only a part. Individual projects are only parts.
Success requires leadership, consistency, assertiveness, tenacity,
and commitment.
While many people might say that the downtown is Main Street,
in fact a healthier definition is the collection of districts that com-
prise the greater downtown. The retail core is the most visible with
its bright lights, colorful storefronts, and heavier traffic flows. But
just as important is the transit center, the nearby neighborhoods of
homes that touch the edge of the retail core, the concentrations of
employment, public open spaces, institutions such as the library,
or cultural facilities like Emerson Center, and the other small dis-
tricts that collectively comprise
the larger downtown and give it its
many personalities.
There is a direct correlation be-
tween the health of a downtown
and the health of the city in which
it is located. As a downtown
moves from struggling to healthy
to superior, there is generally a
corresponding increase in the
larger community that rises with
the tide of success.
So, a great downtown helps contribute to and build a valued com-
munity that in turn attracts stable businesses and residents and
visitors, and that in turn creates tax base to support the community,
its amenities and services, and so continues the cycle of success.
Downtown is front line economic development.
Downtown’s impact on the entire community means that any in-
vestment in downtown Bozeman has the potential to increase the
livability, attractiveness,
and value of the whole City.
Thus, the “balance sheet”
against which invest-
ments should be judged
is not just a single block or
series of blocks on Main
Street. Rather, potential
investments should be
weighed against the value of the new investment that could reason-
ably occur in downtown in the next ten to fifteen years—estimated
at $120 million or more—or the market value of all property in the
City—approximately $2.4 billion. This is the asset base upon which
prudent public investments can have a positive impact.
In order to realize new development on the order of $100 million or
more, the City will need to create an implementation framework with
annual and multi-year targets for development, key public actions,
funding commitments, responsible parties, and additional imple-
mentation strategies. Such an “action plan” will give the City the
means to measure its progress toward the vision described here,
and the tools to make it happen.
Enduring, durable places can realize greater revenues and appre-
ciate over time. Strong place making principles should, properly
designed and controlled, realize greater appreciation in a well-de-
fined and rigorously controlled environment such as a successful
downtown versus their counterpart in a less controlled, more subur-
ban setting where something unfortunate might get built next door.
68
7
Private investors seek communities with:
1. Realistic plan with multiple components2. Multi development opportunities and areas3. Strong governmental and community leadership4. Appropriate level of community quality of life factors5. Available infrastructure6. Appropriate level of governmental and community service, prod-ucts, and resources7. Appropriate balance between assistance and regulation8. Strong partnership both public/private and private public9. Ability to finance needed public investment10. Willingness of leadership and community to take calculated risks
KEYS TO REVITALIZATION
Downtown revitalization requires property rehabilitation, new devel-
opment, and injections of new capital, and these actions, in turn,
require a region in which the population, employment, and incomes
are healthy and growing. In fact, a recent study of the conditions
needed for successful mixed use development found that the first
one is “a strong local economy.”
This means that Bozeman must cultivate its regional and downtown
economic drivers, including Montana State University and Bozeman
Deaconess Hospital and other healthcare services; the growing
technology industry; hospitality, tourism, and recreation; its extremely
desirable outdoor-oriented lifestyle; manufacturing; government em-
ployment; and other business and economic clusters identified in the
2009 City of Bozeman Economic Development Plan.
A healthy business climate requires a number of variables that the
private sector seeks out when making a decision to invest in a com-
munity. These are shown in the table at right.
A recent MSU graduate with a new job in the technology field adds
one more Bozeman resident with the ability to live, work, shop, and
play downtown. A single new high-tech business with $5 million in
annual revenues will add 97 new jobs and 97 times the new spend-
ing power to the city, according to the City’s Economic Development
Plan.
The health of Downtown Bozeman and the strength of the regional
economy are symbiotic, now more so than ever. In the 21st cen-
tury economy, a high quality of
life—of which a vibrant downtown
is an important part—has the ability
to attract businesses, professional
workers, visitors, and ultimately
drive economic growth. This repre-
sents a dramatic change from much
of America’s past, when natural
resources, agriculture, and trans-
portation were the key drivers of the
economy.
“A strong urban core… plays a critical economic role. The
urban center of metropolitan areas is the focus of cultural
activities, civic identity, governmental institutions and usu-
ally has the densest employment, particularly in financial,
professional and creative services. Urban cores are also
the iconic centers of cities, where interaction and connec-
tions are strongest.” -- City Vitals, by CEOs for Cities, 2006.
“Support the continued economic vitality of the Downtown
Bozeman business district, which is broadly recognized
as one of Bozeman’s strongest assets. Continue to sup-
port and promote Downtown Bozeman as the economic
and cultural center of the region, and encourage develop-
ment and re-development through the use of incentives for
future investment and development.”
-- Bozeman’s Economic Development Plan
69
8
NATIONAL TRENDS
Recent American downtown renaissances have been driven by new
housing. This should come as some surprise since “downtown” was
once largely synonymous with “central business district”—the place
where employment and industry took place and most residential life
did not. Some keys to understanding downtown housing in general
and specifically to Bozeman include:
During the last two decades, downtown housing has grown from a
tiny niche market to major national trend, largely due to changing
consumer demand. Today, the national market of potential for ur-
ban dwellers numbers in the tens of millions of households. These
people are seeking an active, exciting environment with abundant
retail and cultural opportunities, and less upkeep and maintenance
than would be required for a traditional single family home.
OPPORTUNITIES FOR BOZEMAN
Most urban residents fall into one of two demographic categories:
first, young singles or couples in their 20s or 30s, and second, down-
sizing baby boomers or retirees approximately 60 or more years old.
Bozeman also has a third group of potential residents: second home
and vacation homeowners. According to the University of Montana,
these households are typically relatively wealthy, with average an-
nual incomes of $100,000, and are
attracted to the state by friends,
family, and the beautiful natural
surroundings. Along with age
and household size, another key
indicator for downtown residential
demand is high levels of education-
al attainment. Nationally, forty-four
percent of downtown residents hold
a bachelor’s or higher degree.
These three key urban residential
markets hold significant promise for
residential and mixed use develop-
ment in downtown Bozeman. 67.2
percent, or approximately 9,000, of all City of Bozeman households
are made up of one or two people. Compared to the approximately
400 households that live in downtown today, this represents a very
large market, even if only a small percentage moves to downtown.
Bozeman is also a relatively young city, with 16.7 percent of its popu-
lation between 25 and 34 years of age, compared to 12.0 percent for
the State of Montana. Within the state, only Missoula has a compa-
rable percentage of residents in this age group. Bozeman is also an
exceptionally well-educated city—52.2 percent of its residents have
completed a bachelor’s degree or more. This is the highest of any
major city in the state, and also higher than cities such as Boise,
Idaho and Spokane, Washington. Each of these demographic indi-
cators shows that there is significant potential for residential growth
downtown. By contrast, the early baby boomer demographic, now
55 to 64 years old, makes up 7.1 percent of Bozeman’s population.
This is lower than the state average and the level of most other
Montana cities.
Downtown residents energize the rest of downtown because they
support more local retailers, events, and other commercial activities
than residents of other areas or down-
town employees. Downtown residents
tend to support three or more times as
much square footage of retail compared
to downtown employees. This is good
not just for downtown businesses, but
for all of Bozeman’s citizens who value
a vibrant downtown.
Over the long term, downtown residents
will attract businesses downtown as
well. There is an established correlation
between where business executives
and their employees live, and where
businesses locate. When residences
moved to the fringes of urban areas in
the late 20th century, so too did busi-
nesses. Now, the reverse is beginning
to happen.
Introduction
70
9
Examples of mixed-use urban development in other cities
Bozeman can expect the new housing seen in downtown to evolve
and increase in scale and density. Typical early-phase downtown
housing includes historic renovations, attached townhouses, and two
or three story wood frame apartments. These are usually followed
by more expensive and ambitious projects that include steel and con-
crete structures of three to five stories. This evolution takes place
as developers test the market to determine the popularity of urban
housing and particular preferences of the local market. While the
Village Downtown and other planned developments have introduced
higher density dwelling types, the current economic downturn is likely
to slow or turn the clock back on the evolution of downtown housing,
and generate more modest projects in the short and medium terms
(within the next five years). During this time frame, it is unlikely that
the current height limits in downtown will become a major constraint
to downtown development.
The consultant team’s initial experience-based assessment is that
there is potential in the Bozeman downtown market for approximately
500 additional residential units. Approximately 200 of these would
be condominium units and the remaining 300 would be apartments.
Due to the still-emerging nature of Bozeman’s downtown residential
market, the condo projects will tend to be smaller—approximately 30
or 40 units each—while the apartment projects will tend to be larger
due to the economies of scale required—ranging between 80 and
150 units each. Additional site specific and Bozeman-area market
research will be needed in order to attach more specific timeframes,
benchmarks, and site specific recommendations to this assessment.
Private investment follows public commitment. In other words, most
developers, business owners, and others want to put their money
and life’s work where it will be reinforced and amplified by established
public goals and investments. It is usually the public sector’s goal to
set the stage and standards and demonstrate that its downtown is a
safe, attractive, exciting—and ultimately profitable—place to invest.
71
10
Like many other cities, Bozeman faces challenges it must address to
keep its downtown prosperous, lively, and appealing. Competition from
the outward growth of retail and other commercial businesses is an
ongoing struggle for downtowns as they try to remain at the center of
commerce and civic life. The following is an overview of the particular
issues facing Downtown Bozeman, and the opportunities – both big and
small – that exist to strengthen and enhance downtown’s role as the
heart of the community and the region.
ISSUES
Access and Circulation
• Vehicular circulation patterns, including the Mendenhall/Babcock
one-way couplet, encourage through traffic and high speeds. One-
way streets make it unnecessarily difficult for cars and pedestrians
to move within downtown.
• Main Street’s truck route designation is at odds with the other func-
tions and character of downtown’s signature pedestrian street.
Maximize Underutilized Parcels
• Many sections of the downtown district contain underutilized
parcels. Such parcels are often located abruptly on the sidewalk
edge and create “dead” spaces at many key locations. Consider-
ing downtown’s pedestrian focus and a finite amount of land for
infill projects, these parcels should be further analyzed to determine
their highest and best use, which may be redevelopment.
Lack of Vitality on Key Streets
• Currently, Main Street defines downtown’s identity because of its
continuous block pattern lined with a mix of active street level shops,
cafes and restaurants. Other key thoroughfares, including Men-
denhall, Babcock, and north-south streets, have significant “gaps”
in their development patterns. These areas lack a critical mass of
activity associated with a higher concentration of development.
• The amount and quality of sidewalks, street trees and street furni-
ture varies throughout downtown. Some areas are appealing, while
many others do not encourage and support getting around on foot.
The lack of a coordinated level of street design compromises the
ability to establish a cohesive district identity.
Connections and Wayfinding
• Parts of downtown feel disconnected from one another. For ex-
ample, downtown houses a variety of arts and cultural facilities
that is not evident on the street to a visitor. Connections need to be
strengthened so that the parts can add up to a stronger and more
accessible whole.
Street-level Conditions
• Downtown Bozeman contains many fine examples of traditional
storefront design, with generous shop windows and ground level
details that add interest and comfort to the pedestrian experience.
However, downtown’s attractiveness is diminished by the design of
some development and façade renovations which are not sympa-
thetic to Bozeman’s architectural heritage.
Little Sense of “Entry”
• Key arrival points into downtown do not signify that you are entering
a special district. Improvements could include big moves (anchor
redevelopments, entry plazas, etc.) and modest improvements.
Regulatory Impediments
• A strong and healthy downtown requires public sector support. Clear
and reasonable zoning and incentives can help remove hindrances
to development under current regulations.
• Although not a zoning issue, it appears that State licensing regu-
lations for restaurants that wish to serve alcohol present financial
and procedural hurdles, making it difficult to open new restaurants
in downtown. Changing this would require legislative efforts at the
State level.
OPPORTUNITIES
Public Support
• Build on the commitment and support to enhance and improve
downtown from all sectors of the community to advance various
initiatives.
OPPORTUNITIES AND ISSUESIntroduction
Surface parking on Mendenhall
72
11
Authentic Main Street Experience
• People are attracted to downtowns to experience the type of vital-
ity and diversity difficult to replicate in more suburban centers.
Bozeman’s intact, historic core and great retail and restaurants
help to distinguish the city from others in the region and should
be used to increase economic competitiveness. Keeping Main
Street healthy in the future will continue to draw visitors, and
contribute to community livability downtown – which is vital to
economic development.
Partnerships
• Attracting new development downtown can be a challenge. Pub-
lic-private development can help mitigate risk and can encourage
projects that otherwise might not be built. This approach should
be explored, particularly for catalyst developments suggested in
this document.
Recent Public Investments
• Investment and maintenance of the public realm is the founda-
tion for a successful downtown. Recent investments, including
the parking garage, library, and streetscape improvements have
provided quality development, efficient use of land, and an attrac-
tive public realm to support private development in the area.
Arts and Culture
• Nationally, the role of entertainment, art, and culture downtown
has been strong and growing. Bozeman has the opportunity to el-
evate its downtown arts and culture scene to attract more people
downtown at night and on the weekends.
“Complete Streets”
• Most streets downtown are in need of improvements. Design
streets to make it safe, easy and enjoyable to get around on foot
and bicycle. “Complete Streets” is a transportation and planning
concept that provides for all modes of use
More Housing Downtown
• Increase the limited amount of housing, taking advantage of the
proximity of local services and stable residential neighborhoods
nearby containing several schools and parks.
New parking garage Retail next to the Baxter Hotel
Vacant Kenyon Lumber siteRecent townhouse development
73
12
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
1 Downtown Bozeman should be the location of buildings of
the greatest height and intensity in the community.
2 All streets and sidewalks in downtown should be designed
to make the experience of pedestrians and bicyclists safe,
comfortable and visually appealing.
3 Downtown should be the focus of civic life, with a concen-
tration of local, state and federal government as well as arts
and culture.
4 The scale and character of the historic core should be
protected but other downtown districts should be able to ac-
commodate contemporary development of greater height and
density.
5 Parking should not govern development poten-
tial; the amount of parking relative to development
should decrease. Parking inventory should be man-
aged so as to ensure convenient access for customers.
GUIDING PRINCIPLESIntroduction
The following principles are intended to provide the philosophical
foundation to the Plan and the recommended next steps. As various
actions are considered, these principles can be checked to ensure
that every action is accomplishing one or more of them.
74
13
6 Transit should be expanded to serve downtown more
extensively and frequently.
7 Public spaces – both large and small – should be en-
hanced and made active through programming or adjacent
uses that can animate and oversee them.
8 Housing – for all income levels – should be encouraged by
a variety of methods.
9 Sustainable methods and techniques should be applied
to infrastructure, street design and redevelopment to contrib-
ute to a healthier and greener community.
10 New buildings should be designed to the level of per-
manence and quality appropriate for a downtown setting.
11 Create strong connections between sub-districts, and
from Downtown to the surrounding community.
12 Natural features and the surrounding mountain setting
should be highlighted and emphasized whenever possible,
strengthening the amenities unique to the city of Bozeman.
75
14
CREATE DISTINCT DISTRICTSStrategies
Neighborhood
Conservation Area
Neighborhood
Conservation Area
Historic
Downtown
Core
North Village
South Village
East Gateway
Northeast
Neighborhood
West Gateway
NOTE: The district boundaries have been intentionally loosely delineated because further analysis may be required.76
15
Historic Downtown Core (Retail/Office)
Right now, there are great “bones” of a Commercial Core District,
as it has already been given attention in the City’s zoning ordinance
and other documents. This is Bozeman’s historic main street area
and is one that has seen great care and investments by a wide
range of people, agencies and organizations. This district should be
further strengthened by a handful of strategic but delicate improve-
ments, but it is well on its way to being lively, dynamic and solid.
Only the recent tragedy of the gasline explosion has presented a
temporary setback, but recovery and infill will be forthcoming. This
plan suggests some ideas for the now empty parcels, but much
thinking will undoubtedly be given to healing this emotional and
physical wound in the townscape. Until then there are a number of
ways of enhancing the core, such as emphasizing brightly lighted
display windows, unique signs, special decorative lighting, so that
it is clearly seen by all as a place to use 18 hours a day.
CREATING DISTINCT DISTRICTS
Downtown Bozeman is not a single, monolithic area. It is large
enough and complex enough that, a number of distinct areas have
begun to emerge. It would be useful to provide a separate identity
for these areas, although still keeping them firmly within the frame-
work of downtown.
Having different districts serves a number a purposes. First, they
could have regulatory implications with differing standards for
height, parking, and other aspects. This approach is described
in the Code section of this plan. Second, each district should be
identified according to its unique character. It is common for down-
town neighborhoods to take on historic or unique names that con-
vey a character and identity. On the maps we have suggested
some names, but these are intended to be place-holders. One can
imagine at some point, there being a “Lindley District” at the east
end, or an “Emerson District” at the west end. Such unique place
names can evolve as people begin to live there and identify with
them and their attributes.
Baxter Hotel BozemanHotel
Historic Downtown Core
77
16
CREATE DISTINCT DISTRICTSStrategies
“North Village” (Residential Emphasis)
This area of downtown has the greatest potential to become a new urban
neighborhood, filled with hundreds of dwelling units of all different types,
unique public spaces, landscaped alleyways, and small service businesses
aimed at local residents both within and near downtown. The presence of
significant housing is the most critical missing piece of Bozeman’s down-
town, and for it to be vital and sustainable over time, housing should be de-
veloped in great numbers and varieties, at all price-points, both rental and
for-sale. This recommendation is a “cornerstone” of this plan. The very fu-
ture of downtown is dependent upon the successful development of hous-
ing -- both for people in the community who wish to stay but downsize as
well as for newcomers.
However, there is one major impediment to this happening. That is the
amount and speed of traffic on Mendenhall. In order for people to want to
invest there and for others to want to live there, this impediment must be
changed. The current state of Mendenhall – narrow sidewalks, many in
disrepair, minimal street trees, flanked with asphalt or dirt parking lots –
presents an uninviting corridor between the neighborhoods to the north and
Main Street. Many other cities, larger and smaller, have been successful in
converting one-way couplets back to two-way without undesirable conse-
quences (see “Tame the Traffic” page 26). This is a key recommendation
that gets at the heart of downtown’s economic vitality and longevity.
“West Gateway” (Office/Mixed Use)
This district could extend from 5th Avenue to Grand. This is a very impor-
tant area that now seems somewhat ragged with parking lots, empty par-
cels, and vacant buildings. This area detracts from the image of downtown
and needs major investment – both public and private. In addition, the
streetscape should be enhanced with more trees, lighting, furnishings and
seasonal planting eventually connecting to the North 7th Avenue Connec-
tivity Plan. New buildings should adhere to design standards that do not
allow setbacks but place windows and doors on the sidewalk with parking
lots prohibited along the street. There is a “suburban” look to this area that
could be dramatically enhanced both in the short term with streetscape and
in the longer term with development.
In addition, four other districts are suggested:
Willson School
Emerson CulturalCenter
Bridger Park Garage
City Hall Building
North Village
West Gateway
78
17
“South Village” (Commercial/Mixed Use)
The blocks along Babcock between Wilson and Rouse contain a
wide-ranging mix of uses from governmental (Federal Building)
to office, to some retail, to housing, to churches, with no one use
seeming to dominate. Nor is there that much property that could
be converted to other uses. Nonetheless, over time parking lots
especially on the north side of Babcock could have new buildings
containing commercial and residential uses. As a street, Babcock
deserves improvements in sidewalks and the addition of street
trees as it is kind of a visual moat along the south side of down-
town. Some of the parking lots associated with churches are used
for parking during weekdays through private agreements. The
Parking Commission should look at this parking resource more
comprehensively to ensure its most effective use.
“East Gateway” (Office/Mixed Use)
The East Gateway is east of Rouse and centered around the li-
brary, grocery store, and Lindley Park. This district has properties
that can be redeveloped to greater intensity, just as has already oc-
curred on some. Care should be taken, however, not to attempt to
extend the retailing too far east. The retail core is already long and
there is evidence (closed stores and unleased space) that retail
might not be the best ground floor use this far away from the core.
Office space or professional services could be acceptable and still
add to the vitality of downtown. There might be some pockets of
retail, such as around the library, but the Main Street retail core
should be kept compact and walkable. There might also be a ma-
jor art feature that denotes the idea of “gateway.” One candidate
location is the public space in front of the library.
Library
US Federal Building
South Village
East Gateway
79
18
BUILD HOUSINGStrategies
BUILD HUNDREDS OF UNITS OF
HOUSING
A healthy downtown must attract people to live, work and play. Hous-
ing plays a key role in this formula for success, since attracting more
people to live downtown establishes a base to support downtown
businesses, allowing retailers such as restaurants and other shops
to thrive. Today, Downtown Bozeman includes only a small amount of
housing, with a limited range of housing types. Nationally, market-rate
residential development has been a powerful force in bringing new
life and economic support to downtowns. This plan includes a pre-
liminary examination of the downtown area through this lens, identify-
ing opportunity areas, and testing the feasibility of these locations for
a range of downtown residential development types. As mentioned
previously, attracting downtown residential development to Bozeman
can help accomplish many goals at the same time:
• provide a new use for many downtown properties currently un-
derutilized;
• increase the customer base for existing businesses and provide
the spending power to attract new businesses and cultural activi-
ties; and
• add more people downtown at all times of the day, increasing
safety, and providing an expanded base of support for future im-
provements, events, and activities.
HOUSING CHOICES
National trends showing a growing demand for downtown housing
suggest a potential market exists in Bozeman. Numerous larger un-
derutilized parcels in this area can be in-filled with primarily housing
redevelopment. Potential downtown residents are a diverse group –
from younger residents to empty nesters, demanding both rental and
ownership housing, and express preferences for a range of housing
types, from townhouses to multifamily dwellings, to rehabs of older
buildings for lofts. Downtown Bozeman has the capacity for this and
contains many of the amenities - including an attractive Main Street,
cafes, shops and restaurants - that are drawing new residents to re-
surgent downtowns across the county. Moreover, Bozeman has its
own special qualities, including its scenic natural setting, homegrown
business, and active social life, from which new development can
draw.
The site analysis of opportunity areas downtown identified potential
accommodation of as many as 500 units over five to fifteen years,
with a concentration in the “North Village” district, and in particu-
lar along Mendenhall. Numerous larger underutilized parcels in this
area can be in-filled with primarily housing redevelopment. The table
and illustration found on page 20 and 21, highlight possible areas
Examples of urban housing in other cities
80
19
Possible Main Street infill development
Areas of opportunity
Possible mixed-use development along Mendenhall
and types of residential projects that may be feasible or attractive to
developers and future residents These ideas are examples intended
to demonstrate the considerable potential for residential and com-
mercial infill.
In addition to new development, there may also be opportunities to
provide or renovate housing in the upper floors of buildings along
Main. Making this happen may require amending the Building Code,
seeking low-income tax credits, or changing height limits and requir-
ing step-backs for added floors, as has been done in other historic
districts.
81
20
1
4
A
B C
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.1
3.2
3.3
BUILD HOUSINGStrategies
NOTE: THE DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS ON THIS MAP AND ACCOMPANYING TABLE ARE
INTENDED ONLY TO ILLUSTRATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR INFILL OF COMMERCIAL AND
RESIDENTIAL USE. THEY ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
D
82
21
BOZEMAN CREEK
10-15 higher end townhouses can breathe new life into this underutilized amenity as part of an improved Creek and trail system.
• 10-15, 2-3-story townhouse units with rear loaded garages from two ac-cess drives off the alley• Enhanced Creek buffer with public trail through middle of site• Density: 20 units/acre
• Parking ratio: 1/du
KENYON NOBLE AREA
These parcels provide opportunities to provide multifamily dwellings on Men-denhall, and smaller townhouses (1,000-1,5000 SF) grouped in a neighbor-hood setting to transition to the surrounding single family area.
Block One Facing Mendenhall– Stacked Flatssite area: 48,000 sf (320’ x 150’)• 80-110 units (2 U-shaped buildings above podium with 4 floors of 15,400 sf each)• 1 story parking (300’ x 120’): 110 stalls• Shared Courtyard: 4,800 sf• Mid-Block Walkway: 1,500 sf• FAR: 2.56• Parking ratio: 1/du
Blocks Two & Three Flanking Lamme – Townhousessite area: 86,400 (320’ x 150’ and 320’ x 120’, respectively)• 50-60, 2-3-story townhouse units with front and rear loaded garages off alley and Lamme Street• Mid-Block Walkway: 3,000 sf• Density: 28 units/acre• Parking ratio: 1/du
OTHER MENDENHALL INFILL SITES
Site 1: NE Corner, Wilson & Mendenhall Stacked Flatssite area: 15,400 sf (110’ x 140’)• 1 story parking: 47 stalls• 4 stories residential above: approx. 40-45 units• FAR: 3.1• Parking ratio: 1/du
Site 2: NW Corner, Bozeman & Mendenhall Mixed-Usesite area: 27,000 sf (180’ x 150’)• 28,800 sf office (2 floors of 14,400 sf each)• residential (2-story, 1200 sf townhouse units above office on floors of 12,600 sf each): 12 units• 1 story parking (180’ x 120’): 66 stalls
• FAR: 2.0• Parking ratio: 1/du; 2/1000 for office
Site 3: SE Corner, Bozeman & Mendenhall Stacked Flatssite area: 14,000 sf (140’ x 100’)• 1 story parking:18 stalls• 2 stories residential (9,100 sf per floor): 18 units• FAR: 1.3
• Parking ratio: 1/du
BOZEMAN CREEK INFILL
(where Bozeman Creek passes under Babcock Street)site area: 9,800 sf (70’ x 140’)• 8,400 sf office/retail (ground level)• 3 Loft units above• 8 surface parking stalls behind building off the alley for residential units and commercial.
• Parking ratio: 1/du; 2/1000 office
TOTAL:
Residential: approximately 210-260 units
4
1
ILLUSTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS
(THEORETICAL EXAMPLES)
2
3
A POSSIBLE CONFERENCE CENTER AND HOTELB POSSIBLE BOUTIQUE HOTELC POSSIBLE OFFICED POSSIBLE THEATER/ MEETING FACILITY
83
22
CREATE A NETWORK OF OPEN SPACES
Existing street trees
Examples of open space in other cities
Examples of street trees
Strategies
The City of Bozeman is surrounded by natural beauty and boasts
numerous parks, trails and recreational areas. Downtown would
benefit from the thoughtful integration of plazas and courtyards, the
creation of pocket parks along Bozeman Creek, and the greening
of streets and alleys surrounding Main Street. This Plan outlines a
strategy to “green” Downtown Bozeman through the careful integra-
tion of street trees and the introduction and improvement of public
spaces.
Plazas, courtyards, and alley improvements will require careful
sighting and attention to solar access, and would be enhanced by
creative lighting and seating solutions in order to maximize the use
and comfort of such spaces throughout the year.
GREEN THE STREETS
Although neighborhoods flanking Downtown Bozeman have tree-
lined streets with lush, dense, canopies, much of the downtown area
is devoid of street trees. (Street trees, by definition, are always lo-
cated with a “sidewalk amenity zone” directly behind the curb. Other
trees may be present on private property but the longevity of those
trees is never assured because of potential development and, there-
fore, they do not have the same role as true street trees.) As part of
an integrated traffic and streetscape improvement plan, street trees
should be planted throughout the downtown core area to enhance
the urban environment.
Economic studies have shown the presence of trees encourage
people to walk greater distances in downtown areas, therefore ex-
posing them to more retail shops and restaurants, increasing spend-
ing along tree-lined streets. Additionally, trees provide a more re-
laxed ambiance, by softening busy streets and reducing the sense
of traffic noise. They create safer walking environments, and have
even been found to reduce perceived travel times of both motorists
and pedestrians. Finally, horticultural research has shown that street
trees contribute both to lowering ambient temperatures in the sum-
mer and to providing valuable urban habitats. Recent improvements
along Main Street provided scores of street trees along that street.
But Mendenhall, Babcock and most side streets are still largely de-
void true street trees
84
23
TRANSFORM ALLEYS
Alleys are often an underutilized, forgotten part of the city. While
they still need to provide service, delivery and emergency access,
they remain unused except for a few hours a day. Many cities have
recognized this and have begun to give alleys a civic or ecological
function. The alleys that wrap around Main can be planted with
greenery, provide natural drainage, create a unique pedestrian network,
and provide usable outdoor spaces for residents and businesses.
When and where possible widen
sections of the alleys to improve
functionality and consider adding
bicycle amenities. In greening
these areas, natural drainage
features could be utilized, and
small plazas and pocket parks
tucked along the edges. These
improvements would serve to
provide a new, unique connection
between downtown businesses and residences, and reinforce the
finer scale of the downtown area.
ADD PLAZAS AND COURTYARDS
Surrounding Downtown are several parks and open spaces, but
Downtown itself has very few. Courtyards and plazas should be
made a priority in new development, and the city should consider
working with property owners to implement a public plaza along the
north side of Main Street.
Downtown would benefit from more functional open spaces that
can be used and enjoyed day and night by residents, visitors, and
workers nearby. Incentive-based requirements for new development
to provide accessible public spaces, such as plazas and entry
forecourts, could add considerably to the amount and variety of open
spaces in the public realm.
CREATE A NETWORK OF OPEN SPACES
Existing downtown alleys
Existing open space
85
24
CREATE A NETWORK OF OPEN SPACESStrategies
86
25
OPEN UP BOZEMAN CREEK
Bozeman Creek should be revealed and made a centerpiece of a
downtown open space system. An intermittent “Bozeman Creek
Park” would provide a natural connection from the north and
south neighborhoods to the downtown commercial area. Where
the creek cannot be daylighted, such as under streets and his-
toric buildings, its presence could be highlighted with public art
or special streetscape surface treatments. Where space is avail-
able, such as through existing parking lots, public open space
should be provided along the creek, complete with seating areas
and viewing platforms, so that this unique natural feature can be
appreciated by both residents and visitors to downtown.
Downstream from downtown, the creek is a natural system that
fish and other wildlife depend on for survival. Currently run-off
from streets and parking lots are draining directly into the creek,
allowing it to be contaminated by petroleum products and other
pollutants. The city has a buffer requirement in place and is en-
couraged to enforce it for the health and quality of the creek, and
improved character and open space for downtown.
Current creek condition Examples of parks along creeks and streams
CREATE A NETWORK OF OPEN SPACES
Open space opportunities along Bozeman Creek and alleys
87
26
TAME THE TRAFFICStrategies
REDUCE TRUCK TRAFFIC AND INVITE
BICYCLISTS TO MAIN STREET
Currently, only two types of users are accommodated on Main
Street: motor vehicles, and pedestrians. Bicyclists have lanes and
signed trails in other areas of the city, but aren’t given any priority
in the downtown core. Cyclists of all levels of experience should
be welcome and invited to visit downtown, by providing bike “shar-
rows” (see photo) on outermost vehicular lanes and racks along
Main Street. Sharrows are physical markings within a vehicular lane,
indicating that the travel lane is shared between motorists and bi-
cyclists. They help to increase the awareness of drivers to the pres-
ence of cyclists, and also communicate to bicyclists that the streets
are designed for them as well.
To further reduce noise, congestion, and pedestrian and bicyclist
discomfort, large through-truck traffic should be diverted around
downtown on I-90. Although Main Street is currently on the Nation-
al Truck Route Network, there is a procedure through the Federal
Highway Administration to alter the system. (This procedure can be
found in Federal Standard 23 CFR part 658).
Additionally, the previous street improvements along Main should be
extended to 5th to meet with the North 7th Avenue Connectivity Plan
improvements, and to the east as far as the library. The library,
Lindley park and the surrounding trails are regional destinations for
Bozeman residents and visitors, and should be better connected to
the downtown core. Users of the park and library should be drawn
downtown for dinner or coffee, and the sidewalk and streetscape
should be inviting and convenient to encourage this crossover of
users.
Lastly, the 2007 update to the area transportation plan calls for a
signalized pedestrian crossing to be added at Broadway and Main
Street. This improvement will increase the comfort and safety for
pedestrians visiting the library and adjacent businesses by helping
to make the highway traffic approaching downtown more aware
that they are entering a lively and bustling downtown district, where
people live, walk, and shop. An additional mid block crossing in
front of the library site would also be advantageous, to break up
the long block length and better connect the library to surrounding
businesses. These traffic improvements will greatly improve the
pedestrian environment of the East Gateway area, and should be
implemented as soon as possible.
View to street from library
88
27
North-south side street with improvements
CONNECT BABCOCK TO LIBRARY SITE
The long term vision for the site design of the library is to con-
nect Babcock to the library’s property on the west side. The City
of Bozeman and Bozeman Public Library should keep this goal in
mind, completing the connection when it is possible to do so in the
future. Connecting Babcock to the library parking area will serve
to lace the library into the existing street grid, reinforcing its close
proximity to downtown.
COMPLETE SIDE STREET
ENHANCEMENTS
Completing the side street enhancements that have already been
developed for downtown – The Downtown Streetscape Project
– will help to strengthen the connection between downtown and
surrounding neighborhoods. Additionally, by making those streets
more pleasant places to be, the businesses along those side
streets will benefit from increased foot traffic as people are drawn
onto the auxiliary streets along Main Street.
Complete side street enhancements
Add “sharrows” for cyclists along Main Street
Convert Mendenhall and Babcock to two-way
Connect Babcock to library site
Existing conditions and opportunities
89
28
TAME THE TRAFFICStrategies
Babcock section (50ft condition)
Mendenhall section
CONVERT MENDENHALL AND
BABCOCK TO TWO-WAY
A major obstacle to introducing housing to downtown right
now, is the one-way couplet of Mendenhall and Babcock.
With most of the housing density encouraged on Mendenhall,
the city must create a neighborhood-friendly environment
through the form and character of the streets. Currently,
Mendenhall acts
more as a major
through-way, get-
ting people through
downtown, than
moving people within
downtown. The lack
of street trees and
vehicular focus will
likely discourage future residents from moving Downtown.
People choose to live downtown because of the benefits
of urban living which include close access to services, en-
tertainment and walkability. Currently, both Mendenhall and
Babcock have a very poor pedestrian environment, with
narrow or inconsistent sidewalks flanked by long stretches
of surface parking
lots. In order to attain
the future vision of
denser, urban hous-
ing downtown, the
city should restore
the original two-way
network of these
streets and provide
pedestrian amenities
such as wider sidewalks, street trees, and safe, comfortable
crossings. The 1998 MAKERS Plan originally recom-
mended the conversion of Mendenhall and Babcock back
to two-way streets in addition to transforming the pedestrian
environment along these corridors.
90
29
TAME THE TRAFFIC
One way streets were created when downtowns were not
considered a place to live, but an employment center, and
it was important to get a large volume of traffic in and out
as efficiently as possible. Many cities are now recognizing
the benefits of creating a balanced and comfortable envi-
ronment for all modes of travel in their downtown areas as
they attempt to attract other uses such as housing during
revitalization efforts. Below are three cities that have suc-
cessfully transformed one-way streets to two-way, effec-
tively restoring their lively downtown grid.
Vancouver, Washington: Since the switch of three streets
in the downtown Main Street area of Vancouver, Washing-
ton, many retailers have reported an increase in pedestri-
ans, and “drive-by” traffic at their stores. The three streets,
each extending roughly 10 blocks, cost the city $612,000.
The project was completed in September of 2007, and was
closely tied to additional work done by their local transit
agency as part of the revitalization effort. Contact: Bill Whit-
comb, Deputy Transportation Manager. (360) 487-7702
Sacramento, California: Began a conversion of 5 streets
to two way in February of this year. Two of the streets have
been successfully converted and two additional streets
were narrowed and bikes lanes were added. There were
no street closures during the construction, and residents
and business owners are already declaring the conversion
a success. Contact: Fran Halbakken, Operations Manager.
(916) 808-7194.
West Palm Beach, Florida: A community of a population
of 80,000 converted their historic retail street back to two-
way, and two State roads. The retail street previously sat at
an 80% vacancy rate, with rents as low as $6/sq ft. After the
conversion, rental rates increased to $25/sq ft and vacancy
rates went down to 10%.
2-WAY STREET CONVER-SION CASE STUDIES
Additional cities that have reversed one-way couplets:
Fairfax, VA
Population: 23,349
Project Description: Two streets were converted to two-way (Main
and North Streets) as part of a larger street enhancement project.
Contact: Alexis Verzosa. Transportation Director,
(703) 385-7889
Norfolk, VA
Population: 234,403
Project Description: Two streets converted in 1998.
Contact: Brian Townsend, Planning,
(757) 664-4752
Toledo, OH
Population: 316,851
Project Description: Two streets were converted in 1997.
Contact: Joe Moran, Downtown Toledo Vision,
(419) 244-3747
Austin, TX
Population: 743,074
Project Description: Ceasar Chavez Avenue was turned from a
one-way street to a two-way street in 2008 as part of a Great Streets
Master Plan.
Contact: Rick Colbrunn, Project Manager,
(512) 974-7089
Chattanooga, TN
Population: 168,293
Project Description: The conversion of M.L. King Boulevard and
McCallie Avenue from one-way to two-way traffic was completed in
2003.
Contact: Todd Womack, Communications Director,
(423) 757-5168
For more information on one-way to two-way conversions, visit
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/circulars/ec019/Ec019_f2.pdf
91
30
FAÇADE IMPROVEMENTS
Strategies
Downtown Bozeman is fortunate to have
numerous intact historic structures, many of
which are well-maintained. Over the years
though, some of the buildings have been
updated with new or restored facades, while
others have been less well maintained. It
is important that all frontages along Main
Street be preserved or enhanced and main-
tained, in order to retain and strengthen
the quality historic character of the district.
Facades that cover or obscure the original
structure or detailing should be removed.
The Downtown Partnership and the City of
Bozeman should start a grant and technical
assistance program to help shopkeepers
and business owners with these restora-
tions. The City of Bozeman is encouraged
to support any such program by offering
incentives like expedited approval.
The City of Billings has been very success-
ful in encouraging the renovation of facades
and buildings through grant programs.
One program offers funding for design as-
sistance. Another provides financing for
improvements
This historic brick facade was covered with additional brick work.
While the business provides a useful service to the neighborhood, the fa-cade doesn’t do much for the character of Main Street.
The Ellen Theatre is an excellent ex-ample of preservation and restoration.
The modern renovation to this facade complements the existing style and structure well.
The US Bank building was at one time a structure similar to the Baxter Hotel or The Bozeman, but has been com-pletely covered. The original windows are still intact behind the black glass paneling .
Large, opaque, dome awnings obscure historic details, as well as windows and entrances. Less bulky awnings are en-couraged. Refer to the Secretary of Interior’s Historic Guidelines for guid-ance.
CREATE A UNIQUE PLACE
92
31
Historic Main Street has many building signs
that likely date back to the early decades of
the 20th Century. These signs help to tell
the story of Bozeman, as well as add to the
pedestrian environment and interest on the
street. Bozeman should encourage the pres-
ervation of historic signs, as well as encour-
age new and unique pedestrian scale signs.
New and historic signs add to the vibrancy
of Main Street as a place to shop, browse,
work or play. In some cases historic repro-
ductions or representations of original signs
may be appropriate.
Artistry, detail and even playfulness should
be encouraged in new signs to promote
energy and activity in the pedestrian en-
vironment. The existing sign code for the
downtown district should be reviewed to
determine whether unique sign designs are
being unnecessarily curtailed, or whether in-
centives could be offered for unusual graph-
ic design.
SIGNAGE PRESERVATION AND ENHANCEMENT
CREATE A UNIQUE PLACE
93
32
CREATE A UNIQUE PLACEStrategies
Many cities provide technical assistance grants
for renovation and preservation. The grants can
be used by property owners, developers or ten-
ants, to hire technical advisors to help them with
studies, improvements, and other types of as-
sistance. The City of Bozeman and the Down-
town Bozeman Partnership should consider
implementing financial and technical assistance
programs within the Downtown Plan area for fa-
cade improvements.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS The City of Billings Montana has implemented a Technical
Assistance Bank, overseen by the Downtown Billings Part-
nership. The program provides up to 70 hours of consul-
tant time for such services as:
Facade improvement assistance
Feasibility studies
Preliminary building assessment
Restoration and renovation opinions
Renovation and reuse studies
Site selection assistance
Landscape/Hardscape Improvements
and Code analysis
Design and construction work is not eligible for assistance
through this grant, but is eligible through the facade im-
provement grant.
In 2006 the Billings TIF awarded $44,500 in Technical
Assistance grants which resulted in $356,000 in private
investment. This represents a return of $8 of private invest-
ment for every assistance dollar awarded.
The Billings Facade Improvement Grant is also overseen
by the Downtown Billings Partnership and is intended to
assist in the maintenance and reuse of buildings in the
downtown area and to “encourage a higher level of qual-
ity and design.” In order to be eligible for the grant monies
the facade improvements must support the Billings Frame-
work Plan.
BILLINGS MONTANATECHNICAL ASSISTANCE BANK
BILLINGS MONTANA FACADE IMPROVEMENT GRANT
94
33
CREATE A UNIQUE PLACE
EMPHASIZE “LOCAL AND UNIQUE”
The City of Bozeman was first settled in 1864, and by
the end of the year, a hotel, and a smattering of cab-
ins and shops lined the wagon trail that is now Main
Street. Many of those buildings remain today and
local businesses still persist. Additionally, downtown
Bozeman has strong roots in culture and community
that started with opera houses and festivals and con-
tinue today with the Downtown Art Walks, Emerson
Cultural Center, the recent revitalization of the Ellen
Theatre, and numerous galleries and artists. All of
this is tucked into a breathtaking natural setting with
virtually limitless opportunities for recreation. These
characteristics should be highlighted and emphasized
through preservation, architecture, art, and urban de-
sign, and made accessible to the public through their
integration with the downtown public realm
One of the positive attributes of Downtown Bozeman
is that it attracts a wide variety of locally-owned,
family-owned businesses, some of which have been
in the community for decades. There are no national
brands, fast food places, or large consumers of floor
space. Instead, are small businesses that each pro-
vide their own individualized style of merchandising
and service. This is reflected in interesting storefronts,
unique signs, well-maintained facades, and many
indications of a place being cared for. This is what
distinguishes downtown Bozeman from other retail
areas and, indeed, from other downtowns.
95
34
STRENGTHEN DOWNTOWN BUSINESSESStrategies
ATTRACTING START-UPS
The community needs to find ways to build upon the strength by
nurturing start-up businesses. Some of these might be users of office
space such as high tech firms. Others
might be seedling retailers who could
eventually grow into larger spaces.
The City could offer incentives to
attract these businesses, or even offer
inexpensive space to operate. Some
existing structures in downtown could
be adapted to provide smaller spaces.
Or new structures could be built with
basic, loft-like spaces for start-ups.
The idea would be to let them grow, get
familiar with being downtown and then help them find other spaces
in buildings above shops. This is not unlike how the Emerson Arts
Center functions: small spaces at reasonable rates.
BUILDING OFFICE SPACES
Although this plan places great emphasis upon providing housing
within the downtown, it is also important to make sure that space
for office users is available. While many office users are small and
can fit into existing buildings, some are not. It is useful for the City to
look at properties that can accommodate new buildings with larger
footprints. One possibility is to encourage this type of development
in the East and West Gateway districts, or on a City owned lot
Downtown. If the latter is done, it would be an excellent opportunity
to make full use of the parking garage and could provide an income
stream to help cover the facility’s operating costs.
DECREASE PARKING REQUIREMENTS
FOR OFFICE USE
Just as high parking ratios are an impediment to building housing
downtown, so are they for office users. Again, downtowns attract
workers who live nearby and can walk or bike. Others take transit.
Bozeman is investing in transit precisely to alter the mode split of
travel patterns. So it makes little sense to continue requiring parking
ratios closer to what one sees in outlying areas. But an automatic,
across the board reduction might not be the only method. Some cities
have allowed reductions when a developer or user submits evidence
of a “parking management program” which involves escalating
fees for parkers, providing transit passes, or preferential spaces
for carpools, or shared cars for daytime use. The current parking
requirement seems to be standing in the way of attracting some
potential office users and should be lowered. The recommended “as
of right” requirement should be reduced to 2 parking stalls / 1000 sf.
ELIMINATE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR SMALL RETAILERS
Within a downtown like Bozeman’s, with a “tight pack” of historic
buildings, it is almost impossible for small businesses to provide for
parking on site. In fact, this would be largely undesirable because it
would carve up potential buildings and leave “missing teeth” in the
streetscape. As it is, the parking standards are producing large fields
of asphalt on the streets parallel and perpendicular to Main, which
is detracting from income and tax revenue streams by keeping land
in unproductive use. It also creates
a moat around the downtown core.
Parking requirements should be
eliminated for any retail or food/drink
establishment for the first 3000 sf of
floor area. This will require a method
to ensure that on-street parking
spaces are available for customers
and workers should not be allowed
to occupy these spaces.
EFFECTIVELY MANAGE PARKING
Parking plays a role in every aspect of downtown. Cooperative ef-
forts should be made to maintain the availability of convenient
public parking for customers, employees, and visitors throughout
the downtown district. The variety of public parking resources—on-
street spaces, surface lots, and the Bridger Park Garage—should be
96
35
STRENGTHEN DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES
managed and maintained to provide a flexible assortment of parking
options for all downtown patrons.
The Bozeman Parking Commission, in coordination with the Down-
town Bozeman Partnership, should conduct regular parking studies
determine and track the inventory of on-street, surface and structured
parking spaces in addition usage patterns and trends. Periodically,
the Parking Commission
and Downtown Partner-
ship should consult with
the business and prop-
erty owners to discuss
anticipated future park-
ing demand and parking
management strategies.
The public parking lots
should be enhanced with
pedestrian scale lighting, way-finding signage, and aesthetic ele-
ments such as screening and landscaping. These improvements were
proposed in the 1998 MAKERS Plan but have yet to be implemented.
Public parking inventory, the 2-hour free spaces both on-street and
in the public lots, must be managed for customer and visitor use.
Business employees, owners, and residents should be encouraged,
and perhaps incentivized, to utilize one of the many leased parking
options downtown, including spaces in the public lots and the Bridger
Park Garage.
The 2-hour free parking spaces in downtown necessitate enforcing
the rules. Effective parking management involves enforcing the rules
while promoting downtown as a friendly place to shop, live, work and
do business. A primary role of all parking employees operating in
the downtown district should be to serve as ambassadors that are
knowledgeable about downtown and helpful to citizens and visitors.
When performing enforcement duties, parking staff should be
empowered to exercise good judgment and common sense.
The following is an excerpt from the 1998 Downtown Bozeman
Improvement Plan—the MAKERS Plan.
Parking Lot Improvements
Upgrade public parking areas with the following improvements:
• Seal coat, reconfigure, and restripe existing parking areas.
• Install landscape buffers and planting areas where appropriate,
including along Bozeman Creek.
• Upgrade security lighting for late afternoon and evening users.
• Improve access signage for new customer convenience.
• Add new, secure bicycle parking lockers in selected lots.
• Plan for artwork and possible footprint inlays to designate
public parking.
• Improve parking-lot-to-Main Street access.
97
36
STRENGTHEN DOWNTOWN BUSINESSESStrategies
CAPITALIZE ON BOZEMAN AS
A REGIONAL HUB
Downtown benefits greatly from the fact that Bozeman serves as
a regional service and educational hub in addition to a national
tourism destination. Bozeman’s proximity to three national parks
(Yellowstone, Grand Teton and Glacier) and three downhill ski areas
(Bridger Bowl, Big Sky and Moonlight Basin) brings considerable
economic activity to the area. Institutions such as Montana State
University and Bozeman Deaconess Hospital function as significant
economic engines for the community.
The Downtown Partnership should develop a strategic plan to
capitalize on the regional and national economic drivers unique to
Bozeman. This might include implementing a comprehensive local
and regional way-finding sign plan. Such a plan could consider a
creative marketing strategy that would not only target local residents
but also regional visitors.
As a side note, much can be learned by analyzing the best and worst
practices of downtowns similar to Bozeman’s such as Ketchum, ID;
Burlington, VT; Boulder, CO; and Missoula, MT.
COORDINATE INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS
While reliable and safe core infrastructure is critical for redevelopment,
the disruption of maintenance and improvements cost businesses
losses of revenue. Considerable time and effort should be invested
to balance the need for infrastructure work and the resulting
disruptions. To this end, public works and utility infrastructure should
be assessed and a comprehensive maintenance and upgrade plan
should be devised. All parties should regularly coordinate efforts to
minimize construction and disruption in the downtown core.
The Downtown Partnership, as the representative of business
and property interests, should play an active role in the planning
of infrastructure projects. The City of Bozeman should consider
higher standards for
infrastructure integrity and
upgrades for downtown
as extra expense may be
justified to preserve and
enhance the community’s
historic core.
POSSIBLE
CONFERENCE
CENTER
Few investments stimulate a local economy over the long term as
much as conference centers do. In fact, its somewhat curious that
Bozeman does not already have such a center, given its national
reputation. It is also noted that the city does not have a “first class”
hotel. Unfortunately, this class of hotel often only comes to a
community if there is a high quality meeting facility. Occasionally,
conference centers are tied to a hotel and they are built as a
package. But since this means it is a for-profit business, all users of
the center must pay full-price for use. Often, communities see the
value in helping fund such a center so that local, non-profit and civic
groups can make use of it on a reduced-fee basis. In such centers,
98
37
STRENGTHEN DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES
there is usually one large space that is designed for larger events
such as banquets, big celebrations, and important civic events. In a
sense, many conference centers are not unlike community centers
in which something interesting is happening all day and evening –
every day. And that is precisely how the successful ones operate:
with a continual mix of private and public events – sometimes even
at the same time in side-by-side spaces. Furthermore, such centers
attract user groups from a wide region, business and professional
organizations book them on a cyclical basis over years – assuring
a continual income. Most communities also recognize that visitors
to conference centers spend hundreds of dollars every day they are
in town, using restaurants, hotels, shops, and other attractions. The
result, in terms of business income and tax revenue, typically offsets
any initial public investment within a few years. The City should
explore the market demand and economic feasibility of a conference
center, as many other communities have done. It also appears that
the City’s room hotel room/bed tax could be increased to be more
consistent with the other communities; the resulting income stream
could help fund not only this study, but an eventual center.
A conference center could also be a joint effort between the City,
MSU, and Deaconess Hospital. In that way, multiple sources of
funding could be used, and a wide range of users would be attracted.
“BOUTIQUE” HOTEL
In some ways it is surprising that a community of Bozeman’s stature
does not already have a small 50-80 room, “four star” hotel. The
university, the hospital and other corporate entities report that such
a hotel is needed for many types of visitors. One impediment, as
indicated above, is that often such hotels want to see a conference
center they can use or at least plans to build one in the near future.
But other impediments may exist as well. A highly visible, well-located
property of sufficient size may be hard to find. Required parking might
be a barrier. Or even height limits could be a factor, as views are often
a consideration. Often communities will actively solicit proponents
of such hotels, offering them assistance with aspects that may be
preventing the development. It is recommended that the City or the
TIF District fund a study of the feasibility and possible sites for
such a hotel and explore financing and property assembly options.
The addition of a conference center or hotel to downtown Bozeman
will require a more detailed study to help determine the size,
location and form most appropriate for the current and projected
market demands.
99
38
ADOPT A CODE UNIQUE TO DOWNTOWNStrategies
DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS
The City should adopt a set of regulations that are tailored to down-
town and the various districts that are suggested. But first, the very
nomenclature should change. Rather than having merely a “B-3”
designation, which might be anywhere, the word “Downtown” should
be used in all titles. This indicates its importance, that downtown is
different than any other part of the community, and that totally differ-
ent methods and standards will be used.
Basic development standards, such as building heights, minimum
and maximum FAR, and parking requirements, should be consid-
ered “entitlements” that are not subject to modification by the City
Commission. They should be presented clearly as measurable
regulations used in a predictable review process to meet the de-
sired urban form. Design standards and guidelines should supple-
ment these basic standards and are best written in a way that offers
choices and allows for projects that are innovative, creative, and of
superior design as individual buildings while also contributing to a
cohesive Downtown district.
BUILDING HEIGHTS
This plan does not recommend any changes to allowable height for
downtown districts. However, a new code should consider reducing
heights for some small distance where a downtown district abuts a
single family district. This is a common technique used in many cit-
ies to ensure a comfortable transition from greater intensity to lower
intensity. The horizontal dimension for this transition might be in the
range of 50 to 100 feet and the height might be equivalent to what
is allowed in the residential district or perhaps slightly higher. There
also might be additional screening requirements. The City might also
consider allowing additional height to developments in downtown if
it provides an extraordinary item of public benefit that involves extra
cost, such as a live theatre, public meeting rooms, a public park, a
high level of sustainable features, or if it has unique functional re-
quirements. Downtown Bozeman already has a few buildings that
exceed the current height limits and they serve as landmarks. It is
also a common device not to allow new development within a down-
town to compete with long-standing landmark structures.
MIX OF USES
Beyond the naming, the regulations should reflect a very different
approach than is typically used for zoning regulations. First, since
all downtown districts are intended to allow a mixture of uses, there
is little point to having a long list of permitted and conditional uses.
With a handful of exceptions (e.g. storage yards), every use should
be allowed – especially if they are contained within buildings. Down-
towns typically accommodate the widest range of uses and so long
as standards are being met, there should be no special permitting
process other than design review to ensure compliance with such
standards.
FLOOR AREA RATIO
The development community has a terminology that is well-ac-
cepted throughout North America. That is Floor Area Ratio or FAR.
Although sounding complicated, it is not. It is simply a factor that,
when multiplied by the lot size, gives an immediate indication of
yield in square feet. Many cities, particularly in their downtowns, use
FAR because developers want to know the basic yield on a site so
they can do necessary financing pro-formas. Floor Area Ratios are
not discretionary; they are contained in the basic code and provide
a certainty to investors and even the public as to what can be built in
a given district. It is also possible to vary FAR’s by different districts
100
39
ADOPT A CODE UNIQUE TO DOWNTOWN
and to set up an “incentive system” so that added FAR is granted if
public amenities are provided. FAR and associated bonus systems
are increasingly used to guide development in downtown areas. For
a downtown of the size, nature, and development pattern of Boze-
man’s, floor area ratios in the range of 3.5 to 5.0 (not including park-
ing) are recommended depending on the district. The transition areas
in the outer edges of downtown may have lower FARs. Development
standards should include a minimum FAR to ensure that new devel-
opment achieves a building form and level of intensity appropriate to
a downtown setting.
PARKING STANDARDS
One of the aspects of the current code is that relatively high parking
ratios are required. This factor adds significant costs to new develop-
ment – both as a result of expensive structured parking and because
a “cash in lieu” is frequently triggered. Many downtowns across the
country have no parking requirements, others have reduced them
dramatically, and still others have low requirements for commercial
and none for residential. Even some have maximum parking stan-
dards that are quite low. Currently, the parking requirements in the
code present a real limitation on development intensity, which is not
the purpose of parking standards. Moreover, it is widely recognized
that accommodating automobile storage for every use does not make
economic or fiscal sense for downtowns, since many customers walk
in, bike, take transit, or park once in shared lots or garages and then
walk to multiple destinations. The City should also seriously consider
eliminating the “cash in lieu” provision altogether, as it – by itself – is
presenting a barrier to downtown development. At the very least the
parking requirement for downtown should be reduced to one parking
stall per unit for residential, two stalls per 1000 sq ft of office, with no
parking requirement for the first 3000 sq ft of retail and restaurant
spaces.
PARK FEE
It is very unusual for development within any downtown to be charged
a fee for parks. This is for several reasons. First, parkland is most
usually needed on the outer edge of a community where families
with children are settling. Downtowns do not typically attract that de-
mographic and thus if development is charged such a fee, in a
sense it is subsidizing edge development. This is contrary to plan-
ning principles involving infill. Second, downtowns usually already
have, or are close to, existing parks with sufficient capacity for
more use; rarely are entirely new parks needed. Finally, the people
who live in, work in, and visit downtowns use public space differ-
ently. They tend to use the sidewalks, cafes and coffeehouses for
relaxing, passive recreation and socializing. In some ways parks
are superfluous.
We recommend this fee be specifically dedicated to the downtown
district and used as a funding source for the “green” strategies
outlined in this plan; improving sidewalks, greening streets and al-
leys, creating small parks along Bozeman Creek, and creating or
improving other public spaces and facilities within the downtown.
DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
It is vitally important that downtown development be guided by a
sound set of design standards and guidelines. Downtown is cur-
rently governed by a set of guidelines, but these are principally
applicable to the core and not other ar-
eas. A set of standards and guidelines
should be created to help inform new
development outside of historic Main
Street. Some should be numerical and
fixed (such as set-to lines, heights, up-
per level step-backs, and requirements
for storefront windows.). But most can
be descriptive and inspirational and
use graphics to explain (such as en-
couraging overhead canopies, artful
signs, rich details, etc.) These need
not be onerous or lengthy but should
be displayed in a concise, highly-illustrated, user-friendly docu-
ment. Finally, by their very nature, design guidelines (in contrast to
standards) are intended to allow flexibility and choices, producing
many different solutions, so long as their intent is fulfilled.
101
40
CULTIVATE EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP
AND PARTNERINGStrategies
A STRATEGIC PLAN AND COMMITTED
LEADERSHIP
Bozeman has already made progress on at least one of the most
important requirements for great downtowns—it has a plan, now in your hands.
Now, the City needs to be sure that its leaders—including elected
leaders, business executives, nonprofit managers, and active citi-
zens of all stripes—get behind it and work to see that its strategic
goals are implemented in the days and years to come.
A strategic plan recognizes that some things will change. Not every
recommendation or prediction made here will take place exactly as
envisioned—and that’s okay. There is both great value and danger
in the details that inform a strategic plan. One danger is that the
details drag all stakeholders down into debates about the minutia—
for example, details in the zoning code or the precise number of
housing units that will be built by 2030. A strategic plan, on the
other hand, is about the big picture, and staying true to the vision
is of the utmost importance. For this plan, the big picture is about
Making a Great Place. This big goal is reinforced by 12 Guiding
Principles on pp. 12 and 13 that will steer more specific actions.
Committed leadership is essential in order for this plan to succeed
and maintain and grow Bozeman’s healthy, vibrant downtown.
Downtown must be a priority for the City Commission and other
key public bodies that support the commission. Downtown’s status
as a priority should be reflected in attention to the redevelopment
of key sites, funding allocation, marketing and public outreach,
streetscape and infrastructure improvements, attention to more
specific planning efforts that will deal with parking, transportation,
individual sites, and more. The best downtowns are a source of
pride for citizens, mayors, and city commissioners, who are their
most visible advocates.
SIMPLIFYING THE DECISION-MAKING
PROCESS
One of the barriers to downtown development may be the process
of reviewing and making decisions on development proposals. Fre-
quently, projects being reviewed are seeking multiple “deviations”
from the code and that triggers review by advisory boards, public
hearings, and even City Commission involvement.
Any City that desires to see its downtown develop must offer a clear
and smooth decision-making process for projects. And such a pro-
cess cannot trigger uncertainties caused by political considerations.
Confusing or unpredictable review processes can deter new devel-
opment from occurring.
The City should restructure its review and decision-making
procedures. All development proposals should be reviewed admin-
istratively with advice, if needed or required, by appointed bodies
having specified expertise such as the Design Review Board. Minor
deviations should be able to be reviewed and approved (or not)
administratively. Only major deviations should require scrutiny by
boards. If more than one board is involved, there should be a con-
solidated review including representatives form both groups. This
avoids a proponent receiving conflicting directions. The City Com-
mission should rely upon its fine professional staff and skilled boards
to make development decisions.
The test of any review should be: “Does it comply with adopted City
standards?” Project design should not be subject to widely varying
personal opinions. The standards should be adopted by the City
Commission, upon recommendation by an appointed body such as
the Planning Board or DRB. The standards must be carefully crafted
to reflect community concerns such as quality and compatibility with
adjacent, existing development. The review of a specific project
is not the time to debate these; the issue during review should be
whether the project comports with current standards.
It is possible that one reason that many projects seek deviations is
that the current standards do not reflect building forms and dimen-
sions commonly associated with contemporary development. As
102
41
indicated elsewhere in this plan, standards for downtown buildings
outside of the historic commercial core should be developed to al-
low modern forms of residential and mixed-use development and not
attempt to recreate older patterns as is more appropriate within the
core.
The review process must be objective, open, and offer ample no-
tice to affected and interested parties. The standards must be clear
and available for anyone to read and see how the project complies.
There could be improvements to public notice, such as erecting a
very prominent sign that announces the application and gives perti-
nent information and contacts. It should be noted that the recently
completed economic development plan contains similar recommen-
dations
KEYS TO EFFECTIVE PUBLIC-PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIPS
Public-private partnerships (PPP) are an important tool that have
been used to advance downtown revitalization efforts in cities across
the country, by combining the individual strengths of the public and
private sectors. Partnerships have produced breakthrough, catalyst
real estate developments in a wide range of locales—from small
town downtowns up to the nation’s biggest urban centers. Typically,
public sector strengths—such as leadership, advocacy, convening,
planning, infrastructure investment, and more—are combined with
private sector strengths—such as site-specific design, real estate
development, market analysis, and financing—to produce a deal that
delivers both public benefits and a reasonable return on investment.
Although this section applies mostly to Partnerships in an urban real
estate development context, there are many other types of partner-
ships, such as ones that build infrastructure or build organizations.
For example, the Downtown Bozeman Partnership can be consid-
ered a PPP, since it brings together contributions of time, effort,
and funding from both public and private sources.
Public-private partnerships are important to this plan and the long-
term success of downtown Bozeman for the following reasons.
Public-private partnerships:
• Implement the vision. The additional development envisioned
as part of this plan—including new housing, office, hotel, retail,
and other uses—will only take place if private investment is
attracted to supplement public efforts.
• Provide community amenities beyond a single project. While
individual projects serve their residents and users, they also
build a better downtown by including community amenities
such as plazas, fountains, improved streetscapes, and active
retail facades.
• Allow the City and other public sector partners to strategically
target and leverage their funds. No city has enough funds to
implement all its visions. Thus, cities seek to strategically direct
public funds to the sites and uses that will leverage the most
private investment. Over the course of a multi-phase down-
town redevelopment, the ratio of public to private dollars will
ideally be in the range of 1 public for 4 or 5 private dollars. The
investment leverage realized on individual projects, however,
varies widely depending on levels of risk, scale, and more.
• Help to manage public and private risk and enhance project
feasibility. For the public sector, partnerships increase the
likelihood that projects will be attractive, and built and man-
aged at a high quality. For the private sector, they mitigate
risk associated with project approvals, funding, and political
barriers. Public-private partnerships can enable projects that
would not otherwise be built, accelerate investment timelines,
and overcome the five types of development barriers: physical,
market, financial, regulatory, and political.
103
42
MOVE TOWARD A SUSTAINABLE CITY CENTERStrategies
• Low Impact Development (LID). Bozeman is currently
in the process of adopting LID regulations. Green Infra-
structure and Green Streets can serve as the foundation
for future development downtown, and a key contributor
to community development. Innovative approaches, such
as porous pavement, rain gardens, reduced hardscape
and preserved native vegetation can protect water re-
sources, restore the urban forest, and promote sustain-
able design in the public realm.
• Integrate into Development Regulations.
• Removing barriers to sustainable development,
such as excessive parking requirements for
mixed-use development, is a first step to enabling
sustainable development to occur.
• Consider allowing demonstration projects that
provide model development techniques and
showcase new green building technologies
• Provide incentives, such as FAR bonuses for
LEED silver or gold certification
• Consider new approaches to requirements, such
as landscaping and incentives for adapative
reuse, in ways to better meet sustainability goals
and policies.
• Encourage higher residential densities downtown.
• Livable and Complete Streets to safely accommodate all
users of all ages – pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and
transit riders. In some cases, street standards and poli-
cies would likely need to be revised.
STRATEGIES FOR INCORPORATING SUSTAINABILITY
104
43
MOVE TOWARD A SUSTAINABLE CITY CENTER
CREATING A SUSTAINABLE DOWNTOWN
Above all, this plan for downtown Bozeman is intended to ensure
that it is sustainable over the long term. A truly sustainable place
requires attention to three spheres of activity equally and at the
same time: environmental sustainability, economic sustainability,
and social sustainability – an approach that is sometimes referred
to as the “triple bottom line.” The plan addresses all three subjects
and establishes clear and explicit directions -- some dramatic,
some less so. They require a wide range of stakeholders, includ-
ing the City, the Downtown Bozeman Partnership, property own-
ers, merchants, and even residents to accomplish; no one person
or group can do it all.
These elements – environmental, economic and social – are also
intertwined. For example, recommended changes to traffic patterns
and street design affect the microclimate, livability and pedestrian
appeal, the marketability of properties, and ultimately tax revenues
resulting from new development occurring in a more accommoda-
tive setting. No one recommendation stands on its own, but ac-
complishes multiple objectives. Choosing to not pursue such a di-
rection would affect many other aspects of downtown and threaten
its sustainability.
Downtown Bozeman is an amazing place. It is cared for, revered
and valued by many individuals and organizations. This plan will
strengthen its unique place in the community and the region and
will carry it well into the Twenty First Century. The Plan will allow
downtown to flourish and attain an even deeper diversity and vital-
ity over the next several decades.
105
44
NEXT STEPS
The “Next Steps and Top Priorities” described on the following page
were developed by the consultant team and the Downtown Boze-
man Partnership to help guide the users of this document through
the process of accomplishing the strategies and recommendations
outlined in this improvement plan. This list should be reviewed and
discussed by the City of Bozeman, the downtown community, and
stakeholders, to confirm the priority established for these objectives.
Successful downtowns have multiple projects and programs occur-
ring at the same time. Some are short in duration, others require
more time and consideration. Pursuing a number of actions simul-
taneously can help ensure a positive outcome.
PRELIMINARY NEXT STEPS
• Adopt the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan
• Establish Technical Assistance Programs
Finalize TIF programs providing financial and technical
assistance for complete redevelopment project analysis
and façade improvements.
• Prepare Code Revisions
Initiate UDO modifications regarding: parking regulations;
design guidelines; and development regulations
and entitlements.
• Parking Study/Analysis
Conduct regular parking studies determine and track the
inventory of on-street, surface and structured parking
spaces in addition usage patterns and trends.
• Perform a Downtown Success Audit
A Downtown Audit examines the economic health of down-
town, both from an income/cost perspective and a tax
revenue perspective. It looks at vacancies, mix of tenan-
cies, “missing” businesses, and ways to specifically support
various market sectors.
• Create “Greening Downtown” Plan
Better identify opportunities to green the alleys, establish
pocket parks, and enhance Bozeman Creek.
• Implement the Downtown Streetscape Project
Complete the plans to make the following improvements
along the side streets between Church and Grand Avenues:
install new sidewalks, street lamps, pedestrian benches,
trash receptacles, and bicycle racks.
• Initiate Exploration of Possible Development Sites
Identify specific properties and evaluate the uses that
could likely be marketed on them. Begin to seek out
development companies and financial institutions that
could take on projects of varying types and sizes. Begin
discussions with the City on the potential disposition of
parcels they currently own.
• Analyze Traffic Calming Methods
Full Cost and Benefit study: social, economic, and
traffic considerations for one-way street conversion,
shared lanes, streetscape improvements, and truck
route modifications.
106
45
NEXT STEPS
Objective Completion
Goals
Lead Entity Potential Partners Nature of Objective
Adopt Downtown
Improvement Plan
November 2009 City of Bozeman Downtown Partnership Administrative
Establish Technical
Assistance Programs
November 2009 Downtown Partnership Administrative & Financial
(TIF Funding approved)
Prepare and Adopt
Code Revisions
January 2010
July 2011
City of Bozeman Downtown Partnership Administrative
(COB staff time)
Parking January 2010 Bozeman Parking
Commission
Review/Approval
Process
June 2010 Economic Development
Advisory Board
Design Standards July 2011
Conduct Downtown
Success Audit
January 2010
(repeat annually)
Downtown Partnership Montana State University
City of Bozeman
Administrative
Conduct Parking
Inventory/Use Study
March 2010
June 2010
Parking Commission Downtown Partnership Financial & Administrative
(prepared by consultants)
Prepare “Green
Downtown” Plan
January 2011 Downtown Partnership Gallatin Valley Land
Trust
Financial & Administrative
(prepared by consultants)
Implement
Streetscape Project
Ongoing Downtown Partnership City of Bozeman Administrative & Financial
(may require future SID)
Explore Public-Private
Partnerships
Ongoing Downtown Partnership
and City of Bozeman
Administrative & Financial
(may involve consultants)
Develop Traffic
Calming and
Streetscape Projects
Ongoing
January 2012
Downtown Partnership
and City of Bozeman
Western Transportation
Institute
Financial & Administrative
NEXT STEPS MATRIX
107
108
PROST
Corresponding Implementation Goals
109
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-1
CHAPTER 10
Recommendations and Implementation
10.0 INTRODUCTION
Chapter 7 provides an analysis of recreation facility and programming needs based on level of service,
Chapter 8 provides policy direction for addressing the recreational needs of the community and Chapter
9 provides a planning framework for recommendations. This chapter provides a summary of identified
community needs and provides recommended strategies for addressing those needs.
10.1 PARKLAND AQUISITION
10.1.1 Recommendation
Because the current system is not working well, revise the City’s cash-in-lieu of parkland
dedication system so that cash-in-lieu funds can be collected, amassed and used as needed to
fund parkland acquisition.
Implementation Strategies
· Establish an ad hoc RPAB committee, including City staff and RPAB members, to
develop a proposal for a new cash-in-lieu system.
· Seek legislative change at the state level if needed.
· Revise the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) as needed.
· Use the criteria in Section 8.4.3 to evaluate cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication proposals.
10.1.2 Recommendation
Consolidate and aggregate parkland to develop larger and more functional parks wherever
possible.
Implementation Strategies
· Encourage off-site parkland dedication to aggregate and consolidate parkland
dedications, especially in currently underserved areas.
· Encourage adjacent property owners to work together on development plans to
aggregate and centralize their parkland dedications.
10.1.3 Recommendation
Ensure that land dedicated for parkland is suitable for recreational uses and promotes the goals,
objectives and policies of this plan.
Implementation Strategies
· Use the criteria contained in Section 8.1.2 when evaluating proposals to dedicate
wetlands.
110
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-2
· Use the criteria contained in Section 8.2.1 when evaluating proposals to dedicate ponds
or lakes.
· In the UDO formalize the policy of not counting watercourse setbacks to satisfy
parkland dedication requirements, but allowing watercourse setbacks to be dedicated to
the City.
· Use the parkland dedication criteria contained in Section 8.7 when evaluating proposals.
10.1.4 Recommendation
Continue to provide a level of service for parkland of approximately 18.0 acres per 1,000 people.
Implementation Strategies
· Maximize parkland dedication requirements allowable by state law.
· Continue methods used to augment the parkland dedication or cash-in-lieu of parkland
dedication process, including grants, land donations, fundraising, etc.
· Develop and implement possible new methods to augment the parkland dedication or
cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication process, for example: establishment of a parkland
charitable foundation, a Citywide bond measure for the purchase of parkland, impact
fees, etc.
10.1.5 Recommendation
Provide neighborhood parks and community parks in underserved areas of the City as identified
in Chapter 8.
Implementation Strategies
· Obtain parkland through the development review process or other methods as
appropriate.
10.1.6 Recommendation
Require the provision of parkland in multi-phased developments in a logical and predictable
manner.
Implementation Strategies
· Revise the City’s development regulations to reflect the policy contained in Section 8.10
“Phased Developments.”
10.1.7 Recommendation
Provide public access to parks owned by homeowners’ associations as County parks are annexed
to the City of Bozeman.
Implementation Strategies
· Require the provision of public access easements on parks owned by homeowners’
associations as land is annexed to the City.
· Revise the City’s annexation policy as needed.
111
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-3
10.2 PARKLAND DEVELOPMENT
10.2.1 Recommendation
Prepare individual park master plans for all City parks to guide the development of the City’s
parkland.
Implementation Strategies
· Collect copies of all adopted individual park master plans, and make the plans available
to City staff and the public in the Parks Division offices and the Department of Planning
& Community Development.
· Continue to require that developers prepare individual park master plans for all newly
dedicated parkland. Evaluate the City’s individual park master plan preparation process
from time to time, and revise the Unified Development Ordinance as needed.
· Allocate funds in the City budget for City staff and/or consultants to prepare individual
park master plans for existing parks lacking an adopted plan.
· Revise and update existing individual park master plans as needed or proposed,
following the procedure described in Section 1.8.2.
· Require that individual park master plans include two plans – one depicting the full
build-out of the park and one depicting what initial improvements the developer will
provide. Amend the UDO to include this provision.
10.2.2 Recommendation
Ensure that regional, community and special use parks are served by adequate transportation
networks, and have adequate parking to avoid negative impacts on nearby neighborhoods.
Implementation Strategies
· Regional, community and some special use parks should be located on arterial and
collector streets, and should be served by the community trail and transit systems.
· Parking lots should be provided as needed, especially when on-street parking is not
available.
· Evaluate the establishment of parking requirements for parks and recreational facilities,
and include in the UDO if deemed appropriate.
10.2.3 Recommendation
Whenever opportunities arise, parkland dedications should be sited adjacent to existing or
proposed school sites to accommodate larger acreage for joint development and shared
maintenance by the City and school district.
Implementation Strategies
· Continue to seek school district comments on development applications.
· Work with the school district to secure agreements related to joint development, use and
maintenance.
112
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-4
· Continue with City representation on the school district’s Long-Range Planning
Committee.
10.2.4 Recommendation
Require that any improvements to City parks and recreational facilities be made in conformance
with an adopted individual park master plan.
Implementation Strategies
· Collect copies of all adopted individual park master plans, and make the plans available
to City staff and the public in the Parks Division offices and the Department of Planning
& Community Development.
· Make sure that City staff, user groups, service organizations, neighborhood
organizations, etc. are familiar with the process for preparation and amendment of
individual park master plans as described in Section 1.8.2.
10.2.5 Recommendation
Ensure that all new parks are constructed in compliance with the City’s design guidelines as
outlined in Appendix C.
Implementation Strategies
· Advise developers about their park construction requirements during the development
review process.
· Conduct preconstruction meetings and on-site inspections to ensure that parks are being
properly developed.
· Educate the development community and contractors regarding the City’s design
guidelines for parks.
· Upgrade existing parks, as needed and as opportunities arise, so they are in conformance
with the design guidelines for parks.
10.2.6 Recommendation
Include standardized signage in all City parks to increase visibility, accessibility, usability and
safety.
Implementation Strategies
· The location for signage should be included on all park plans.
· New signage must comply with the signage design requirements included in Appendix
G.
· Install signage in existing parks as funding becomes available.
10.2.7 Recommendation
Ensure that City parks include the desired amenities, based on park type, as shown on Page 7-31.
113
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-5
Implementation Strategies
· Consult the list of recommended amenities when reviewing proposed new or revised
park plans.
· Install planned park amenities as funding becomes available and opportunities arise.
· Ensure that all installed amenities comply with any applicable design guidelines
contained in the Appendices of this document.
10.2.8 Recommendation
Provide ample access and parking for City parks.
Implementation Strategies
· Provide street frontage for City parks and public open space in compliance with the
policies contained in Section 8.8.2 of this plan.
· Parking lots should be provided as needed, especially when sufficient on-street parking is
not provided.
· Evaluate the establishment of parking requirements for parks and recreational facilities,
and include in the UDO if deemed appropriate.
10.2.9 Recommendation
Ensure that all lands currently used for City parks are dedicated for that use, including but not
limited to Soroptmist, Centennial and Burke Parks.
Implementation Strategies
· Evaluate which means of dedication are available and implement as appropriate.
10.2.10 Recommendation
Ensure that water and sewer services lines are provided, in compliance with an adopted
individual park master plan, to facilitate development of parks.
Implementation Strategies
· Require developers to install water and sewer stubs for any public park facilities requiring
water and sewer services, such as restrooms, with the installation of other water and
sewer infrastructure.
· Require that water and sewer stubs be installed in compliance with an adopted individual
park master plan.
10.3 PARKLAND MAINTENANCE
10.3.1 Recommendation
Develop a GIS-based system to track park size, location, ownership, and intended use where
records are easy to retrieve and review for use in scheduling and conducting maintenance.
114
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-6
Implementation Strategies
· Work with the Information Technology Department to develop a computerized system
and develop a process for updating information.
· Purchase equipment to facilitate use of the system, including remote access from the
field.
· Provide Park Division employees with training to use, update and maintain the
information.
· Develop a more consistent labeling system for park, private and public open space, etc.
to denote ownership and access for use on subdivision plats and site plans.
10.3.2 Recommendation
Continue to provide a high level of service for park maintenance to meet the demands of a
growing community.
Implementation Strategies
· As the City’s size and amount of parkland increases, increase the City’s capacity to
maintain parks with additional staff and equipment.
· Establish park maintenance standards for facilities being maintained by the City, and
review the standards from time to time and identify areas for improvement.
10.3.3 Recommendation
Continue to require that developers prepare a maintenance plan for any parks or trails to be
maintained by the homeowners’ or property owners’ associations until a Citywide parks
maintenance district or some equivalent alternative is created.
Implementation Strategies
· Establish a process for review and approval of the maintenance plans by the Parks
Division.
· Ensure that the City’s requirements for maintenance plans are adequate, and revise the
UDO as needed.
10.3.4 Recommendation
Continue to require that homeowners’ or property owners’ associations maintain newly
dedicated parkland and trails within their development until a Citywide parks maintenance
district or some equivalent alternative is created.
Implementation Strategies
· Formalize this policy in the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance.
· Provide staff to monitor maintenance on a regular schedule to ensure compliance.
115
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-7
10.4 RECREATION PROGRAMS
10.4.1 Recommendation
Research community needs and provide programs to ensure needs are being met.
Implementation Strategies
· Conduct age specific focus groups and/or surveys of recreation needs, and develop and
implement comprehensive recreational planning for each demographic group.
. Conduct program surveys.
· Monitor demographic change in the community, such as population growth, changes in
household composition, population aging, income characteristics, etc.
· Monitor social change in the community, such as time use patterns, lifelong learning,
environmental awareness and stewardship, technology and communications innovation,
etc.
10.4.2 Recommendation
Continue to provide a high level of service for recreational programming to contribute to the
quality of life enjoyed by Bozeman residents.
Implementation Strategies
· As the City’s size and population increases, increase the City’s capacity to provide
excellence in recreational programming by providing resources for additional staff,
equipment and facilities.
. Increase general operating budget for staff in order to provide recreation programs.
10.4.3 Recommendation
Ensure that City recreation programs and the use of City facilities are affordable for all.
Implementation Strategies
· Continue and advertise existing programs to help people with affordability, such as
allowing people to volunteer to pay for recreation programs.
· Design and implement additional resources to ensure affordability such as sponsorships
and donations by others in order to offer additional free programming
10.4.4 Recommendation
Develop recreational activities and events that celebrate Bozeman’s growing cultural and ethnic
diversity.
Implementation Strategies
· Offer recreation programs to teach about different cultures and countries.
116
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-8
10.4.5 Recommendation
Continue to provide support for community partners offering recreational and educational
opportunities.
Implementation Strategies
· Continue to serve as a source of information for recreational opportunities in the
community.
· Continue to support the RPAB’s web site, infobozeman.com as a means of
disseminating information about recreation in Bozeman.
· Continue other supportive activities such as facilities scheduling, special event planning,
activity registration, etc. to support recreation groups.
10.4.6 Recommendation
Use recreational programming to enhance our community.
Implementation Strategies
· Offer recreation programs that encourage healthy and active lifestyles.
· Offer recreation programs for families to enhance family relationships and teach parents
skills for recreating with their children.
· Offer recreation programs geared towards youth and their unique needs.
· Offer recreation programs where people can improve their professional competencies by
learning new skills and gaining additional knowledge.
· Offer recreation programs that encourage civic engagement.
10.5 RECREATION FACILITIES
10.5.1 Recommendation
Maintain existing recreational facilities to ensure they remain operational as long as possible.
Implementation Strategies
· Evaluate existing recreational facilities for structural stability and renovation options.
. Fund needed renovations.
10.5.2 Recommendation
Site and construct a community recreation center to provide year-round recreation for all age
groups.
Implementation Strategies
· Identify and acquire land for a community recreation center, possibly through the
parkland dedication process.
· Evaluate possible funding sources for land acquisition and construction, and implement
the funding option(s) identified. See Chapter 11.
117
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-9
· Budget for staff to develop and operate a recreation center, and for on-going
maintenance of the building and its grounds.
· Amend individual park plan(s) as needed.
10.5.3 Recommendation
Develop two new revenue producing family-oriented leisure aquatic centers, one in the south
side of the City and the other in the north or northwest part of the City.
Implementation Strategies
· Identify and acquire land for aquatics facilities, possibly through the parkland dedication
process.
· Evaluate possible funding sources for land acquisition and construction, and implement
the funding option(s) identified. See Chapter 11.
· Budget for staff to develop and operate new aquatics facilities.
10.5.4 Recommendation
Provide additional covered facilities or picnic shelters that can accommodate groups of 20 to 50
people.
Implementation Strategies
· Evaluate existing and planned parks for siting of a new covered facility or picnic shelter.
· Amend individual park plans as needed.
· Explore various funding options, described in Chapter 11, for construction of additional
picnic shelters.
Picnic shelter at the Bozeman Ponds
118
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-10
10.5.5 Recommendation
Develop additional playgrounds in all quadrants of the City and ensure that playground
equipment is safe.
Implementation Strategies
· When evaluating new developments and park plans, include playgrounds in all
appropriate locations.
· Add playground equipment to existing parks as funding is available and opportunities
arise.
· Ensure that all new playground equipment complies with the City’s design guidelines
contained in Appendix C.
· Upgrade existing playground equipment as needed and as funding is available.
· Amend individual park plan(s) as needed.
Playground at Kirk Park
10.5.6 Recommendation
Provide additional fields for soccer.
Implementation Strategies
· Increase the number of developed soccer fields in the northeast, southwest and
southeast quadrants of the City.
· Increase the amount of large grassy areas all over the City for use for soccer practice.
119
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-11
· Evaluate existing parks and proposals for new parks in underserved areas for their
appropriateness for developed soccer fields and/or informal practice areas.
· Amend individual park plan(s) as needed.
10.5.7 Recommendation
Provide additional football fields.
Implementation Strategies
· Evaluate existing parks and proposals for new parks for their appropriateness for a
developed football field.
· Amend individual park plan(s) as needed.
10.5.8 Recommendation
Provide additional baseball/softball fields so that all neighborhoods are included within a ½ mile
service area.
Implementation Strategies
· Evaluate existing parks and proposals for new parks in underserved areas for their
appropriateness for baseball/softball fields.
· Amend individual park plan(s) as needed.
Baseball diamond at Aasheim Fields
120
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-12
10.5.9 Recommendation
Provide additional basketball courts so that all neighborhoods are included within a ½ mile
service area.
Implementation Strategies
· Evaluate existing parks and proposals for new parks in underserved areas for their
appropriateness for basketball courts.
· Amend individual park plan(s) as needed.
Basketball court at Valley Unit Park
10.5.10 Recommendation
Provide additional tennis courts so that all neighborhoods are included within a ½ mile service
area.
Implementation Strategies
· Evaluate existing parks and proposals for new parks in underserved areas for their
appropriateness for tennis courts.
· Amend individual park plan(s) as needed.
· Evaluate possible funding sources for tennis court construction, and implement the
funding option(s) identified. See Chapter 11.
121
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-13
10.5.11 Recommendation
Create off-leash dog areas when and where opportunities arise.
Implementation Strategies
· Evaluate existing parks and proposals for new parks for their appropriateness for fenced
off-leash areas.
· Amend individual park plan(s) as needed.
The dog beach at Bozeman Ponds
10.5.12 Recommendation
Provide a disc golf course in the City of Bozeman.
Implementation Strategies
· Complete improvements to Rose Park to provide a disc golf course.
10.6 OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION AND MAINTENANCE
10.6.1 Recommendation
Develop a public open space acquisition and management program for the City of Bozeman,
similar to the programs in Missoula and Helena.
122
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-14
Implementation Strategies
· Prepare an open space plan, including an examination of possible funding sources such
as a Citywide open space bond.
· Examine other successful open space programs such as Missoula’s for ideas.
10.6.2 Recommendation
Once a public open space acquisition and management program is developed, some City parks
may be included in the open space program rather than the parks program.
Implementation Strategies
· Evaluate which City parks or other lands would best be labeled and managed in a public
open space program rather than as City parks.
10.6.3 Recommendation
Continue to require that property owners associations maintain open space within their
development. If a Citywide park maintenance district or some other similar alternative is created
consideration should given to the maintenance of open space with public access on a case-by-
case basis.
Implementation Strategies
· Ensure that developers are providing adequate open space maintenance plans, and
develop a process for review of these plans.
· Ensure that the City’s requirements for open space maintenance plans are adequate, and
revise the UDO as needed.
10.7 TRAIL ACQUISITION
10.7.1 Recommendation
Ensure that the trail system within the City connects with the Countywide trail system, and with
trails on state and federal lands where appropriate, and complies with the PROST Plan Trail
Map.
Implementation Strategies
· Coordinate trail planning with the Gallatin County Board of Park Commissioners, and
state and federal agencies.
· Review the adopted “Connecting Communities: 2001 Gallatin County Trails Report and
Plan” when evaluating trail development proposals, especially on the edges of the City.
· Support the community effort to construct a safe trail between Bozeman and Belgrade.
· Require that annexation proposals be accompanied by a master plan showing how any
contiguous parks, open space, and/or trails will be extended to and through the property
to be annexed, and ensure connections to existing or planned trails on developed or
undeveloped adjacent properties.
123
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-15
· Hire a Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator to coordinate with County, State and Federal
government representatives.
· Implement the policies and recommendations of the Bozeman Area Transportation
Plan.
· Continue cooperation with GVLT in trail planning.
10.7.2 Recommendation
Site of new trails to be consistent with the adopted growth policy, and with any adopted subarea
or neighborhood plan.
Implementation Strategies
· Require that the detailed information provided in subarea and neighborhood plans
include trails and trail connections.
· Review the adopted growth policy and any applicable adopted subarea or neighborhood
plan when evaluating the proposed location of a new trail,.
· Hire a Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator to evaluate new trail proposals for compliance
with the adopted planning documents.
10.7.3 Recommendation
Continue to expand the trail system in the City in a logical, convenient and safe manner as
opportunities arise.
Implementation Strategies
· Consult the PROST Plan Trail Map when reviewing development proposals, and require
the provision of identified trail corridors or links as shown on the plan.
· Continue to work with GVLT to expand the Main Street to Mountains trail system.
· Work with the County to connect the trail system in the City to the County’s trail system.
· Work with property owners to secure trail easements for critical trail connections.
· Implement the policies and recommendations of the Bozeman Area Transportation
Plan.
10.7.4 Recommendation
Evaluate new trails or trail systems for suitability for cross-country skiing.
Implementation Strategies
· Work closely with GVLT and the Bridger Ski Foundation to review proposals for new
trails.
· If a new development will include trails for cross-country skiing, determine special
conditions related to grooming and maintenance responsibility, hours of use, parking, etc
on a case by case basis.
· Amend individual park plan(s) as needed.
124
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-16
10.7.5 Recommendation
Provide a level of service for trails of 1.5 miles of trail per 1,000 people.
Implementation Strategies
· Implement the PROST Plan Trail Map as opportunities arise including development
proposals.
· Secure critical trail connections and segments, to create longer and more usable trails, as
funding becomes available and opportunities arise.
· Focus trail acquisition activities on connections and segments that connect community
facilities such as parks, schools, public library, etc.
· Hire a Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator to coordinate trail acquisition for the City of
Bozeman.
10.7.6 Recommendation
Provide public access to trails owned by homeowners’ associations as developments containing
trails are annexed to the City of Bozeman.
Implementation Strategies
· Require the provision of public access easements on trails owned by homeowners’
associations as land is annexed to the City.
· Revise the City’s annexation policy as needed.
10.8 TRAIL DEVELOPMENT
10.8.1 Recommendation
Provide a high level of accessibility and safe routes of travel to and from City parks, and between
other community facilities such as the public library, schools, and downtown.
Implementation Strategies
· Continue the City’s sidewalk installation, repair and replacement program.
· Implement the PROST Plan Trail Map.
· Improve existing trails and secure needed trail connections as opportunities arise.
10.8.2 Recommendation
Require that linear parks and public trail easements are at least 25 feet in width, recognizing that
additional width may be required for cross-country skiing trails to be determined on a case-by-
case basis.
Implementation Strategies
· Edit the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance as needed.
125
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-17
10.8.3 Recommendation
Ensure that all new trails are constructed in compliance with the City’s design guidelines as
outlined in Appendix C.
Implementation Strategies
· During the development review process classify all new trails to ensure that the proper
design guidelines are applied.
· Conduct preconstruction meetings and on-site inspections to ensure that trails are being
property constructed.
· Educate the development community and contractors regarding the City’s design
guidelines for trails.
· Upgrade existing trails, as needed and as opportunities arise, to comply with the PROST
Plan Trail Map.
· Hire a Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator to ensure compliance with the City’s design
guidelines for new trail construction.
10.8.4 Recommendation
Include standardized signage on City trails to increase visibility, accessibility, usability and safety.
Implementation Strategies
· Include the location for signage on all linear park plans.
· Design new signage to comply with the signage design requirements included in
Appendix G.
· Install signage in key existing trail segments as funding becomes available.
Standardized trail signage is needed to ensure visibility, accessibility, usability and safety
126
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-18
10.8.5 Recommendation
Evaluate all trail and street crossings for safety and compliance with the crossing guidelines
contained in the Bozeman Area Transportation Plan.
Implementation Strategies
· Require that all new trail and street crossings comply with the guidelines contained in the
Bozeman Area Transportation Plan.
· Upgrade all existing trail and street crossings, where needed, so they comply with the
guidelines set forth in the Bozeman Area Transportation Plan.
· Review all proposed trail and street crossings for compliance with applicable engineering
and design standards.
· Hire a Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator to coordinate safety measures for trail and street
crossings for the City of Bozeman.
10.8.6 Recommendation
Provide a 20-foot building setback from parks, including linear parks.
Implementation Strategies
· Amend the UDO as needed.
10.9 TRAIL MAINTENANCE
10.9.1 Recommendation
Continue to require that homeowners’ or property owners’ associations maintain newly
developed trails within their development until the adoption of a Citywide parks maintenance
district or other similar program.
Implementation Strategies
· Formalize this policy in the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance.
· Provide staff to monitor maintenance on a regular schedule to ensure compliance.
10.9.2 Recommendation
Continue to require that developers prepare a maintenance plan for any trails to be maintained
by the homeowners’ or property owners’ association.
Implementation Strategies
· Edit Bozeman UDO to clarify that this requirements also applies to trails.
· Establish a process for review and approval of the maintenance plans by the Parks
Division.
· Ensure that the City’s requirements for maintenance plans are adequate, and revise the
UDO as needed.
127
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-19
10.9.3 Recommendation
Prepare a detailed trail and trail segment inventory using GIS technology including classification,
amenities, surface, etc. to use for planning new trails and trail segments, and for maintaining
trails.
Implementation Strategies
· Coordinate with GVLT, user groups, service groups, etc. to prepare a detailed inventory.
· Investigate the use of interns for inventory preparation, especially for mapping amenities.
Trail amenities, such as this bridge in Valley West, should be inventoried in the City’s GIS-based asset management system
10.9.4 Recommendation
Continue to improve trail conditions and maintenance.
Implementation Strategies
· Ensure that all new trails, and trail amenities such as bridges, comply with the City’s trail
design standards, and upgrade existing trails to comply with the standards as
opportunities arise.
· Increase the Parks Division’s capacity for trail maintenance, including weed control.
· Use the GIS-based trail and trail segment inventory to improve trail maintenance.
· Ensure that the trail maintenance plans provided by developers and/or property owners’
associations are adequate, and that the plans are being implemented.
128
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-20
· Launch a public education campaign that includes topics such as proper bike use, animal
control laws, and proper trail etiquette.
· Investigate more community-based efforts to maintain trails such as having community
groups or neighborhoods “adopt” a trail segment similar to the “Adopt a Highway”
program.
· Improve trail amenities such as signage, dog stations, benches, bridges, etc. as funding is
available and opportunities arise.
10.9.5 Recommendation
Continue to provide a high level of service for trail maintenance.
Implementation Strategies
· As the City’s size and amount of trail increases, increase the City’s capacity to maintain
trails with additional staff and equipment.
· Establish trail maintenance standards for facilities being maintained by the City, and
review the standards from time to time and identify areas for improvement.
10.10 OTHER
10.10.1 Recommendation
Ensure that City parks, recreation facilities and trails are accessible to the greatest extent
possible.
Implementation Strategies
· Evaluate existing City recreation facilities and trails for compliance with accessibility
standards, and make recommendations for facilities lacking in compliance.
· Allocate funds to make upgrades and improvements to existing facilities to achieve
greater accessibility.
· Review the plans for all new recreation facilities, and Class I and II trails, for compliance
with accessibility requirements.
· Hire a Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator to evaluate trails for compliance with ADA
requirements and make recommendations.
10.10.2 Recommendation
Work with the school district to formalize agreements related to use of school district facilities
by the general public during non-school hours.
Implementation Strategies
· Work with the school district to secure agreements related to joint development, use and
maintenance.
129
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-21
10.10.3 Recommendation
Obtain user group contracts with all user groups that provide organized activities at the same
location on a regular basis, and intend to continue the activities for the foreseeable future.
Implementation Strategies
· Maintain an up-to-date list of user groups and contact information.
· Formalize contracts with identified user groups.
10.10.4 Recommendation
Provide materials, instructions, signage, etc. in other languages, Spanish in particular, as
necessary.
Implementation Strategies
· Evaluate City recreation and park materials and signage to determine which should be
provided in both English and Spanish, with emphasis on materials critical to protecting
life and safety.
· Identify community resources that can help translate materials as needed, and budget
accordingly.
· Budget funds to provide information in Spanish, with emphasis on larger, more
expensive items such as signage.
10.10.5 Recommendation
Address issues related to dogs in City parks and trails.
Implementation Strategies
· Enforce City ordinances related to dogs.
· Evaluate the possibility of hiring seasonal workers to patrol the public parks and issue
citations to people found to be violating City ordinances, and to educate and discuss
responsibility with dog owners. Implement this strategy if deemed appropriate.
· Consider revising City ordinances related to dogs to prohibit dogs from playground areas
in City parks.
· Evaluate the current pet licensing program for effectiveness and efficiency, and revise
the program as deemed appropriate.
· Initiate a public education program to inform pet owners about their responsibilities,
including pet ordinances and licensing requirements.
· Continue to provide dog stations in parks and trails, and provide adequate funds for bags
and waste removal.
· Include yearly removal of pet waste from parks and trails as part of the Bozeman Clean
up Day.
· Create a new City advisory board to work on pet-related issues and activities.
10.10.6 Recommendation
Address vandalism and graffiti in City parks.
130
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-22
Implementation Strategies
· Increase police patrols of City parks.
· Implement patrol beats to allow an officer to be more familiar with neighborhoods
and citizens in their assigned area; to promote community oriented policing; and give
officers opportunity for more focused preventative patrols, building checks and traffic
enforcement.
10.11 TOP TEN CAPITAL FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
The following capital facilities and/or capital improvements were identified during this planning process
to be the most important to the community based on survey results, public input and level of service
analysis. The list is not presented in order by priority. All estimated costs are presented in 2007 dollars.
· Complete development of Rose Park
Estimated cost: $155,000 to complete restrooms; install an asphalt parking lot with curb and
gutter; landscaping such as berms, soil and seeding; and installation of power.
Possible funding source: general fund, park improvement grants, private donations
· New aquatics center
Estimated cost: $6 million (does not include the cost of land)
Possible funding source: general obligation bonds, user fees, foundation
· Multipurpose community recreation center
Estimated cost: $16 million (does not include the cost of land)
Possible funding source: general obligation bonds, user fees, memberships, impact fees,
foundation
· BMX facility at Westlake Park
Estimated cost: $110,000 to complete restrooms; install an asphalt parking lot with curb and
gutter; and installation of power.
Possible funding source: general fund, park improvement grants, private donations
· New outdoor swimming pool on the west or northwest side of the City
Estimated cost: $5 million (does not include the cost of land)
Possible funding source: general obligation bonds, user fees, foundation
· Tennis courts to increase the City’s level of service
Estimated cost: $75,000 to construct one new court with sub-grade, concrete, acrylic surfacing,
fencing, nets and posts (does not include the cost of land). Economies of scale accrue from
constructing multiple courts at one time.
Possible funding source: general fund, special improvement district, impact fees, park
improvement grants, user groups, private donation, foundation
131
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan Recommendations and Implementation
Page 10-23
· Off-leash dog parks
Estimated cost: $35,000 to 45,000 depending on amenities, includes fencing, landscaping, water
service, irrigation system, benches, surfacing and dog stations (does not include the cost of
land).
Possible funding source: general fund, special improvement district, impact fees, park
improvement grants, user groups, private donation, foundation
· Playground equipment so all homes are within ¼ mile of a playground
Estimated cost: $25,000 for a small installation and up to $50,000 for a large one like Bogert
Park
Possible funding source: general fund, special improvement district, impact fees, park
improvement grants, private donation, foundation
· Multiuse fields (soccer, football, rugby, lacrosse, etc.)
Estimated cost: $ $1.00 to 2.50 per square foot (depending on the need for amended soils) which
includes seeding, rough grade, irrigation system and fertilization (does not include the cost of
land)
Possible funding source: general fund, special improvement district, impact fees, park
improvement grants, user groups, private donation, foundation
· Basketball courts
Estimated cost: $25,000 to $30,000
Possible funding source: general fund, special improvement district, impact fees, park
improvement grants, private donation, foundation
10.12 TOP TEN NON-FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
The following non-facility recommendations were identified during this planning process as a priority
based on survey results, public input and level of service analysis. The list is not presented in order by
priority. Costs estimates are provided where costs can be estimated. All estimated costs are presented in
2007 dollars.
· Evaluate and implement new methods of acquiring and improving parkland
· Revise the City’s cash-in-lieu valuation system
· Fund a new Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator position
Estimated cost: Alta Planning and Design provided some information about similar positions in
the region. Financial compensation for these positions ranged from $40,000 to $60,000 per year.
This salary reflects the fact that most positions have degrees in Engineering or Planning, with at
least three years of experience.
Possible funding source: general fund
· Evaluate and implement a Citywide parks maintenance district or some equivalent
alternative
132
Recommendations and Implementation Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Page 10-24
· Prepare individual park master plans for all City parks
· Prepare and adopt an open space plan for the Bozeman planning area
· Improve and maintain detailed GIS-based inventories of parkland, open space and trails
in the City
Estimated cost: As part of the City’s asset management system it would cost $6,000 to $8,000 for
the software depending upon the desired functionality. There are also annual maintenance costs
for the software. It would cost an additional $5,000+ for a rugged tablet pc.
Possible funding source: general fund
· Create a new City advisory board for pet-related issues and activities
· Prepare City park and trail maintenance standards
· Expand the recreation programs offered by the City
133
Storm Water
Executive Summary and corresponding Implementation Goals
134
135
136
137
Transportation
Executive Summary and corresponding Implementation Goals
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
Waste Water
Corresponding Implementation Goals
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
Water
Corresponding Implementation Goals
188
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 46
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
7 CONSERVATION OPTIONS FOR BOZEMAN
This chapter defines the most reasonable water conservation options for the City of Bozeman,
and provides estimates of their impact on the long-term water demand for the City. The
options explored in this report are not detailed implementation plans, but are more general and
result oriented in their approach. They are meant to provide the City with a road map for
possible future demand management strategies and leave detailed implementation plans to
future studies.
A total of 5 scenarios have been included in this report, and these can be modified and
changed as conditions warrant. The scenarios are described in Table 19. Case A, the
Baseline Case has been described in Chapter 6. Scenario 0 represents the estimated loss in
savings that would occur if the EP Act were repealed by Congress. Scenarios B through E
represent the conservation scenarios.
Table 19: Water Conservation Scenarios
Scenario Description
0 Sub-baseline case: repeal of Energy Policy Act and revert to old
fixture standards.
A
Baseline. No overt efforts at conservation except to allow for natural
replacement of old plumbing fixtures with new ones meeting EP Act
standards.
B
Require all new homes and apartments use best available technology
for plumbing fixtures, clothes washer and dishwashers. Devise
strategy to get 5% of existing customers to retrofit to BAT per year.
C
Same as A, but obtain a 25% reduction in irrigation use in new
residences and commercial customers. Reduce irrigation use in
existing customers by 0.5% per year.
D Combination of B and C
E Add water conservation program on MSU
7.1 Energy Policy Act of 1992
In 1992 Congress passed the Energy Policy (EP) Act, which mandated maximum allowable
flow rates and flush volumes for toilets, urinals, showerheads and faucets. The continued
operation of these national regulations provide automatic savings for water utilities as they are
incorporated into new and existing buildings at the time of their construction or rehabilitation.
During the last several session of Congress legislation has been introduced by Senator Joseph
Knollenberg, of Michigan, that would repeal these standards. In order to quantify the savings
associated with the water conservation programs included in this study we have assumed that
the EP Act remains in force, and have used it as the baseline case, but a special analysis has
been done (Case 0) that shows the impacts of loss of these standards and reversion to the
previous efficiency levels.
189
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 47
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
The EP Act sets maximum use standards, but there are devices that exceed these standards,
such as toilets that use 1.0 gpf. These have been referred to as Best Available Technology
(BAT) standards. In addition, while the EP Act does not mention clothes washers there are
many models that are water conserving which have been included under the BAT standards.
Table 20: U.S. Energy Policy Act Standards
Fixture Maximum Water Use
Toilets (all after 1997) 1.6 gpf
Urinals 1.0 gpf
Showerheads 2.5 gpm (at 80 psi)
Faucets 2.5 gpm (at 80 psi)
Metering Faucet 0.25 gal per cycle
Source: See note 17
7.2 Targeting the Most Important Uses
An examination of Figure 8 shows that for Bozeman the most important water use in terms of
volumes consumed is for the two residential categories. Together these make up 56% of the
total demand. If the commercial users are brought in, the total rises to 83%, MSU brings the
total to 99%. We know from Figure 10 that 75% of the total system demand is for indoor
purposes, and Figure 11 and Table 5 show that the only customer category that has a
significant outdoor demand is the single family residents, which use 42% of their total for
outdoor purposes. All of the remaining sectors use 20% or less of their water outdoors.
The information sited from Chapter 4 indicates that from the standpoint of annual water
demands the most likely order of uses to target consist of residential indoor uses, followed by
commercial indoor uses, and residential outdoor uses. Since MSU makes up a largely
independent system with its own governing body, they will need to be approached about
working on water conservation as a joint project with the City. The two most likely areas for
conservation on campus are for domestic bathroom uses and laboratory cooling.
7.3 Scenario B: Interior Conservation
7.3.1 Description
This case seeks to increase the efficiency of water use for indoor purposes through a fairly
aggressive combination of building codes, incentives and code requiring upgrades of
plumbing fixtures and appliances upon sale of the home. The goal would be to insure that all
new homes meet BAT standards and that 5% of all existing homes per year be upgraded to
these standards, so that after 20 years all of the homes in Bozeman consume no more than 40
gallons per capita per day for indoor uses instead of the existing 70 gpcd for single family and
45 gpcd for multi family. Reaching this efficiency level will require the use of dual flush or
1.0 gpf toilet and clothes washers that use 25 gallons per load or less. It will also require the
co-operation and support of the existing customers, which will be achieved through a long
term public relations and education program.
190
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 48
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
Irrigation use would not be affected by this plan, which is limited strictly to interior
conservation measures.
For commercial and public accounts this scenario assumes a 25% reduction in bathroom uses
due for toilets, urinals and faucets for all new customers and 5% of the existing customers per
year (for 20 years). Use of waterless urinals and metered faucets would be included in this
type of program. As dual flush commercial toilets become available, they could be included
into the program.
This program includes no special conservation efforts on MSU campus beyond the baseline
case reliance on the EP Act standards for new plumbing fixtures.
7.3.2 Water Demands and Savings
Under this scenario demands would grow to 7039 af over the 30 year study period, which
represents a savings of 948 acre feet, or 11.9% of the baseline demand. The annual demands
are shown in Figure 23, and are summarized in Table 21. Because all of the existing homes
would be retrofit after 20 years in this scenario most of the savings are captured in the first 20
years of the program, and the rate of savings decreases in years 20 to 30. Under this scenario
peak day demands would also decrease, as shown in Figure 24. Peak day demands would not
reach 90% of the treatment plant capacity until year 23 of the study period. (Note this assumes
no supply from the Lyman Creek system.)
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324252627282930
YearDemand (AF)SF existing SF new MF existing MF new ICI existing ICI new
Public existing Public new Inst. existing Inst. new Irrig. existing Irrig. new
Unaccounted System losses Ave Yld Dry Yld
Figure 23: Scenario B Demand Projections
191
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 49
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
Table 21: Scenario B Demands and Savings
10yr 20yr 30yr
Baseline Demands (af)6324 7229 7987
Scenario Demands (af) 5886 6360 7039
Savings (af)438 869 948
% Savings 6.9% 12.0% 11.9%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Study YearWTP Output (MGD)Peak Day WTP Cap 90% Cap
Figure 24 : Scenario B, Peak Day Demands
7.4 Scenario C: Irrigation Conservation
7.4.1 Description
In Scenario C, conservation efforts would be directed solely to irrigation uses, and there
would be no additional indoor conservation over the baseline case. Programs would be set up
to help existing residential customers to reduce their irrigation use so that outdoor use as a
whole for residential customers would decrease by 0.5% per year over the 30 year period. In
other words, at the end of the 30 years the total outdoor use for the single family and multi-
family accounts on-line at the start of the period would be 15% less than their current demand.
This would be accomplished though a combination of gradual sod replacement programs and
increases in irrigation efficiencies. New single family accounts would be required to limit the
amount of sod and total landscaping to affect a 20% reduction in their outdoor water use
compared to existing customers. New multi-family accounts would be required only to not
increase outdoor use over existing customers since their outdoor use is so much lower than the
192
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 50
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
single family customers. In the baseline case, the multifamily customers were assumed to
increase their outdoor use over the existing accounts.
In this scenario, the commercial accounts would be addressed by requiring new accounts to
use 25% less outdoor water than existing commercial accounts, primarily through efficiency
increases and area sod reductions. Existing commercial accounts would not be targeted. No
action would be taken for either governmental or MSU accounts since neither are major
outdoor water users.
7.4.2 Water Demands and Savings
The savings under this scenario are not as great as those in Scenario B. Figure 25 shows the
annual demands increasing to 7612 af and Table 22 shows that the total savings are 375 af
after 30 years which represents 4.7% of the baseline demand. The peak day demands would
be reduced as shown in Figure 26. Under this scenario, peak day demand would not reach
90% of the water treatment plant capacity until year 15 which represents a 3 year delay
compared to the baseline case.
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324252627282930
YearDemand (AF)SF existing SF new MF existing MF new ICI existing ICI new
Public existing Public new Inst. existing Inst. new Irrig. existing Irrig. new
Unaccounted System losses Ave Yld Dry Yld
Figure 25: Scenario C Demand Projections
193
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 51
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
Table 22: Scenario C Demands and Savings
10yr 20yr 30yr
Baseline Demands (af) 6324 7229 7987
Scenario Demands (af) 6180 6961 7612
Savings (af) 144 268 375
% Savings 2.3% 3.7% 4.7%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Study YearWTP Output (MGD)Peak Day WTP Cap 90% Cap
Figure 26: Scenario C Peak Day Demands
7.5 Scenario D: Combined Indoor and Outdoor Program
This scenario is simply a combination of Scenarios A and B and represents a fairly major
conservation effort addressing all of the significant water using categories, with the exception
of MSU. The annual demands, shown in Figure 27, rise to 6,697 acre-feet over 30 years.
This represents a savings of 16% compared to the baseline case; most of which occurs in the
first 20 years of the study period. The peak day demands for the system under this scenario
do no reach the 13.5 MGD level until year 28 of the study period.
194
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 52
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324252627282930
YearDemand (AF)SF existing SF new MF existing MF new ICI existing ICI new
Public existing Public new Inst. existing Inst. new Irrig. existing Irrig. new
Unaccounted System losses Ave Yld Dry Yld
Figure 27: Scenario D Demand Projections
Table 23: Scenario D Demands and Savings
10yr 20yr 30yr
Baseline Demands (af) 6324 7229 7987
Scenario Demands (af) 5753 6114 6694
Savings (af) 570 1115 1293
% Savings 9% 15% 16%
195
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 53
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Study YearWTP Output (MGD)Peak Day WTP Cap 90% Cap
Figure 28 : Scenario D Peak Day Demands
7.6 Scenario E: Conservation at MSU
The final scenario is the same as Scenario D, but adds a more aggressive conservation effort
at MSU, perhaps as a partnership between the University and City. In the baseline case only
passive replacement of outmoded plumbing fixtures was anticipated, but in this case a major
effort would be made to upgrade the water using fixtures and equipment on campus. An
important goal would be to reduce the amount of once through cooling used in the research
buildings through construction of closed loop cooling systems and use of air cooled
equipment where possible. In addition to cooling uses, kitchen, bathroom, laundry and
process uses on campus would be reduced through more aggressive retrofitting of plumbing
fixtures and process control equipment. The addition of this program results in an additional
134 af of savings over the thirty year study period.
196
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 54
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324252627282930
YearDemand (AF)SF existing SF new MF existing MF new ICI existing ICI new
Public existing Public new Inst. existing Inst. new Irrig. existing Irrig. new
Unaccounted System losses Ave Yld Dry Yld
Figure 29: Secenario E Demands
Table 24: Scenario E Demands and Savings
10yr 20yr 30yr
Baseline Demands (af) 6324 7229 7987
Scenario Demands (af) 5619 5979 6560
Savings (af) 705 1249 1427
% Savings 11.1% 17.3% 17.9%
7.7 Summary of Water Savings
To assist with the evaluation of the various scenarios a summary matrix showing the most
important parameters for each customer category under each scenario is provided in Table 25
for residential customers and in Table 26 for non-residential customers. These tables show
that a fully implemented program, which includes the Montana State University could result
in water savings of up to 1250 acre feet over the twenty years period after the programs were
implemented, and 1400 acre feet over a thirty year period. These represent a reduction in
demand of over 17% compared to the baseline case. The tables also show that the Energy
Policy Act of 1992 contribute an additional 240 to 320 acre feet in savings for which the City
needs to do nothing except lobby for the continuance of these Federal standards. In the next
chapter the report will discuss how these program would affect the capital and financial
situation of the Water Utility and their benefits and costs.
197
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 55
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
Table 25: Summary of Modeling Parameters for Residential Customers
Parameter
ABCDE
Baseline Interior Outdoor B+C D + MSU
Single Family, Existing
Persons per Household 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
Initial Per Capita Use 70.3 70.3 70.3 70.3 70.3
Target Per Capita Use 60 40 60 40 40
Percent of homes targetted 0.50% 5.00% 0.50% 5.00% 5.00%
Irrigated Area (sf) 4000 4000 4000 4000 4000
Annual Change in Irr Area (%) 0% 0% -0.5% -0.5% -0.5%
Average Application Rates (gpsf) 10.6 10.6 10.6 10.6 10.6
Average Application Rate (in) 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.1
Annual Change in App Rate (%) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0%
Single Family, New
Persons per Household 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
Initial Per Capita Use 60 40 60 40 40
Target Per Capita Use 60 40 60 40 40
Percent of homes targetted 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Irrigated Area (sf) 4000 4000 3000 3000 3000
Annual Change in Irr Area (%) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Average Application Rates (gpsf) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
Average Application Rate (in) 16.04 16.04 16.04 16.04 16.04
Annual Change in App Rate (%) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Multi Family, Existing
Persons per Household 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9
Initial Per Capita Use 45.6 45.6 45.6 45.6 45.6
Target Per Capita Use 40 40 40 40 40
Percent of homes targetted 0.5% 5.0% 0.5% 5.0% 5.0%
Irrigated Area (sf) 5041 5041 5041 5041 5041
Annual Change in Irr Area (%) 0.0% 0.0% -0.5% -0.5% -0.5%
Average Application Rates (gpsf) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0
Average Application Rate (in) 12.83 12.83 12.83 12.83 12.83
Annual Change in App Rate (%) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Multi Family, New
Persons per Household 11.929 11.929 11.929 11.929 11.929
Initial Per Capita Use 45.6 40 45.6 40 40
Target Per Capita Use 45.6 40 45.6 40 40
Percent of homes targetted 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Irrigated Area (sf) 7500 7500 5000 5000 5000
Annual Change in Irr Area (%) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Average Application Rates (gpsf) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
Average Application Rate (in) 16.04 16.04 16.04 16.04 16.04
Scenario
198
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 56
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
Table 26: Summary of Modeling Parameters for Non-residential Customers
Parameter
ABCDE
Baseline Interior Outdoor B+C D + MSU
Existing Commercial
Ave Demand per Account (kgal)493 493 493 493 493
Target Change in Impacted Acts (kgal)-15 -38 -15 -38 -38
Percent of Acts. Impacted/yr.1.0% 5.0% 1.0% 5.0% 5.0%
New Commercial
Ave Demand per Account (kgal)492 492 492 492 492
Target Change in Impacted Acts (kgal)-23 -38 -48 -48 -48
Percent of Acts. Impacted/yr.100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Existing Governmental
Ave Demand per Account (kgal)556 556 556 556 556
Target Change in Impacted Acts (kgal)-39 -66 -39 -66 -66
Percent of Acts. Impacted/yr.1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
New Governmental
Ave Demand per Account (kgal)559 559 559 559 559
Target Change in Impacted Acts (kgal)-39 -66 -39 -66 -66
Percent of Acts. Impacted/yr.100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Existing MSU
Ave Demand per Account (kgal)11816 11816 11816 11816 11816
Target Change in Impacted Acts (kgal)-1481 -1481 -1481 -1481 -3353
Percent of Acts. Impacted/yr.10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0%
New MSU
Ave Demand per Account (kgal)5700 5700 5700 5700 5700
Target Change in Impacted Acts (kgal)-579 -579 -579 -579 -579
Percent of Acts. Impacted/yr.100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Scenario
199
Bozeman Water Conservation Study 09/21/01
Page 57
Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management 303-786-9691
2709 Pine Street 303-786-8696 (fax)
Boulder, CO 80302 www.aquacraft.com
Water Demand Scenarios
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000
7500
8000
8500
9000
Study Year, Demand (af)Annual Water Demand (af)A B C D E 0
A 5482 5581 5775 5870 5963 6146 6236 6324 6421 6611 6704 6795 6973 7060 7145 7311 7392 7471 7549 7701 7775 7847 7987
B 5438 5493 5599 5650 5700 5795 5841 5886 5939 6042 6092 6140 6232 6276 6319 6434 6506 6577 6647 6783 6849 6914 7039
C 5467 5551 5715 5795 5875 6030 6106 6180 6264 6428 6508 6587 6741 6816 6889 7032 7102 7170 7237 7367 7431 7492 7612
D 5424 5465 5544 5582 5618 5688 5721 5753 5795 5874 5912 5949 6019 6051 6083 6177 6239 6300 6360 6476 6532 6587 6694
E 5411 5438 5491 5515 5538 5582 5602 5620 5662 5742 5780 5816 5886 5919 5951 6045 6107 6169 6228 6345 6401 6456 6563
0 5497 5611 5835 5944 6052 6264 6368 6470 6577 6786 6888 6989 7185 7281 7375 7558 7648 7735 7822 7989 8071 8151 8306
124568910111314151718192122232426272830
Figure 30: Summary of Projected Demands
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Study Year Savings (af)Water Savings (af)0 B C D E
0 -15 -30 -45 -60 -74 -89 -103 -118 -132 -146 -156 -165 -175 -184 -194 -203 -212 -221 -230 -238 -247 -256 -264 -272 -280 -288 -296 -304 -312 -319
B 44 88 132 176 220 264 307 351 395 438 482 525 569 612 655 698 741 784 826 869 877 886 894 902 910 918 925 933 940 948
C 15 30 45 60 75 89 103 117 130 144 157 170 183 196 208 220 232 244 256 268 279 290 301 312 323 334 344 354 365 375
D 58 116 173 231 288 344 401 457 513 569 625 680 735 790 844 898 952 1006 1060 1113 11321150 1169 1187 1204 1222 1239 1256 1273 1290
E 71 143 214 284 355 425 495 565 634 704 759 814 869 924 979 1033 1087 1141 1194 1247 12661285 1303 1321 1339 1356 1374 1391 1408 1424
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930
Figure 31: Summary of Water Savings
200
I. IWRP Framework
Integrated Water Resources Plan (IWRP) – DRAFT Outline
A. Define the ‘Need for Action’
1. Existing events and assessments
a) Forecasted firm yield shortage documented in current water facility plan
b) High growth rates experienced and reasonably expected to continue.
Documented in facility plans (trans, water, wastewater) and Community Plan.
c) Drought rationing has occurred in the past (however, Lyman Creek source was offline when these rationing events experienced (?)) Unclear whether
rationing was a result of source water shortage, or inadequate plant peaking /
finished water storage capacity
2. Demand Forecast
a) Develop a robust demand forecasting model
(1) Update Annually
(2) Integrate water rights periods of use
(3) Re-analyze reliable yield hydrology
B. Identify the Planning Issues for New Source Development
1. Gather sufficient background information and package in white paper(s)
a) Characterize relevant potential new supply sources
(1) Water Quality and Quantity
(2) Water Rights Issues
(3) Environmental Impacts
(4) Source Water Protection Issues
(5) Infrastructure Requirements
(6) Property Acquisition
(7) Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
(8) Permitting Agencies and Regulations
(9) Financial Funding
b) Identify and solicit input from key stakeholders
c) Prepare a rigorous overview evaluation
(1) Assess risks and generate a risk matrix
(a) Cost-effectiveness (b) Financial Feasibility
(c) Environmental Permitting Issues (d) Water Rights Permitting Issues
(e) Public Acceptability
d) Formulate a decision-making process
C. Develop a Work Plan
1. Identify and describe tasks and develop a task flow diagram for each potential
new source
a) Estimate cost and time b) Determine schedule critical path
c) Identify critical decision making points and progress reviews
2. Decide who will perform identified tasks
a) Allocate budget
b) Assign Staff and determine portions needing outside consultants
c) Package RFPs and establish deliverable schedule
3. Develop and implement a Public Involvement Plan that integrates with and
compliments the Work Plan
4. Prepare capital funding strategy
201
II. IWRP Immediate Priorities
A. Cuss, Discuss and Settle on IWRP Framework - Admin
1. Assign roles and responsibilities
2. Commit as an administration to remaining faithful to the IWRP process
(Commission Resolution?). We’re outlining a process, not necessarily a product. This
should be revisited periodically to determine effectiveness and to amend appropriately.
B. Water Rights Study
1. Assess legal validity of existing Bozeman Creek Reservoir Company rights
2. Compile all water rights held by and/or transferred to City of Bozeman and assess
validity of same
3. Provide recommendations for water rights Change Application(s)
4. Identify strategic privately held water rights that are worth pursuing.
5. Act on water facility plan recommendations to modify Story Mill rights,
Lichtenberg rights, and Lyman Creek rights
C. Water Demand Forecasting Model
1. This item is critical to smart and strategic planning; we don’t know how to get
wherever we’re going until we know precisely where we are! This remains equally valid
during all stages of the IWRP. A solid demand forecast reveals the magnitude and timing
required for new source development.
2. Requires water rights study results and re-evaluation of reliable yield hydrology to
really firm up.
III. New Source Options for Potential White Papers
A. Comprehensive Water Conservation
1. Need to know how aggressive the Commission really wants to be with water
conservation.
a) Keep it incentive-based? Enact restrictive use ordinances? Implement a
truly effective conservation-oriented inclined block water rates? Maintain funding at a level to keep program active (i.e. rebates, bill stuffers, educational
promotions, etc.)? Hire an FTE? Keep funding future water renovations?
B. Purchase Additional Hyalite Reservoir Storage Rights
C. Sourdough Creek Large On-stream Reservoir
D. Sourdough Creek Series of Small On-Stream Reservoirs
E. Sourdough Creek Off-stream Reservoir
F. Old Mystic Dam Site Rehabilitation
G. Shallow Alluvial Groundwater
H. Deep Karstic Groundwater – Madison Aquifer
I. Aquifer Storage and Recovery – Madison Aquifer
J. Conjunctive Use of Alluvial Groundwater and Farmers Canal Water
K. Re-analyze ‘shrink’ factor used for Hyalite Reservoir Storage Rights
L. Water Right Leasing – Farmers Canal and/or Hyalite Reservoir Water
M. Reclaimed Municipal Wastewater to Irrigate Riverside Country Club in
Exchange for their Surface and/or Groundwater Rights
N. Purchase Water from Wholesalers – Salar Water Project
O. Yellowstone River Pipeline over Gallatin Divide
202
203
204
Economic
Development
Corresponding Implementation Goals
205
1
2010-2011 Economic Development Council
Priorities and Recommendations
In the performance of its duty to advise the Bozeman City Commission on economic
development issues, the City‟s Economic Development Council (EDC) has developed a series of policy recommendations that build upon our City‟s existing advantages and position the community to excel by supporting and encouraging growth and expansion of existing businesses,
attracting and retaining new businesses, increasing investments and creating jobs. In order to
gauge the success of the City‟s economic development program over time, the EDC recommends
the creation of an annual economic development report card. The Economic Development Report Card, or some other measure, would encourage accountability and is critical to analyzing the outcomes of the proposed reforms and programs and thus determine the impact on the local
economy.
We recommend that the City Commission take action to adopt these and other specific reforms,
such as those being considered by the Planning Board that will further improve our City‟s business climate. Equally important, we strongly believe the City Commission must identify the
promotion of economic development as long-term priority. To this end, the City Commission
should carefully monitor and measure enacted reforms, survey the effectiveness of steps taken
and continually seek additional opportunities to improve Bozeman‟s economic competitiveness. The priorities and recommendations listed below occupy no particular order. In fact, each
recommendation overlaps the others in significant ways. Therefore, each recommendation
should be reviewed in the context of all others and considered collectively.
1) Ongoing financial commitment to Economic Development.
Bozeman is a premier city in the Rockies that enjoys economic „competitive advantages‟ in
addition to a high quality of life compared to many other U.S. cities and towns. At the same
time, City and community leaders recognize that a number of necessary and important steps
are needed to shape Bozeman as a more business-friendly community. The success of economic development in and around the community hinges on the commitment to economic
development as a lasting and long-term priority—along with the necessary long-term
commitment of resources, time, and emphasis.
The EDC applauds the actions and reforms already taken by the City to promote economic development. Further improving the business climate in Bozeman will produce long-lasting
benefits for local companies, employees and families far into the future.
Areas of investment in economic development include:
a. Increased financial investment in, and available resources for, the Economic Development Liaison working to support and strengthen the business community
from within the City Manager‟s office;
i. Support a five year commitment for funding of the City‟s Economic
Development Liaison position;
206
2
ii. Recognition that the title and placement (within the City Manager‟s
Office) of the Economic Development Liaison position represents a
critical Commission priority and is important to public perception of the
City‟s commitment to economic development; and iii. Increase the current budgeted amount, $2,500.00 for FY 11, as soon as is practical.
b. Approve additional general fund investment to promote Economic Gardening
principles, the entrepreneurial approach to economic development that seeks to
grow the local economy from within; c. Host a yearly local Economic Development Conference or Summit; i. Establish EDC Conference/Summit Subcommittee; and
ii. Conference/Summit proposed for March, 2011.
d. Fund the production of materials such as resource guides and helpful tips
brochures; i. Establish a business resource task force in partnership with, among others, MSU, Chamber of Commerce and the City.
e. Develop and support a dashboard of local economic indicators using locally
derived data and metrics for our community the purpose being to supplement that
which is available nationally and regionally and provide the public with relevant and timely trends in our local and regional economy. Some indicators may include, among others:
i. Cost of living indices;
ii. Local demographic statistics;
iii. Home prices and sales; iv. Airport arrivals/departures; v. Hotel/motel room nights;
vi. Various labor statistics;
vii. Yellowstone National Park visitations;
viii. Business licenses, planning and building permits; ix. Geographic information systems (GIS); x. Economic profiles and impact analysis;
xi. Agricultural prices;
xii. Property foreclosures,
xiii. Bankruptcies; and xiv. Applicant and/or customer follow-up process for feedback on development application review and other City procedures, processes and
services.
f. Increase economic development program offerings and/or incentives by:
i. Promoting revolving loan funds and Technical Assistance Grants (TAG);
ii. Assisting with business counseling, research services and/or strategic planning;
iii. Establishing and maintaining data depositories to expand industry research
capabilities and services including data and resources available through
the Bozeman Public Library and/or captured by the City of Bozeman and
other agencies and institutions:
207
3
1. Utilize CoB Geographic Information Services (GIS) and perhaps
outside consultant, if necessary, to develop data services for the
business community based on data collected by the CoB and other
sources; and 2. Increase business database offerings at the Bozeman Public Library, i.e. RefrenceUSA, InfoTrac and WestLaw.
iv. Facilitating relationships and networks between existing businesses within
the City to encourage industry and business clustering and examine cross-
marketing, knowledge and resource sharing opportunities; v. Supporting, in partnership with Montana State University‟s College of Business a Business Relations Survey; and
vi. Supporting the production of Business Resource Guides and other related
materials.
g. EDC sponsored forums, roundtable discussions and surveys designed to elicit timely and relevant feedback from the business community; h. Brand and market the City‟s economic development outreach strategy and
initiative by:
i. Creating a portal or web link to an economic development site as the
„face‟ of Bozeman‟s economic development programs and partnerships; ii. Developing an area economic development marketing and communication strategy utilizing the internet via web pages and social networks as
primary methods of communication; and
i. Create and support additional funding mechanisms which may include, among
others: i. Support of a bonding program to promote economic development, business innovation and long-term growth;
ii. Promotion of the passage of a local mill levy to support economic
development;
iii. Identification of federal, state and local funding opportunities 1. SBA grants; 2. Montana‟s Big Sky Economic Development Trust Fund Grant;
3. Workforce Study and Training Grant(s); and
4. Leverage local economic development funds.
2) Commitment to a business-friendly process with a focus on retention and expansion of existing local businesses.
The Bozeman City Commission‟s stated goal is for the City to be the most business
friendly community in the State of Montana. Staff is currently allocating existing
resources to researching improvements to internal processes. Additionally, the Planning Board intends to make recommendations to the Commission concerning suggestions for
improving processes which may result in more consistent, effective and timely decision-
making for all parties involved in City processes.
In addition to looking inward to improving existing processes and services, local economic development should also look outward toward the local business community
208
4
and beyond to understand their needs and provide value added services that support
business growth and job retention and expansion as well as create strategies for attracting
and growing new businesses and facilitating new job creation.
Realizing the Commission‟s ambitious goal will require continuing internal process reviews, as identified, and additional actions listed:
a. Streamline the development review process;
b. Identify and consolidate duplicative business related services; c. Create economic development partnerships and encourage co-locations and knowledge and resource pooling where appropriate;
d. Provide updated and consistent information in a consolidated resource guide and
tip and fact sheets offering economic development services from both public and
private sectors, distributed to all local public and private economic development agencies and organizations; and e. Continue business site visits with the City‟s Economic Development Liaison and
Economic Development Council representative(s).
3) Stabilize existing local incubators and create a full service business incubator program to achieve a healthy business ecosystem.
Traditional business incubators are brick and mortar facilities that, in addition to off-site business
services, can co-locate several upstart, or phase I, businesses. This arrangement takes advantage
of business synergies and economies of scale to provide assistance and support. Typically, incubators provide clients with flexible space arrangements, affordable rents, shared business services (knowledge and resource pooling), development training, mentorship, financial
assistance and networking opportunities. Several local companies have been served, and some
500 new jobs created in the area due to the services offered by Bozeman‟s only, tech-centered
incubator, TechRanch. Additionally, business incubation services have shown to be an excellent catalyst to diversifying local economies. Inexpensive space remains a challenge for most business incubators.
Addressing the support for a business incubator and incubation services includes:
a. Prioritize the stabilization of TechRanch; b. Determine the full scope of incubation services needed locally, i.e. technology,
manufacturing, retail, food service, hospitality, professional services or other
industry specific types and general business;
c. Identify what business incubation services exist locally;
d. Establish strategic partnerships with MSU that support local technology transfer and an expansion of technology and research commercialization efforts utilizing
applied research arising from intellectual capital cultivated at MSU and other
local educational institutions;
e. Support the establishment of new local business incubators;
f. Identify ongoing funding mechanisms to assist existing incubators;
209
5
g. If new or expanded incubation services are necessary, identify a funding and
leadership model for such expansions;
h. Discuss and determine long-term location for business incubation services; and
i. Explore consolidation and/or co-location of incubation services with other economic development resources.
4) Core Services and Infrastructure.
Critical to encouraging and supporting economic development in and around Bozeman is the continued delivery of the City‟s core services and support of other critical services not directly provided by the City of Bozeman. Service delivery, overall quality, timeliness and efficiency of
construction, maintenance and/or repair projects, initial right-sizing of infrastructure (to
minimize costly retro-fits) and predictable, responsive emergency response systems, access to
information based services (Bozeman Public Library), among others, all contribute to creating and fostering supportive environments for growing and attracting business and creating jobs.
The appropriate support, maintenance and/or upgrades to the following core service areas as well
as support for critical indirect services are particularly important to economic development:
a. Timely and efficient road maintenance, construction and repair; b. Predictable and affordable delivery of potable water;
c. Predictable and affordable refuse and recycling pick-up and disposal;
d. Predictable and affordable delivery of sewer services;
e. Predictable and affordable fire protection; f. Predictable and affordable police protection; g. Support the establishment of, or upgrade to, communication networks, i.e., high
speed and ultra-high speed internet access, by encouraging local service providers
to offer industry leading connection speeds and services; and
h. Support timely and efficient delivery of information services through the Bozeman Public Library‟s unique information databases and reference services.
5) Identification and Establishment of Business Incentives.
We recommend that the City of Bozeman offer some type of financial incentive to attract, retain
and support businesses and job growth.. Local initiatives to enhance growth include a large variety of fiscal, tax and nonfinancial tools to attract, retain and create jobs. Currently, the
following incentive programs exist in the City: a) City of Bozeman‟s Revolving Loan Fund (in
partnership with the Prospera Business Network), b) Tax Abatement Program for historic
preservation, c) the Business Retention and Expansion Program (Bozeman Area Chamber of
Commerce), d) North 7th Rehab Grant Program, e) the Big Sky Energy Revolving Loan Fund (in partnership with the Rocky Mountain RC & D) and f) the Downtown Technical Assistance Grant (Downtown Bozeman Partnership). Other incentives include a flexible rebate program that
considers rebates of certain taxes and fees to primary employers in the City, provided that the
companies meet certain thresholds, requirements and guidelines, a microloan program and/or
smart business incentives, in partnership with a local energy provider, for reducing costs through reducing energy consumption.
210
6
Additionally, creating, strengthening and maintaining strong and effective partnerships with
public institutions and agencies as well as private businesses, represents a cost-effective method
for incentivizing economic development. Collaborative community relationships outwardly
represent a culture of working together to create solutions and inwardly build trust and willingness to communicate and take collective, informed and mutually beneficial action.
Business incentives and partnerships should include:
a. Financial Incentives include, but are not limited to, grants, loans, tax-exempt
bonds and equity and near-equity financing;
b. Tax Incentives include, but are not limited to, tax abatements, tax exemptions, accelerated depreciation, tax classification, tax credit, tax deferral, tax
stabilization agreement and tax increment financing or TIF (Bozeman currently
supports the Downtown TIF, North 7th TIF, Mandeville Farms TIF, Tourism BID
and could consider a Technology TIF in the future.);
c. Non-financial assistance includes, but is not limited to, professional assistance with site development, use of land banks, establishment of industrial, eco-industrial and technology parks;
d. Creation of enterprise zones; and
e. Broaden and deepen strategic public-private partnerships.
6) Workforce Development.
Workforce development refers to initiatives that address both the demand and the supply
side of the labor market by identifying potential areas of employment growth and
developing the skills of job-seekers to meet that demand.
Additionally, critical to a vibrant and diversified local economy is support for a local workforce qualified to meet the labor needs of the regions businesses coupled with a
variety of affordable, market-rate and subsidized rental and owner-occupied housing
options with access to affordable transportation resources.
a. Support the efforts of MSU to create Gallatin College and expand 2-year degree
and job training and certification programs; b. Identify and expand human resources and capital which include customized training, workforce studies and development and increased local educational
opportunities and partnerships;
c. Support common and alternative transportation methods and improve connectivity
both locally and regionally, i.e., bikes, cars, buses, trains and air service, among others; d. Support the strengthening and expansion of MSU internship programs, (Public
Administration and College of Business, among others) creating additional
opportunities for graduate and undergraduate students to gain experience in
business development and/or economic development adding value but little overall cost to the economic development program; and
211
7
e. Support the creation of affordable, market-rate and subsidized rental and owner-
occupied housing that meets the needs of the local workforce.
212
8
City of Bozeman
Economic Development Council
Priority and Recommendation Matrix
No. Recommendation
Lead Support Timeline Current Status Less than 6 mos. 6 – 12 mos. 1-2 years Ongoing 1. Ongoing financial commitment to
Economic Development
a. Increased financial investment in and available
resources for, the Economic Development
Liaison working to support and strengthen the
business community from within the City Manager‟s office.
City
Commission
EDC &
EDL
Salary and
Benefits for
EDL &
$2,500 budgeted for
FY 11
b. Approve additional general fund investment to promote Economic Gardening principles, the
entrepreneurial approach to economic
development that seeks to grow the local
economy from within.
City Commission EDC & EDL Progressing
c. Host a yearly local Economic Development
Conference or Summit.
City
Commission
/EDC
EDL Progressing
213
9
City of Bozeman
Economic Development Council
Priority and Recommendation Matrix
No. Recommendation
Lead Support Timeline Current Status Less than 6 mos. 6 – 12 mos. 1-2 years Ongoing d. Fund the production of materials such as
resource guides and helpful tips brochures. City
Commission/EDC
EDL Progressing
e. Develop and support a dashboard of local
economic indicators using locally derived data and metrics for our community the purpose
being to supplement that which is available
nationally and regionally and provide the public
with relevant and timely trends in our local and
regional economy.
City
Commission/EDC
EDL &
GIS
Progressing
(exploring grant
opportunity
for
“dashboard”&
exploring improved
methods to
capture and
utilize data
from business licenses)
f. Increase economic development program
offerings and/or incentives. City
Commission/EDC
EDL Consideration
214
10
City of Bozeman
Economic Development Council
Priority and Recommendation Matrix
No. Recommendation
Lead Support Timeline Current Status Less than 6 mos. 6 – 12 mos. 1-2 years Ongoing g. EDC sponsored forums, roundtable discussions
and surveys designed to elicit timely and relevant feedback from the business community.
City
Commission& EDC
EDL Planning
h. Brand and market the City‟s economic
development outreach strategy. City
Commission& EDC
EDL & IT Planning
i. Create and support additional funding mechanisms. City Commission& EDC
EDL Consideration
2. Commitment to a business-friendly process with a focus on retention and
expansion of existing local businesses
a. Streamline the development review process. Planning
Board
Planning
Department
& EDL
Progressing
b. Identify and consolidate duplicative business
related services.
EDC EDL Consideration
c. Create economic development partnerships and
encourage co-locations and knowledge and
EDC EDL Progressing
215
11
City of Bozeman
Economic Development Council
Priority and Recommendation Matrix
No. Recommendation
Lead Support Timeline Current Status Less than 6 mos. 6 – 12 mos. 1-2 years Ongoing resource pooling where appropriate.
d. Provide updated and consistent information in a
consolidated resource guide and tip and fact
sheets offering economic development services
from both public and private sectors, distributed
to all local public and private economic development agencies and organizations.
EDC EDL Progressing
e. Continue business site visits with the City‟s Economic Development Liaison and Economic Development Council representative(s).
EDC EDL Planning
3. Stabilize existing local incubators and create a full service business incubator
program to achieve a healthy business
ecosystem
a. Prioritize the stabilization of TechRanch. City Commission EDC & EDL Progressing
216
12
City of Bozeman
Economic Development Council
Priority and Recommendation Matrix
No. Recommendation
Lead Support Timeline Current Status Less than 6 mos. 6 – 12 mos. 1-2 years Ongoing b. Determine the full scope of incubation services
needed locally, i.e. technology, manufacturing, retail, food service, hospitality, professional
services or other industry specific types and
general business.
EDC EDL Consideration
c. Identify what business incubation services exist
locally.
EDC EDL Progressing
d. Establish strategic partnerships with MSU that
support local technology transfer and an expansion of technology and research commercialization efforts utilizing applied
research arising from intellectual capital
cultivated at MSU and other local educational
institutions.
EDC EDL Progressing
e. Support the establishment of new local business
incubators.
City
Commission
& EDC
EDL Consideration
f. Identify ongoing funding mechanisms to assist
existing incubators.
EDC EDL Consideration
217
13
City of Bozeman
Economic Development Council
Priority and Recommendation Matrix
No. Recommendation
Lead Support Timeline Current Status Less than 6 mos. 6 – 12 mos. 1-2 years Ongoing g. If new or expanded incubation services are
necessary, identify a funding and leadership model for such expansions.
EDC EDL Consideration
h. Discuss and determine long-term location for
business incubation services. EDC EDL Topic of
discussion
i. Explore consolidation and/or co-location of
incubation services with other economic
development resources.
EDC EDL Topic of
discussion
4. Core Services and Infrastructure
a. Timely and efficient road maintenance, construction and repair. City Commission City Manager & EDC
Ongoing
b. Predictable and affordable delivery of potable water. City Commission City Manager &
EDC
Ongoing
c. Predictable and affordable refuse and recycling pick-up and disposal. City Commission City Manager &
EDC
Ongoing
218
14
City of Bozeman
Economic Development Council
Priority and Recommendation Matrix
No. Recommendation
Lead Support Timeline Current Status Less than 6 mos. 6 – 12 mos. 1-2 years Ongoing d. Predictable and affordable delivery of sewer
services. City
Commission
City
Manager & EDC
Ongoing
e. Predictable and affordable fire protection. City
Commission
City
Manager & EDC
Ongoing
f. Predictable and affordable police protection. City Commission City Manager & EDC
Ongoing
g. Support the establishment of, or upgrade to, communication networks, i.e., high speed and
ultra-high speed internet access, by encouraging
local service providers to offer industry leading
connection speeds and services.
City Commission City Manager &
EDC
Progressing (Google Fiber
Project)
h. Support timely and efficient delivery of
information services through the Bozeman
Public Library‟s unique information databases and reference services.
City
Commission
& Bozeman Public Library
City
Manager &
EDC
Some
business-
related databases are currently
available
219
15
City of Bozeman
Economic Development Council
Priority and Recommendation Matrix
No. Recommendation
Lead Support Timeline Current Status Less than 6 mos. 6 – 12 mos. 1-2 years Ongoing 5. Identification and Establishment of
Business Incentives
a. Financial Incentives include, but are not limited to, grants, loans, tax-exempt bonds and equity
and near-equity financing.
City Commission
& EDC
EDL & Finance
Dept.
Consideration
b. Tax Incentives include, but are not limited to, tax abatements, tax exemptions, accelerated
depreciation, tax classification, tax credit, tax
deferral, tax stabilization agreement and tax
increment financing or TIF (Bozeman currently supports the Downtown TIF, North 7th TIF, Mandeville Farms TIF, Tourism BID and could
consider a Technology TIF in the future.)
City Commission
& EDC
EDL & Finance
Dept.
Progressing
c. Non-financial assistance includes, but is not
limited to, professional assistance with site
development, use of land banks, and
establishment of industrial, eco-industrial and
technology parks.
City
Commission
& EDC
EDL Progressing
220
16
City of Bozeman
Economic Development Council
Priority and Recommendation Matrix
No. Recommendation
Lead Support Timeline Current Status Less than 6 mos. 6 – 12 mos. 1-2 years Ongoing d. Creation of enterprise zones. City
Commission & EDC
EDL &
Finance Dept.
Consideration
e. Broaden and deepen strategic public-private
partnerships.
City
Commission & EDC
EDL &
Finance Dept.
Progressing
6. Workforce Development
a. Support the efforts of MSU to create Gallatin
College and expand 2-year degree and job
training and certification programs.
City
Commission
& EDC
EDL Progressing
b. Identify and expand human resources and
capital which include customized training,
workforce studies and development and increased local educational opportunities and partnerships.
EDC EDL Planning
c. Support common and alternative transportation methods and improve connectivity both locally and regionally, i.e., bikes, cars, buses, trains and
air service, among others.
City Commission & EDC
EDL Progressing (YBP‟s LINX program)
221
17
City of Bozeman
Economic Development Council
Priority and Recommendation Matrix
No. Recommendation
Lead Support Timeline Current Status Less than 6 mos. 6 – 12 mos. 1-2 years Ongoing d. Support the strengthening and expansion of
MSU internship programs, (Public Administration and College of Business, among
others) creating additional opportunities for
graduate and undergraduate students to gain
experience in business development and/or
economic development adding value but little overall cost to the economic development
program.
City
Commission & EDC
EDL (Expanding
current MPA internship and
working to
create a
College of
Business internship)
e. Support the creation of affordable, market-rate and subsidized rental and owner-occupied
housing that meets the needs of the local
workforce.
City Commission
& EDC
EDL Progressing (Workforce
Housing
Ordinance
1710)
222
City of Bozeman
Economic Development Plan
2009
223
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Advisory Committee:
Prospera Business Network acknowledges and thanks the many individuals that contributed to the
development of this Economic Development Plan, especially the members of the Advisory
Committee for their participation, support and guidance throughout the process.
Sean Becker, Bozeman City Commission
Gary Bloomer, Tech Ranch
Eugene Graf, Southwest Montana Building Industry Association
Sally Hickey, Gallatin Association of Realtors
Tom Kelly, U.S. Bank
Chris Mehl, Bozeman Planning Board
Chris Naumann, Downtown Bozeman Partnership
Scott Pogh, Northern Rocky Mountain RC&D
Jim Rimpau, Montana State University
Chris Saunders, City of Bozeman Planning Department
David Smith, Bozeman Area Chamber of Commerce
Chris Westlake, Midwest Welding & Machine
Additional thanks to Jon Henderson of the City of Bozeman for his work on the maps.
This document was written by Bob Hietala, Peter Bertelsen and Cherlyn Wilcox of Prospera
Business Network.
224
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction………………………………………………………
II. Economic Vision and Values……………………………………
III. Economic Profile of Bozeman
…………………………...
………………………………...
……………………………
……………………...
………….
………………….
………………………….
……………….
…………………………
……………………..
……………………………
IV. Major Industry Sectors
………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………
……………………...
……………………………………...
………..
……………………………………………..
………………………………….
……...
……………………………………………….
………………..
………………………………………………...
…………………………………
……………………………………………
………………………………..
V. Bozeman Economic Development Survey……………………...
VI. SWOT Analysis of Bozeman’s Economy……………………….
VII. Bozeman Economic Development Goals and Strategies…….
VIII. Implementation Matrix………………………………………..
IX. Appendix
………….
……………………………
..
………………..
………………………………………..
……………………………………………………...
...……………...
I-1
II-1
A.Economic History of Bozeman III-1
B.Population Demographics III-5
C.Socioeconomic Characteristics III-11
D.Employment and Workforce Trends III-19
E.Residential and Commercial Real Estate Trends III-24
F.Education and Workforce Development III-30
G.Land Use and Business Location III-34
H.Regulatory Environment and Tax Structure III-36
I.Infrastructure and Transportation III-40
J.Small Business and Entrepreneurship III-42
K.Business Assistance Resources III-43
A.Technology IV-1
B.Retail IV-6
C.Hospitality, Tourism, and Recreation IV-9
D.Gallatin Field Airport IV-16
E.Construction, Land Development, and Real Estate IV-19
F.Manufacturing IV-22
G.Montana State University IV-24
H.Healthcare and Bozeman Deaconess Health Services IV-28
I.Government IV-31
J.Finance and Professional Business Services IV-32
K.Agriculture IV-34
L.Non-Profit Organizations IV-36
M.Telecommuters IV-38
N.Economic Impact Analysis IV-39
V-1
VI-1
VII-1
VIII-1
1.List of Economic Development Plans Reviewed IX-1
2.Business Assistance Resources IX-2
3.Economic Development Financing & Funding Resources IX-5
4.Value of SBIR/STTR Awards in Montana IX-8
5.Big Box Ordinance IX-9
6.Maps IX-10
7.Economic Development Survey & Results IX-23
225
This is page intentionally blank.
226
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
I.INTRODUCTION I-1
I. INTRODUCTION
City of Bozeman Economic Development Plan
Economic Backdrop
Photo Courtesy of MSU
City of Bozeman Economic Development Plan
Bozeman 2020 Community Plan
Bozeman 2020 Community Plan
Bozeman 2020 Community Plan
Bozeman 2020 Community Plan
City of
Bozeman Economic Development Plan
quality of life
This is the result of more
than 9 months of research and development. Previously, economic
development planning was covered in a chapter in the City’s
primary planning document, the . In
2007, the City of Bozeman initiated the process of updating its
primary planning document and contracted with Clarion and
Associates to conduct a review of the .
The result of that review, the Clarion Report, recommended that the
City develop a separate and comprehensive “Economic and Business Development Plan” and also expand
and refocus the chapter on Economic Development in the .
For more than a year, the City undertook the process of updating the . During
that time, the City Commission made a commitment to follow the recommendations of the Clarion Report
and approved a proposal by Prospera Business Network to lead the development of the first-ever
. This Plan will provide guidance to the City Commission, City staff, and
the community regarding economic and business development issues in Bozeman. It is considered to be
a “living document” that will be amended and updated as economic conditions change.
The high , the presence of Montana State University, the excellent air service at Gallatin
Field Airport, and many other strengths offer significant opportunities for continued economic
development in Bozeman. The strategies in this Plan will help define Bozeman in the minds of
businesses and residents throughout the area. Sound economic development policies will enhance
the community’s ability to capture job growth and business expansion, while maintaining its capacity
to provide public services for current and future residents and guaranteeing the high quality of life
for which it is known.
This Plan provides Bozeman with the opportunity to address the community’s most pressing
economic development needs and to come together behind a strategy for progressive and
sustainable change. The benefit that will come from successful implementation of the goals and
strategies contained in this Plan will positively impact the operations of all Bozeman businesses
(both large and small) and the lives of all Bozeman residents. This Plan will enable Bozeman to be a
premier city in the Rocky Mountain west that recognized early the need to support economic
development to maintain its high quality of life.
There was widespread interest and support for this project among the Bozeman business
community, especially as the effects of the national economic recession began to be felt locally in
late 2008. The declining local economy created a unique backdrop as Prospera Business Network
began the collection of input on economic development from the Bozeman community. After many
227
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
I.INTRODUCTION I-2
Methodology
years of strong economic growth, with unemployment rates below 2%, and five years (2003-2007) of
growth in non-farm labor income over 6% annually, the national economic recession began to hit
the Bozeman area. In December 2008, the unemployment rate in the area had risen to 4.6% due to a
severe slowdown in the construction sector, reduced consumer confidence and spending impacted
the retail sector, and other sectors began to feel the impact of the slipping local economy. This
economic slowdown in Bozeman, after years of being one of the fastest growing economic areas of
the state, created a new sense of urgency for economic development planning in Bozeman.
Prospera Business Network staff began this project in September 2008, conducting economic
research on the City, interviewing a broad spectrum of business and community leaders, evaluating
other cities’ economic development planning documents, and surveying the stakeholders in the
community. At the beginning of the project, an advisory committee of leaders representing business
and key stakeholder groups in the community (names listed in acknowledgements section) was
formed to provide feedback throughout the process. This committee met throughout the process,
offered valuable input on the economic development needs of the City and provided feedback and
assistance to Prospera Business Network staff on specific aspects of the Plan.
Economic research was conducted to better understand the local economy. There were some limits
on the utility of some of the available data as the 2000 U.S. Census data has diminished relevance for
an area like Bozeman that has grown considerably in the past nine years. The 2007 Community
Survey from the U.S. Census Bureau has helped bridge the gap until the 2010 Census and is
providing some current data for our research. Some important economic and demographic data is
only available at the county level, though our discussions with economists confirmed the usefulness
of Gallatin County data for the research for this project given the City of Bozeman’s dominant
position (in terms of population and economic activity) within Gallatin County.
In order to better understand the functioning of the Bozeman economy and to solicit feedback on
the economic development needs and priorities for the City, Prospera Business Network conducted
a broad-based survey of the economy and the City’s economic development needs. The survey
generated a strong response, with more than 220 survey responses completed including: 34 in-
person interviews with business leaders; 53 surveys from other business leaders; and 133 surveys
from interested citizens. The broad-based input received from these surveys has yielded a wealth of
information for the Plan.
The research component of the project also included an analysis of economic development planning
documents from over 30 other cities (See Appendix, Section 1). Initial thoughts of finding a
comparable city with a comprehensive economic development plan that could serve as a model or
“benchmark” were not successful as the differences that exist in the comparisons with other cities
were too great to be much use for a wholesale comparison. This research did offer many benefits as
specific components of a number of cities’ economic development plans offered valuable
information that was relevant to Bozeman.
228
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
II.ECONOMIC VISION &VALUES II-1
II. ECONOMIC VISION AND VALUES
Economic Vision
Economic Values
()
Things that are important to Bozeman’s Economic future include:
Strengthen and further diversify the local economy
Increase economic activity
Create higher paying jobs
Create high quality employment in Bozeman to match the high quality of life
Support our homegrown business community
Economic opportunity is part of the American dream. Bozeman possesses a rich natural heritage, educational
opportunities, and an entrepreneurial spirit. As a community, Bozeman endeavors to provide a solid framework within
which hard work and personal accountability is rewarded, a high quality community is maintained, and a sustainable
economy can thrive. Bozeman Community Plan, Chapter 8
•
•
•
•
•
229
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
II.ECONOMIC VISION &VALUES II-2
This is page intentionally blank.
230
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-1
III. ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN
A. ECONOMIC HISTORY OF BOZEMAN
Historical Development
Photo Courtesy of Pioneer Museum
For hundreds of years, the Gallatin Valley was home
to Native American tribes such as the Shoshone,
Bangtail, Nez Perce, Sioux, Flathead, and Blackfeet.
In 1805, Captains Meriwether Lewis and William
Clark and the Corps of Discovery camped at the
headwaters of the Missouri River. They named the
southern fork Gallatin in honor of Albert Gallatin,
then Secretary of the Treasury; the middle fork
Madison in honor of James Madison, then Secretary of State; and the northern fork
Jefferson in honor of Thomas Jefferson, then President of the U.S. In 1806, William Clark
traveled though the area as he traveled east following the Gallatin from the headwaters of
the Missouri River. Journal entries from Clark’s party briefly describe the area of the future
City of Bozeman as “the Valley of the Flowers.”
The City of Bozeman is named for John Bozeman, a gold prospector who came to Montana
from Colorado in 1862. Seeing a need to supply the gold mining camps, he realized it would
be more profitable to "mine the miners" than to mine for gold. In 1863, he and John Jacobs
blazed a northern cutoff route (the Bozeman Trail) from the Oregon Trail to guide miners
to the mining town of Virginia City in the Tobacco Root Mountains on the western edge of
the Gallatin Valley.
John Bozeman saw the fertile Gallatin Valley as a most desirable place to live. He chose the
site "standing right in the gate of the mountains ready to swallow up all tenderfeet that
would reach the territory from the east, with their golden fleeces to be taken care of" to
make his fortune. John Bozeman began an agricultural colony in the Gallatin Valley to raise
potatoes and wheat for miners working in the Virginia City gold mines. In 1864, John
Bozeman along with Daniel Rouse and William Beall, platted the town which would bear his
name. The Bozeman Trail passed directly through the Gallatin Valley and was used by
travelers until 1868 when it was closed because of the Indian Wars, but the fertile land of the
valley soon attracted permanent settlers to Bozeman's fledgling town.
231
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-2
Agriculture
Railroads
Railroad and Interstate Impact on Growth
Montana State University
Growth and Development of Technology and Manufacturing
Jim Bridger, a well-known frontiersman, came to Bozeman in 1864, bringing the first wagon
train through the mountain canyon north of town (now known as the Bridger Mountains
and Bridger Canyon). In 1866, Nelson Story arrived in Bozeman driving 3,000 longhorn
cattle from Texas, which formed the beginnings of Montana’s strong cattle industry. He
would later be a strong supporter for the establishment of Montana State College (now
Montana State University). Bozeman’s agricultural heritage is a significant part of its
economic history. Once the premier industry in the Gallatin Valley, agriculture has been
surpassed by tourism, services, construction, and other industries.
In 1883, the Northern Pacific Railroad finished its pathway to Bozeman through what is
now known as the Bozeman Pass, following a route parallel to the Bozeman Trail (which is
now Interstate-90). In the mid 1920’s, the Milwaukee Railroad built a line across Montana to
the Pacific Ocean, with a spur line built to carry travelers to Yellowstone National Park. A
grand railroad hotel was built in the small town of Salesville (now known as Gallatin
Gateway).
The construction of Interstate 90 through the Gallatin Valley in the 1950’s, following the
route of the old Bozeman Trail, has had a significant impact on the growth and development
of Bozeman. As a major piece of the U.S. interstate highway system, I-90 passes through
Montana on the route from Seattle to Boston.
Montana was granted statehood and became the 41st state in the Union in 1889. In a trade-
off allowing Helena to become the state capital, Bozeman community leaders were promised
the state’s land-grant college. In 1893, the Agricultural College of the State of Montana was
founded as the state’s land-grant college in Bozeman. Renamed the Montana College of
Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, the school was popularly known as Montana Agricultural
College and by the 1920’s its preferred name was Montana State College. In 1965, the state
legislature changed the name to Montana State University. [The economic impact of
Montana State University is covered in Section IV-G.]
Montana State University has also played a significant role in the growth and development of
Bozeman’s technology and manufacturing industries, and is the reason the Bozeman area is
considered the technology center of the state.
232
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-3
Regional Trade Center
Growth of Bozeman Deaconess Hospital
Gallatin Field Airport
Downtown Bozeman
Economic Impact of Development in Big Sky
Bozeman is now a second order trade center, with the export components (dollars coming
into Bozeman from the surrounding areas) of retail trade and health care accounting for a
sizable share of the economic base. Since the late 1990’s, Bozeman has experienced a
significant boom in retail development with the arrival of many national “big box” retail
chains, such as the Costco, Home Depot and Lowes, and the expansion of the retail
corridors along North 7th Avenue and North 19th Avenue.
Bozeman Deaconess Hospital has been an integral part of the Gallatin Valley for over 100
years, and is today the largest private employer in Bozeman. It has grown as the community
it serves has experienced rapid growth and increased demand for medical services. Originally
located in downtown Bozeman, the hospital relocated to its current facility on Highland
Boulevard in 1986. [The economic impact of Bozeman Deaconess Hospital is further
covered in Section IV-H.]
Gallatin Field Airport has become a major regional airport in Montana as the 2nd busiest
airport in the state, with exceptional airline service providing non-stop flights to 11 cities in
10 states. Since 1992, passenger enplanements have increased 127%, making Gallatin Field
the fastest growing airport in Montana. Bozeman’s airport has played a crucial role in the
tremendous economic growth the area has experienced since 1990. [The economic impact of
Gallatin Field Airport is also covered in this same section under Infrastructure &
Transportation and in Section IV-D.]
Bozeman’s historic downtown has served as its center of economic activity since the city was
first established. As the community’s core, it has served as a commercial center, with
banking, professional, and hospitality services. In more recent years, as the city has grown
and commercial development has spread to the west and to the north of downtown, the
downtown district has remained strong. Today, it is considered by most to be one of
Bozeman’s most important amenities and assets.
Big Sky Resort has had a significant impact on Bozeman’s economy since it opened in
December 1973. It has greatly contributed to the boom in construction and other supporting
sectors.The resort, located on the eastern face of Lone Mountain in the Gallatin Mountain
Range, some 40 miles south of Bozeman, was conceived and built by the late NBC News
anchorman Chet Huntley, a Montana native. Huntley had purchased much of what is now
known as Big Sky Mountain and Meadow Villages in the late 1960’s and dreamed of
developing one of Montana’s first alpine ski areas. Development of the alpine area and the
233
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-4
residential villages began in the early 1970’s and the mountain resort opened for skiing in
December 1973. The resort was sold to Boyne Resorts in 1976, an operator of ski and golf
resorts throughout the U.S.
In 1990, an $18 million investment was made with the construction of the Shoshone
Condominium Hotel and Yellowstone Conference Center. In 2000, a $50 million investment
was made with the Summit Hotel Condominium project. In 2001, Boyne announced a 10
year $400 million capital investment plan beginning with a $23 million investment in the
construction of the Village Center One project in 2005. In addition to the growth of Big Sky
Resort, the Big Sky area experienced considerable development with a residential and
commercial construction boom beginning during the late 90’s and extending to present.
The Yellowstone Club was founded in 2000, with the $24 million purchase of 13,400 acres
adjacent to Big Sky Resort. This exclusive, private residential community is limited to 864
residential properties, with an exclusive membership structure ($250,000 membership fee
plus $75,000 annual fee). Home prices in Yellowstone Club range from $2 million to $12
million. Yellowstone Club has more than 500 employees.
Moonlight Basin Ski Resort opened in 2003, with the purchase of 25,000 acres on Lone
Mountain adjacent to Big Sky Resort. This real estate development and ski and golf resort
offers homes for sale ranging from $1.4 million to $6 million.
The Club at Spanish Peaks was founded in 2004. This 5,700 acre private residential and golf
community development adjacent to Big Sky Resort has 850 residences priced from
$500,000 to $9 million.
234
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-5
B. POPULATION DEMOGRAPHICS
Population
Population Change (Growth)
Year Bozeman Change Gallatin
County Change
The City of Bozeman, with an estimated population of 37,981 in 2007, is the largest city in
southwestern Montana and the county seat of Gallatin County (with an estimated population
of 84,400). Bozeman is now the 4th largest city in Montana.
Gallatin County is the fastest growing county in the state, with its population increasing
28.8% since the 2000 U.S. Census. Gallatin County appears in the U.S. Census Bureau’s
2007 “100 Fastest Growing Counties” list – at #92, and is now the 3rd largest county in
Montana, recently overtaking Flathead County.
Since 1900, the greatest rate of population change occurred during the decade of 1900-1910
when the population grew by approximately 49%. The decade between 1960 and 1970 had
the second greatest rate of population change. During this ten-year period, the City’s
population increased by approximately 40%. The decades between 1930 and 1940, and 1940
and 1950, had the third and fourth greatest rate of population change of the century. During
these ten-year periods, the City’s population increased by approximately 26% and 31%
respectively.
1900 3,419 -9,553 -
1910 5,107 +49.4%14,079 +47.4%
1920 6,183 +21.1%15,864 +12.7%
1930 6,855 +10.9%16,124 +1.6%
1940 8,665 +26.4%18,269 +13.3%
1950 11,325 +30.7%21,902 +19.9%
1960 13,361 +18.0%26,045 +18.9%
1970 18,670 +39.7%32,505 +24.8%
1980 21,645 +15.9%42,865 +31.9%
1990 22,660 +4.7%50,463 +17.7%
2000 27,509 +21.8%67,831 +34.4%
2007 37,981 +38.0%84,400 +24.4%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2007 Data is estimated.
(Source: Appendix B, Bozeman Community Plan)
235
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-6
Population Ranking
City Rank 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003
Bozeman 4 37,981 36,981 35,012 33,576 31,824
The chart below shows the population ranking of the 7 largest cities in Montana in 2007.
Billings 1 101,876 100,208 98,775 96,998 95,398
Missoula 2 67,165 65,982 64,488 63,206 61,845
Great Falls 3 58,827 58,536 58,162 57,729 57,427
Butte 5 31,967 31,994 32,087 32,210 32,386
Helena 6 28,726 28,074 27,592 27,454 26,992
Kalispell 7 20,298 19,339 18,463 17,440 16,875
The bar graph below illustrates the population comparison between Billings, Missoula, Great
Falls, Bozeman, Butte, Helena, and Kalispell from 2003-2007.
Bozeman’s population in the last three years has grown 3.06% annually compared to 1.4%
nationally. Since 2000, Bozeman’s population growth has been 27.4% compared to 5.9%
nationally and 7.2% for Montana.
Source: Montana Department of Commerce
236
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-7
Population Projection: 92,500 by 2025
Age & Gender
Source: U.S. Census
Source: Bozeman Community Plan and Wastewater Treatment Project Projections
Source: 2005-2007 U.S. Census estimates
Source: U.S. Census estimates 2005-2007
Based on historical growth trends, Bozeman’s population increase is projected to reach
92,500 by 2025. This projection is acknowledged to be on the high end of the population
growth potential. By 2025, approximately 75% of the County’s population will be within the
City of Bozeman and 50% of the growth in the state will be within 100 miles of Bozeman.
Bozeman has the youngest population of the largest cities in Montana. From 2005-2007, the
City of Bozeman had a total population of approximately 35,000. Approximately 16,000 (or
46%) were female and approximately 19,000 (or 54%) were male. Bozeman has the highest
concentration of 18-24 year olds in Montana.
237
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-8
Age & Gender Demographics:
Subject Total Male Female
Total
population 34,836 18,897 15,939
Age
Subject Total Male Female
Gallatin County Birth, Death Rates and Migration:
Table 4: Cumulative Estimates of the Components of Population Change for Counties of Montana:
April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2007
Vital Events Net Migration
Geographic Area
Total
Population
Change*
Natural
Increase Births Deaths Total International*Internal
Source: U.S. Census estimates 2005-2007
Source: 2005-2007 U.S. Census estimates
*Net international migration includes the international migration of both native and foreign-born populations. Specifically, it
includes: (a) the net international migration of the foreign born, (b) the net migration between the United States and Puerto Rico,
(c) the net migration of natives to and from the United States, and (d) the net overseas movement of the Armed Forces population.
Source: MT Department of Commerce
Under 5 years 6.4%4.9%8.1%
5 to 9 years 3.5%4.1%2.8%
10 to 14 years 3.2%2.5%4.0%
15 to 19 years 10.5%10.3%10.7%
20 to 24 years 20.6%21.8%19.1%
25 to 29 years 12.3%14.6%9.6%
30 to 34 years 8.0%8.3%7.5%
35 to 39 years 6.1%6.5%5.7%
40 to 44 years 4.3%4.5%4.2%
45 to 49 years 4.7%4.3%5.1%
50 to 54 years 6.0%5.7%6.4%
55 to 59 years 4.5%4.5%4.5%
60 to 64 years 2.8%2.9%2.6%
65 to 69 years 1.6%1.4%1.8%
70 to 74 years 1.4%1.1%1.8%
75 to 79 years 1.5%1.1%2.0%
80 to 84 years 1.6%0.8%2.5%
85 years and over 1.0%0.6%1.5%
Montana 55,666 23,847 83,417 59,570 32,545 2,099 30,446
.Gallatin County 19,528 4,553 7,292 2,739 15,239 583 14,656
238
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-9
Median Age
Median Age
Year Billings Missoula Great Falls Bozeman Helena Montana
Median Age
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 *2005-2007
Median age in Bozeman and Gallatin County were parallel until the 1990’s when Gallatin
County’s median age started to increase while Bozeman’s stayed the same. The increase in
age is due to a large population of people born between 1946 and 1964 (“baby boomers”);
the increase in average life expectancy of Americans; and the decrease in average family size.
Another chart below, comparing other cities in Montana in 2000 and present day reveals a
higher median age around the state. The City and County’s median age is still considerably
less than the median age nationwide.
2000 36.9 33.2 36.7 25.4 39 37.5
*2005-2007 38.1 30.7 39.6 27.2 39.6 39.3
Gallatin County 28.3 27.2 25.1 24.3 25.7 28.9 30.7 32
Bozeman 28.9 27.4 26.4 23.7 24.9 26.6 25.4 27.2
Source: U.S. Census
*Source: U.S. Census estimates
239
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-10
The map below shows the population change rates for Montana’s counties between 2006
and 2007. Gallatin County had one of the highest population change rates (+24.5 per 1,000
people). Adjacent Madison County and nearby Sweet Grass County had population change
rates of 33.8 and 30.4 per 1,000 people, respectively.
240
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-11
C. SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS
Household Types
Number of Households and Average Household Size
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Bozeman
Montana
The number of households within the City of Bozeman and Gallatin County has grown
steadily over time. From 2005-2007 there were 13,000 households in the City of Bozeman.
The average household size was 2.4 people, comparable to the other large cities in Montana.
Families made up 48% of the households in Bozeman. The figure below includes both
married-couple families (42%) and other families (5%). Non-family households made up
53% of all households in Bozeman. Most of the non-family households were people living
alone, but some were composed of people living in households in which no one was related
to the householder From 2005-2007, Bozeman had 13,000 occupied housing units; 6,100
(47%) owner occupied units; and 6,900 (53%) renter occupied units. The rental numbers are
likely driven up by the MSU student population.
Households 1,400 1,542 2,772 3,520 4,099 5,736 7,496 9,117 10,877
Average Size 4.42 5.74 3.13 3.22 3.26 3.25 2.89 2.49 2.26
Households x x 161,633 172,440 202,240 217,304 283,742 306,919 358,667
Average Size x x 3.46 3.22 3.25 3.1 2.7 2.6 2.45
.
Source: U.S. Census estimates 2005-2007
Source: U.S. Census; x= not available
241
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-12
Bozeman Housing Occupancy 2005-2007
x
x
Bozeman Housing Tenure 2005-2007
Cost of Housing: Highest in the State
Total Housing Units 13,979 100%
Occupied housing units 13,013 93.1%
Vacant housing units 966 6.9%
Homeowner vacancy rate 3.1
Rental vacancy rate 4.2
Occupied housing units 13,013 x
Owner-occupied 6,072 47%
Renter-occupied 6,941 53%
Average household size of owner occupied unit 2.39 x
Average household size of renter occupied unit 2.35 x
Bozeman has the highest cost of housing in Montana.In Bozeman during 2005-2007, the
median monthly housing cost for a mortgaged owner was $1,412; $430 for a non-mortgaged
owner; and $779 for a renter. The amount of household income spent on housing in
Bozeman is high: 35% of owners with mortgages; 16% of owners without mortgages; and
51% of renters spend 30 % or more of their household income on housing.
Source: U.S. Census estimates 2005-2007
242
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-13
Education: Most Educated Population in Montana
Percent of people 25 years and older
Educational Attainment in Bozeman
Population Age Total #High School Graduate or
Higher
Bachelor’s Degree or
Higher
Bozeman has the most educated population in Montana. During 2005-2007, 54% of
Bozeman residents 25 years and older had a bachelor’s degree or higher; and 96% had at
least a high school diploma.
25 to 34 7,063 98.7%55.4%
35 to 44 3,641 95.6%55.5%
45 to 64 6,258 95.4%54.5%
65 years and over 2,496 90.7%44.5%
Source: U.S. Census estimates 2005-2007
243
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-14
Education Total
Population 18 to 24 years 10,298
Population 25 years and over 19,458
Percent of people 25 years and older
Less than high school graduate 2.7%
High school graduate (includes
equivalency)23.9%
Some college or associate’s degree 63.4%
Bachelor’s degree or higher 10.0%
Less than 9th grade 1.7%
9th to 12th grade, no diploma 2.3%
High school graduate (includes
equivalency)14.4%
Some college, no degree 21.5%
Associate’s degree 6.4%
Bachelor’s degree 34.5%
Graduate or professional degree 19.2%
Bozeman has the highest percentage of people age 25 years and older with a bachelor’s
degree or greater in Montana.
Source: U.S. Census Estimates 2005-2007
Source: U.S. Census estimates 2005-2007
244
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-15
Geographic Mobility
Income
From 2005-2007, 58% of the people at least one year old living in Bozeman city were living
in the same residence one year earlier; 21% had moved during the past year from another
residence in the same county, 8% from another county in the same state, 12% from another
state, and 1% from abroad.
As noted below, Montana’s high percentage of same geographic residences at 82% contrast
Bozeman’s percentage of 58% shows that Bozeman residents’ mobility is greater than other
Montana residents.
Below is a comparison of 7 cities and Montana broken down into three income categories,
including Median income, Per capita income and Median household income.
is defined as the amount which divides the income distribution into two equal groups, half
having income above that amount, and half having income below that amount.
(not to be confused with or ) is often the combination of
two income earners pooling the resources and should therefore not be confused with an
individual's earnings. Even though the term family income may sometimes be used as a
synonym for household income, the U.S. Census Bureau defines the two differently. While
household income takes all households into account, family income only takes households
with two or more persons related through blood, marriage or adoption into account.
is total income calculated on a per person basis.
Source: U.S. Census estimates 2005-2007
Median income
Household
income personal income family income
Per
capita income
245
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-16
The income data presented in the graphs below are based on the 2005-2007 U.S. Census
estimates.
Source: U.S. Census estimates 2005-2007
246
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-17
Cost of Living
Bozeman has the highest cost of living in Montana. The National Cost of Living Index
measures regional differences in the cost of consumer goods and services, excluding taxes
and non-consumer expenditures, for professional and managerial households in the top
income quintile. It is based on more than 50,000 prices covering almost 60 different items
for which costs are collected quarterly by participating urban areas.
The Index is compiled and published quarterly by ACCRA – The Council for Community
and Economic Research. Prospera Business Network compiles and reports this data for the
City of Bozeman each quarter. The national average composite index is set at 100.
The graph below illustrates the table following, revealing a comparison of Bozeman, Missoula
and Kalispell’s composite index for the Cost of Living for 2003-2008. Missoula and Kalispell
are the only other Montana cities that participate in the study.
247
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-18
2008 Annual Average
Composite
Index
Grocery
Items Housing Utilities Transportation Health
Care
Goods &
Services
Bozeman
Missoula
Kalispell
2007 Annual Average
Composite
Index
Grocery
Items Housing Utilities Transportation Health
Care
Goods &
Services
Bozeman
Missoula
Kalispell
2006 Annual Average
Composite
Index
Grocery
Items Housing Utilities Transportation Health
Care
Goods &
Services
Bozeman
Missoula
Kalispell
2005 Annual Average
Composite
Index
Grocery
Items Housing Utilities Transportation Health
Care
Goods &
Services
Bozeman
Missoula
Kalispell
2004 Annual Average
Composite
Index
Grocery
Items Housing Utilities Transportation Health
Care
Goods &
Services
Bozeman
Missoula
Kalispell
2003 Annual Average
Composite
Index
Grocery
Items Housing Utilities Transportation Health
Care
Goods &
Services
Bozeman
Missoula
Kalispell
The table below summarizes the cost of living data for the cities of Bozeman, Missoula and
Kalispell from 2003-2008.
107.6 105.0 118.9 103.9 98.0 100.3 104.0
105.0 125.2 96.0 108.3 103.3 105.6 104.9
102.3 114.4 100.0 96.9 98.0 105.9 102.1
104.0 97.1 118.5 101.8 94.4 101.0 98.8
101.2 113.5 96.2 101.8 98.6 99.8 101.4
101.5 111.4 98.7 97.4 97.5 103.0 102.2
101.9 96.4 112.8 100.6 99.3 99 96.6
102.5 115.0 95.7 108.2 96.9 103.2 103.1
99.9 111.9 91.4 105.8 296.3 100.7 101.9
101.7 97.5 99.4 105.5 95.6 99.9 105.9
102.5 113.9 96.4 111.3 97.8 105.0 101.7
98.4 104.4 95.0 98.1 95.7 99.1 99.7
103.4 102.2 105.3 105.7 95.7 98.1 104.3
99.9 116.1 86.8 92.3 100.2 117.5 105.1
99.2 107.5 90.0 83.6 95.3 109.2 101.7
102.7 107.5 101.7 94.9 99.1 94.6 105.9
98.1 115.1 91.4 84.2 98.9 100.5 100.5
98.4 107.8 86.7 105.0 95.3 104.7 102.7
Source: The Council for Community and Economic Research
248
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-19
D. EMPLOYMENT AND WORKFORCE TRENDS
Employment in Gallatin County in 2007
Rank Sector Number of
Establishments
Average Annual
Employment
Annual Wages
per Job
Bozeman has one of the highest quality workforces in Montana. The combination of a
young population, a highly educated population and a high quality of life, have helped create
a talented and diverse workforce in Bozeman. This high quality workforce can be seen in
companies throughout the various business sectors. Business leaders speak highly of their
employees here in Bozeman.
Montana State University is also a major contributor to the local workforce. MSU graduates
can be found in large numbers in companies throughout Bozeman. MSU students also fill
part-time employment needs in food services, retail, and other businesses. Montana is a state
with a high rate of multiple job-holdings per worker. In 2004, Montana was tied with
Wyoming for the 3rd highest multiple job-holding rates in the nation, with an estimated 9%
of the state’s employed population holding more than one job. The high cost of living and
the young workforce make it likely that this trend holds in Bozeman.
The chart below lists the top 14 employment industries in Gallatin County ranked by the
average annual employment numbers in 2007.
1 Total Government (includes MSU)103 7,179 38,650
2 Retail Trade 559 7,098 25,604
3 Construction 1,123 6,168 38,731
4 Accommodation & Food 356 5,453 13,837
5 Health Care & Social Assistance 330 3,355 35,043
6 Professional & Technical Services 703 3,288 51,483
7 Manufacturing 197 2,635 35,653
8 Other Services 338 1,460 24,334
9 Wholesale Trade 185 1,364 39,660
10 Finance & Insurance 208 1,270 48,999
11 Recreation, Arts & Entertainment 137 1,228 22,752
12 Information 83 632 39,350
13 Education 60 491 15,913
14 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting 66 409 24,083
Ranked by Average Annual Employment. Source: Montana Department of Labor & Industry, 2007
249
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-20
The pie graph below, illustrating Gallatin County’s average annual employment by sector for
2007, corresponds with the preceding table.
The annual average labor force for Gallatin County in 2000 through 2007 is indicated below
including employed and unemployed numbers. The unemployment rate for Gallatin County
increased through 2008 reaching 4.6% in December.
Source: Montana Department of Labor & Industry, 2007
Source: Montana Department of Labor & Industry
250
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-21
Largest Public & Private Employers in the City of Bozeman
Company/Entity Number of Employees
Wages
2007 QCEW (Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages)
Annual County Data Ranked by Total Annual Average Wage
County Total Employment Total Wages Private Annual
Average Wage
Total Annual
Average Wage Rank
Statewide 436,695 $14,071,645,084 $30,953 $32,223 x
Montana State University 2,679
Bozeman Deaconess Hospital 1,238
Bozeman Public School District 587
Gallatin County Government 460
RightNow Technologies*400
Wal-Mart Stores 370
City of Bozeman 351
Kenyon-Noble Lumber Company 236
Williams Plumbing and Heating 200
Zoot Enterprises*177
Costco Wholesale 176
Bozeman Community Food Co-Op 170
Simkins-Hallin Lumber Company 169
Murdoch’s Ranch & Home Supply 160
Martel Construction 150
Gibson Guitar-Montana Division 140
Billion Auto Group 135
Bozeman Daily Chronicle 128
Rosauer’s Supermarket 123
Best Western GranTree Inn 115
Target Stores 110
Gallatin County’s total annual average wage for 2007 was $32,520 and ranked 9th in the state.
Yellowstone 76,706 $2,742,145,002 $34,776 $35,749 5
Lewis & Clark 33,855 $1,197,183,586 $30,929 $35,362 6
Gallatin 45,735 $1,487,284,067 $31,378 $32,520 9
Missoula 55,501 $1,788,841,025 $30,458 $32,231 10
Flathead 41,406 $1,297,858,294 $30,473 $31,345 12
(* Note: RightNow Technologies and Zoot Enterprises are located outside the Bozeman city limits.)
Source: Montana Department of Labor & Industry
251
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-22
MONTANA QCEW (Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages) COMPARISON
AREA\ COUNTY 2006
EMP
2007
EMP
%
CHANGE
2006
WAGE
2007
WAGE
%
CHANGE
Unemployment
YELLOWSTONE 73,958 76,706 3.72%$33,647 $35,749 6.25%
MISSOULA 54,440 55,501 1.95%$30,664 $32,231 5.11%
GALLATIN 44,259 45,735 3.33%$30,903 $32,520 5.23%
FLATHEAD 39,631 41,406 4.48%$30,008 $31,345 4.46%
LEWIS & CLARK 32,264 33,855 4.93%$33,661 $35,362 5.05%
SILVER BOW 15,183 15,394 1.39%$31,677 $33,435 5.55%
STATE 426,220 436,695 2.46%$30,607 $32,223 5.28%
Bozeman’s unemployment rate in recent years has been the lowest in Montana and it has
been consistently below the state and national rates. The history of strong economic growth
in the area has made recruiting and retaining employees a frequent issue for Bozeman
employers. Economic downturns and recessions (as in 2000 and 2008/9) have been the
exception to this trend. The chart below shows the most recent labor force statistics for
Montana counties (as of December 2008).
Source: Montana Department of Labor & Industry
Source: U.S. Census estimates 2005-2007; data does not include government wages
252
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-23
Unemployment Rates 1997-2008
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
County Labor Force Statistics, December-2008
Non-Seasonally Adjusted Preliminary
Area Labor Force Employed Unemployed Rate
Source: Montana Department of Labor & Industry
*Annual unemployment rates for 2008 are unavailable at this time. Monthly unemployment rates for the month of December-
2008 were 4.6% in Bozeman, 5.4% in Montana, and 7.2% nationally.
Source: Montana Department of Labor & Industry
The following chart and graph reveal Bozeman’s low unemployment in comparison to
Montana and the national rates, until the recent rise in December 2008.
Bozeman 2.9 3.6 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.1 2.7 2.3 2.2 *
Montana 5.3 4.8 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.1 3.8 3.3 3.1 *
U.S.4.2 4 4.7 5.8 6 5.5 5.1 4.6 4.6 *
Montana 500,030 472,590 27,440 5.5
Flathead 47,975 43,782 4,193 8.7
Missoula 58,058 54,880 3,178 5.5
Yellowstone 80,303 77,518 2,785 3.5
Lewis & Clark 33,010 31,669 1,341 4.1
Gallatin 51,473 49,090 2,383 4.6
Cascade 39,501 37,750 1,751 4.4
Silver Bow 16,978 16,104 874 5.1
253
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-24
E. RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE TRENDS
Downtown Office Rates Compared – January, 2009
Low High Effective Avg.Vacancy
Bozeman Downtown Office
Billings Downtown Office
Missoula Downtown Office
In spite of the recent downturn,residential and commercial real estate in Bozeman has
experienced very high growth rates during the past 10 years. Increasing inventory in both
residential and commercial real estate along with price increases evidences this. In Bozeman,
residential real estate prices peaked in 2006.
While commercial real estate in the Bozeman area has been somewhat cushioned from the
more recent volatility experienced in other markets nationally (higher vacancy rates, etc.),
there has been a slight decline in demand for office and retail space that will likely slow the
absorption of a small oversupply. Market commercial rental rates remain stable in the $13 to
$15 per square foot for suburban Class A office space.
In the industrial sector, warehouse demand has weakened slightly, along with the decline in
new housing starts. However, demand remains healthy for high-tech flex and R&D space,
thanks in part to the influence of Montana State University’s $100-million annual research
activity and related business activity. [
The table below provides a comparison of downtown office rates between Bozeman,
Billings, and Missoula. Price rates are per square foot. Vacancy rates are current for January
2009. The downtown rates are divided into new construction (AAA), Class A (prime), and
Class B (secondary).
New Construction (AAA)$16.00 $20.00 $18.00 2.0%
Class A (Prime)$15.00 $19.00 $17.00 4.0%
Class B (Secondary)$12.00 $14.00 $13.00 5.0%
New Construction (AAA)N/A N/A N/A N/A
Class A (Prime)$16.00 $22.00 $18.00 1.0%
Class B (Secondary)$8.00 $12.00 $10.00 8.0%
New Construction (AAA)$20.00 $25.00 $21.00 10.0%
Class A (Prime)$17.00 $21.00 $17.50 7.0%
Class B (Secondary)$13.00 $17.00 $14.00 6.0%
[Source: NAI Landmark Commercial Real Estate]
Source: NAI Landmark Commercial Real Estate Annual Report]
Source: NAI Landmark Commercial Real Estate
254
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-25
Home Prices
Source: Gallatin Association of Realtors®
Source: Gallatin Association of Realtors®
As noted in the graph below, housing prices have been steadily increasing in Bozeman. The
Bozeman cost of living is continually higher than the national average due to the cost of
housing.
National economic trends have recently impacted local lending and housing markets. In
2008, Bozeman area home sale prices fell to a median of $308,850, a decline of $18,400 or
5.6% from the previous year, according to figures released by the Gallatin Association of
Realtors®. From a peak of $340,851 in 2006, Bozeman area home prices have fallen $32,001
or 9.3% in two years, according to figures compiled by the 800 member association’s
Southwest Montana Multiple Listing Service.
255
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-26
Housing Variety
Year 2000 2007
Number of
Dwelling
Units
Percent
Number of
Dwellings
Units
Percent
Single-Household
Townhouse
Duplex
Triplex/Fourplex
Multi-Household
Mobile home
Other
Total
Source: Gallatin Association of Realtors®
Source: City of Bozeman, see Appendix C, page C-8 of the City of Bozeman Community Plan
Source: City of Bozeman, Building Department, 2000-2007
A greater number of Bozeman residents live in attached housing units more than ever
before. In the period 2002-2007, 4,378 new homes were built within Bozeman. Based upon
the existing value for persons per household, over the next 20 years up to 25,553 new homes
may be required to house an expanding population. This estimate is based on the City’s fairly
aggressive population growth prediction, as explained previously in Section III-B.
4,696 39.0%6,395 38.4%
639 5.3%986 5.9%
1,322 11.0%1,941 11.6%
1,898 15.8%2,575 15.5%
2,709 22.53%4,043 24.3%
621 5.2%709 4.3%
141 1.2%0 0.0%
12,026 100.0%16,649 100.0%
256
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-27
Housing Starts
Year
Total
Permits
Housing
Units
Residential building permit activity in the City of Bozeman has been strong ever since 1991.
At the time of the 1990 U.S. Census, there were 9,117 dwelling units within the Bozeman
city limits. By the 2000 U.S. Census, there were 11,577 dwelling units in Bozeman,
representing a 27% increase in the city’s housing stock in just 10 years. Annexation of new
developments into the city limits was a significant factor. At the end of 2008, there were
approximately 16,700 dwelling units within the city limits, a 31% increase since 2000.
Since 1990, single-household units have been the most popular housing type with
approximately 37% of housing permits, followed by multi-household units at approximately
25% of the permits issued. Of the 756 housing units permitted in 2007:
28.3% were for single-household
residences
9.4% for townhomes
10.6% for duplexes
4.4% for triplexes
5.8% for four-plexes
41.5% for multi-household units
0% for manufactured homes
Construction starts on single-family homes in Gallatin County continued to fall throughout
2008, according to the Southwest Montana Builders Industry Association (SWMBIA), with
total new home construction starts down 39% over 2007. Other resources of construction
activity including permits issued and electrical and gas hookups all showed steep declines in
2008.
Below is a graph of Bozeman’s new construction housing units and permits, including the
same data in table form to the right. A significant number of the permits issued in 2008 were
due in part to the large number of roof repairs and replacements following the August 2008
hailstorm damage.
2004 964 879
2005 893 954
2006 832 670
2007 900 758
2008 1044 249
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
257
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-28
Annexations
Below is a graph of the valuation of new construction in Bozeman broken down into
residential and commercial numbers.
Annexation is the process by which the city incorporates new development areas into the
city limit boundary. Land is annexed into the city to make city services, including water and
sewer, available to the new development.[See Appendix , Section 6 for Map of Areas
Recently Annexed into the City of Bozeman.]
In addition to population growth, the City of Bozeman continues to grow in geographic
area. With this growth, new land for residential, commercial and industrial development
continues to be annexed into the city. In 1990, the City of Bozeman was approximately
6,420 acres (10 square miles) in area. By the end of 2007, it was approximately 12,215 acres
(19 square miles) in area, representing a 90% increase in the area of the city limits in 18 years.
The City of Bozeman Department of Planning processed 7 annexation applications during
2007. From 2002 to 2007, the City of Bozeman annexed 2,523 acres (or approximately 3.94
square miles) into the city limits. (Source: City of Bozeman Department of Planning. The City of Bozeman Planning
Department will release an updated Vacancy Inventory for 2008 in mid April, 2009.)
258
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-29
Bozeman Affordable Housing Ordinance
Often referred to as or , the concept of
seeks to promote the production of affordable housing by requiring developers to dedicate a
percentage of housing units in a future development at a specific price as low-and moderate-
income housing to be used to help ensure adequate affordable housing exists for the
community’s workforce.
Increasingly home ownership has become more difficult for the average family to afford.
This is especially true in Bozeman, where higher than average housing costs related to a
limited supply are matched with lower than average wages in many sectors. This issue was
raised in both the 2007 Bozeman National Citizen Survey and the surveys conducted for this
. The City of Bozeman Workforce Housing
Ordinance (WFHO) was enacted in August 2007 to help with this problem. The WFHO is
the result of years of coordination with local citizens, community groups, builders,
developers and governmental organizations.
inclusionary housing inclusionary zoning workforce housing
City of Bozeman Economic Development Plan
Source: City of Bozeman
259
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-30
F. EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
Montana State University
MSU College of Technology in Bozeman
Workforce training and development in Bozeman is an area with both strong points and
significant weaknesses.
The presence of Montana State University in Bozeman provides the area economy with
numerous benefits ranging from the talent pool from which local companies recruit skilled
employees, to the nearly $100 million in annual research expenditures. MSU research has
helped launch a large number of Bozeman-based companies. With graduates receiving
baccalaureate degrees in 51 fields, master’s degrees in 42 fields, and doctoral degrees in 18
fields, MSU supplies a well-educated workforce to Bozeman employers. The University
Career Services and Student Employment office is very active with the local business
community and through job fairs, job postings, intern programs and other methods, is
effectively matching the graduates with employers. Many of Bozeman’s local business leaders
are graduates of Montana State University. [See Section IV-G for more detail on MSU’s
role as an economic anchor in Bozeman.]
Montana State University in Bozeman is the only campus of the Montana University System
that does not have a two-year college in its mission or its structure. To fill this gap, when the
university system was restructured in 1994, MSU – Great Falls began to function as the MSU
College of Technology. For about a decade, MSU – Great Falls provided short courses and
workshops through its Outreach and Workforce Development program.
In 2005, the offerings of the MSU College of Technology (COT) in Bozeman, an Extension
of MSU-Great Falls College of Technology expanded to include the degree programs and
developmental courses currently being offered. The COT in Bozeman has a three-part
mission:
Workforce development degree programs (Associate of Applied Science degrees
in Aviation, Interior Design, and Design Drafting, and a Certificate of Applied
Science in Welding.
Developmental preparatory coursework in math, English, and study skills
designed to develop skills to ensure the success in follow-on courses in MSU
curricular areas.
Workforce courses, customized trainings, and Veterans’ Upward Bound courses
through the Office of Outreach and Workforce Development at the Downtown
Bozeman Training Center.
•
•
•
260
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-31
Semester Developmental course
FTE
Workforce programs
FTE Total FTE
Semester Developmental course
FTE
Workforce programs
FTE Total FTE
Organizational Structure of COT
Enrollment data for MSU-GF COT extension in Bozeman (FTE=full-time equivalent):
Fall 2006 167 13 180
Fall 2007 207 40 247
Fall 2008 193 71 264
Spring 2007 85 18 103
Spring 2008 79 41 120
Spring 2009 78 72 151
Enrollment in COT courses are higher in Fall semesters due to MSU students who start
classes needing developmental coursework, but who successfully complete it in the Fall and
move to full MSU-Bozeman course loads in the Spring semester. The workforce programs
FTE remains fairly consistent from Fall to Spring semester. It is the workforce programs
FTE that will grow in future years as new degree programs are added.
Fall 2008 enrollment
Developmental and Workforce degree:
Developmental coursework: 546 students (193 FTE)
Workforce degree programs: 95 students (71 FTE)
Outreach courses:
34 classes offered in Fall 2008
35 classes offered in Spring 2008 (366 students)
Spring 2009 enrollment
Developmental coursework: 283 students (78 FTE)
Workforce degree programs: 85 students (72 FTE)
The organizational structure of the COT had been discussed at many levels during the past
few years. There seems to be recognition among those involved with the Bozeman COT
(including the COT Advisory Board) that the current structure of operating as a satellite
campus of MSU Great Falls, located on the grounds of MSU Bozeman, is less than ideal.
This structure creates confusion not only for students and faculty, lacks efficiency, and has
not resulted in the level of programming that is needed. Discussions around changing the
organizational structure have taken place with the Board of Regents, though any change in
the current structure has been deferred.
•
–
–
•
–
–
•
•
261
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-32
Limited 2 Year Degree Programs in Bozeman
Bozeman Job Service
The most frequently discussed scenarios for changing the organizational structure are:
Become a College within MSU-Bozeman (e.g., College of Applied Sciences) with a
Dean and same structure as current academic colleges
“Co-located” College of Technology (like UM COT, MT Tech COT in Butte, or
MSU-Billings COT)—these COTs are treated differently than Colleges within their 4
year University counterparts, but are affiliated with the University—their budgets
come through the affiliated University, and the COTs share some resources with the
affiliated University, but otherwise are autonomous institutions
A relevant comparison of COT offerings would be Missoula. Missoula also has a 4-year
University (University of Montana), an active and growing business community and a
College of Technology, though this COT is co-located and affiliated with the University.
The Missoula’s COT offers 35 workforce degree programs (Certificate of Applied Science
and/or Associate of Applied Science) in: accounting, computer support, electronics
technology, medical assisting, registered nursing, welding and other areas.
www.bozeman.msugf.edu
The limited number of 2-year degree programs available in Bozeman is a significant area of
weakness for the city’s education and workforce development needs (cited consistently in
the surveys conducted for this Plan). The area of workforce development needs that could
be improved is the acquisition of practical job skills that do not require a bachelor’s degree.
Workers and students that are interested in pursuing this training often have to travel outside
Bozeman to one of the two-year colleges located in another part of the state.
While the COT in Bozeman offers quality programs, the needs of many Bozeman residents
and employers for two-year degree programs and workforce programs goes far beyond the
current offerings. The enrollment numbers show that the COT is serving an increasing
number of students through the current program offerings. The demographics of Bozeman,
as one of the youngest areas of the state, along with the historical growth in the local
economy, make the case for additional workforce course offerings irrefutable.
The Bozeman Job Service Workforce Center, under the Montana Department of Labor and
Industry, provides Bozeman area job seekers and Bozeman businesses with a variety of
employment related services. For job seekers the Bozeman Job Service Center provides: job
posting searches, job application services, resume writing assistance, interviewing training
and other services. For Bozeman area businesses, the Center provides: job posting services,
consultation on employment law, wage and hour expertise, workers compensation training
and other services. During 2008, over 1,700 people found employment through the use of
the Bozeman Job Service Center. This resource is a valued asset to both job applicants and
•
•
262
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-33
Career Transitions
READI Workforce Training System
Bozeman Public Library
Bozeman Public Schools
employers alike.
www.wsd.dli.mt.gov/local/bozeman
This Belgrade based organization provides educational training and employment
opportunities. Services provided include: career assessments, job readiness, computer and
office skills training, job seeker services and other areas.
www.careertransitions.com
READI, or Responding to Economic Action through Dynamic-Innovation provides
professional and technical education for area workers. Programs that are offered include:
Welding, Dommercial Driver’s license, Auto Cad, Hospitality skills Training and others.
www.readitwts.com
The library fulfills a need in workforce development by providing job skills classes in the
computer lab, resources for employers and job seekers and Internet access.
Interviews with business leaders and citizen surveys show that Bozeman Public Schools are
viewed as academically strong and as an asset that is worth supporting. Both the business
and academic community recognize the link between a quality K-12 education system and a
good workforce. The frequent support for school bond issues is a good measure of the value
the community places on the school system.
263
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-34
G. LAND USE AND BUSINESS LOCATION
Current Land Use Regulations
The Bozeman Community Plan outlines the following 7 core principals to guide the City’s
land use policies and planning:
1. (preservation of existing neighborhoods and new development part of a
larger whole, rather than just anonymous subdivisions);
2. (distinct character of Bozeman related to the natural setting as well as
constructed landmarks such as historic downtown and MSU);
3. (Bozeman’s natural environment is a significant contributor to the
high quality of life);
4. (center-based development is more compact and requires less land area, and
contributes to a sense of neighborhood);
5. (land use policy integrated and supported by all other City policies
and programs);
6. (density of development balanced against community character, parks
and open space, and housing choice of citizens); and
7. (preserve quality of life and natural environment for future residents).
Bozeman’s downtown has served as the city’s central business district since the city was
established. This historic core is a hub for retail, entertainment, banking, and professional
service businesses. It is also a major center of art and culture for the region. The major
transportation routes through the city, the entry corridors of Main Street, North 7th Avenue,
North 19th Avenue, and Oak Street include the significant regional commercial and services
businesses. Community commercial mixed use businesses are integrated with significant
transportation corridors throughout the city. In addition, business park (B-P zoning) and
light industrial areas (M-1 and M-2 zoning) are generally located in the north side of
Bozeman, outside residential areas between 7th Avenue and Rouse Avenue and the East
Frontage Road. Technology firms are generally located around the university campus. There
is a concentration of firms in the Advanced Technology Park, west of MSU off West College
Street. There is also a cluster of technology firms located in the Genesis Park area around
the campus of Right Now Technologies west of South 19th Avenue.
City land use is governed by a Unified Development Ordinance, which sets the basic rules
for subdividing and developing land in the City of Bozeman. It provides specific
requirements for land development such as zoning districts and subdivision standards,
setbacks, entryway corridors, landscaping, parks and recreation requirements, parking, and
workforce (affordable) housing. [For further detail, see Section III-H. Regulatory
Environment and Tax Structure.]
Neighborhoods
Sense of Place
Natural Amenities
Centers
Integration of Action
Urban Density
Sustainability
264
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-35
TIF Districts
Urban Renewal Districts
Tax increment financing is a viable tool used by the City of Bozeman to encourage
development, redevelopment, and to finance improvements to infrastructure within a
specifically designated area. In a TIF district, tax revenues that exceed the base valuation are
paid into a separate fund overseen by a district authority and are used to pay debts incurred
by the authority. Tax increments are based on an increase in assessed valuation, not on an
increase in taxes due only to rising mill levies. The increased property tax revenues from the
designated area finance the development of its infrastructure. The City has 4 designated TIF
districts: the Downtown District, the Northeast District, the North 7th Avenue District, and
the Mandeville Farms District. [Refer to Map of the City of Bozeman Tax Increment
Finance Districts in the Appendix, Section 6.]
The City of Bozeman has designated urban renewal districts to encourage infill development
and re-development within the city limits. The urban renewal district designation
corresponds to the creation of tax increment financing districts to help finance infill. The
City of Bozeman has 3 designated urban renewal districts: Downtown, Northeast, and North
7th Avenue.
Business Improvement District mechanism allows property owners within a defined area to
assess themselves to finance improvements that will benefit all property owners within that
defined area. Construction bonds may be issued based on the income stream projected from
the assessment.
265
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-36
H. REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT AND TAX STRUCTURE
State of Montana
Montana Business Climate and Tax Rankings
Businesses in the City of Bozeman are regulated by 3 governmental authorities: the State of
Montana, Gallatin County, and the City of Bozeman.
The State of Montana does not require that all businesses hold a general business license;
however, certain types of businesses are required to register and be licensed by the state.
The regulates environmental permitting, licensing,
accreditation, certification and applications to determine compliance with the laws and rules
that have been enacted to protect the quality of the state’s air, water, and land.
The provides oversight and regulates the Montana
Workers’ Compensation system, enforces state and federal labor standards, enforces state
and federal safety and occupational health laws, establishes and enforces building industry
codes, licenses and regulates professions and occupations, and regulates all weighing or
measuring devices used in commercial transactions.
The administers more than 30 state taxes and fees including
income taxes, natural resource taxes, corporation taxes and other miscellaneous taxes. It also
establishes values for taxable property including agricultural land, residential real estate,
commercial real estate, business equipment, and others.
The administers the filing of records (registering businesses,
maintaining private sector documents such as corporate charters, applications for assumed
business names, and registration of trademarks) for businesses and corporations conducting
business in Montana.
Two issues that receive frequent mention by Bozeman business leaders are Montana’s high
workers compensation rates and the state’s tax on business equipment. They are seen as
detrimental to business growth in Montana and are often targeted for legislative change by
business advocacy organizations.
In national comparisons, Montana has received high rankings for its business climate in
recent studies. In 2008, magazine ranked Montana as the “fastest climber” of the
“most business friendly states.” also ranked Montana as 8th in the nation for its
economic climate. magazine ranked Montana 7th in the nation for its overall
business climate in 2008. The business tax climate in Montana is competitive with
neighboring states in the region, according to Ernst & Young’s “
” report. In 2008, ranked Montana 6th in the nation for best state
Montana Department of Environmental Quality
Montana Department of Labor & Industry
Montana Department of Revenue
Montana Secretary of State’s Office
Forbes
Forbes
Business Facilities
Total State and Business
Taxes The Tax Foundation
266
CITY OF BOZEMAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
III.ECONOMIC PROFILE OF BOZEMAN III-37
Gallatin County
City of Bozeman
Land Use Regulations
Design Objectives Plan
business tax climate and 11th in the nation for the lowest combined state and local tax
burden. magazine also ranked Montana 3rd in the nation for the best sales
tax climate for business. Montana has no general sales tax on business.
Three elected commissioners responsible for legislative, executive and administrative
functions of the county government. County has developer exactions fee (development
impact fee) that is prescribed against a land developer to offset the public’s cost of providing
infrastructure to a development. In addition, the county assesses review fees when land is
being subdivided for fire department and weed board reviews. The
is responsible for valuing all real and personal property for tax purposes. The
is responsible for the collection of property taxes. The
handles land use planning and zoning, rural land use, flood plain
administration and the countywide growth plan. Additional departments regulate compliance
with health and safety codes, environmental health codes, and motor vehicle registration.
The City of Bozeman regulates business licensing for all businesses, including home based
businesses within the city limits. The city also regulates land use and development through
the Department of Planning and Community Development.
City land use is governed by a Unified Development Ordinance, which sets the basic rules
for subdividing, developing, and redeveloping land in the City of Bozeman. It provides
specific requirements for development such as zoning districts, subdivision standards,
setbacks, entryway corridor requirements, landscaping, parks and recreation, parking, and
workforce housing requirements.
The Design Objectives Plan applies to all specially designated commercial corridors within
the City of Bozeman. These corridors serve as key entry routes into the core of the city, set
expectations for the quality of development downtown, and in each case the character and
functional qualities of the area greatly enhances the sense of community. These design
guidelines were produced to assure that development in the commercial corridors results in
dynamic, attractive neighborhoods and also reflects the overall goals for high-quality design
throughout the community. The Design Objectives Plan applies to all development within
the city’s jurisdictional area that falls within certain distances of eight corridors: South 19th
Avenue, West Main Street, North 19th Avenue, Oak Street, North 7th Avenue, North Rouse
Avenue/Bridger Canyon Road, East Main Street, and I-90 (as specified by the Unified
Development Ordinance Chapter 18.30). The guidelines address four topics of design and a
corridor specific section:
neighborhood design,
Business Facilities
Gallatin County Assessor’s
Office Gallatin
County Treasurer Gallatin County
Planning Department
•
267