HomeMy WebLinkAboutProvisional Adoption of Ordinance No. 1808, amending Title 18, UDO, review procedures for subdivisions.pdf
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning Director
Tim McHarg, Planning Director
SUBJECT: First Reading for Ordinance 1808 amending Chapters 18.06, 18.08, 18.10,
18.40 relating to delegation of planning board review authority for certain subdivisions and
review of subdivisions by rent or lease, and Section 18.74.030 relating to installation of
sidewalks, of Title 18, Unified Development Ordinance, Bozeman Municipal Code.
MEETING DATE: June 27, 2011
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action Item
RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing on Ordinance 1808, and having considered
public testimony, the materials presented in the packet, and the review criteria for adoption of an
ordinance, provisionally adopt Ordinance 1808.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: “Having heard and considered public testimony, the materials
presented in the packet, and the review criteria for adoption of an ordinance under the City’s
subdivision review and self-government powers authority I find that the text of Ordinance 1808
is consistent with the review criteria and move to provisionally adopt Ordinance 1808.”
BACKGROUND: The City manages the development of land within the City boundaries
through Title 18, Unified Development Ordinance. This Title includes zoning, subdivision, and
other review authority. The City monitors its regulations through time to identify ways to
improve.
The state has adopted certain standards and procedures for the review of subdivisions. Review of
subdivisions is compulsory. The citizens of Bozeman adopted a charter to govern the operations
of the City. The charter took effect on January 1, 2008. The charter and Title 7, Chapter 3, Part 7,
MCA allow the City additional flexibility in establishing local ordinance which overrides
provisions of state law. The City is invoking this authority to modify some of the statutory
provisions governing subdivisions.
The Planning Board recommended favorably on the draft ordinance after conducting a public
hearing on June 7th. The process of developing text amendments is on-going. There have been
some amendments for clarification and to reflect the recommendation of the Planning Board
since the Planning Board held its public hearing. The present draft of the ordinance reflects the
direction given by the Planning Board which resulted in some sections of the prior draft being
consolidated.
224
The draft ordinance shows edits with underlines and strikeouts. Underlined text shows an
addition to existing language. Struck through text indicates a deletion. The changes since the
Planning Board public hearing are identified either by having a double strike through for
deletions, or if an addition the text is presented in all-capitals. Should the Commission grant
preliminary approval the historical editing marks will be removed and a simplified underline and
single strikeout draft will be prepared for the final reading which shows the actions of the
Commission on first reading. The edits are also emphasized with red text to make them more
readily identified.
Principal actions by this ordinance are:
1) Delegate the review of all minor subdivisions from the Planning Board to the Planning
Director. This is allowed by statute.
2) Modify the provisions for extending the preliminary approval of a subdivision preliminary
plat. The statute on this subject was changed in the most recent legislature. Bozeman is invoking
self-government powers to add specific review criteria for evaluation of an extension and to
allow the Planning Director to approve some extensions.
3) Revises subdivision exemptions for aggregation of lots and rearrangements of lots to be
exempt from state law limits on how many lots can be affected and replace with locally
established boundary criteria. This affects several sections of the ordinance. Bozeman is
invoking self-government powers to do this.
4) Modify multiple sections having to do with “subdivisions by rent or lease”. These are
developments which do not actually generate a transferable land title but are required to be
reviewed as a subdivision by state law. Bozeman is invoking self-government powers to conduct
these reviews with zoning authority and procedures instead of through the subdivision
procedures.
5) Modify the existing requirements for installation of sidewalks to provide procedures to request
extensions of the time period within which the sidewalks must be installed.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None at this time.
ALTERNATIVES: The City Commission could decline to approve the draft ordinance or
could propose alternative text.
FISCAL EFFECTS: This ordinance does not have a direct expense to the City.
Attachments: Ordinance 1808, Staff report, Planning Board resolution and minutes.
Report compiled on: June 16, 2011
225
Page 1 of 23
ORDINANCE NO. 1808
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA, PROVIDING THAT THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE BE
AMENDED BY REVISING CHAPTER 18.06, CHAPTER 18.08, CHAPTER 18.10,
AND CHAPTER 18.74; REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR SUBDIVISIONS, LAND
SUBDIVISIONS CREATED BY RENT OR LEASE, SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS,
AND IMPROVEMENTS AND GUARANTEES.
WHEREAS, Title 76, Chapter 3, MCA requires local governments to adopt
procedures and standards for review and processing of divisions of land; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has adopted Title 18, Unified Development
Ordinance which establishes procedures and standards for subdivision development; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman’s Unified Development Ordinance implements the
City’s growth policy and state law regarding divisions of land; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman is a local government unit with self-government
powers as provided in Article XI, sections 5 and 6, of the Montana Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the purposes of Title 76, Chapter 3, MCA can be satisfied through
various means and procedures which can be adapted to the needs of local communities; and
WHEREAS, several modifications to the standards for processing subdivisions were
identified which will provide for a more effective management of land and the review of
applications while addressing the purposes of Title 76, Chapter 3, MCA and meeting the local
needs of Bozeman; and
WHEREAS, certain modifications require additional flexibility in process to review
proposed development and the City as a charter government with self-government powers has
the authority to implement such alternate approaches; and
226
Page 2 of 23
WHEREAS, the proposed Unified Development Ordinance text amendment
application has been properly submitted, and reviewed, and all necessary public notice was given
for all public hearings; and
WHEREAS, the Bozeman Planning Board held a public hearing on June 7, 2011 to
receive and review all written and oral testimony on the request for a Unified Development
Ordinance text amendment; and
WHEREAS, no member of the public offered comment on the proposed amendments;
and
WHEREAS, as shown in Planning Board Resolution P-11021, the Bozeman Planning
Board recommended to the Bozeman City Commission that the proposed Unified Development
Ordinance text amendments be approved with two changes; and
WHEREAS, after proper notice, the City Commission held a public hearing on June
27, 2011, to receive and review all written and oral testimony on the request for a text
amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission reviewed and considered the relevant text
amendment criteria established by Sections 76-3-102, and 76-3-501, M.C.A., and found the
proposed Unified Development Ordinance text amendment to be in compliance with the
purposes of the title as locally adopted in Section 18.02.040, BMC; and
WHEREAS, at its public hearing, the City Commission found that the proposed
Unified Development Ordinance text amendment would be in compliance with Bozeman’s
adopted growth policy and applicable statutes and would provide a superior means of advancing
the private and the public interest.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Commission of the City of
Bozeman, Montana, that:
Section 1
Section 18.06.040 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section shall read as
follows:
18.06.040 PRELIMINARY PLAT
After the requirement for a pre-application review has been satisfied, the developer may submit a
subdivision application. Subdivision applications shall be submitted, along with the appropriate
review fee and all required subdivision application information as set forth in Chapter 18.78,
BMC, to the Planning Department and must conform to the requirements of this title. The
preliminary plat shall be prepared by a surveyor licensed to practice in Montana.
227
Page 3 of 23
A. Acceptability and Adequacy of Application. The time limits in paragraphs 1 and
2 of this subsection apply to each successive submittal of the application until a
determination is made that the application contains the required materials and is
adequate for review and the subdivider or their agent is notified.
1. The Planning Department shall review a subdivision application within five
working days of receipt of the application and applicable fee submitted in
accordance with any deadlines established for submittal to determine if the
application is acceptable. An application is acceptable only if it contains all of the
information required by this title. If the application is unacceptable, the
application, the review fee and a written explanation of why the application is
unacceptable will be returned to the subdivider, who is the property owner. If the
application is acceptable the subdivider shall be so notified. The property owner
may designate in writing another party to receive notifications regarding
acceptability. The five working day review period shall be considered met if the
letter is dated, signed and placed in the outgoing mail within the five day review
period.
2. After the application is deemed acceptable it shall be reviewed for adequacy. The
review for adequacy shall be conducted by the appropriate agency with expertise
in the subject matter. The adequacy review period shall begin on the next working
day after the date that the Planning Department determines the application is
acceptable and sends the required notice to the subdivider; and shall be completed
within not more than 15 working days. The 15 working day review period shall be
considered met if the letter is dated, signed and placed in the outgoing mail within
the 15 working day review period. If the application is inadequate, a written
explanation of why the application is inadequate will be returned to the
subdivider, who is the property owner. If the application is adequate the
subdivider shall be so notified. The property owner may designate in writing
another party to receive notifications regarding adequacy.
a. In the event the missing information is not received by the City within 15
working days of notification to the subdivider of inadequacy, all
application materials and one-half of the review fee shall be returned to
the subdivider or their representative. Subsequent resubmittal shall require
payment of a review fee as if it were a new application.
b. A determination that an application is adequate does not restrict the City
from requesting additional information during the subdivision review
process. A determination of adequacy establishes the applicable review
criteria as specified in §18.64.080.A, BMC.
3. The DRC may grant reasonable waivers from submittal of application materials
required by these regulations where it is found that these regulations allow a
waiver to be requested and granted. If in the opinion of the final approval
authority the waived materials are necessary for proper review of the
development, the materials shall be provided before review is completed.
4. In order to be granted a waiver the applicant shall include with the submission of
the subdivision application a written statement describing the requested waiver
and the reasons upon which the request is based. The final approval body shall
228
Page 4 of 23
then consider each waiver at the time the subdivision application is reviewed. All
waivers must be initially identified with the pre-application stage of review.
B. Review by Affected Agencies. After an application is deemed acceptable, the Planning
Department may submit copies of the preliminary plat and supplementary information to
relevant public utilities and public agencies for review and comment, and FOR MAJOR
SUBDIVISIONS to the Planning Board for its advice pertaining to the approval or denial
of the subdivision application. Review by public agencies or utilities shall not delay the
City Commission’s consideration of the subdivision application beyond the statutorily
specified review period. If the Planning Department shall request review by a public
utility, agency of government, and other parties regarding the subdivision application that
was not identified during the pre-application review the Planning Department shall notify
the subdivider.
C. Planning Board Review. At a regularly noticed meeting or public hearing, the Planning
Board shall review all major subdivision applications, together with required
supplementary plans and information, and determine whether the plat is in compliance
with the City’s growth policy. The Planning Board shall hold a public hearing on all
MAJOR subdivisions for which a public hearing is required. Pursuant to Section 76-1-
107, MCA the Planning Board has delegated its review of all minor subdivisions from a
tract of record to the Planning Director or their designee.
1. Public Testimony. All written public comment received at or prior to a public
hearing shall be incorporated into the written record of the review. Minutes shall
be taken of verbal comment received during the public hearing or public meeting
before the Planning Board and shall be incorporated into the written record of the
review. Copies of the minutes and written comments shall be included in any
recommendation made to the City Commission by the Planning Board.
2. Planning Board Recommendation. Within ten working days of their review, the
Planning Board shall submit in writing to the City Commission, a resolution
forwarding its advice regarding compliance with the City’s growth policy, and a
recommendation for approval, conditional approval or denial of the subdivision
application.
3. Planning Director Recommendation. All written public comment received prior to
transmittal of the Planning Director’s recommendation to the City Commission
regarding a first minor subdivision shall be incorporated into the written record of
the review. Copies of the written comments shall be included in the
recommendation made to the City Commission.
D. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVIEW. THE PLANNING DIRECTOR SHALL REVIEW
ALL MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS, TOGETHER WITH REQUIRED
SUPPLEMENTARY PLANS AND INFORMATION, AND DETERMINE WHETHER
THE PLAT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY’S GROWTH POLICY. THE
229
Page 5 of 23
PLANNING DIRECTOR SHALL MAKE A WRITTEN RECOMMENDATION
INCLUDING A SUMMARY OF THE AGENCY REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE
REVIEW CRITERIA ESTABLISHED IN THIS TITLE AND A RECOMMENDATION
FOR APPROVAL, CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF THE
SUBDIVISION APPLICATION
1. PUBLIC TESTIMONY. ALL WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED
DURING THE PLANNING DIRECTOR’S REVIEW SHALL BE
INCORPORATED INTO THE WRITTEN RECORD OF THE REVIEW.
COPIES OF WRITTEN COMMENTS SHALL BE INCLUDED IN ANY
RECOMMENDATION MADE TO THE CITY COMMISSION BY THE
PLANNING DIRECTOR.
ED. City Commission Review. The City Commission shall review and take action on all
proposed subdivisions.
1. The following requirements for a public hearing or a public meeting, and for
statutory review periods, shall be met:
a. First Minor Subdivision Created from a Tract of Record. The City
Commission shall consider the subdivision application and the Planning
Director’s Board’s recommendation during a regular public meeting of the
Commission. The City Commission, when legal and physical access is
provided to all lots shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the
subdivision application of a first minor subdivision within thirty-five
working days of the determination that the application is adequate, unless
there is a written extension from the developer for a period not to exceed
one year. A minor subdivision must reviewed as a second or subsequent
minor subdivision if the Tract has been previously subdivided or created
by a subdivision; or the Tract has descended from a tract of record which
has previously been divided by exemption or other means into 6 or more
tracts of record since July 1, 1973.
(1) Variance Requests for Minor Subdivisions. If the developer of a
minor subdivision is requesting a variance from any requirement of
this title, the procedures of §18.66.070, BMC must be followed
except that a public hearing shall not be held.
b. Subdivisions Eligible for Summary Review. The City Commission shall
consider the application and the Planning Director’s Board’s
recommendation during a regular public meeting of the Commission. The
City Commission shall approve, conditionally approve or deny a proposed
subdivision that is eligible for summary review within thirty-five calendar
days of determination that the application is adequate, unless there is a
written extension from the developer. Minor subdivisions are eligible for
230
Page 6 of 23
summary review if the plat has been approved by the Montana Department
of Environmental Quality whenever approval is required by §76-4-101 et
seq., MCA.
c. Second or Subsequent Minor Subdivision Created From a Tract of Record.
For the second or subsequent minor subdivision created from a tract of
record, the City Commission shall hold a public hearing on the subdivision
application. The City Commission shall approve, conditionally approve or
deny the subdivision application of a second or subsequent minor
subdivision within sixty working days of the determination that the
application is adequate for review, unless there is a written extension from
the developer, not to exceed one year.
d. Major Subdivisions. For a major subdivision, the City Commission shall
hold a public hearing on the subdivision application. The City
Commission shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the subdivision
application within sixty working days of the determination that the
application is adequate for review if the subdivision has less than 50 lots,
and within 80 working days of the determination that the application is
adequate for review if the subdivision has 50 or more lots, unless there is a
written extension from the developer, not to exceed one year.
e. Public Testimony. All written public comment received at a public
meeting or public hearing prior to a decision to approval, approve with
conditions, or deny a subdivision application shall be incorporated into the
written record of the review. Minutes shall be taken of verbal comments
received during the public hearing before the City Commission and shall
be incorporated into the written record of the review maintained by the
City.
f. New and Credible Information. The City Commission shall determine
whether public comments or documents presented to the City Commission
at a public hearing regarding a subdivision application held pursuant to
§18.06.040.D, BMC constitute:
(1) Information or analysis of information that was presented at a
public hearing held pursuant to §18.06.040.D, BMC that the public
has had a reasonable opportunity to examine and on which the
public has had a reasonable opportunity to comment; or
(2) New information regarding a subdivision application that has never
been submitted as evidence or considered by either the City
Commission, Planning Board or by city staff at a hearing during
which the subdivision application was considered.
(3) If the City Commission determines that the public comments or
documents constitute new information not previously considered at
a public hearing, the City Commission may:
(a) Approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposed
subdivision without basing its decision on the new
231
Page 7 of 23
information if the governing body determines that the new
information is either irrelevant or not credible; or
(b) Schedule or direct its agent or agency to schedule a
subsequent public hearing before the City Commission for
consideration of only the new information that may have an
impact on the findings and conclusions that the governing
body will rely upon in making its decision on the proposed
subdivision.
(c) In deciding whether the information is both new and
credible the City Commission shall consider:
(1) Whether the topic of the information has previously
been examined or available for examination at a
public hearing on the subdivision application;
(2) Whether the information is verifiable, and if
applicable developed by a person with professional
competency in the subject matter;
(3) Whether the information is relevant to a topic
within the jurisdiction of the City.
(4) If a subsequent public hearing is held to consider new and credible
information, the 60 working day review period required in
§18.06.040.D is suspended and the new hearing must be noticed
and held within 45 days of the governing body's determination to
schedule a new hearing. After the new hearing, the otherwise
applicable time limit for review resumes at the governing body's
next scheduled public meeting for which proper notice for the
public hearing on the subdivision application can be provided. The
governing body may not consider any information regarding the
subdivision application that is presented after the hearing when
making its decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the
proposed subdivision.
g. When the subdivision does not qualify, pursuant to §76-4-125(2), MCA,
for the certification established in §18.06.050, BMC, the City shall at any
public hearing collect public comment given regarding the information
required BY §18.78.050.I, BMC regarding sanitation. The City shall make
any comments submitted or a summary of the comments submitted
available to the subdivider within 30 days after conditional approval or
approval of the subdivision application.
(1) The subdivider shall, as part of the subdivider's application for
sanitation approval, forward the comments or the summary
provided by the governing body to the:
(a) Reviewing authority provided for in Title 76, chapter 4, for
subdivisions that will create one or more parcels containing
less than 20 acres; and
(b) Local health department or board of health for proposed
subdivisions that will create one or more parcels containing
20 acres or more and less than 160 acres.
232
Page 8 of 23
(2) Parcel Size.
(a) For a proposed subdivision that will create one or more
parcels containing less than 20 acres, the governing body
may require approval by the department of environmental
quality as a condition of approval of the final plat.
(b) For a proposed subdivision that will create one or more
parcels containing 20 acres or more, the governing body
may condition approval of the final plat upon the
subdivider demonstrating, pursuant to MCA 76-3-604, that
there is an adequate water source and at least one area for a
septic system and a replacement drainfield for each lot.
2. Criteria for City Commission Action. The basis for the City Commission’s
decision to approve, conditionally approve or deny the subdivision shall be
whether the subdivision application, public hearing if required, Planning Board
advice and recommendation and additional information demonstrates that
development of the subdivision complies with this title, the City’s growth policy,
the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and other adopted state and local
ordinances, including, but not limited to, applicable zoning requirements. The
City Commission may not deny approval of a subdivision based solely on the
subdivision’s impacts on educational services. When deciding to approve,
conditionally approve or deny a subdivision application, the City Commission
shall:
a. Review the preliminary plat, together with required supplementary plans
and information, to determine if it meets the requirements of this title, the
development standards and policies of the City’s growth policy, the
Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, and other adopted state laws and
local ordinances, including but not limited to applicable zoning
requirements.
b. Consider written comments from appropriate public agencies, utilities or
other members of the public.
c. Consider the following:
(1) Relevant evidence relating to the public health, safety and welfare;
(2) Other regulations, code provisions or policies in effect in the area
of the proposed subdivision;
(3) The recommendation of the Planning Board; and
(4) Any relevant public testimony.
233
Page 9 of 23
d. When the subdivision does not qualify, pursuant to §76-4-125(2), MCA,
for the certification established in §18.06.050, BMC the City Commission
may conditionally approve or deny a proposed subdivision as a result of
the water and sanitation information provided pursuant to §18.78.050.I,
BMC, or public comment received pursuant to 76-3-604 on the
information provided pursuant to §18.78.050.I, BMC. A conditional
approval or denial shall be based on existing subdivision, zoning, or other
regulations that the City Commission has the authority to enforce.
3. City Commission Action. If the City Commission denies or conditionally
approves the subdivision application, it shall forward one copy of the plat to the
developer accompanied by a letter over the appropriate signature stating the
reason for disapproval or enumerating the conditions that must be met to ensure
approval of the final plat. This written statement must include:
a. The reason for the denial or condition imposition;
b. The evidence that justifies the denial or condition imposition; and
c. Information regarding the appeal process for the denial or condition
imposition.
4. Mitigation. The City Commission may require the developer to design the
subdivision to reasonably minimize potentially significant adverse impacts
identified through the review required by this title. The City Commission shall
issue written findings to justify the reasonable mitigation required by this title.
The City Commission may not unreasonably restrict a landowner’s ability to
develop land, but it is recognized that in some instances the unmitigated impacts
of a proposed development may be unacceptable and will preclude approval of the
plat. When requiring mitigation under this subsection, the City Commission shall
consult with the developer and shall give due weight and consideration to the
expressed preference of the developer.
5. Findings of Fact. Within 30 working days of the final action to approve, deny, or
approve with conditions a subdivision, the City Commission shall issue written
findings of fact that discuss and weigh the following criteria, as applicable
(pursuant to §76-3-608, MCA):
a. Criteria.
(1). Compliance with the survey requirements of the Montana
Subdivision and Platting Act;
(2). Compliance with this title and the review process of these
regulations;
(3). The provision of easements to and within the subdivision for the
location and installation of any necessary utilities;
234
Page 10 of 23
(4). The provision of legal and physical access to each parcel within
the subdivision and the notation of that access on the applicable
plat and any instrument transferring the parcel; and
(5). For major subdivisions, the findings of fact shall also address the
effect on agriculture, agricultural water user facilities, local
services, the natural environment, wildlife and wildlife habitat, and
public health and safety.
b. Required Components. The written findings of fact shall contain at a
minimum:
(1) Information regarding the appeal process for the denial or
imposition of conditions;
(2) Identifies the regulations and statutes used in reaching the decision
to deny or impose conditions and explains how they apply to the
decision;
(3) Provides the facts and conclusions that the governing body relied
upon in making its decision to deny or impose conditions. The
documents, testimony, or other materials that form the basis of the
decision and support the conclusions of the governing body may be
incorporated into the written findings by reference.
6. INITIAL Subdivision Application Approval Period. Upon approving or
conditionally approving a subdivision application, the City Commission shall
provide the developer with a dated and signed findings of fact and order statement
of approval. This approval shall be in force for not more than one calendar year
for minor subdivisions, two years for single-phased major subdivisions and three
years for multi-phased major subdivisions after the date of the findings of fact and
order. At the end of this period, the City Commission may, at the written request
of the developer, extend its approval for a mutually agreed-upon period of time.
for no more than one calendar year, except that the City Commission may extend
its approval for a period of more than one year if that approval period is included
as a specific condition of a written subdivision improvements agreement between
the City Commission and the developer, provided for in §18.74.060, BMC.
7. EXTENSIONS OF PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL PERIOD. Any mutually
agreed upon extension must be in writing and dated and signed by the subdivider
or their authorized agent and by the City Commission or their authorized agent.
More than one extension may be requested for a particular subdivision. Each
request shall be considered on its individual merits. An extension of the
subdivision approval under Chapter 18.06, BMC does not extend other City or
non-City agency approvals, e.g. for design of infrastructure extensions, necessary
to complete the project. Duration of the requested Individual extensionS MAY BE
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR WHEN THE EXTENSION IS
FOR A PERIOD OF NOT MORE THAN TWO YEARS. extensions for two
235
Page 11 of 23
years or less may be approved by the Planning Director; Extensions for more than
two years shall be approved by the City Commission after notice equivalent to
that for a first minor subdivision. When evaluating an extension request, the City
shall consider:
a. Changes to the development regulations since the original approval and
whether the subdivision as originally approved is essentially compliant
with the new regulations;
b. Progress to date in completing the subdivision as a whole and any phases,
including maintenance of the remainder of the site in good condition;
c. Phasing of the subdivision and the ability for existing development to
operate without the delayed development;
d. Dependence by other development on any public infrastructure or private
improvements to be installed by the subdivision;
e. Demonstrated ability of the subdivider to complete the subdivision;
f. Whether mitigation for impacts of the subdivision identified during the
preliminary plat review and findings of fact and order remain relevant,
adequate, and applicable to the present circumstances of the subdivision
and community.
87. Changes to Conditions After Approval. Upon written request of the developer, the
City Commission may amend conditions of subdivision application approval
where it can be found that errors or changes beyond the control of the developer
have rendered a condition unnecessary, impossible or illegal. Changes to
conditions that are not unnecessary, impossible or illegal shall be subject to the
provisions of §18.02.070, BMC.
a. The written request shall be submitted to the Planning Department.
b. The written consent of all purchasers of land (via contract for deed, etc.)
shall be included with the written request to amend conditions.
c. If it is an application for a major subdivision, the City Commission shall
conduct a public hearing on the request. If it is an application for a minor
subdivision, the City Commission shall consider the request at a regularly
scheduled meeting.
(1) If a public hearing is held, public notice of the hearing shall be
given in accordance with this title.
d. The City Commission may approve the requested change if it meets the
criteria set forth in this title.
236
Page 12 of 23
e. The City Commission shall issue written findings of fact as required in
this title.
Section 2
Section 18.08.010 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section shall read as
follows:
18.08.010 GENERAL
A. Land subdivisions created by rent or lease, rather than sale, refer to areas that provide
multiple spaces for manufactured homes, mobile homes or recreational camping vehicles
regardless of the size of the area or whether the spaces will be made available for rent by
the general public for a fee. The land shall be owned as one parcel under single
ownership, which can include a number of persons owning the property in common.
Subsequent action to sell interests in less than the entirety of the development may
necessitate review under parts 5 and 6 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act prior
to any sale. Subdivisions complying with §§18.10.010. H and 18.10.010.I, BMC, are not
subject to this chapter. Land subdivisions created by rent or lease are not subject to this
chapter or the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act if:
1. They are developed on property which has been subdivided in compliance with
parts 5 and 6 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting act or which have a
boundary documented by a Certificate of Survey recorded after July 1, 1973; and
2. They are reviewed as a site plan, conditional use permit, or planned unit
development as described and authorized under this title; and
3. They comply with the adopted zoning regulations and other land development
standards adopted by the City.
B. Land proposed for a subdivision created by rent or lease shall have a RMH, Residential
Manufactured Home or RS, Residential Suburban zoning designation.
BC. DPHHS License. If a land subdivision by rent or lease, that will provide multiple spaces
for manufactured homes, mobile homes or recreational camping vehicles is also a
“campground,” “trailer court,” “work camp,” or “youth camp” as defined below, the City
Commission shall not grant final approval until the developer obtains a license for the
facility from the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services (DPHHS)
under Title 50, Chapter 52, MCA.
1. “Campground” means a parcel of land available to and principally used by the
public for camping, where persons can camp, secure tents or cabins, or park
trailers for camping and sleeping purposes.
2. “Trailer court” means a parcel of land upon which two or more spaces are
available to the public and designated for occupancy by trailers, manufactured
homes or mobile homes for use as residences. The term does not include a parcel
composed of platted lots, if each lot:
a. Is filed with the County Clerk and Recorder;
b. Contains only one trailer space; and
237
Page 13 of 23
c. Is served by a public water supply system and public sewage system that
meet the requirements of rules for systems adopted pursuant to Title 75,
Chapter 6, Part 1, MCA, and that are located within the boundaries of the
City of Bozeman.
3. “Work camp” means a parcel of land on which housing is provided by a person
for two or more families or individuals living separately, for the exclusive use of
the employees of the person and the families, if any, of the employees. For
purposes of this subsection, “housing” includes but is not limited to camping
spaces; trailer parking spaces; manufactured, mobile, modular or permanent
barracks or structures; and any appurtenant water supply and distribution system,
sewage collection and disposal system, solid waste collection and disposal
system, or food service and dining facilities. Housing does not include shelter
provided by an employer for persons who are employed to perform agricultural
duties on a ranch or farm.
4. “Youth camp” means a parcel of land on which permanent buildings, tents or
other structures are maintained as living quarters for ten or more people and that
is used primarily for educational or recreational use by minors. The term includes
any appurtenant water supply and distribution system, sewage collection and
disposal system, solid waste collection and disposal system, or food service and
dining facilities.
CD. Surveying and Filing Requirements Exemption. Land subdivisions created by rent or
lease are exempt from the surveying and filing requirements of the Montana Subdivision
and Platting Act.
Section 3
Section 18.10.010 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section shall read as
follows:
18.10.010 DIVISIONS OF LAND ENTIRELY EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENTS
OF THIS TITLE PERTAINING TO SUBDIVISIONS AND THE MONTANA
SUBDIVISION AND PLATTING ACT
Unless the method of disposition is adopted for the purpose of evading this title or the Montana
Subdivision and Platting Act (the “Act”), the requirements of this title pertaining to subdivisions
and the Act may not apply when:
A. A division of land is created by order of any court of record in this state or by operation
of law or that, in the absence of agreement between the parties to the sale, could be
created by an order of any court in the state pursuant to the law of eminent domain (§76-
3-201(1)(a), MCA);
1. Before a court of record orders a division of land, the court shall notify the
governing body of the pending division and allow the governing body to present
written comment on the division.
238
Page 14 of 23
B. A division of land is created to provide security for mortgages, liens or trust indentures
for the purpose of construction, improvements to the land being divided, or refinancing
purposes (§76-3-201(1)(b), MCA). This exemption applies;
1. To a division of land of any size;
2. If the land that is divided is not conveyed to any entity other than the financial or
lending institution to which the mortgage, lien or trust indenture was given or to a
purchaser upon foreclosure of the mortgage, lien or trust indenture. A transfer of
the divided land, by the owner of the property at the time that the land was
divided, to any party other than those identified in this subsection subjects the
division of land to the requirements of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act
and Chapter 18.06, BMC.
3. To a parcel that is created to provide security, however the remainder of the tract
of land is subject to the provisions of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act
and Chapter 18.06, BMC if applicable.
C. A division of land creates an interest in oil, gas, minerals or water that is severed from the
surface ownership of real property (§76-3-201(1)(c), MCA);
D. A division of land creates cemetery lots (§76-3-201(1)(d), MCA);
E. A division of land is created by the reservation of a life estate (§76-3-201(1)(e), MCA);
F. A division of land is created by lease or rental for farming and agricultural purposes
(§76-3-201(1)(f), MCA);
G. A division of land is created for rights-of-way or utility sites. A subsequent change in the
use of the land to a residential, commercial or industrial use is subject to the requirements
of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and Chapter 18.06, BMC (§76-3-201(1)(h),
MCA);
H. The land upon which an improvement is situated has been subdivided in compliance with
this title and the Act, the sale, rent, lease or other conveyance of one or more parts of a
building, structure or other improvement situated on one or more parcels of land is not a
division of land (§76-3-202, MCA);
I. The sale, rent, lease or other conveyance of one or more parts of one or more a buildings,
structures or other improvements, whether existing or proposed, is not a division of land
when a transferable parcel of land with an individual legal description is not created. The
sale, rent, lease or other conveyance of one or more parts of buildings, structures or other
improvements, whether existing or proposed, is subject to zoning standards and review
procedures (§76-3-204, MCA);
J. A division of land created by lease or rental of contiguous airport-related land owned by
a city, county, the state, or a municipal or regional airport authority provided that the
lease or rental is for onsite weather or air navigation facilities, the manufacture,
maintenance, and storage of aircraft, or air carrier-related activities (§76-3-205(1),
MCA);
K. A division of state-owned land unless the division creates a second or subsequent parcel
from a single tract for sale, rent or lease for residential purposes after July 1, 1974 (§76-
3-205(2), MCA); and
239
Page 15 of 23
L. Deeds, contracts, leases or other conveyances that were executed prior to July 1, 1974
(§76-3-206, MCA).
Section 4
Section 18.10.020 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section shall read as
follows:
18.10.020 SPECIFIC DIVISIONS OF LAND EXEMPT FROM REVIEW BUT SUBJECT
TO SURVEY REQUIREMENTS AND ZONING REGULATIONS FOR
DIVISIONS OF LAND NOT AMOUNTING TO SUBDIVISIONS
Unless the method of disposition is adopted for the purpose of evading this title or the Act, the
following divisions or aggregations of land are not subdivisions under this title and the Act, but
are subject to the surveying requirements of §76-3-401, MCA for lands other than subdivisions
and are subject to applicable zoning regulations adopted under Title 76, Chapter 2, MCA. A
division of land may not be made under this section unless the County Treasurer has certified
that no real property taxes and special assessments assessed and levied on the land to be divided
are delinquent. The County Clerk and Recorder shall notify the Planning Department of any
land division described in this section or §76-3-207 (1), MCA.
A. Divisions made outside of platted subdivisions for the purpose of relocating common
boundary lines between adjoining properties (§76-3-207(a), MCA);
B. Divisions made outside of platted subdivisions for the purpose of a single gift or sale in
each county to each member of the landowner’s immediate family (§76-3-207(b), MCA);
C. Divisions made outside of platted subdivisions by gift, sale or a agreement to buy and sell
in which the parties to the transaction enter a covenant running with the land and
revocable only by mutual consent of the City of Bozeman and the property owner that the
divided land will be used exclusively for agricultural purposes (§76-3-207(c), MCA);
D. For five or fewer lots within a platted subdivision, the relocation of common boundaries
where the relocation does not cross public or private street rights of way or an external
boundary of the subdivision. (§76-3-207(d), MCA). The restriction of 76-3-207(2), MCA
on the number of lots to be rearranged and designation of review authority shall not apply
in such instances; and
E. Divisions made for the purpose of relocating a common boundary line between a single
lot within a platted subdivision and adjoining land outside a platted subdivision. A
restriction or requirement on the original platted lot or original unplatted parcel continues
to apply to those areas (§76-3-207(e), MCA).
F. Aggregation of parcels or lots when a certificate of survey or subdivision plat shows that
the boundaries of the original parcels have been eliminated and the boundaries of the
larger aggregate parcel are established. A restriction or requirement on the original
platted lot or original unplatted parcel continues to apply to those areas (§76-3-207(f),
MCA). The restriction of 76-3-207(2), MCA on the number of lots to be rearranged and
designation of review authority shall not apply in such instances.
240
Page 16 of 23
Section 5
Section 18.10.030 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section shall read as
follows:
18.10.030 EXEMPTIONS FROM SURVEYING AND FILING REQUIREMENTS BUT
SUBJECT TO REVIEW
Subdivisions created by rent or lease are exempt from the surveying and filing requirements of
Chapter 18.06, BMC and the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, but must be submitted for
review and approved by the City Commission before portions thereof may be rented or leased
unless exempted by Chapter 18.08, BMC.
Section 6
Section 18.10.070.E of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section shall read
as follows:
E. For five or fewer lots within a platted subdivision, relocation of common boundaries and
the aggregation of lots (§76-3-207(d), MCA).
1. The proper use of the exemption for aggregation of lots and/or relocation of
common boundaries is the rearrangement and/or aggregation of five or fewer lots
within a platted subdivision which does not increase the total number of lots
within the subdivision. The plat shall contain the title “amended plat” and must
be filed with the County Clerk and Recorder.
2. The amended plat showing the aggregation of lots and/or relocation of common
boundary within a platted subdivision must be accompanied by:
a. An original deed exchanging recorded interest from every person having a
recorded interest in adjoining properties for the entire newly-described
parcel(s) that is acquiring additional land;
b. Documentation showing the need or reason for the relocation (for
example: structure encroachment, surveyor error, or enhancement of the
configuration of the property); and
c. The amended plat must bear the signatures of all landowners whose
parcels are changed by the relocation or aggregation. The amended plat
must show that the exemption was used only to change the location of
boundary lines or aggregate lots, and must clearly distinguish the prior
boundary location (shown, for example, by a dashed or broken line or a
notation) from the new boundary (shown, for example, by a solid line or
notation).
3. The City makes a rebuttable presumption that a proposed aggregation of lots
and/or relocation of common boundaries within a platted subdivision is adopted
for the purpose of evading the Act if it determines that the relocation crosses the
boundary of a public or private street right of way or the external boundary of the
subdivision. six or more lots are affected by the proposal.
241
Page 17 of 23
4. Any division of lots which results in an increase in the number of lots or which
redesigns or rearranges six or more lots must be reviewed as a subdivision and
approved by the City of Bozeman prior to the filing of the final plat.
Section 7
Section 18.40.120 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section shall read as
follows:
18.40.120 MANUFACTURED HOME COMMUNITIES
Manufactured home communities are included in the state classification of land subdivisions by
rent or lease. Therefore, applicants for such developments shall apply for and be reviewed under
both site plan and subdivision procedures unless exempted per Section 18.08.010. These When
both review processes are required they will be reviewed concurrently when appropriate. All
standards of this title are applicable unless explicitly waived.
A. State of Montana Requirements. All manufactured home communities developed under
this section shall comply with Montana State Department of Public Health and Human
Services, Department of Environmental Quality and any other applicable state
regulations. Prior to final approval for a manufactured home community, copies of
approval letters from relevant state agencies shall be submitted or compliance with all
applicable regulations shall be certified by a professional civil engineer licensed by the
State of Montana.
B. Lot Improvements. The location of boundaries of each manufactured home lot for rent or
lease shall be clearly and permanently marked on the ground with flush stakes, markers
or other suitable means. The location marked must be closely approximate to those
depicted on the approved plans.
1. Utility Hookup. Every manufactured home shall be permanently connected to
electric power, water supply, sewage disposal, gas and telephone service lines in
compliance with applicable City codes, and all utility distribution and service
lines shall be installed underground.
2. Permanent Foundations and Anchoring. All manufactured homes shall be required
to be tied or otherwise physically anchored to an approved permanent concrete
foundation. Building permits for foundations and anchoring, issued through the
City Building Department in accordance with the adopted International Building
Code, are required. The method of anchoring and foundations shall be specified as
part of the required preliminary development review.
3. Maintenance.
a. There shall be no exposed outdoor storage of furniture (except lawn
furniture), household goods, tools, equipment, or building materials or
supplies.
b. No manufactured home may be parked on a public or private street for
more than twenty-four hours.
242
Page 18 of 23
c. An abandoned, burned or wrecked manufactured home must be secured
against entry as directed by the Fire Marshall and may not be kept on a lot
for more than forty-five days.
d. Each manufactured home must bear an insignia which attests that the
construction of the manufactured home meets regulation A 119.1 of the
American National Standards Institute (adopted by the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development), or be certified as meeting the Mobile
Home Construction and Safety Standards of the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development.
e. Within twenty-one days of placement, standard manufactured home
skirting of fire-resistive material similar in character to that of the
manufactured home must be provided around the entire perimeter of the
manufactured home between the bottom of the body of the manufactured
home and the ground, except where the running gear has been removed
and the manufactured home itself is attached directly to the permanent
foundation.
f. All required front yards of lots for rent or lease for manufactured homes
shall be fully landscaped.
g. All private, commonly owned recreation areas not devoted to buildings,
structures, surfaced courts, sand boxes, etc. shall be landscaped and
irrigated.
4. Manufactured home lots for rent or lease shall be arranged to permit the practical
placement and removal of manufactured homes. Every lot for rent or lease must
front on a public or private street.
C. Permits and Inspections.
1. Owner’s and Agent’s Responsibility. It shall be the responsibility of the
individual property owners or, in the case of a rental community, the managers of
the rental community to see that all sections of this article are complied with,
including requirements relative to placement of manufactured homes, and all
required permits.
2. Move In Permit Required. All manufactured homes moved into the City must be
issued a move-in permit, pursuant to this section, and be inspected by the City
Building Official, prior to gas and electric service being turned on by the
servicing utility. A copy of the original sales contract shall be available for permit
informational purposes.
3. City Inspection Required.
a. The required inspections for manufactured homes shall include: onsite
utilities requirements including gas, electric, sewer and water; setback
requirements; and off-street parking requirements. Fees for these have
been established by the City Commission by resolution.
b. It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or agency to turn on, or
allow to be turned on, any gas or electric service without an inspection and
clearance from the City Building Official.
243
Page 19 of 23
4. Non-Manufactured Home Improvements Subject to the International Building
Code. Permits must be obtained for additions, alterations, canopies, carports,
storage areas and detached refrigeration units that were not included in the
original sale of the manufactured home unit, fees for which are set by the
International Building Code and Uniform Mechanical Code.
D. Plans. The preliminary and final plans shall accurately depict:
1. All proposed and required landscaping;
2. Locations of storage areas for recreational vehicles and other chattels of the
residents;
3. A layout of typical lots for rent or lease showing the location and dimensions of
the lot, manufactured home stand, driveway and parking spaces;
4. Mail delivery area; and
5. Foundation and anchoring details.
E. A permanent enclosure for temporary storage of garbage, refuse and other waste material
shall be provided for every manufactured home space. If trash dumpsters are to be used,
they shall be centrally and conveniently located, shall not be located in any front yard,
and shall otherwise comply with the requirements of this title.
F. Landscaping may be required by the City Commission to provide a buffer between
manufactured home communities and adjacent uses, and to enhance the appearance of the
development. The landscaping may be interspersed with a fence or wall. Specific
perimeter landscape/buffering treatments shall be determined on a case-by case basis,
with the City considering appropriate factors such as the nature of adjacent uses, noise
and proximity to busy streets.
G. Recreation Areas. At a minimum, the amount of land required to be dedicated under
§18.50.020, BMC, shall be reserved as park or recreation area. Recreation areas may
include space for community recreation buildings and facilities.
1. Public access through the recreation area may be required, through the provision
of a written public access easement, if it is determined by the City commission
that public access is necessary to ensure public access through the private
recreational area from adjoining properties to nearby or adjacent public parks.
H. Accessory Buildings. Accessory buildings for individual dwellings are subject to
§18.38.050, BMC.
Section 8
Section 18.40.170 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section shall read as
follows:
18.40.170 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARK AND OVERNIGHT CAMPGROUND
Recreational vehicle parks and overnight campgrounds are included in the state classification of
land subdivisions by rent or lease. Therefore, applicants for such developments shall apply for
and be reviewed under both site plan and subdivision procedures unless exempted by Section
18.08.010.
244
Page 20 of 23
A. Recreational vehicle parks shall be screened from view of any adjacent residential
development.
B. Internal circulation roads shall be paved with a concrete or asphaltic concrete surface.
C. Individual recreational vehicle parking pads shall be plainly marked and maintained with
a dust free surface.
D. Individual recreational vehicle parking pads shall be set back at least 30 feet from the
perimeter of the park and 30 feet from any public street right-of-way.
E. Approved trash disposal, bathroom and laundry facilities, including facilities for the
handicapped, shall be provided for use of overnight campers.
F. Recreational vehicles spaces shall be separated by no less than 15 feet and shall be no
less than 1,500 square feet in area.
G. Land proposed for use for a recreational vehicle park must have a R-S, Residential
Suburban District or a RMH, Residential Manufactured Home Community District
zoning designation. Recreational vehicle parks are a principal use in the RMH district
and a conditional use in the R-S district.
Section 9
Section 18.74.030.B.2 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended so that such section shall
read as follows:
2. Sidewalks. City standard sidewalks (including a concrete sidewalk section
through all private drive approaches) shall be constructed on all public and private
street frontages prior to occupancy of any structure on individual lots. Should a
subdivider choose not to install all sidewalks prior to final plat, an improvements
agreement shall be entered into with the City of Bozeman guaranteeing the
completion of all sidewalks within the subdivision within a three-year period or as
described in subsection (b) below. The developer shall supply the City of
Bozeman with an acceptable method of security equal to 150 percent of these
remaining sidewalk improvements.
a. The subdivider shall install sidewalks adjacent to public lands, including
but not limited to, parks, open space, and the intersection of alleys and
streets or street easements. Sidewalks in these areas shall be installed prior
to final plat approval, or shall be subject to an approved improvements
agreement and financially guaranteed.
b. Except as provided in subsection (c) below, Uupon the third anniversary
of the plat recordation of any phase of the subdivision, any lot owner who
has not constructed said the required sidewalk shall, without further
notice, construct within 30 days, said the sidewalk for their lot(s),
regardless of whether other improvements have been made upon the lot.
c. On any face of a block between any two intersecting streets where less
than 50% of lots have been issued a building permit, and when
construction of a sidewalk is not immediately required to provide
pedestrian connectivity to the destinations described in 4 below, the
245
Page 21 of 23
Planning Director may allow the lot owner up to an additional two (2) year
period to construct the sidewalk. The additional time is subject to either an
extension of an existing improvements agreement with the subdivider or
the entering into of a new improvements agreement with the lot owner(s).
The Planning Director may authorize subsequent extensions in up to two-
year increments. The granting of an extension does not allow sidewalk
installation to be delayed beyond occupancy of any structure on an
individual lot. The provision of a financial guarantee in a form acceptable
to the City shall not be waived.
The following information in map and/or text form shall be provided for
all requests to extend the time period to complete subdivision sidewalks:
1. The total number of residential lots in the subdivision.
2. The percent of subdivision lots that have been sold and are no longer
under subdivider’s/applicant’s ownership
3. The percent of subdivision lots that have been sold and are still vacant.
4. A description of adjoining subdivisions, public parklands, open spaces,
neighborhood commercial nodes, commercial centers and public trail
corridors within one-half mile of the subdivision.
5. Describe what public sidewalks and/or public trails within the interior
of the subdivision are proposed to be completed that will provide
effective connectivity within the interior of the subdivision, as well as
adjoining subdivisions, public parklands, open space, neighborhood
commercial nodes, commercial centers and public trail systems.
6. Describe the extended time period being requested to complete the
required subdivision sidewalks.
7. Provide a copy of the final plat and at least one colored exhibit
illustrating the subdivision being considered, along with the number of
lots sold, those developed with residential structures, vacant lots, those
lots/areas where sidewalks have been constructed, and remaining lots
still under applicant’s ownership.
Section 10
Repealer
All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of this
ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances of the
City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force
and effect.
Section 11
Savings Provision
246
Page 22 of 23
This ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred or
proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this ordinance. All other provision of
the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this Ordinance shall remain in full force and
effect.
Section 12
Severability
That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be
adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity
of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so decided to be
invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman Municipal
Code as a whole.
Section 13
Codification
The provisions of Section 1 - 10 shall be codified as appropriate in Title 18, Unified
Development Ordinance, of the Bozeman Municipal Code. All references within the Bozeman
Municipal Code shall be revised to reflect the changes in this ordinance.
Section 14
Effective Date
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption.
PROVISIONALLY PASSED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana,
on first reading at a regular session held on the _______ day of _______, 2011.
____________________________________
JEFFREY K. KRAUSS
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
STACY ULMEN, CMC
City Clerk
247
Page 23 of 23
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________________
GREG SULLIVAN
City Attorney
FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City
of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ____ day
of ________________, 2011. The effective date of this ordinance is __________, __, 2011.
____________________________________
JEFFREY K. KRAUSS
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
STACY ULMEN, CMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________________
GREG SULLIVAN
City Attorney
248
#Z-11021a City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report – Ord. 1808 1
STAFF REPORT - UDO TEXT AMENDMENTS FILE NO. #Z-11021a
Item: Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment Application #Z-11021a,
Ord. 1808 amend Chapter 18.06 Review Procedures for Subdivisions,
including, but not limited to: Section 18.06.040 Preliminary Plat, to modify
review procedures by the planning board and modify the approval period for
subdivisions; to amend Chapter 18.08 Land Subdivisions Created by Rent or
Lease, to modify requirements and create an exemption from subdivision
review for projects meeting defined criteria; to amend Chapter 18.10
Subdivision Exemptions, including, but not limited to: 18.10.010 to create an
exemption from subdivision review for certain projects which comply with
zoning procedures and standards, Section 18.10.020 to modify restrictions on
the relocation of common boundaries and aggregations of lots, Section
18.10.030 Exemptions from surveying and Filing Requirements but Subject
to Review, to coordinate exemptions modified in Chapters 18.08 and 18.10,
Section 18.10.070 Exemption Review Criteria, to modify the standards for
determining when a proposed development is evading the subdivision and
platting act; and Section 18.74.030 Completion of Improvements to modify
the criteria for when sidewalks must be installed.
Applicant: Bozeman City Commission
P.O. Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59771-1230
Representative: Department of Planning and Community Development
P.O. Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59771-1230
Date/Time: Before the Bozeman Planning Board on Tuesday, June 7, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. in
the Commission Room, City Hall 121 N Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana.
Before the Bozeman City Commission on Monday, June 27, 2011 at 6:00 p.m.
in the Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Avenue, Bozeman,
Montana.
Report By: Chris Saunders, Assistant Director of Planning and Community
Development
PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed edits apply city-wide.
PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The City monitors its regulations to ensure that they are effective and consistent with the purposes for
which they were created and in balance with a broad range of community priorities. From time to time
various possible changes are identified which have potential to improve effectiveness and balance.
Revisions to state law may also require amendment to local ordinances. On April 5, 2011, the Planning
249
#Z-11021a City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report – Ord. 1808 2
Staff and Planning Board discussed several possible edits to the City’s subdivision review standards and
processes. The Board was supportive of the suggestions brought forward by Staff at that meeting. This
amendment set includes some of the edits discussed at that meeting. A draft of the ordinance was
distributed to the Planning Board for their consideration prior to the May 17th scheduled meeting. As
there was no quorum of the Board present on that day there was no formal discussion on the subject.
There are five substantive changes addressed in this ordinance.
1) State law regarding the role of planning boards allows them to delegate their review of minor
subdivisions to planning staff. Especially first minor subdivisions have a quick review time which can
make it difficult for the Planning Board to hold a formal public meeting. The draft ordinance proposes to
delegate the Planning Board’s review for first minor subdivisions to the planning staff which will
simplify the review process and make it easier to meet the require review timelines. If desired, the
wording could be modified to delegate the Planning Board review of all minor subdivisions to the
planning staff. This is in section 1 of the draft ordinance.
2) The 2011 Legislative session passed House Bill 522 which modifies how extensions to the approval
period for preliminary plats is allowed to occur. The City is implementing this section and adding some
criteria to guide decision makers as they consider extending an approval. The bill allows extensions
when they are mutually agreeable to both parties and the addition of criteria will help all understand the
circumstances under which the City will consider an extension. The City is invoking its authority as a
charter government to vary from the state subdivision standards as it relates to extension of subdivision
approval. The difference from statute is the delegation of certain extensions to the staff and to provide a
noticing requirement for extensions of more than 2 years. This is beneficial for simplicity of operation
and recognition of the effect that extensions may have on adjacent properties. This is in section 2 of the
draft ordinance.
3) The City is invoking its authority as a charter government to vary from the state subdivision standards
as it relates to subdivisions by lease or rent. The statute requires that certain development actions which
do not create legally described parcels of land must be reviewed through the subdivision process. These
are typically called subdivisions by rent or lease and are addressed in several sections of Title 76,
Chapter 3, Part 2, MCA. Certain actions are also exempted from review as a subdivision.
Subdivision review is the only compulsory land use/development review required of all local
governments in the state. The purposes of zoning review and of subdivision review are very similar.
Both provide a means to review impacts of future use of land and establish mitigation of negative effects
if necessary. The current requirements for subdivisions by lease or rent has generated considerable
debate lately at the state level with several court cases seeking to extend its reach in a way that is
duplicative to zoning review and would create a substantial burden to developing within the City. The
2011 Legislature passed HJ39 recognizing these problems and calling for a review of the issue during
the interim.
The City has a robust zoning review program that addresses the concerns and issues from subdivision
but which is less rigid than subdivision review and more responsive to site conditions. Since the areas of
public concern are addressed by zoning the City is acting to remove the duplicative subdivision review
process. This is addressed in sections 3, 4, 6, 8, and 9 of the draft ordinance.
4) The City is invoking its authority as a charter government to vary from the state subdivision standards
as it relates to subdivision exemptions to realign common boundaries between lots and for aggregation
of lots. The state law limits the number of parcels which can realign common boundaries or aggregate to
five. There are circumstances both in existing developed areas like downtown and in new subdivisions
250
#Z-11021a City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report – Ord. 1808 3
where it is desirable to consolidate lots or reconfigure property boundaries to better reflect actual
ownership and use or to facilitate development. Any additional development potential can typically be
adequately reviewed through the City’s zoning regulations. Relocations and consolidations must still
comply with zoning standards and other regulatory requirements. The difference in additional
development allowed is minimal. No additional lots may be created through a relocation or
consolidation.
The City proposes to modify the standard for relocation or consolidations to allow changes to any
number of lots so long as certain boundary conditions are met. This provides much more flexibility but
does not materially alter public infrastructure or other areas of public interest. There remains a procedure
in place to determine if a subdivision exemption is being used to evade the Montana Subdivision and
Platting Act. No evasions will be allowed.
5) Sidewalks are part of the basic street infrastructure. They are usually not installed until the private lot
is developed or 3 years after recording of the final plat. The requirement for timing of installation has
varied over the years. The slowdown in development rates has pointed out circumstances where the time
has come for installation of sidewalks but there is no development on a block. If there are no occupants
on the block then usefulness of the sidewalk is limited. The proposed changes establish criteria and
procedure to determine when the installation may be deferred beyond the initial three year period and
when the sidewalks must be installed without deferral. The base requirement for installation sooner than
three years after filing of the final plat if the property is developed is not proposed to change.
REVIEW CRITERIA
The Planning Board have criteria for their review established in statute which are in turn mirrored in
local ordinance. The analysis below notes that review criteria are met with the term ‘yes’, are not met
with the term ‘no’, or are not materially affected with the term ‘neutral’. This report is a summary of the
review conducted by Staff in evaluating the material.
According to Section 18.68.020 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), the Bozeman Planning
board shall cause to be made an investigation of facts bearing on each UDO text amendment application
relevant to subdivision. A public hearing must be held by the Planning Board to hear and consider any
public testimony prior to making their recommendation to the City Commission. The Planning Board
must review the information they consider necessary to assure that the action of each UDO text
amendment application is consistent with the intent and purpose of the UDO. Specifically, the
investigation must address the following criteria as required in Section 76-3-102 and 76-3-501, Montana
Code Annotated. These are incorporated locally into Section 18.02.040, BMC.
Interpretation and application of Title 18, Unified Development Ordinance must take into account the
document as a whole. Therefore, the analysis is of the document as a whole as amended by the
suggested text revisions. If a substantial change is made then a particular point may be emphasized. To
prevent redundancy, when an earlier review criterion has addressed an issue a later review criterion
addressing the same issue may refer back to the prior answer.
Section 76-1-606 MCA. Effect of growth policy on subdivision regulations:
1. Subdivision regulations adopted after a growth policy has been adopted must be made in
accordance with the growth policy.
Yes. The various changes proposed in Ordinance 1808 are consistent with the principles of the growth
policy. Selections from chapters goals and objectives are included below.
251
#Z-11021a City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report – Ord. 1808 4
Chapter 1: Addressing Growth and Change
Objective G-1.1: Ensure growth is planned and developed in an orderly and publicly open manner that
maintains Bozeman as a functional, pleasing, and social community.
Objective G-1.2: Ensure that adequate public facilities, services, and infrastructure are available and/or
financially guaranteed in accordance with facility or strategic plans prior to, or concurrent with,
development.
Objective G-1.3: Require development to mitigate its impacts on our community as identified and
supported by evidence during development review, including economic, health, environmental, and
social impacts.
Goal G-2: Implementation – Ensure that all regulatory and non-regulatory implementation actions
undertaken by the City to achieve the goals and objectives of this plan are effective, fair, and are
reviewed for consistency with this plan on a regular basis.
Objective G-2.1: Ensure that development requirements and standards are efficiently implemented,
fairly and consistently applied, effective, and proportionate to the concerns being addressed.
Objective G-2.4: Develop a balanced system of regulatory requirements, programs, and incentives to
ensure that development within the Planning Area is in compliance with the Bozeman Community Plan.
The allowance for greater flexibility in reconfiguration of existing parcels facilitates infill development
and protects existing investments in property by removing unnecessary procedural steps that cause delay
and expense without providing meaningful protections to the public. The proposed changes for
subdivision extensions includes criteria to ensure that mitigation and standards remain valid for the
subdivision. This helps ensure concurrency of infrastructure installation. The modifications for sidewalk
installation include criteria to ensure that the installation of sidewalks will not be delayed when they are
needed in the immediate vicinity but that expense is deferred when users are not yet present.
Chapter 3: Land Use
Objective LU-1.4: Provide for and support infill development and redevelopment which provides
additional density of use while respecting the context of the existing development which surrounds it.
Respect for context does not automatically prohibit difference in scale or design.
Objective LU-2.3: Encourage redevelopment and intensification, especially with mixed uses, of
brownfields and underutilized property within the City consistent with the City’s adopted standards.
Using this approach rehabilitate corridor based commercial uses into a pattern more supportive of the
principles supported by commercial centers.
Objective LU-3.2: Encourage the use and redevelopment of underutilized and brownfield sites to
provide employment and housing which will help to maintain the vibrancy and vitality of the Historic
Core area.
Minor subdivisions and subdivision exemptions are commonly used in infill and redevelopment
projects. The changes proposed have the potential to simplify the infill and redevelopment process
Review processes which avoid unnecessary steps and expense remove barriers to development and
therefore will advance these goals and objectives.
Chapter 11: Transportation
Goal T-2: Ensure that a variety of travel options exist which allow safe, logical, and balanced
252
#Z-11021a City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report – Ord. 1808 5
transportation choices.
Objective T-2.1: For the purposes of transportation and land use planning and development, non-
motorized travel options and networks shall be of equal importance and consideration as motorized
travel options. This balance shall ensure that a variety of travel opportunities are available which do not
require the use of automobiles for local trips.
Goal T-4: Pathways–Establish and maintain an integrated system of transportation and recreational
pathways, including streets, bicycle and pedestrian trails, neighborhood parks, green belts and open
space.
Objective T-4.1: Coordinate development of non-motorized transportation systems in conjunction with
motor vehicular transportation systems.
Objective T-4.2: Further develop and maintain an interconnected and convenient pedestrian and bicycle
network for commuting and recreation as discussed and described in the transportation facility plan and
in coordination with the design standards of the transportation facility plan and the Parks, Recreation,
Open Space, and Trails Plan.
Sidewalks are an essential part of the City’s transportation system and are required with new
development. A coherent system of sidewalks that enables continuous travel is of more utility and value
than disconnected bits and pieces. To function effectively the sidewalk system needs to be not only
present but also maintained such as removal of snow and debris. Construction of adjacent buildings can
damage sidewalks unless protective measures are taken. The proposed changes allow for sidewalk
installation to be deferred until there is an amount of development in the block that can generate need for
the facility. When development passes that 50% threshold on a block face the sidewalks need to be
installed. The City will consider the connectivity of an individual block to other areas as well so that the
ability to travel safely will be provided.
Subdivision Purposes – Section 76-3-102 MCA.
1. Promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by regulating the subdivision of
land.
Yes. The proposed amendments are integrated with the remainder of Title 18 to ensure that adequate
infrastructure is provided in a timely manner to service development. The amendments will clarify
various procedures and standards, thereby improving the opportunity to understand and equitably apply
the standards and procedures of the title. The general welfare will be improved by simplifying
procedures and more clearly identifying the applicability of certain standards. The removal of excess
and duplicative procedures will encourage reinvestment and redevelopment of existing areas. The
changes retain the essential functions of review for impacts of development and when necessary the
proper surveying and documentation of legal property boundaries.
2. Prevent the overcrowding of land.
Yes. The UDO establishes zoning standards for parking, surface area coverage, and other performance
standards to ensure that building mass, height, density of dwellings, and other features may be
adequately met on any given parcel of land. The proposed amendments are not expected to materially
change the standards addressing this issue. By providing for good, but not duplicative, review
procedures for subdivisions and subsequent site development the necessary infrastructure will be in
place as needed to serve the residents and users of those developments.
253
#Z-11021a City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report – Ord. 1808 6
3. Lessen congestion in the streets and highways.
Neutral. The UDO contains a variety of transportation improvement and right-of-way standards
designed to ensure the provision of adequate transportation facilities and the functionality of those
facilities. The UDO also encourages alternative transportation modes such as walking, biking and
transit. The revisions do not alter these requirements.
4. Provide adequate light, air, water supply, sewage disposal, parks and recreation areas,
ingress and egress, and other public improvements.
Yes. The UDO contains a variety of standards designed to ensure the provision of adequate public
improvements and the functionality of those facilities. For examples see Chapter 18.44, Section
18.38.030.D, Chapter 18.42, and Chapter 18.74. The amendments do not materially alter these
standards. Items 1 and 3 above further address these issues.
5. Require development in harmony with the natural environment.
Neutral. The proposed amendments are not expected to materially affect this area of concern.
6. Protect the rights of property owners.
Yes. The UDO was crafted with the aim of balancing the rights of applicant property owners with the
need to protect the rights of other property owners and the health, safety and general welfare of the
community as a whole. This is reflected in the provisions of the ordinance including, but not limited to,
defined criteria and procedures for reviewing development proposals. Removal of duplicative review
processes supports the right of property owners to timely and efficient due process in the review of
development proposals.
7. Require uniform monumentation of land subdivisions and transferring interests in real
property by reference to a plat or certificate of survey.
Neutral. The UDO requires compliance with the uniform standards for monumentation and the
preparation of final plats as outlined in the Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM). The ARMs are
prepared by the state agency with responsibility to administer a given Montana law. The ARMs set
forth how the responsible state agency will administer the law. No changes have been proposed relating
to this criterion.
Subdivision Purposes – Section 76-3-501 MCA. Requires local governments to adopt regulations that
reasonably provide for:
1. Orderly development within the jurisdictional area.
Yes. The UDO has previously been reviewed and found to meet this criterion. Extensions of service and
timely delivery of services remain as requirements. The changes to subdivision exemptions will allow
property owners to configure and consolidate land with good documentation in a reasonable time frame.
This will reduce the likelihood of owners seeking to evade the review requirements and make
development more orderly. The modification to sidewalk installation requirements ensures that
sidewalks will be installed when and where they are most needed which will encourage their
maintenance in good condition.
2. Coordination of roads within subdivided land with other roads, both existing and planned.
Neutral. The UDO requires that the arrangement, type, extent, width, grade and location of all streets be
considered in relation to existing and planned streets. When a proposed development adjoins
254
#Z-11021a City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report – Ord. 1808 7
undeveloped land, and access to the undeveloped land would reasonably pass through the new
development, the UDO requires that streets within the proposed development be arranged to allow the
suitable development of the adjoining undeveloped land. The UDO also requires that developers
arrange streets to provide for the continuation of streets between adjacent developed properties when
such continuation is necessary for the convenient movement of traffic, effective provision of emergency
services and efficient provision of utilities. The amendments do not modify these requirements.
3. Dedication of land for roadways and for public utility easements.
Neutral. The UDO requires that all streets either be dedicated rights-of-ways or be private streets with a
public access easement. The UDO requires the provision of utility easements for both public and private
utilities. No changes to this subject were made with these amendments.
4. Improvement of roads.
Neutral. The UDO contains standards for the arrangement, type, extent, width, grade, location, design
and construction of streets and roads. No material changes were made with these amendments. The
zoning standards include mechanisms to ensure that right-of-way is provided and streets developed to
the same standards as through a subdivision process.
5. Provision of adequate open spaces for travel, light, air and recreation.
Neutral. The standards for this subject are unaltered.
6. Adequate transportation, water and drainage.
Yes. The UDO contains standards for the provision of transportation, water and drainage facilities. In
addition, the UDO requires compliance with adopted transportation, water and stormwater facility plans.
See sections above for additional discussion.
7. Regulation of sanitary facilities, subject to section 76-3-511 MCA.
Neutral. The UDO contains standards for the provision of sewer facilities. In addition, the UDO
requires compliance with state requirements regarding sanitary facilities and with the adopted sewer
facility plan. No changes are proposed with these amendments. Whether the development proposed is
reviewed under subdivision or zoning procedures the issues of sanitation, extension of public mains, and
related topics will be addressed.
8. Avoidance or minimization of congestion.
Neutral. The UDO contains a variety of transportation improvement standards designed to ensure the
provision of adequate transportation facilities and the functionality of those facilities. The UDO also
encourages alternative transportation modes such as walking, biking and transit. The substantive
elements of these standards which relate to subdivisions are not proposed to be altered. See criteria
above for further discussion.
9. Avoidance of subdivision which would involve unnecessary environmental degradation and
the avoidance of danger or injury to health, safety, or welfare by reason of nature hazard or the
lack of water, drainage, access, transportation, or other public services or would necessitate an
excessive expenditure of public funds for the supply of such services.
Yes. The UDO contains a variety of requirements aimed at protecting public health, safety and welfare
from natural hazards, including: wetlands protection; watercourse setbacks; provision of easements for
agricultural water facilities; floodplain protection; requirements to connect to City water and sewer
255
#Z-11021a City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report – Ord. 1808 8
service; prohibition of development on steep slopes and ridgeline protection; and soil conservation
provisions. These provisions also minimize public costs. The UDO contains standards for the provision
of transportation, water and drainage facilities. In addition, the UDO requires compliance with relevant
state requirements as well as adopted transportation, water and stormwater facility plans. The
amendments do not modify these requirements. All development whether reviewed under zoning or
subdivision procedures are subject to the same standards.
STAFF FINDINGS/CONCLUSION
Planning Staff has reviewed this application for a Unified Development Ordinance text amendment
against the criteria set forth in statute and reflected in the Unified Development Ordinance. Staff’s
analysis finds that this application does not conflict with and complies with the required criteria.
Pursuant to Section 76-1-106 and 606, Montana Codes Annotated, and Section 18.68.030, Bozeman
Municipal Code, the Planning Board is charged to review the Unified Development Ordinance text
amendment application to determine if the proposed changes met the requirements of the adopted
Growth Policy and Title 76, chapter 3, MCA.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment had been received when this report was prepared. A notice of the public hearing was
published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle. A mailing of the notice was also distributed to architectural
and engineering services firms. If comments are received after the Planning Board packets are
distributed copies of the comment will be provided separately prior to the close of the public hearing.
ATTACHMENTS
Application form
Initial draft of Ordinance 1808 showing the proposed amendments
256
Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION #Z-11021a
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
TEXT AMENDMENT APPLICATION THAT WOULD AMEND THE TEXT OF THE
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 18.06 REVIEW
PROCEDURES FOR SUBDIVISIONS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
SECTION 18.06.040 PRELIMINARY PLAT, TO MODIFY REVIEW PROCEDURES BY
THE PLANNING BOARD AND MODIFY THE APPROVAL PERIOD FOR
SUBDIVISIONS; TO AMEND CHAPTER 18.08 LAND SUBDIVISIONS CREATED BY
RENT OR LEASE, TO MODIFY REQUIREMENTS AND CREATE AN EXEMPTION
FROM SUBDIVISION REVIEW FOR PROJECTS MEETING DEFINED CRITERIA;
TO AMEND CHAPTER 18.10 SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO: 18.10.010 TO CREATE AN EXEMPTION FROM SUBDIVISION
REVIEW FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS WHICH COMPLY WITH ZONING
PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS, SECTION 18.10.020 TO MODIFY RESTRICTIONS
ON THE RELOCATION OF COMMON BOUNDARIES AND AGGREGATIONS OF
LOTS, SECTION 18.10.030 EXEMPTIONS FROM SURVEYING AND FILING
REQUIREMENTS BUT SUBJECT TO REVIEW, TO COORDINATE EXEMPTIONS
MODIFIED IN CHAPTERS 18.08 AND 18.10, SECTION 18.10.070 EXEMPTION
REVIEW CRITERIA, TO MODIFY THE STANDARDS FOR DETERMINING WHEN A
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS EVADING THE SUBDIVISION AND PLATTING
ACT; AND SECTION 18.74.030 COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO MODIFY
THE CRITERIA FOR WHEN SIDEWALKS MUST BE INSTALLED.
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has adopted subdivision regulations through its
Unified Development Ordinance pursuant to Section 76-3-501 M.C.A. to implement its growth
policy; and
WHEREAS, Section 76-3-503, M.C.A. allows local governments to amend regulations
pertaining to subdivisions if a public hearing is held and official notice is provided; and
WHEREAS, Section 76-3-606, M.C.A. states that the subdivision regulations must be
made in accordance with the growth policy and; and
WHEREAS, Section 76-1-107, M.C.A. states that the governing body shall seek the
advice of the Planning Board in matters pertaining to approval of subdivisions; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board has been created by the Bozeman City
Commission; and
257
Page 2 of 2
WHEREAS, Chapter 18.68 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance sets forth
the procedures and review criteria for amendments affecting Title 18, Unified Development
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 18.02 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance sets forth
the purposes of subdivision regulations which serve as review criteria for regulation
amendments; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman applied for a Unified Development Ordinance text
amendment, pursuant to Chapter 18.68 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance, to
modify multiple sections of the Unified Development Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the proposed text amendment request has been properly submitted, reviewed
and advertised in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Bozeman Unified Development
Ordinance and other applicable law; and
WHEREAS, after proper and sufficient public notice was given the City of Bozeman
Planning Board held a public hearing on June 7, 2011, to formally receive and review all written
and oral testimony on the proposed text amendments; and
WHEREAS, no members of the public submitted written or oral testimony on the
proposed text amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board discussed the proposed amendments and suggested
alternative wording to expand the delegation of the Planning Board’s review of minor
subdivisions to the Planning Director and to rearrange wording in Section 2 of the draft; and
WHEREAS, after considering staff’s recommendation and discussion amongst Planning
Board and Zoning Commission members, the Planning Board found that the application
complied with the review criteria applicable to subdivisions;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Bozeman Planning Board
officially recommends to the Bozeman City Commission that the amendments be approved with
minor changes on a unanimous vote of 6 to 0.
DATED THIS DAY OF , 2011, Resolution #Z-11021a
_____________________________ ____________________________
Tim McHarg, Director Ed Sypinski, President
Dept. of Planning & Community Development Bozeman Planning Board
258
ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2011
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
Chairperson Sypinski called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. and ordered the Recording
Secretary to take attendance.
Members Present:
Ed Sypinski, Chairperson
Nathan Minnick, Vice Chairperson
David Peck
City Commission Liaison
Chris Mehl
Members Absent:
Staff Present:
Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning Director
Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary
Guests Present:
Kelly Kapinos
Kip Kapinos
ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT {Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the
Zoning Commission and not scheduled on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.}
Seeing there was no general public comment forthcoming, Chairperson Sypinski closed this
portion of the meeting.
ITEM 3. MINUTES OF MAY 17, 2011
MOTION: Vice Chairperson Minnick moved, Mr. Peck seconded, to approve the minutes of
May 17, 2011 as presented. The motion carried 3-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson
Sypinski, Mr. Peck, and Vice Chairperson Minnick. Those voting nay being none.
ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW
Chairperson Sypinski reversed the order of the items under project review.
2. U.D.O Edits ZCA #Z-11021 – Ordinance #1804 City initiated code changes to create Chapter
2.65 Zoning Commission and to amend Sections 18.28.010.A - Intent and Purpose, 18.28.040 -
Certificate of Appropriateness, 18.28.070 - Deviations from Underlying Zoning Requirements,
Page 1 of 5
Zoning Commission Minutes – June 7, 2011
259
18.28.090 – Appeals, 18.42.170 – Trash and Garbage Enclosures, 18.50.030 - Cash Donation In-
lieu of Land Dedication, 18.64.160 - Violation - Penalty - Assisting or Abetting - Additional
Remedies, 18.66.030.C - Filing of Notice of Appeal, 18.66.040.A – Administrative Interpretation
Appeals, 18.70.030 - Public Hearing Procedures and Requirements, 18.80.1945 – Mural,
18.80.3210 – Window Sign. Additional sections may be amended which are relevant to the
same topics if a need to do so is identified during the public review process. (Saunders)
Assistant Planning Director Chris Saunders presented the Staff Report noting the draft ordinance
and Staff report were available on the City’s website along with the notice for the proposal. He
stated the proposed ordinance would put the Zoning Commission under the same statutory
organization as other main advisory bodies and would define membership as well as jurisdiction.
He stated the City was a self governing power which can mean there is additional flexibility, but
for Zoning the City must comply with the State requirements of authorizing statute.
Assistant Director Saunders stated the Historic Preservation Advisory Board and Staff had
discussions regarding the proposed amendment to exempt certain types of work from the
Certificate of Appropriateness review process; he stated the exceptions were limited and
addressed roofing, fencing, smaller scale accessory buildings, and egress windows in the older
part of Bozeman.
Assistant Director Saunders noted that a provision to corral construction waste would also be
included due to the number of complaints regarding construction debris. He noted modifications
to required parkland were also being proposed for the B-3 zoning district downtown and would
include a default option for cash-in-lieu and the approval authority would be delegated to the
Planning Director. He stated the purpose for the combination of changes was to simplify the
review process and requirements for downtown Bozeman.
Assistant Director Saunders stated that there was a group of edits pertaining to signage; the
definition of a mural had been created and the proposed language more clearly indicated what
would be a mural so it could be exempted from requirements and what was signage so there was
no question when each definition applied. He directed the Zoning Commission to examples of
window signage downtown to better depict what was being discussed. He noted the window
divisions would play a factor in the allowable window signage amount. Chairperson Sypinski
asked for clarification that each pane separated by a division of 4 or more inches would be
aggregated in the calculation. Assistant Director Saunders responded Chairperson Sypinski was
correct though each pane could be calculated individually. He added there were also proposed
amendments to modify the allowable sign area as well as the sign area for secondary building
frontages; the purpose was to find ways of counteracting a bias in the language as it exists and
would encourage more of a streetscape with buildings being more closely presented to the street.
He cited an example of a signage calculation under the current restrictions and noted the
proposed code would allow 2 square feet for the first 50 feet instead of 1.5 square feet; it would
make a significant difference for smaller buildings. He stated the sign area calculations for B-1
and R-O district would be modified for multi-tenant buildings as well as the requirements for a
Comprehensive Signage Plan.
Assistant Director Saunders stated the way the City would handle enforcement of zoning
violations would also be clarified while zoning protests would be amended to reflect new
Page 2 of 5
Zoning Commission Minutes – June 7, 2011
260
changes in State Law. He added the evening’s meeting was the first of two public hearings that
had been scheduled for the proposal. He stated no public comment had been received for the
proposal and the Historic Preservation as well as the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Subdivision Committee were also supportive of the amendments; Staff would meet with the full
Recreation and Parks Advisory Board later in the week. Chairperson Sypinski suggested the
Northeast Urban Renewal and North Seventh Urban Renewal Boards should also be consulted.
Attorney Cooper stated existing subsection 18.64.160.E.2 required the City to release any pre-
recorded non-compliance notice and asked why it had been proposed a second time. Assistant
Director Saunders responded they were two different items and the proposed would address
issues that had been resolved; the intent was to make a notice that the parcel had been reviewed
and what had been approved prior to someone’s purchase arrangements.
Chairperson Sypinski opened the item for public comment. Seeing none forthcoming, the
public comment period was closed.
Vice Chairperson Minnick stated he thought the proposal was clear and stated he was supportive
of the amendments as proposed; he added the Certificate of Appropriateness and sign
amendments would really help expedite the process and would make signage more beneficial to
local business owners.
Chairperson Sypinski stated it was important to note that sections 1 & 6 as well as 8-18 were
City wide while sections 2-5 were specific to the Conservation Overlay District, and some were
specific to downtown Bozeman. He stated he found the application to be in keeping with the
review criteria as set forth in the U.D.O. and would possibly improve some of the conditions set
forth in the review criteria. He stated he was supportive of the proposal with Staff findings as
outlined in the Staff Report.
MOTION: Vice Chairperson Minnick moved, Mr. Peck seconded, to forward a
recommendation of approval to the City Commission for U.D.O. Edits ZCA #Z-11021 –
Ordinance #1804 with Staff findings as outlined in the Staff Report. The motion carried 3-0.
Those voting aye being Chairperson Sypinski, Mr. Peck, and Vice Chairperson Minnick. Those
voting nay being none.
1. U.D.O Edits ZCA #Z-11021 – Ordinance #1809 Chapter 18.34 Site Plan Review to clarify
text, include site plan phasing, limit duration of special temporary use permits, allow greater
flexibility of modification to conditional use permits, cap the maximum duration of master site
plan approvals and to amend Section 18.64.010 to allow the Planning Director to approve master
site plans. Additional sections may be amended which are relevant to the same topics if a need
to do so is identified during the public review process. (Saunders)
Assistant Planning Director Chris Saunders presented the Staff Report noting Staff had been
doing ongoing monitoring of the ordinance and had identified necessary changes. He stated the
decision making authorities would be modified with regard to the City Commission, Board of
Adjustment, and Planning Director. He stated the proposal included an allowance for the
Planning Director to approve Master Site Plans if they had no Variances or Deviations proposed.
Page 3 of 5
Zoning Commission Minutes – June 7, 2011
261
Assistant Director Saunders stated the creation of procedures to review zoning based
development would never cause a deed to transfer land title to be filed with the Clerk and
Recorder’s Office. He stated the amendments would expand the master site plan use for phasing
of development.
Assistant Director Saunders stated there would be modifications to the threshold for the review
of the Design Review Board as the parking allocations were usually the trigger; a 90 space
threshold would be more appropriate. He stated Special Temporary Use Permits would be
restricted to one year increments and clarification of the reuse and redevelopment procedures
had been included so it was clear they would be sketch plans.
Assistant Director Saunders stated phasing would be included in several sections to provide
clarity. He stated several sections had been consolidated as they were pertinent to the
Conditional Use Permit process; modification to CUP approval would be handled as though it
were a modification to an approved Final Site Plan. He added criteria for approval extensions
and clarity of time frames for approvals would also be included. Mr. Mehl asked how Staff had
decided on a five year approval. Assistant Director Saunders responded longer term approval
seemed reasonable for phased developments and the language had been included in the original
text.
Assistant Director Saunders stated the City had been developed long before modern
requirements had come about and noted Staff was modifying reuse/redevelopment procedures
with regard to how aggressive the City should be on existing site circumstances. He stated the
hearings had been noticed and other advisory bodies that would be impacted had been included.
He stated Staff was supportive of the amendments and felt they met the criteria as set forth in the
UDO.
Chairperson Sypinski opened the item for public comment. Seeing none forthcoming, the public
comment period was closed.
Chairperson Sypinski stated a number of comments had been provided by the Zoning
Commission at the Work Session discussion and added he felt more comfortable moving the
proposal forward. He stated he felt the application was in keeping with the review criteria as set
forth in the ordinance.
Mr. Mehl asked for clarification of the City Commission’s right to reclaim jurisdiction of a
project. Assistant Director Saunders responded that once the City Commission reclaimed
jurisdiction, the Planning Director could not make a decision and the City Commission would
have the approval authority, which could be appealed by the applicant.
MOTION: Vice Chairperson Minnick moved, Mr. Peck seconded, to forward a
recommendation of approval to the City Commission for U.D.O. Edits #Z-11021 – Ordinance
#1809. The motion carried 3-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Sypinski, Mr. Peck, and
Vice Chairperson Minnick. Those voting nay being none.
Page 4 of 5
Zoning Commission Minutes – June 7, 2011
262
Page 5 of 5
Zoning Commission Minutes – June 7, 2011
ITEM 5. NEW BUSINESS
Chairperson Sypinski stated an application had been submitted to the City Commission for a new
Zoning Commission member.
ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT
The Zoning Commission meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m.
Edward Sypinski, Chairperson Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning Director
Zoning Commission Dept. of Planning & Community Development
City of Bozeman City of Bozeman
263