HomeMy WebLinkAboutProvisional Adoption of Ordinance No. 1809, Amending Title 18, UDO, Site Plan Review.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 1809 replacing Chapter 18.34, Site Plans, and
amending Section 18.64.010 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 1809, and having considered
public testimony, the materials presented in the packet, and the review criteria for adoption of a
zoning ordinance, provisionally adopt Ordinance 1809.
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
zoning authority I find that the text of Ordinance 1809 is consistent with the criteria and move to
provisionally adopt Ordinance 1809.”
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 majority of development in Bozeman is processed through a site plan or
conditional use procedure. This ordinance modifies the chapter that addresses both of these
review processes.
The Zoning Commission 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 minor amendments for clarification since the Zoning Commission held its public
hearing.
Two versions of the ordinance are presented in this packet. The official version is titled and
contains the introductory whereas clauses and the signature blocks. Since the ordinance wholly
replaces Chapter 18.34 in Section 1 of the draft it is all new text and therefore shows no editing
marks in Section 1. A working version of Section 1 is presented separately and contains editing
marks. This is provided to help with understanding of the substantive changes being made in the
official draft without cluttering the actual text.
169
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
Zoning Commission public hearing are identified by having either 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 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) Clean up common references so they are more consistent and do not create possible conflicts
with other sections. An example of this is to use the term “review authority” rather than specify a
certain party. The authority to conduct a review is established in 18.64. This also advances a
larger cleanup project to simplify project review and approval which the Planning Board has
been working on. The City Commission will be asked in the next few months to give additional
guidance in this area. The present changes will not limit Commission policy discretion in that
future discussion.
2) More clearly established provisions to support greater phasing of projects and better
management of phased projects.
3) Consolidates several sections, especially relating to conditional uses, so that the text and
conceptual structure flows more understandably.
4) Addresses sketch plan review and the applicability of sketch plan review for reuse/further
development of sites which were originally developed prior to the ‘modern’ zoning standards
which took effect in September 1991.
5) Allow for conditional use permits to be subject to the same modification provisions as a
regular site plan. Currently, any expansion or change to a conditional use permit requires the
review and approval of another conditional use permit. Experience has shown that most of the
changes to conditional use permits are minor and pose no hazard that justifies the effort of a
conditional use permit review. There are specific thresholds for site plans that limit how much of
a change can occur before a full review is required.
6) Expand the provisions for extensions of final site plans. These changes are related to the
phasing provisions and also provide an overall improvement to the code.
7) Allow the Planning Director to approve master site plans that do not include variances or
deviations. This is to facilitate phasing of projects without adding additional procedural
requirements. The City Commission currently approves all master site plans.
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 1809, Editing marks version of Section 1, Staff report, Zoning
Commission resolution and minutes.
170
Report compiled on: June 16, 2011
171
Page 1 of 20
ORDINANCE NO. 1809
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA, PROVIDING THAT THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE BE
AMENDED BY REVISING CHAPTER 18.34, SITE PLAN REVIEW, AND
AMENDING SECTION 18.64.010, REVIEW AUTHORITY TO AUTHORIZE THE
PLANNING DIRECTOR TO APPROVE MASTER SITE PLANS.
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has adopted a Unified Development Ordinance
which establishes standards and procedures for development under the City’s authority to zone
established in Title 76, Chapter 2, Part 3, MCA; and
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 Zoning Commission 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 members of the public offered comment on the proposed ordinance;
and
172
Page 2 of 20
WHEREAS, as shown in Zoning Commission Resolution Z-11021, the Bozeman
Zoning Commission recommended to the Bozeman City Commission that the proposed Unified
Development Ordinance text amendments be approved; 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 Unified
Development Ordinance text amendment criteria established by Section 76-2-304, 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 that the amendments
would yield a superior outcome for the community than the text as presently exists; 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 be in the public interest.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Commission of the City of
Bozeman, Montana, that:
Section 1
That Chapter 18.34, Site Plan Review, of the Bozeman Municipal Code be deleted in its entirety
and be wholly replaced with a new a new chapter to read as follows:
CHAPTER 18.34
PLAN REVIEW
18.34.010 INTRODUCTION
A. All non-subdivision development proposals within the City will be subject to plan review
and approval except repair, maintenance, grading below the minimum defined limits of
173
Page 3 of 20
this title, and interior remodeling, or other items specifically exempted in this title.
Depending on the complexity of development and status of proposed use in the
applicable zoning district, either sketch plans, site plans, master site plans, or conditional
use permits (referred to herein as a ‘plan’) will be required as specified in this chapter.
Although work may be exempt from zoning review it may require review for other
permits before construction may begin.
B. Special development proposals (e.g., PUDs, CUPs, variances, etc.) require other
information to be submitted in conjunction with plans and are subject to requirements
specific to the type of proposal. These additional submittal requirements and review
procedures are outlined in §18.34.030, BMC.
C. When a development is proposed within a neighborhood conservation or entryway
corridor overlay district, or proposes signs which do not specifically conform to the
requirements of this title, design review is required in conjunction with plan review per
the authority in Section 18.62.010. In such cases, additional submittal requirements and
review procedures apply as outlined in §18.78.090, BMC.
D. Conditional Uses. Certain uses, while generally not suitable in a particular zoning district,
may, under certain circumstances, be acceptable. When such circumstances can be
demonstrated by the applicant to exist, a conditional use permit may be granted by the
review authority. Conditions may be applied to the issuance of the permit and periodic
review may be required. No conditional use permit shall be granted for a use which is not
specifically designated as a conditional use in this title.
E. Approval shall be granted for a particular use and not for a particular person or firm.
F. This chapter is provided to meet the purposes of §18.02.040, BMC and all other relevant
portions of this title.
G. Applications subject to this chapter shall be reviewed under the authority established by
Chapter 18.64, BMC.
18.34.020 CLASSIFICATION OF PLANS
A. All developments, as defined in Chapter 18.80, within the City shall be subject to plan
review procedures and criteria of this title and the applicable submittal requirements of
Chapter 18.78, BMC. For the purposes of this title, plans will be classified as either a site
plan or a master site plan.
1. Exception. Those developments specified in Sections 18.34.070, BMC and other
development proposals when so specifically identified require only sketch plan
review.
B. A master site plan is a generalized development plan that establishes building envelopes
and overall entitlements for complex, large-scale projects that will require multiple years
to reach completion. Use of a master site plan is not required unless necessary to address
phasing of a proposed development (see Section 18.34.090.B.3) or if required as part of
the residential emphasis mixed use district. A master site plan involves one or more of
the following:
1. One hundred or more dwelling units in a multiple household structure or
structures;
174
Page 4 of 20
2. Fifty thousand or more square feet of office space, retail commercial space,
service commercial space or industrial space;
3. Multiple buildings located on multiple contiguous lots and/or contiguous City
blocks;
4. Multiple owners;
5. Development phasing projected to extend beyond two years; or
6. Parking for more than two-hundred vehicles.
C. Any planned unit development shall be reviewed according to the regulations in Chapter
18.36, BMC, in addition to this chapter.
D. Telecommunication facilities shall be reviewed according to the regulations in Chapter
18.54, BMC, in addition to this chapter.
E. Uses identified in Chapter 18.40, BMC shall be reviewed according to the standards and
regulations contained in Chapter 18.40, BMC, in addition to this chapter.
18.34.030 SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS - ADDITIONAL APPLICATION
REQUIREMENTS, REVIEW PROCEDURES AND REVIEW CRITERIA
A. Application Requirements. Applications for special development proposals (e.g. PUD,
CUP, flood plain development permits, variances, etc.) shall include:
1. The required information for site plans described in §18.78.080, BMC;
2. Any additional application information required for specific reviews as listed in
the following chapters of this title:
a. §18.36, Planned Unit Development;
b. §18.40, Standards for Specific Uses;
c. §18.54, Telecommunications;
d. §18.58, Bozeman Floodplain Regulations; and
e. §18.66, Appeals, Deviations and Variance Procedures;
B. Review Procedures and Review Criteria. Additional review procedures and review
criteria for specific development proposals are defined in the following chapters of this
title:
1. §18.34.080, Certificate of Appropriateness;
2. §18.34.110, Conditional Use;
3. §18.36, Planned Unit Development;
4. §18.40, Standards for Specific Uses;
5. §18.54, Telecommunications;
6. §18.58, Bozeman Floodplain Regulations; and
7. §18.66, Appeals, Deviations and Variance Procedures.
18.34.040 REVIEW AUTHORITY
A. The review authorities are established in Section 18.64.010, BMC and as may be
specified elsewhere in this title.
175
Page 5 of 20
B. The Development Review Committee, Design Review Board, Administrative Design
Review Staff, and Wetlands Review Board have the advisory authority established in
Chapter 18.62, BMC.
C. Plan Design Review Thresholds. When a development is subject to design review and
meets one or more of the following thresholds the Design Review Board shall have
responsibility for conducting the design review.
1. Twenty or more dwelling units in a multiple household structure or structures;
2. Thirty thousand or more square feet of office space, retail commercial space,
service commercial space or industrial space;
3. Twenty thousand or more square feet of exterior storage of materials or goods; or
4. Parking for more than ninety vehicles.
18.34.050 APPLICATION OF PLAN REVIEW PROCEDURES
A. These procedures shall apply to all developments within the City unless explicitly
exempted in this title.
B. The preliminary site plan shall be submitted and approved, and final site plan approval
received, prior to the issuance of any building permit.
C. No occupancy permits shall be issued for any development for which site plan review is
required until certification has been provided under Section 18.74.030 demonstrating that
all terms and conditions of site plan approval have been complied with.
D. Unless a deviation or variance is explicitly sought and granted in association with a site
plan, all standards of this title apply whether explicitly mentioned in the record of the
review or not. An omission or oversight of a nonconformity with the standards of this
title in the site plan shall not constitute approval of such nonconformance. Any
nonconformance which was not the subject of an explicitly approved deviation or
variance may be required to be cured at such time the City becomes aware of the
nonconforming condition’s existence.
E. In the event that the volume of site development applications submitted for review
exceeds the ability of the City to process them simultaneously, preference in order of
scheduling will be given to those projects which provide the most affordable housing in
excess of minimum requirements, as measured by the total number of affordable units.
F. When a development subject to this chapter is located within an overlay district
established by Chapters 18.28 or 18.30 a certificate of appropriateness is required in
addition to other required review procedures.
G. Public notice of development proposals and approvals subject to this chapter shall be
provided as required by Chapter 18.76, BMC.
H. Improvements depicted on an approved plan shall be installed subject to the requirements
of Chapter 18.74, BMC.
18.34.060 SPECIAL TEMPORARY USE PERMIT
A. Generally. Uses permitted subject to a special temporary use permit are those temporary
uses which are required for the proper function of the community or are temporarily
required in the process of establishing a permitted use, constructing a public facility or
176
Page 6 of 20
providing for response to an emergency. Such uses shall be so conducted that they will
not be detrimental in any way to the surrounding properties or to the community. Uses
permitted subject to a special temporary use permit may include:
1. Carnivals, circuses, special events of not over seventy-two consecutive hours;
2. Tent revival meetings;
3. Swap meets; or
4. Such other uses as the Planning Director may deem to be within the intent and
purpose of this section.
B. Application and Filing Fee. Application for a special temporary use permit may be made
by a property owner or his authorized agent. A copy of the fees are available at the
Planning Department. Such application shall be filed with the Planning Director who
shall charge and collect a filing fee for each such application, as provided in Chapter
18.64, BMC. The Planning Director may also require any information deemed necessary
to support the approval of a special temporary use permit, including site plans per this
chapter.
C. Decision. Approval or conditional approval shall be given only when in the judgment of
the review authority such approval is within the intent and purposes of this chapter.
D. Conditions. In approving such a permit, the approval shall be made subject to a time
limit, not to exceed one year per approval, and other conditions deemed necessary to
assure that there will be no adverse effect upon adjacent properties. Such conditions may
include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Regulation of parking;
2. Regulation of hours;
3. Regulation of noise;
4. Regulation of lights;
5. Requirement of financial security or other guarantees for cleanup or removal of
structure or equipment; and/or
6. Such other conditions deemed necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this
section.
18.34.070 SKETCH PLAN REVIEW
A. Sketch Plan Submittal Requirements.
1. Certain independent development proposals (i.e., not in conjunction with other
development) are required to submit only sketch plans which include the
information specified in §18.78.110, BMC.
2. Separate construction plans are necessary for building permits when the proposal
requires such permits. Additional information is also necessary when the proposal
requires the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness (see §18.34.080 and
§18.78.090, BMC).
3. Examples of independent projects which qualify for sketch plan review are:
individual single-household including manufactured homes on individual lots,
two-household, three-household, and four-household residential units, each on
177
Page 7 of 20
individual lots and independent of other site development; accessory dwelling
units in the R-2, R-3 and R-4 districts; fences; signs in compliance with the
requirements of this title; regulated activities in areas with regulated wetlands not
in conjunction with a land development proposal; grading of sites disturbing more
than one-eighth but less than one-half acre, or movement of more than 30 but less
than 100 cubic yards of material, or cut or fill of less than one cumulative foot,
whichever is less; special temporary uses; reuse, change in use, or further
development of sites per Section 18.34.150; and accessory structures associated
with these uses. Other similar projects may be determined by the Planning
Director to require only sketch plan review. The Planning Director may determine
submittal requirements in addition to those in Section 18.78.110. Projects which
do not require sketch plan review may still require review and permitting for non-
zoning issues.
B. Sketch Plan Review Procedures.
1. No Certificate of Appropriateness Required. Sketch plans for projects which do
not require a certificate of appropriateness shall be submitted to the Planning
Department staff for a determination of compliance with the requirements of this
title. Once compliance is achieved, the application will be approved for
construction or referred to the appropriate permitting authorities. In determining
whether compliance is achieved the staff shall consider the individual
circumstances of the site when the development is subject to Section 18.34.150.
2. Certificate of Appropriateness Required. Sketch plans, including the material
required by §18.78.090, BMC, and such additional information as may be
required for projects which require a certificate of appropriateness as per
§18.34.080, BMC shall be submitted to the ADR staff, who shall review the
proposal for compliance with this title, including compliance with the applicable
overlay district requirements. Once compliance is achieved, the application will
be approved for construction or referred to the appropriate permitting authorities.
C. Sketch Plan Review Criteria. Sketch plans shall be reviewed for compliance with all
applicable requirements of this title including overlay district requirements and the
cessation of any current violations of this title, exclusive of any legal nonconforming
conditions. Plan changes may be required.
18.34.080 CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS - ADDITIONAL REVIEW
PROCEDURES AND REVIEW CRITERIA
A. Sign Proposals Which Do Not Specifically Conform to the Requirements of This Title.
Independent sign proposals (i.e., not in conjunction with other development) which do
not specifically conform to the requirements of this title, are required to submit full site
plans. Additional site design information, in sufficient detail to demonstrate compliance
with the Design Objective Plan, encompassing the property’s location shall be provided.
B. Review Procedures and Criteria for Certificates of Appropriateness.
1. Certificates of appropriateness shall be issued according to procedures and criteria
specified in Chapters 18.28, 18.30, 18.36 and 18.62, BMC in addition to this
chapter.
178
Page 8 of 20
2. Sign proposals which specifically conform to the requirements of this title shall be
reviewed according to procedures and criteria outlined in Chapter 18.52, BMC.
18.34.090 SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCEDURES
A. Acceptability and Adequacy of Application.
1. The Planning Department shall review the application for acceptability within five
working days to determine if the application is does not omit any of the submittal
elements required by this title. If the application does not contain all of the
required elements, the application, review fee and a written explanation of what
the application is missing shall be returned to the property owner or their
representative. The five working day review period will 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 to contain the required elements and to be
acceptable, it shall be reviewed for adequacy. A determination of adequacy means
the application contains all of the required elements in sufficient detail and
accuracy to enable the applicable review agency to make a determination that the
application either does or does not conform to the requirements of this title and
any other applicable regulations under the jurisdiction of the City of Bozeman.
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 to contain all the required elements and shall be completed within not
more than 15 working days. The 15 working day review period will 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 property owner. Upon
a determination of adequacy the review of the development will be scheduled.
a. In the event the missing information is not received by the City within 15
working days of notification to the property owner of inadequacy, all
application materials and one-half of the review fee shall be returned to
the property owner 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 site plan review process.
3. Should the property owner choose not to provide the required information after an
application has been found unacceptable, nor to accept return of the application
and accompanying fee, the application may be processed by the City with the
recognition by the property owner that unacceptability is an adequate basis for
denial of the application regardless of other merit of the application.
4. 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.
179
Page 9 of 20
5. In order to be granted a waiver the applicant shall include with the submission of
the preliminary site plan a written statement describing the requested waiver and
the reasons upon which the request is based. The final approval body shall then
consider each waiver at the time the preliminary site plan is reviewed. All waivers
must be identified not later than initial submittal of the preliminary site plan stage
of review.
B. Site plans shall be reviewed by the review bodies established by Chapter 18.62, BMC and
according to the procedures established by this title. After review of the applicable
submittal materials required by Chapter 18.78, BMC, and upon recommendation by the
appropriate advisory bodies, the review authority shall act to approve, approve with
conditions or deny the application, subject to the appeal provisions of Chapter 18.66,
BMC. The basis for the review authority’s action shall be whether the application,
including any required conditions, complies with all the applicable standards and
requirements of this title, including § 18.02.050, BMC.
1. Plan. The review authority shall provide an opportunity for the public to comment
upon development proposals. The duration of the initial comment period shall be
included in any notice required by Chapter 18.76, BMC. The comment period
shall be from the date of the first consideration of the complete preliminary plan
and supplementary materials by the DRC until 5:00 pm on the third working day
after DRC and other review bodies as may be appropriate have taken action
regarding the proposal.
a. The review authority after receiving the recommendations of the, advisory
bodies and considering any public comment shall act to approve, approve
with conditions or deny an application within ten working days of the
close of the public comment period. The decision shall be in writing and
shall include any special conditions which are to be applied to the
development.
(1) After formal notice of a project review has been given, interested
parties may request in writing to receive a copy of the decision
regarding an application. Persons making such a request shall
provide an addressed envelope for use in delivering their copy of
the decision.
2. Plan with Deviations or Variances or Conditional Use Permits. The review
authority shall provide an opportunity for the public to comment upon a proposed
plan. The comment period shall be from the date of the first consideration of the
complete preliminary plan and supplementary materials by the DRC until the
decision is made..
a. The review authority, after receiving the recommendations of the,
advisory bodies and considering any public comment shall act to approve,
approve with conditions or deny an application. The decision shall be in
writing and shall include any special conditions which are to be applied to
the development.
3. Phasing. The entitlement period for which a final plan is valid is specified in
Section 18.34.120, BMC. Preliminary single phase site plan applications will only
180
Page 10 of 20
be accepted for development that can occur under building permits issued within
this final plan approval period.
a. Any development that includes phases/buildings that would extend past
the final plan approval period shall proceed under the master site plan
application process with a first phase plan for those portions that can be
constructed under the single phase final plan approval. The master site
plan and first phase site plan may be reviewed concurrently as a single
application. Each future project phase must submit a standalone site plan
application following initial master site plan approval.
b. Each phase of a plan must not include more buildings than will be
constructed within a one year timeframe. These subsequent site plan
applications may be expedited through the review process if they are
consistent with the master site plan. Independent fees will be assessed for
each required application.
c. A preliminary site plan application may be received where it is unclear
whether the buildings/units can be constructed under building permits
issued within one year of final site plan approval. In this case the planning
director may request proof of a construction financing commitment prior
to accepting the application for review. Applications, where it is clear that
the buildings/units cannot be constructed under building permits issued
within one year of final site plan approval, will be deemed unacceptable
for review and directed to proceed through a master site plan with first
phase site plan process.
18.34.100 SITE PLAN AND MASTER SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA
A. In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the review authority and
advisory bodies shall consider the following criteria. When considering the criteria for
future phases of a master site plan, other than those for criteria 1-3, the evaluation shall
be of a more generalized demonstration of compliance, recognizing that a subsequent site
plan shall be submitted in the future which shall provide evidence of specific compliance.
The level of detail submitted and review conducted shall be equal with the level of
entitlement being sought with the application. See Chapter 18.78 for required submittal
materials.
1. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy.
2. Conformance to this title, including the cessation of any current violations;
3. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances and regulations;
4. Relationship of site plan elements to conditions both on and off the property,
including:
a. Compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the
site and the adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development
relative to architectural design, building mass and height, neighborhood
identity, landscaping, historical character, orientation of buildings on the
site and visual integration;
181
Page 11 of 20
b. Design and arrangement of the elements of the site plan (e.g., buildings,
circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) so that activities are
integrated with the organizational scheme of the community,
neighborhood, and other approved development and produce an efficient,
functionally organized and cohesive development;
c. Design and arrangement of elements of the site plan (e.g., buildings
circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) in harmony with the existing
natural topography, natural water bodies and water courses, existing
vegetation, and to contribute to the overall aesthetic quality of the site
configuration; and
d. If the proposed project is located within a locally designated historical
district, or includes a locally designated landmark structure, the project is
in conformance with the provisions of Chapter 18.28, BMC;
5. The impact of the proposal on the existing and anticipated traffic and parking
conditions;
6. Pedestrian and vehicular ingress, egress and circulation, including:
a. Design of the pedestrian and vehicular circulation systems to assure that
pedestrians and vehicles can move safely and easily both within the site
and between properties and activities within the neighborhood area;
b. Non-automotive transportation and circulation systems design features to
enhance convenience and safety across parking lots and streets, including,
but not limited to, paving patterns, grade differences, landscaping and
lighting;
c. Adequate connection and integration of the pedestrian and vehicular
transportation systems to the systems in adjacent developments and
general community; and
d. Dedication of right-of-way or easements necessary for streets and similar
transportation facilities;
7. Landscaping, including the enhancement of buildings, the appearance of vehicular
use, open space and pedestrian areas, and the preservation or replacement of
natural vegetation;
8. Open space, including:
a. The enhancement of the natural environment;
b. Precautions being taken to preserve existing wildlife habitats or natural
wildlife feeding areas;
c. If the development is adjacent to an existing or approved public park or
public open space area, have provisions been made in the site plan to
avoid interfering with public access to and use of that area;
d. Is any provided recreational area suitably located and accessible to the
residential units it is intended to serve and is adequate screening provided
to ensure privacy and quiet for neighboring residential uses;
e. Open space shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 18.50, BMC;
182
Page 12 of 20
f. Park land shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 18.50, BMC.
9. Building location and height;
10. Setbacks;
11. Lighting;
12. Provisions for utilities, including efficient public services and facilities;
13. Site surface drainage and stormwater control;
14. Loading and unloading areas;
15. Grading;
16. Signage;
17. Screening;
18. Overlay district provisions;
19. Other related matters, including relevant comment from affected parties; and
20. If the development includes multiple lots that are interdependent for circulation or
other means of addressing requirements of this title, whether the lots are either:
a. Configured so that the sale of individual lots will not alter the approved
configuration or use of the property or cause the development to become
nonconforming; or
b. The subject of reciprocal and perpetual easements or other agreements to
which the City is a party so that the sale of individual lots will not cause
one or more elements of the development to become nonconforming.
21. Compliance with Title 17 Chapter 2, BMC;
22. Phasing of development.
B. If the review authority, after recommendation from the applicable advisory bodies shall
determine that the proposed site plan or master site plan will not be detrimental to the
health, safety or welfare of the community, is in compliance with the requirements of this
title and is in harmony with the purposes and intent of this title and the Bozeman growth
policy, approval shall be granted, and such conditions and safeguards may be imposed as
deemed necessary. Notice of action shall be given in writing.
C. Plan approval may be denied upon a determination that the conditions required for
approval do not exist. Persons objecting to the recommendations of review bodies carry
the burden of proof. A denial of approval shall be in writing.
D. Following approval of a master site plan, the applicant shall submit to the Planning
Department, sequential individual site plans for specific areas within the master site plan.
Each subsequent application for a site plan shall be consistent with the approved master
site plan and subject to the review criteria set forth in subsection A above. Evidence that
the review criteria have been met through the master site plan review process may be
incorporated by reference in order to eliminate duplication of review.
183
Page 13 of 20
18.34.110 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
A. The person applying for a conditional use permit shall fill out and submit to the Planning
Director the appropriate form with the required fee. The request for a conditional use
permit shall follow the procedures and application requirements of this chapter.
B. In consideration of all conditional use permit applications, a public hearing shall be
conducted by the review authority. Notice of the public hearing shall be provided in
accordance with Chapter 18.76, BMC.
C. If a rezoning is required prior to approval of a conditional use permit, the application for
rezoning and the conditional use permit may be filed and acted upon simultaneously,
however the conditional use permit shall not be effective until the rezoning has been
implemented by ordinance.
D. The review authority, in approving a conditional use permit, shall review the application
against the review requirements of §18.34.090, BMC;
E. In addition to the review criteria of §18.34.090, BMC, the review authority shall, in
approving a conditional use permit, determine favorably as follows:
1. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and topography to
accommodate such use, and all yards, spaces, walls and fences, parking, loading
and landscaping are adequate to properly relate such use with the land and uses in
the vicinity;
2. That the proposed use will have no material adverse effect upon the abutting
property. Persons objecting to the recommendations of review bodies carry the
burden of proof;
3. That any additional conditions stated in the approval are deemed necessary to
protect the public health, safety and general welfare. Such conditions may
include, but are not limited to:
a. Regulation of use;
b. Special yards, spaces and buffers;
c. Special fences, solid fences and walls;
d. Surfacing of parking areas;
e. Requiring street, service road or alley dedications and improvements or
appropriate bonds;
f. Regulation of points of vehicular ingress and egress;
g. Regulation of signs;
h. Requiring maintenance of the grounds;
i. Regulation of noise, vibrations and odors;
j. Regulation of hours for certain activities;
k. Time period within which the proposed use shall be developed;
l. Duration of use;
m. Requiring the dedication of access rights; and
184
Page 14 of 20
n. Other such conditions as will make possible the development of the City
in an orderly and efficient manner.
F. In addition to all other conditions, the following general requirements apply to every
conditional use permit granted:
1. That the right to a use and occupancy permit shall be contingent upon the
fulfillment of all general and special conditions imposed by the conditional use
permit procedure; and
2. That all of the conditions shall constitute restrictions running with the land use,
shall apply and be adhered to by the owner of the land, successors or assigns,
shall be binding upon the owner of the land, his successors or assigns, shall be
consented to in writing, and shall be recorded as such with the County Clerk and
Recorder’s Office by the property owner prior to the issuance of any building
permits, final site plan approval or commencement of the conditional use.
G. Applications for conditional use permits may be approved, conditionally approved or
denied by motion of the review authority. If an application is denied, the denial shall
constitute a determination that the applicant has not shown that the conditions required
for approval do exist.
H. The applicant shall be notified in writing of the final action taken within seven working
days of the action. If the conditional use permit has been granted the notification shall
include any conditions, automatic termination date, period of review or other
requirements. If the conditional use permit has been granted, the permit shall be issued
upon the signature of the Planning Director after completion of all conditions and final
plan.
I. Termination/ Revocation of Conditional Use Permit approval.
1. Conditional use permits are approved based on an analysis of current local
circumstances and regulatory requirements. Over time these things may change
and the use may no longer be appropriate to a location. A conditional use permit
will be considered as terminated and of no further effect if:
a. After having been commenced, the approved use is not actively conducted
on the site for a period of two continuous calendar years;
b. Final zoning approval to reuse the property for another principal or
conditional use is granted;
c. The use or development of the site is not begun within the time limits of
the final site plan approval in Section 18.34.130, BMC.
2. A conditional use which has terminated may be reestablished on a site by either,
the review and approval of a new conditional use permit application, or a
determination by the Planning Director that the local circumstances and
regulatory requirements are essentially the same as at the time of the original
approval. A denial of renewal by the Planning Director may not be appealed. If
the Planning Director determines that the conditional use permit may be renewed
on a site then any conditions of approval of the original conditional use permit are
also renewed.
185
Page 15 of 20
3. If activity begins for which a conditional use permit has been given final
approval, all activities must comply with any conditions of approval or code
requirements. Should there be a failure to maintain compliance the City may
revoke the approval through the procedures outlined in Section 18.64.160, BMC.
18.34.120 FINAL PLAN
A. No later than six months after the date of approval of a preliminary site plan or master
site plan, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Department a final plan with
accompanying application form and review fee. The number of copies of the final plan to
be submitted shall be established by the Planning Director. The final plan shall contain
the materials required in §§18.78.080 and18.78.090 BMC and whatever revisions to the
preliminary site plan or master site plan are required to comply with any conditions of
approval. Prior to the passage of six months, the applicant may seek an extension of not
more than an additional six months from the Planning Director.
B. In addition to the materials required in subsection A of this section, the owner shall
submit a certification of completion and compliance stating that they understand any
conditions of approval and the submitted final site plans or master site plan have
complied with any conditions of approval or corrections to comply with code provisions.
C. In addition to the materials required in subsections A and B of this section, the owner
shall submit a statement of intent to construct according to the final site plan. Such
statement shall acknowledge that construction not in compliance with the approved final
site plan may result in delays of occupancy or costs to correct noncompliance.
D. Following approval of a final site plan, the final site plan shall be in effect for one year.
Prior to the passage of one year, the applicant may seek an extension of not more than
one additional year from the Planning Director. In such instances, the Planning Director
shall determine whether the relevant terms of this title and circumstances have
significantly changed since the initial approval. If relevant terms of this title or
circumstances have significantly changed, the extension of the approval shall not be
granted.
E. Following approval of a final master site plan, the final master site plan shall be in effect
for not less than three but not more than five years with the initial duration to be specified
during the final action of the review authority. Owners of property subject to the master
site plan may seek extensions to not exceed five years in a single extension. Approval of
an extension shall be made by the Planning Director. Approval shall be granted if the
Planning Director determines that the criteria of 18.34.120.F are met.
F. Any request for an extension must be in writing and be dated and signed by the owner of
the undeveloped area or incomplete development for which the extension is sought. More
than one extension may be requested for a particular development. Each request shall be
considered on its individual merits. An extension of the development approval under
Chapter 18.34, BMC does not extend other City or non-City agency approvals, e.g. for
design of infrastructure extensions, necessary to complete the project. When evaluating
an extension request, the City shall consider:
1. Changes to the development regulations since the original approval and whether
the development as originally approved is compliant with the new regulations;
186
Page 16 of 20
2. Progress to date in completing the development as a whole and any phases;
3. Phasing of the development and the ability for existing development to operate
without the delayed development;
4. Dependence by other development on any public infrastructure or private
improvements to be installed by the development;
5. For extensions of approval greater than one year, the demonstrated ability of the
developer to complete the development;
6. Overall maintenance of the site;
7. Whether mitigation for impacts of the development identified during the
preliminary plan review remain relevant, adequate, and applicable to the present
circumstances of the development and community.
G. Upon approval of the final site plan by the Planning Director the applicant may obtain a
building permit as provided for by Chapter 18.64, BMC.
1. Subsequent site plan approvals are required to implement a master site plan, and
approval of a master site plan only does not entitle an applicant to obtain any
building permits.
18.34.130 AMENDMENTS TO PLANS
A. It is the intent of this section to assure that issues of community concern are addressed
during the redevelopment, reuse or change in use of existing facilities in the community.
Specific areas of community concern include public safety, mitigation of off-site
environmental impacts and site character in relation to surroundings. The following
procedures for amendments to approved plans, reuse of existing facilities and further
development of sites assure that these concerns are adequately and expeditiously
addressed.
B. Any amendment to or modification of a plan approved under the ordinance codified in
this chapter (September 3, 1991 - Ordinance 1332) shall be submitted to the Planning
Director for review and possible approval. Proposals for further development, reuse or
change in use of sites developed pursuant to this title shall be reviewed as an amendment
to an approved plan. All amendments shall be shown on a revised plan drawing.
Amendments to approved plans shall be reviewed and may be approved by the Planning
Director upon determining that the amended plan is in substantial compliance with the
originally approved plan. If it is determined that the amended plan is not in substantial
compliance with the originally approved plan, the application shall be resubmitted as a
new application and shall be subject to all standards and plan review and approval
provisions of this title. Substantial compliance may be shown by demonstrating that the
amendments do not exceed the thresholds established in §18.34.170.B, BMC.
C. Modifications or amendments to a master site plan at the time an extension of approval is
sought may be proposed by either the applicant or the review authority, and shall be
based on substantive current information that indicates that relevant circumstances have
changed and that such circumstances support the proposed modifications. Such
circumstances may include market analyses, economic conditions, changes in
surrounding land uses, changes in ownership, etc.
187
Page 17 of 20
18.34.150 REUSE, CHANGE IN USE OR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF SITES
DEVELOPED PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE
CODIFIED IN THIS TITLE
A. It is the policy of the City to work with owners of property during the reuse, change in
use, or further development process to correct existing violations of the City’s and other
agency’s regulations, to encourage reinvestment and renewal of existing developed sites,
and to move existing sites toward compliance with current standards while recognizing
the limitations that may exist in relation to an existing site.
B. Sites legally developed prior to the adoption of the ordinance codified in this title
(September 3, 1991 - Ordinance 1332) shall be considered to have developed under an
approved plan. Proposals for reuse, change in use or the further development of sites
legally developed prior to the adoption of the ordinance codified in this title may be
approved by the review authority upon determining that no significant alteration of the
previous use and site are proposed, and upon review by the City Engineer or designee to
assure that adequate access and site surface drainage are provided. All such proposals
shall be shown on a plan drawing as required by Section 18.78.110.
C. The criteria for determining that no significant alteration of the previous use and site will
result from the proposed reuse, change in use or further development of a site shall
include but not be limited to the following:
1. The proposed use is allowed under the same zoning district use classification as
the previous use, however replacement of nonconforming uses must comply with
the provisions of Chapter 18.60, BMC;
2. Changes proposed for the site, singly or cumulatively, do not increase lot
coverage by buildings, storage areas, parking areas or impervious surfaces and/or
do not result in an increase in intensity of use as measured by parking
requirements, traffic generation or other measurable off-site impacts;
a. By more than 20 percent for developments not meeting one or more of the
criteria of §18.34.040.C; OR
b. By more than 10 percent for developments meeting or exceeding one or
more of the criteria of §18.34.040.C;
3. The proposed use does not continue any unsafe or hazardous conditions
previously existing on the site or associated with the proposed use of the property.
D. If it is determined that the proposed reuse, change in use or further development of a site
contains significant alterations to the previous use and/or site, the application shall be
resubmitted as a new application and shall be subject to all plan review and approval
provisions of this chapter.
E. When proposals for reuse, change in use or further development of a site are located in
the neighborhood conservation or entryway corridor overlay districts, review by ADR
staff or the DRB may be required to determine whether resubmittal as a new application
is necessary.
188
Page 18 of 20
18.34.160 IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING DEVELOPED SITES INDEPENDENT OF
SITE PLAN REVIEW
The continued improvement of existing developed sites is desired to increase the level of
compliance with the provisions of this title and to encourage maintenance and viability of the
site. An applicant may propose improvements, not in association with a plan review, to increase
conformity with the standards of this title for landscaping, lighting, parking or similar
components of a site to occur over a defined period of time, not to exceed three years. Such
improvements shall be depicted on a site plan drawn to scale and which shall be sufficiently
detailed to clearly depict the current conditions, the intended end result of the proposed
improvements and any phasing of work. Such improvements shall be reviewed by and approved
at the discretion of the review authority which may require surety in accordance with the terms
of Chapter 18.74, BMC for work performed. A certificate of appropriateness may be required if
the site is located within the entryway overlay district or the neighborhood conservation overlay
district.
18.34.170 BUILDING PERMITS BASED UPON APPROVED SKETCH OR SITE
PLANS
Based upon the approved sketch or final site plan and after any appeals have been resolved, a
building permit for the site may be requested and may be granted pursuant to Chapter 18.64,
BMC. No building permit may be granted on the basis of an approved sketch or site plan whose
approval has expired.
18.34.180 APPEALS
Appeals of decisions rendered in conjunction with this chapter may be taken as set forth in
Chapter 18.66, BMC.
Section 2
That Section 18.64.010.B, Unified Development Ordinance, of the Bozeman Municipal Code be
amended to read as follows:
B. The Planning Director shall, upon recommendation from the DRC, DRB, ADR or WRB
or other advisory body as may be applicable approve, approve with conditions or deny all
applications subject to this title, except master site plans, conditional use permits, planned
unit developments and subdivisions, those applications specifically reserved to another
APPROVAL AUTHORITY, or any application involving deviations or variances.
Decisions of the Planning Director are subject to the appeal provisions of Chapter 18.66,
BMC,
1. Exception. The City Commission may, by an affirmative, simple majority, vote of
its members at a regularly scheduled meeting reclaim to itself the final approval
of a development normally subject to the approval of the Planning Director. The
vote shall occur prior to the action of the Planning Director.
.Section 3
189
Page 19 of 20
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 4
Savings Provision
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 5
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 6
Codification
The provisions of Sections 1 and 2 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 7
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.
____________________________________
190
Page 20 of 20
JEFFREY K. KRAUSS
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
STACY ULMEN, CMC
City Clerk
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
191
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 1 of 19
Section 1
That Chapter 18.34, Site Plan Review, of the Bozeman Municipal Code be deleted in its entirety
and wholly replaced with a new a new chapter to read as follows:
CHAPTER 18.34
SITE PLAN REVIEW
18.34.010 INTRODUCTION
A. All non-subdivision development proposals within the City will be subject to plan review
and approval except repair, maintenance, grading below the minimum defined limits of
this title, and interior remodeling, or other items specifically exempted in this title.
Depending on the complexity of development and status of proposed use in the
applicable zoning district, either sketch plans, site plans, master site plans, or conditional
use permits (referred to after this as a ‘plan’) will be required as specified in this chapter.
Although work may be exempt from zoning review it may require review for other
permits before construction may begin.
B. Special development proposals (e.g., PUDs, CUPs, variances, etc.) require other
information to be submitted in conjunction with sketch plans or site plans and are subject
to requirements specific to the type of proposal. These additional submittal requirements
and review procedures are outlined in §18.34.030, BMC.
C. When a development is proposed within a neighborhood conservation or entryway
corridor overlay district, or proposes signs which do not specifically conform to the
requirements of this title, design review is required in conjunction with either sketch plan
or site plan review per the authority in Section 18.62.010. In such cases, additional
submittal requirements and review procedures apply as outlined in §18.78.090, BMC.
D. Conditional Uses. Certain uses, while generally not suitable in a particular zoning district,
may, under certain circumstances, be acceptable. When such circumstances can be
demonstrated by the applicant to exist, a conditional use permit may be granted by the
review authority Board of Adjustment. Conditions may be applied to the issuance of the
permit and periodic review may be required. No conditional use permit shall be granted
for a use which is not specifically designated as a conditional use in this title.
E. Approval shall be granted for a particular use and not for a particular person or firm.
F. This chapter is provided to meet the purposes of §18.02.040, BMC and all other relevant
portions of this title.
G. Applications subject to this chapter shall be reviewed under the authority established by
Chapter 18.64, BMC.
18.34.020 CLASSIFICATION OF SITE PLANS
A. All developments, as defined in Chapter 18.80, within the City shall be subject to site
plan review procedures and criteria of this chapter title and the applicable submittal
192
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 2 of 19
requirements of Chapter 18.78, BMC. For the purposes of this title, site plans will be
classified as either a site plan or a master site plan.
1. Exception. Those developments specified in Sections 18.34.070, BMC and other
development proposals when so specifically identified require only sketch plan
review.
B. A master site plan is a generalized development plan that establishes building envelopes
and overall entitlements for complex, large-scale projects that will require multiple years
to reach completion. Use of a master site plan is an option and not required unless
necessary to address phasing of a proposed development (see Section 18.34.090.B.3) or if
required as part of the residential emphasis mixed use district. A master site plan
involves one or more of the following:
1. One hundred or more dwelling units in a multiple household structure or
structures;
2. Fifty thousand or more square feet of office space, retail commercial space,
service commercial space or industrial space;
3. Multiple buildings located on multiple contiguous lots and/or contiguous City
blocks;
4. Multiple owners;
5. Development phasing projected to extend beyond two years; or
6. Parking for more than two-hundred vehicles.
C. Any planned unit development shall be reviewed according to the regulations in Chapter
18.36, BMC, in addition to this chapter.
D. Telecommunication facilities shall be reviewed according to the regulations in Chapter
18.54, BMC, in addition to this chapter.
E. Uses identified in Chapter 18.40, BMC shall be reviewed according to the standards and
regulations contained in Chapter 18.40, BMC, in addition to this chapter.
18.34.030 SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS - ADDITIONAL APPLICATION
REQUIREMENTS, REVIEW PROCEDURES AND REVIEW CRITERIA
A. Application Requirements. Applications for special development proposals (e.g. PUD,
CUP, flood plain development permits, variances, etc.) shall include:
1. The required information for site plans described in §18.78.080, BMC;
2. Any additional application information required for specific reviews as listed in
the following chapters of this title:
a. §18.36, Planned Unit Development;
b. §18.40, Standards for Specific Uses;
c. §18.54, Telecommunications;
d. §18.58, Bozeman Floodplain Regulations; and
e. §18.66, Appeals, Deviations and Variance Procedures;
193
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 3 of 19
B. Review Procedures and Review Criteria. Additional review procedures and review
criteria for specific development proposals are defined in the following chapters of this
title:
1. §18.34.080, Certificate of Appropriateness;
2. §18.34.110, Conditional Use;
3. §18.36, Planned Unit Development;
4. §18.40, Standards for Specific Uses;
5. §18.54, Telecommunications;
6. §18.58, Bozeman Floodplain Regulations; and
7. §18.66, Appeals, Deviations and Variance Procedures.
18.34.040 REVIEW AUTHORITY
A. The City Commission, Board of Adjustment and Planning Director have the review
authority review authorities are established in Section 18.64.010, BMC and as may be
specified elsewhere in this title.
B. The Development Review Committee, Design Review Board, Administrative Design
Review Staff, and Wetlands Review Board have the review advisory authority
established in Chapter 18.62, BMC.
C. Site Plan Design Review Thresholds. When a development is subject to design review
and meets one or more of the following thresholds the Design Review Board shall have
responsibility for conducting the design review.
1. Twenty or more dwelling units in a multiple household structure or structures;
2. Thirty thousand or more square feet of office space, retail commercial space,
service commercial space or industrial space;
3. More than two buildings on one site for permitted office uses, permitted retail
commercial uses, permitted service commercial uses, permitted industrial uses or
permitted combinations of uses;
3. Twenty thousand or more square feet of exterior storage of materials or goods; or
4. Parking for more than sixty ninety vehicles.
18.34.050 APPLICATION OF SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCEDURES
A. These procedures shall apply to all developments within the City unless explicitly
exempted in this title. except for development proposals specified as requiring only
sketch plan review.
B. The preliminary site plan shall be submitted and approved, and final site plan approval
received, prior to the issuance of any building permit.
C. No occupancy permits shall be issued for any development for which site plan review is
required until certification has been provided under Section 18.74.030 demonstrating that
all terms and conditions of site plan approval have been complied with.
D. Unless a deviation or variance is explicitly sought and granted in association with a site
plan, all standards of this title apply whether explicitly mentioned in the record of the
194
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 4 of 19
review or not. An omission or oversight of a nonconformity with the standards of this
title in the site plan shall not constitute approval of such nonconformance. Any
nonconformance which was not the subject of an explicitly approved deviation or
variance may be required to be cured at such time the City becomes aware of the
nonconforming condition’s existence.
E. In the event that the volume of site development applications submitted for review
exceeds the ability of the City to process them simultaneously, preference in order of
scheduling will be given to those projects which provide the most affordable housing in
excess of minimum requirements, as measured by the total number of affordable units.
F. When a development subject to this chapter is located within an overlay district
established by Chapters 18.28 or 18.30 a certificate of appropriateness is required in
addition to other required review procedures.
18.34.120 PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
G. Public notice of development proposals and approvals subject to this chapter shall be
provided as required by Chapter 18.76, BMC.
18.34.210 IMPROVEMENTS
H. Improvements depicted on an approved plan shall be installed subject to the requirements
of Chapter 18.74, BMC.
18.34.060 SPECIAL TEMPORARY USE PERMIT
A. Generally. Uses permitted subject to a special temporary use permit are those temporary
uses which are required for the proper function of the community or are temporarily
required in the process of establishing a permitted use, constructing a public facility or
providing for response to an emergency. Such uses shall be so conducted that they will
not be detrimental in any way to the surrounding properties or to the community. Uses
permitted subject to a special temporary use permit may include:
1. Carnivals, circuses, special events of not over seventy-two consecutive hours;
2. Tent revival meetings;
3. Swap meets; or
4. Such other uses as the Planning Director may deem to be within the intent and
purpose of this section.
B. Application and Filing Fee. Application for a special temporary use permit may be made
by a property owner or his authorized agent. A copy of the fees are available at the
Planning Department. Such application shall be filed with the Planning Director who
shall charge and collect a filing fee for each such application, as provided in Chapter
18.64, BMC. The Planning Director may also require any information deemed necessary
to support the approval of a special temporary use permit, including site plans per this
chapter.
C. Decision. Application for a special temporary use permit shall be reviewed by the
Planning Director who shall approve, conditionally approve or disapprove such
application. Approval or conditional approval shall be given only when in the judgment
195
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 5 of 19
of the review authority Planning Director such approval is within the intent and purposes
of this chapter.
D. Conditions. In approving such a permit, the approval shall be made subject to a time
limit, not to exceed one year per approval, and other conditions deemed necessary to
assure that there will be no adverse effect upon adjacent properties. Such conditions may
include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Regulation of parking;
2. Regulation of hours;
3. Regulation of noise;
4. Regulation of lights;
5. Requirement of bonds financial surety or other guarantees for cleanup or removal
of structure or equipment; and/or
6. Such other conditions deemed necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this
section.
18.34.070 SKETCH PLAN REVIEW
A. Sketch Plan Submittal Requirements.
1. Certain independent development proposals (i.e., not in conjunction with other
development) are required to submit only sketch plans which include the
information specified in meeting the requirements of §18.78.110, BMC.
2. Separate construction plans are necessary for building permits when the proposal
requires such permits. Additional information is also necessary when the proposal
requires the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness (see §18.34.080 and
§18.78.090, BMC).
3. Examples of independent projects which qualify for sketch plan review are:
individual single-household including manufactured homes on individual lots,
two-household, three-household, and four-household residential units, each on
individual lots and independent of other site development; accessory dwelling
units in the R-2, R-3 and R-4 districts; fences; signs in compliance with the
requirements of this title; regulated activities in areas with regulated wetlands not
in conjunction with a land development proposal; grading of sites disturbing more
than one-eighth but less than one-half acre, or movement of more than 30 but less
than 100 cubic yards of material, or cut or fill of less than one cumulative foot,
whichever is less; special temporary uses; reuse, change in use, or further
development of sites per Section 18.34.150; and accessory structures associated
with these uses. Other similar projects may be determined by the Planning
Director to require only sketch plan review. The Planning Director may determine
submittal requirements in addition to those in Section 18.78.110. Projects which
do not require sketch plan review may still require review and permitting for non-
zoning issues.
B. Sketch Plan Review Procedures.
1. No Certificate of Appropriateness Required. Sketch plans for projects which do
not require a certificate of appropriateness shall be submitted to the Planning
196
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 6 of 19
Department staff for a determination of compliance with the requirements of this
title. Once compliance is achieved, the application will be approved for
construction or referred to the appropriate permitting authorities. In determining
whether compliance is achieved the staff shall consider the individual
circumstances of the site when the development is subject to Section 18.34.150.
2. Certificate of Appropriateness Required. Sketch plans, including the material
required by §18.78.090, BMC, and such additional information as may be
required for projects which require a certificate of appropriateness as per
§18.34.080, BMC shall be submitted to the ADR staff, who shall review the
proposal for compliance with this title, including compliance with the applicable
overlay district requirements. Once compliance is achieved, the application will
be approved for construction or referred to the appropriate permitting authorities.
Review and approval authority for sketch plans that require certificates of
appropriateness shall rest with the DRB if the ADR staff consists of less than two
members.
C. Sketch Plan Review Criteria. Sketch plans shall be reviewed for compliance with all
applicable requirements of this title including overlay district requirements and the
cessation of any current violations of this title, exclusive of any legal nonconforming
conditions. Plan changes may be required.
18.34.080 CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS - ADDITIONAL REVIEW
PROCEDURES AND REVIEW CRITERIA
A. Sign Proposals Which Do Not Specifically Conform to the Requirements of This Title.
Independent sign proposals (i.e., not in conjunction with other development) which do
not specifically conform to the requirements of this title, are required to submit full site
plans. Additional site design information, in sufficient detail to demonstrate compliance
with the Design Objective Plan, encompassing the property’s location shall be provided.
If no Design Objectives Plan has been prepared for the location, additional site design
information, if necessary, shall be determined by the ADR staff. All signs shall comply
with the dimensional standards of this title unless a deviation or variance has been
properly granted.
B. Review Procedures and Criteria for Certificates of Appropriateness.
1. Certificates of appropriateness shall only be issued according to procedures and
criteria specified in Chapters 18.28, 18.30, 18.36 and 18.62, BMC in addition to
this chapter.
2. Sign proposals which specifically conform to the requirements of this title shall be
reviewed according to procedures and criteria outlined in Chapter 18.52, BMC.
18.34.090 SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCEDURES
A. Acceptability and Adequacy of Application.
1. The Planning Department shall review the application for acceptability within five
working days to determine if the application is does not omit any of the submittal
elements required by this title. If the application does not contain all of the
required elements, the application, review fee and a written explanation of what
the application is missing shall be returned to the property owner or their
197
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 7 of 19
representative. The five working day review period will 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 to contain the required elements and to be
acceptable, it shall be reviewed for adequacy. A determination of adequacy means
the application contains all of the required elements in sufficient detail and
accuracy to enable the applicable review agency to make a determination that the
application either does or does not conform to the requirements of this title and
any other applicable regulations under the jurisdiction of the City of Bozeman.
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 to contain all the required elements and shall be completed within not
more than 15 working days. The 15 working day review period will 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 property owner. Upon
a determination of adequacy the review of the development will be scheduled.
a. In the event the missing information is not received by the City within 15
working days of notification to the property owner of inadequacy, all
application materials and one-half of the review fee shall be returned to
the property owner 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 site plan review process.
3. Should the property owner choose not to provide the required information after an
application has been found unacceptable, nor to accept return of the application
and accompanying fee, the application may be processed by the City with the
recognition by the property owner that unacceptability is an adequate basis for
denial of the application regardless of other merit of the application.
4. 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.
5. In order to be granted a waiver the applicant shall include with the submission of
the preliminary site plan a written statement describing the requested waiver and
the reasons upon which the request is based. The final approval body shall then
consider each waiver at the time the preliminary site plan is reviewed. All waivers
must be identified not later than initial submittal of the preliminary site plan stage
of review.
B. Site plans shall be reviewed by the review bodies established by Chapter 18.62, BMC and
according to the procedures established by this title. After review of the applicable
submittal materials required by Chapter 18.78, BMC, and upon recommendation by the
198
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 8 of 19
appropriate advisory bodies, the Planning Director, Board of Adjustment, or City
Commission review authority shall act to approve, approve with conditions or deny the
application, subject to the appeal provisions of Chapter 18.66, BMC. The basis for the
Planning Director’s, Board of Adjustment’s, or City Commission’s review authority’s
action shall be whether the application, including any required conditions, complies with
all the applicable standards and requirements of this title, including § 18.02.050, BMC.
1. Site Plan. The Planning Director review authority shall provide an opportunity for
the public to comment upon development proposals. The duration of the initial
comment period shall be included in any notice required by Chapter 18.76, BMC.
The comment period shall be from the date of the first consideration of the
complete preliminary plan and supplementary materials by the DRC until 5:00 pm
on the third working day after DRC and other review bodies as may be
appropriate have taken action regarding the proposal.
a. The Planning Director, review authority after receiving the
recommendations of the DRC, ADR, DRB or WRB, advisory bodies and
considering any public comment shall act to approve, approve with
conditions or deny an application within ten working days of the close of
the public comment period. The Planning Director’s decision shall be in
writing and shall include any special conditions which are to be applied to
the development.
(1) After formal notice of a project review has been given, interested
parties may request in writing to receive a copy of the director’s
decision regarding an application. Persons making such a request
shall provide an addressed envelope for use in delivering their
copy of the decision.
2. Site Plan with Deviations or Variances or Conditional Use Permits. The Board of
Adjustment review authority shall provide an opportunity for the public to
comment upon a proposed site plan or conditional use permit. The ending date of
the comment period shall be included in the notice required by Chapter 18.76,
BMC. The comment period shall be from the date of the first consideration of the
complete preliminary plan and supplementary materials by the DRC until the
decision is made. by the Board of Adjustment.
a. The Board of Adjustment review authority, after receiving the
recommendations of the DRC, ADR, DRB or WRB, advisory bodies and
considering any public comment shall act to approve, approve with
conditions or deny an application. The Board of Adjustment’s decision
shall be in writing and shall include any special conditions which are to be
applied to the development.
3. Phasing. The entitlement period for which a final plan is valid is specified in
Section 18.34.120, BMC. Preliminary single phase site plan applications will only
be accepted for development that can occur under building permits issued within
this final plan approval period.
a. Any development that includes phases/buildings that would extend past
the final plan approval period shall proceed under the master site plan
application process with a first phase plan for those portions that can be
199
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 9 of 19
constructed under the single phase final plan approval. The master site
plan and first phase site plan may be reviewed concurrently as a single
application. Each future project phase must submit a standalone site plan
application following initial master site plan approval.
b. Each phase of a plan must not include more buildings than will be
constructed within a one year timeframe. These subsequent site plan
applications may be expedited through the review process if they are
consistent with the master site plan. Independent fees will be assessed for
each required application.
c. A preliminary site plan application may be received where it is unclear
whether the buildings/units can be constructed under building permits
issued within one year of final site plan approval. In this case the planning
director may request proof of a construction financing committment prior
to accepting the application for review. Applications, where it is clear that
the buildings/units cannot be constructed under building permits issued
within one year of final site plan approval, will be deemed unacceptable
for review and directed to proceed through a master site plan with first
phase site plan process.
4. Master Site Plan. The City Commission review authority, shall provide an
opportunity for the public to comment upon a proposed master site plan. The
duration of the comment period shall be included in any notice required by
Chapter 18.76, BMC. The comment period shall be from the date of the first
consideration of the complete preliminary plan and supplementary materials by
the DRC until the decision by the City Commission.
a. The City Commission review authority,, after receiving the
recommendations of the DRC, ADR, DRB or WRB, shall act to approve,
approve with conditions or deny an application. The City Commission’s
decision shall be in writing and shall include any special conditions which
are to be applied to the development.
18.34.100 SITE PLAN AND MASTER SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA
A. In considering applications for site plan approval under this title, the review authority and
advisory bodies Planning Director, Board of Adjustment, City Commission, DRC, and
when appropriate, the ADR staff, DRB or WRB shall consider the following criteria.
When considering the criteria for future phases of a master site plan, other than those for
criteria 1-3, the evaluation shall be of a more generalized demonstration of compliance,
recognizing that a subsequent site plan shall be submitted in the future which shall
provide evidence of specific compliance. The level of detail submitted and review
conducted shall be equal with the level of entitlement being sought with the application.
See Chapter 18.78 for required submittal materials.
1. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy.
2. Conformance to this title, including the cessation of any current violations;
3. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances and regulations;
200
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 10 of 19
4. Relationship of site plan elements to conditions both on and off the property,
including:
a. Compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the
site and the adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development
relative to architectural design, building mass and height, neighborhood
identity, landscaping, historical character, orientation of buildings on the
site and visual integration;
b. Design and arrangement of the elements of the site plan (e.g., buildings,
circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) so that activities are
integrated with the organizational scheme of the community,
neighborhood, and other approved development and produce an efficient,
functionally organized and cohesive development;
c. Design and arrangement of elements of the site plan (e.g., buildings
circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) in harmony with the existing
natural topography, natural water bodies and water courses, existing
vegetation, and to contribute to the overall aesthetic quality of the site
configuration; and
d. If the proposed project is located within a locally designated historical
district, or includes a locally designated landmark structure, the project is
in conformance with the provisions of Chapter 18.28, BMC;
5. The impact of the proposal on the existing and anticipated traffic and parking
conditions;
6. Pedestrian and vehicular ingress, egress and circulation, including:
a. Design of the pedestrian and vehicular circulation systems to assure that
pedestrians and vehicles can move safely and easily both within the site
and between properties and activities within the neighborhood area;
b. Non-automotive transportation and circulation systems design features to
enhance convenience and safety across parking lots and streets, including,
but not limited to, paving patterns, grade differences, landscaping and
lighting;
c. Adequate connection and integration of the pedestrian and vehicular
transportation systems to the systems in adjacent developments and
general community; and
d. Dedication of right-of-way or easements necessary for streets and similar
transportation facilities;
7. Landscaping, including the enhancement of buildings, the appearance of vehicular
use, open space and pedestrian areas, and the preservation or replacement of
natural vegetation;
8. Open space, including:
a. The enhancement of the natural environment;
b. Precautions being taken to preserve existing wildlife habitats or natural
wildlife feeding areas;
201
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 11 of 19
c. If the development is adjacent to an existing or approved public park or
public open space area, have provisions been made in the site plan to
avoid interfering with public access to and use of that area;
d. Is any provided recreational area suitably located and accessible to the
residential units it is intended to serve and is adequate screening provided
to ensure privacy and quiet for neighboring residential uses;
e. Open space shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 18.50, BMC;
f. Park land shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 18.50, BMC.
9. Building location and height;
10. Setbacks;
11. Lighting;
12. Provisions for utilities, including efficient public services and facilities;
13. Site surface drainage and stormwater control;
14. Loading and unloading areas;
15. Grading;
16. Signage;
17. Screening;
18. Overlay district provisions;
19. Other related matters, including relevant comment from affected parties; and
20. If the development includes multiple lots that are interdependent for circulation or
other means of addressing requirements of this title, whether the lots are either:
a. Configured so that the sale of individual lots will not alter the approved
configuration or use of the property or cause the development to become
nonconforming; or
b. The subject of reciprocal and perpetual easements or other agreements to
which the City is a party so that the sale of individual lots will not cause
one or more elements of the development to become nonconforming.
21. Compliance with Title 17 Chapter 2, BMC;
22. Phasing of development.
B. In considering applications for master site plan approval under this title, the City
Commission, DRC, and when appropriate, the ADR staff, DRB or WRB shall consider
the following:
1. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy;
2. Conformance to this title, including the cessation of any current violations;
3. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances and regulations;
4. A generalized site plan showing the orientation and relationships among key plan
elements both on and off the property, including:
202
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 12 of 19
a. Compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the
site and the adjacent neighborhoods in terms of overall site organization
and building mass and height;
b. Arrangement of the elements of the site plan (e.g., buildings, circulation,
open space and landscaping, etc.) so that activities are integrated with the
structure of the surrounding area and produce an efficient, functionally
organized and visually cohesive development that contributes to the
overall aesthetic quality of the area;
c. If the proposed project is located within a locally designated historical
district, or includes a locally designated landmark structure, a statement
describing how the project is in conformance with the provisions of
Chapter 18.28, BMC; and
d. Description of many elements in a Master Site Plan may be described in
written and/or graphic formats whichever provides the superior form of
communication.
5. A statement accompanying the site plan describing the generalized architectural
character and its relationship to and compatibility with the historical character of
the area, generalized landscape concept including treatment of public space and
relationship to the surrounding area, and visual and aesthetic integration of the
proposed development into the surrounding area and its effect on the identity of
the adjacent neighborhood;
6. The impact of the proposed development on the existing and anticipated traffic
and parking conditions, including identification of the traffic generation and
parking needs of individual plan elements;
7. Pedestrian and vehicular ingress, egress and circulation, including:
a. Overall pedestrian and vehicular circulation systems to assure that
pedestrians and vehicles can move safely and easily both within the site
and between properties and activities within the neighborhood area;
b. Non-automotive transportation and circulation systems design features to
enhance convenience and safety across parking lots and streets;
c. Adequate connection and integration of the pedestrian and vehicular
transportation systems to the systems in adjacent developments and
general community; and
d. Dedication and/or abandonment of rights-of-way or easements necessary
for efficient land use and accompanying streets and related transportation
facilities;
8. Open space, if required under the zoning classification(s) of the proposed
development, including:
a. Enhancement of the natural environment;
b. Precautions being taken to preserve existing wildlife habitats or natural
wildlife feeding areas;
203
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 13 of 19
c. Provisions to avoid interfering with public access to and use of any
adjacent parks and other open space;
d. Provision of recreational areas suitably located and configured, and
accessible to the residential units it is intended to serve; and
e. Adequacy of open space as required within this title;
f. Open space shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 18.50, BMC;
g. Park land shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 18.50, BMC.
9. Generalized building gross area (square feet), building locations, building
envelopes, and building heights;
10. Setbacks;
11. Generalized lighting concept as pertains to public safety;
12. Generalized provisions for utilities, including efficient public services and
facilities;
13. Generalized site surface drainage and stormwater control;
14. Generalized locations of loading and unloading areas;
15. Generalized grading;
16. Statement regarding proposed signage;
17. Statement regarding screening of trash, outdoor storage and utility areas;
18. Overlay district provisions where applicable; and
19. Other related matters, including relevant comment from affected parties.
B. If the Planning Director, Board of Adjustment, or City Commission review authority,
after recommendation from the applicable advisory bodies DRC and, if appropriate, ADR
staff, DRB and WRB shall determine that the proposed site plan or master site plan will
not be detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of the community, is in compliance
with the requirements of this title and is in harmony with the purposes and intent of this
title and the Bozeman growth policy, approval shall be granted, and such conditions and
safeguards may be imposed as deemed necessary. Notice of action shall be given in
writing.
C. Plan approval may be denied upon a determination that the conditions required for
approval do not exist. Persons objecting to the recommendations of review bodies carry
the burden of proof. A denial of approval shall be in writing.
D. Following approval of a master site plan, the applicant shall submit to the Planning
Department, sequential individual site plans for specific areas within the master site plan.
Each subsequent application for a site plan shall be consistent with the approved master
site plan and subject to the review criteria set forth in subsection A above. Evidence that
the review criteria have been met through the master site plan review process may be
incorporated by reference in order to eliminate duplication of review.
204
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 14 of 19
18.34.110 APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - NOTICE
REQUIREMENTS
A. The person applying for a conditional use permit shall fill out and submit to the Planning
Director the appropriate form with the required fee. The request for a conditional use
permit shall follow the procedures and application requirements of this chapter.
B. In consideration of all conditional use permit applications, a public hearing shall be
conducted by the review authority Board of Adjustment. Notice of the public hearing
shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 18.76, BMC.
C. If a rezoning is required prior to approval of a conditional use permit, the application for
rezoning and the conditional use permit may be filed and acted upon simultaneously,
however the conditional use permit shall not be effective until the rezoning has been
implemented by ordinance. has been approved by the City Commission.
18.34.120 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CONSIDERATION AND RECORD FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
D. The review authority Board of Adjustment, in approving a conditional use permit, shall
review the application against the review requirements of §18.34.090, BMC;
E. In addition to the review criteria of §18.34.090, BMC, the review authority Board of
Adjustment shall, in approving a conditional use permit, determine favorably as follows:
1. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and topography to
accommodate such use, and all yards, spaces, walls and fences, parking, loading
and landscaping are adequate to properly relate such use with the land and uses in
the vicinity;
2. That the proposed use will have no material adverse effect upon the abutting
property. Persons objecting to the recommendations of review bodies carry the
burden of proof;
3. That any additional conditions stated in the approval are deemed necessary to
protect the public health, safety and general welfare. Such conditions may
include, but are not limited to:
a. Regulation of use;
b. Special yards, spaces and buffers;
c. Special fences, solid fences and walls;
d. Surfacing of parking areas;
e. Requiring street, service road or alley dedications and improvements or
appropriate bonds;
f. Regulation of points of vehicular ingress and egress;
g. Regulation of signs;
h. Requiring maintenance of the grounds;
i. Regulation of noise, vibrations and odors;
j. Regulation of hours for certain activities;
k. Time period within which the proposed use shall be developed;
205
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 15 of 19
l. Duration of use;
m. Requiring the dedication of access rights; and
n. Other such conditions as will make possible the development of the City
in an orderly and efficient manner.
F. The Board of Adjustment shall, in In addition to all other conditions, impose the
following general conditions upon requirements apply to every conditional use permit
granted:
1. That the right to a use and occupancy permit shall be contingent upon the
fulfillment of all general and special conditions imposed by the conditional use
permit procedure; and
2. That all of the special conditions shall constitute restrictions running with the land
use, shall apply and be adhered to by the owner of the land, successors or assigns,
shall be binding upon the owner of the land, his successors or assigns, shall be
consented to in writing, and shall be recorded as such with the County Clerk and
Recorder’s Office by the property owner prior to the issuance of any building
permits, final site plan approval or commencement of the conditional use.
G. Applications for conditional use permits may be approved, conditionally approved or
denied by motion of the review authority Board of Adjustment. If an application is
denied, the denial shall constitute a determination that the applicant has not shown that
the conditions required for approval do exist.
H. The applicant shall be notified in writing of the final action taken by the Board of
Adjustment within seven working days of its the action. If the conditional use permit has
been granted the notification shall include any conditions, automatic termination date,
period of review or other requirements. If the conditional use permit has been granted, the
permit shall be issued upon the signature of the Planning Director after completion of all
conditions and final plan.
I. Termination/ Revocation of Conditional Use Permit approval.
1. Conditional use permits are approved based on an analysis of current local
circumstances and regulatory requirements. Over time these things may change
and the use may no longer be appropriate to a location. A conditional use permit
will be considered as terminated and of no further effect if:
a. After having been commenced, the approved use is not actively conducted
on the site for a period of two continuous calendar years;
b. Final zoning approval to reuse the property for another principal or
conditional use is granted;
c. The use or development of the site is not begun within the time limits of
the final site plan approval in Section 18.34.130, BMC.
2. A conditional use which has terminated may be reestablished on a site by either,
the review and approval of a new conditional use permit application, or a
determination by the Planning Director that the local circumstances and
regulatory requirements are essentially the same as at the time of the original
approval. A denial of renewal by the Planning Director may not be appealed. If
206
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 16 of 19
the Planning Director determines that the conditional use permit may be renewed
on a site then any conditions of approval of the original conditional use permit are
also renewed.
3. If activity begins for which a conditional use permit has been given final
approval, all activities must comply with any conditions of approval or code
requirements. Should there be a failure to maintain compliance the City may
revoke the approval through the procedures outlined in Section 18.64.160, BMC.
18.34.130 MODIFICATION OR ENLARGEMENT OF STRUCTURES AUTHORIZED
UNDER A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Any proposed additions, enlargements or modifications of the structures approved in any
conditional use permit, or any proposed extension of the use into areas not approved in any such
permit, shall be subject to the review procedures of this chapter.
18.34.120 FINAL SITE PLAN
A. No later than six months after the date of approval of a preliminary site plan or master
site plan, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Department a final site plan with
accompanying application form and review fee. The number of copies of the final site
plan to be submitted shall be established by the Planning Director. The final site plan
shall contain the materials required in §§18.78.080 and18.78.090 BMC and whatever
revisions to the preliminary site plan or master site plan are required to comply with any
conditions of approval. Prior to the passage of six months, the applicant may seek an
extension of not more than an additional six months from the Planning Director.
B. In addition to the materials required in subsection A of this section, the owner shall
submit a certification of completion and compliance stating that they understand any
conditions of approval and the submitted final site plans or master site plan have
complied with any conditions of approval or corrections to comply with code provisions.
C. In addition to the materials required in subsections A and B of this section, the owner
shall submit a statement of intent to construct according to the final site plan. Such
statement shall acknowledge that construction not in compliance with the approved final
site plan may result in delays of occupancy or costs to correct noncompliance.
D. Following approval of a final site plan, the final site plan shall be in effect for one year.
Prior to the passage of one year, the applicant may seek an extension of not more than
one additional year from the Planning Director. In such instances, the Planning Director
shall determine whether the relevant terms of this title and circumstances have
significantly changed since the initial approval. If relevant terms of this title or
circumstances have significantly changed, the extension of the approval shall not be
granted.
E. Following approval of a final master site plan, the final master site plan shall be in effect
for not less than three but not more than five years with the initial duration to be specified
during the final action of the review authority. Owners of property subject to the master
site plan may seek extensions to not exceed five years in a single extension. Approval of
an extension shall be made by the Planning Director. Approval shall be granted if the
Planning Director determines that the criteria of 18.34.120.F are met. relevant terms of
this title and circumstances have not significantly changed since the initial approval.
207
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 17 of 19
F. Any request for an extension must be in writing and be dated and signed by the owner of
the undeveloped area or incomplete development for which the extension is sought. More
than one extension may be requested for a particular development. Each request shall be
considered on its individual merits. An extension of the development approval under
Chapter 18.34, BMC does not extend other City or non-City agency approvals, e.g. for
design of infrastructure extensions, necessary to complete the project. When evaluating
an extension request, the City shall consider:
1. Changes to the development regulations since the original approval and whether
the development as originally approved is essentially compliant with the new
regulations;
2. Progress to date in completing the development as a whole and any phases;
3. Phasing of the development and the ability for existing development to operate
without the delayed development;
4. Dependence by other development on any public infrastructure or private
improvements to be installed by the development;
5. For extensions of approval greater than one year, the demonstrated ability of the
developer to complete the development;
6. Overall maintenance of the site;
7. Whether mitigation for impacts of the development identified during the
preliminary plan review remain relevant, adequate, and applicable to the present
circumstances of the development and community.
G. Upon approval of the final site plan by the Planning Director the applicant may obtain a
building permit as provided for by Chapter 18.64, BMC.
1. Subsequent site plan approvals are required to implement a master site plan, and
approval of a master site plan only does not entitle an applicant to obtain any
building permits.
18.34.130 AMENDMENTS TO SKETCH AND SITE PLANS
A. It is the intent of this section to assure that issues of community concern are addressed
during the redevelopment, reuse or change in use of existing facilities in the community.
Specific areas of community concern include public safety, mitigation of off-site
environmental impacts and site character in relation to surroundings. The following
procedures for amendments to approved plans, reuse of existing facilities and further
development of sites assure that these concerns are adequately and expeditiously
addressed.
B. Any amendment to or modification of a site plan or master site plan approved under the
ordinance codified in this chapter (September 3, 1991 - Ordinance 1332) shall be
submitted to the Planning Director for review and possible approval. Proposals for further
development, reuse or change in use of sites developed pursuant to this title shall be
reviewed as an amendment to an approved plan. All amendments shall be shown on a
revised plan drawing. Amendments to approved plans shall be reviewed and may be
approved by the Planning Director upon determining that the amended plan is in
substantial compliance with the originally approved plan. If it is determined that the
208
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 18 of 19
amended plan is not in substantial compliance with the originally approved plan, the
application shall be resubmitted as a new application and shall be subject to all standards
and plan review and approval provisions of this title. Substantial compliance may be
shown by demonstrating that the amendments do not exceed the thresholds established in
§18.34.170.B, BMC.
C. Modifications or amendments to a master site plan at the time an extension of approval is
sought may be proposed by either the applicant or the review authority City Commission,
and shall be based on substantive current information that indicates that relevant
circumstances have changed and that such circumstances support the proposed
modifications. Such circumstances may include market analyses, economic conditions,
changes in surrounding land uses, changes in ownership, etc.
18.34.150 REUSE, CHANGE IN USE OR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF SITES
DEVELOPED PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE
CODIFIED IN THIS TITLE
A. It is the policy of the City to work with owners of property during the reuse, change in
use, or further development process to correct existing violations of the City’s and other
agency’s regulations, to encourage reinvestment and renewal of existing developed sites,
and to move existing sites toward compliance with current standards while recognizing
the limitations that may exist in relation to an existing site.
B. Sites legally developed prior to the adoption of the ordinance codified in this title
(September 3, 1991 - Ordinance 1332) shall be considered to have developed under an
approved plan. Proposals for reuse, change in use or the further development of sites
legally developed prior to the adoption of the ordinance codified in this title may be
approved by the Planning Director review authority upon determining that no significant
alteration of the previous use and site are proposed, and upon review by the City
Engineer or designee to assure that adequate access and site surface drainage are
provided. All such proposals shall be shown on a plan drawing as required by Section
18.78.110 the Planning Director.
C. The criteria for determining that no significant alteration of the previous use and site will
result from the proposed reuse, change in use or further development of a site shall
include but not be limited to the following:
1. The proposed use is allowed under the same zoning district use classification as
the previous use, however replacement of nonconforming uses must comply with
the provisions of Chapter 18.60, BMC;
2. Changes proposed for the site, singly or cumulatively, do not increase lot
coverage by buildings, storage areas, parking areas or impervious surfaces and/or
do not result in an increase in intensity of use as measured by parking
requirements, traffic generation or other measurable off-site impacts;
a. By more than 20 percent for developments not meeting one or more of the
criteria of §18.34.040.C; OR
b. By more than 10 percent for developments meeting or exceeding one or
more of the criteria of §18.34.040.C;
209
Ordinance 1809 markup text
Page 19 of 19
3. The proposed use does not continue any unsafe or hazardous conditions
previously existing on the site or associated with the proposed use of the property.
D. If it is determined that the proposed reuse, change in use or further development of a site
contains significant alterations to the previous use and/or site, the application shall be
resubmitted as a new application and shall be subject to all plan review and approval
provisions of this chapter.
E. When proposals for reuse, change in use or further development of a site are located in
the neighborhood conservation or entryway corridor overlay districts, review by ADR
staff or the DRB may be required to determine whether resubmittal as a new application
is necessary.
18.34.160 IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING DEVELOPED SITES INDEPENDENT OF
SITE PLAN REVIEW
The continued improvement of existing developed sites is desired to increase the level of
compliance with the provisions of this title and to encourage maintenance and viability of the
site. An applicant may propose improvements, not in association with a plan review, to increase
conformity with the standards of this title for landscaping, lighting, parking or similar
components of a site to occur over a defined period of time, not to exceed three years. Such
improvements shall be depicted on a site plan drawn to scale and which shall be sufficiently
detailed to clearly depict the current conditions, the intended end result of the proposed
improvements and any phasing of work. Such improvements shall be reviewed by and approved
at the discretion of the Planning Director. The Planning Director review authority which may
require surety in accordance with the terms of Chapter 18.74, BMC for work performed. A
certificate of appropriateness may be required if the site is located within the entryway overlay
district or the neighborhood conservation overlay district.
18.34.170 BUILDING PERMITS BASED UPON APPROVED SKETCH OR SITE
PLANS
Based upon the approved sketch or final site plan and after any appeals have been resolved, a
building permit for the site may be requested and may be granted pursuant to Chapter 18.64,
BMC. No building permit may be granted on the basis of an approved sketch or site plan whose
approval has expired.
18.34.180 APPEALS
Appeals of decisions rendered in conjunction with this chapter may be taken as set forth in
Chapter 18.66, BMC. In such event, any plan review approval and associated right to proceed
with development shall be stayed until the appeal process has been completed.
210
STAFF REPORT
UDO TEXT AMENDMENTS FILE NO. #Z-11021
#Z-11021 Ord. 1809 City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report 1
Item: Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment Application #Z-11021,
Ord. 1809 to replace entirely 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 approval master site plans;
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 Zoning Commission on Tuesday, June 7, 2011 at 6:00
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, Interim Director of Planning and Community Development
PROJECT LOCATION
This amendment process does not alter the boundaries of zoning districts. 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.
The site development review process established in Chapter 18.34 is essential to the well being of the
citizens and institutions of Bozeman. The site plan process provides a legal mechanism to identify,
avoid, and mitigate harmful impacts resulting from development. The plan review process allows for the
review and verification of other adopted standards for development. Years of experience administering
the chapter have allowed staff and others to identify ways to improve the process. Given the extensive
rearrangement of text the entire chapter is simply being replaced. A copy of the text containing
underlines and strikeouts is provided to enable the public to see the material changes. The implementing
ordinance simply shows the entirely new text.
Many of the changes are clarifications and refinements of existing processes. The substantive changes
are:
211
#Z-11021 Ord. 1809 City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report 2
1) Explicitly including procedures and mechanisms to address multiple phases in a single development.
With the change in economic climate, there is a need to be able to generally plan an overall development
for purposes of coordinating site design, utilities, etc., but be able to construct it in reasonable
increments.
2) Allow more flexibility for Conditional Use Permits to be altered in the same manner as site plans
have in the past. The current requirement to process a new CUP to make even minor changes has been
found to be disproportionately complex to many incremental changes necessitated by evolving business
needs.
3) Establish more specific criteria for extensions of approvals, especially for multi-phased projects to
maintain clarity and consistency in code administration over time.
4) Authorize the Planning Director to grant preliminary approval for master site plans. With the use of
master site plans to address phased developments this encourages utilization of this tool and reduces
processing time for applications. Any master site plan requiring a deviation or variance will still go to
the City Commission.
REVIEW CRITERIA
The Zoning Commission criteria for review are established in statute. 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 Staff’s analysis.
Interpretation and application of the Unified Development Ordinance must take into account the
document as a whole. 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.
According to Section 18.68.020 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), the Bozeman Zoning
Commission shall cause to be made an investigation of facts bearing on each UDO text amendment
application relevant to zoning. The Zoning Commission 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 76-2-304, Montana Code Annotated.
Section 76-2-304, MCA Criteria
A. Be in accordance with a growth policy.
Yes. Overall, the Bozeman Community Plan encourages quality of design and protection of the public
safety. Generally applicable principles are illustrated by the following excerpts from the Bozeman
Community Plan. The various changes proposed in Ordinance 1804 are consistent with the principles of
the growth policy.
“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 revisions to sign area related to site orientation are an incentive to place buildings and
parking in a manner consistent with the goals of this growth policy. The revisions to certificate of
appropriateness standards for certain exemptions from review procedures encourages the use of those
construction types found to be appropriate for historic preservation. Revisions to the parkland
requirements in the B-3 district will remove a disincentive to development of additional downtown
housing as advocated in the 2nd implementation strategy in the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan,
212
#Z-11021 Ord. 1809 City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report 3
a neighborhood plan, under the growth policy.
Chapter 4, Community Quality, Section 4.1, Intent and Background. “In many ways, the perceived
image of a community affects the quality of life enjoyed by current residents, influences the desirability
of the community to newcomers and visitors, and ultimately impacts its economic viability….
Community Quality extends from the framework of the City, that which supports it and gives it physical
form (streets, utilities, trails, natural features) to the individual architectural details and materials used on
new buildings.”
Chapter 8, Economic Development, Section 8.3 Economic Development Goals and Objectives,
“Objective ED-1.3: Foster a positive economic climate through a well managed and aesthetically
pleasing built environment, and by maintaining a beautiful and healthy natural environment to promote
and attract businesses with a desirable impact on the community.”
Section 13.3, Disaster and Emergency Preparedness Goals and Objectives, “Goal D-2: Recognize and
strive to address both chronic as well as acute hazards and the effect of cumulative actions on increasing
or decreasing hazards.
Rationale: While some problems occur quickly and have obvious impacts, others can be inconspicuous
and only recognized after longer term evaluation. Some problems, like flooding, can be increased
incrementally by actions that individually are not significant. However, as many actions are taken the
cumulative effect can result in a substantially increased hazard level and impact to the community.”
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-2.4: 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.
B. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems.
Yes. The amendments as presented have only small immediate impacts on transportation. See also H
below.
C. Secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers.
Neutral. It is not expected that these subjects will be affected by these amendments. Most of the
amendments are procedural in nature.
D. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare.
Yes. The amendments improve the general welfare by advancing the goals and objectives of the growth
policy as described in A, above.
E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air.
Neutral. None of the edits change setbacks, required area per dwelling, parks or open space, or allowed
lot coverage.
F. Prevention of overcrowding of land.
Neutral. These amendments are not altering requirements for lot coverage or building density.
Objectively, overcrowding is a condition where the use of land overwhelms the ability of infrastructure
and buildings to meet the needs of users. This functional problem is addressed by ensuring the
installation of water, sewer, transportation, and other services. See H below.
213
#Z-11021 Ord. 1809 City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report 4
G. Avoiding undue concentration of population.
Neutral. The proposed amendments do not change standards for density of population.
H. Facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and
other public requirement.
Yes. The amendments address phasing of multi-year projects. The appropriate phasing of infrastructure
to correspond to development helps ensure than infrastructure is installed as needed and avoids
deficiencies. The amendments also improve the process to review proposed changes to existing
developed sites. This will help to ensure that existing sites maintain compliance with infrastructure
standards.
I. Conserving the value of buildings.
Yes. These proposed changes improve and make more consistent the procedures for reviewing the
proposed reuse or further development of existing sites. A more predictable process removes uncertainty
which can be an impediment to reinvestment.
J. Character of the district.
Yes. The primary character giving standards of the various zoning districts remain essentially
unchanged.
K. Peculiar suitability for particular uses.
Neutral. The amendments are not specific to a particular parcel but are procedural in nature.
L. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area.
Neutral. These amendments will not alter the uses allowed in zoning districts or the boundaries of the
districts.
M. Promotion of Compatible Urban Growth.
Yes. The proposed amendments do not expand the development area of the City or change the allowed
land uses in the zoning districts. The changes do facilitate the development within the City of phased
projects. This supports development within the City’s urbanized area.
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 is consistent with or does not conflict with the required criteria.
Pursuant to Sections 76-2-304, Montana Codes Annotated, the Zoning Commission reviewed the
Unified Development Ordinance text amendment application to determine if the proposed zoning
change met the requirements of the adopted Growth Policy, state statute, and other adopted state and
local ordinances.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment had been received when this report was prepared.
In the case of protest against these changes signed by the owners of 25% or more of either of the area of
the lots included in the proposed change; or those lots 150 feet from a lot included in a proposed change,
such amendment may not become effective except upon a favorable vote of two-thirds of the present and
214
#Z-11021 Ord. 1809 City Initiated UDO Text Amendment Staff Report 5
voting members of the City Commission.
ATTACHMENTS
Application form
Initial draft of Ordinance 1809
Sample text showing the proposed amendments
Zoning Commission Resolution Z-11021 [to be provided after zoning commission action]
Zoning Commission draft minutes [to be provided after zoning commission action]
215
Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION #Z-11021
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
TEXT AMENDMENT APPLICATION THAT WOULD CREATE CHAPTER 2.65
ZONING COMMISSION DESCRIBING DUTIES, COMPOSITION, AND RELATED
MATTERS FOR A MUNICIPAL ZONING COMMISSION; AMEND CHAPTER 18.28
NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT TO CREATE CERTAIN
EXEMPTIONS FROM REQUIREMENT TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS BEFORE BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION AND CLARIFYING
TEXT OF THE CHAPTER; REPLACE ENTIRELY 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; AMEND SECTION 18.42.170,
TRASH AND GARBAGE ENCLOSURES TO REQUIRE CONTAINMENT OF
CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS; AMEND CHAPTER 18.50 PARK AND RECREATION
REQUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICALLY SECTION 18.50.030 CASH DONATION IN-
LIEU OF LAND DEDICATION TO MODIFY HOW THE REQUIREMENT FOR
PROVISION OF PARKLAND IS HANDLED IN THE B-3, CENTRAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT; AMEND CHAPTER 18.52 SIGNS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
SECTION 18.52.020 TO EXEMPT MURALS FROM REGULATION AS SIGNS,
SECTION 18.52.050 TO MODIFY DETERMINATION OF WINDOW SIGN AREA,
SECTION 18.52.060 TO MODIFY THE FORMULA FOR DETERMINING ALLOWED
SIGN AREA ON A LOT, AND SECTION 18.52.130 ADDING A CROSS REFERENCE
TO CITY STANDARDS FOR ADDRESSING; AMEND SECTION 18.64.010 TO ALLOW
THE PLANNING DIRECTOR TO APPROVAL MASTER SITE PLANS; AMEND
SECTION 18.64.160 VIOLATION-PENALTY-ASSISTING OR ABETTING-
ADDITIONAL REMEDIES TO CLARIFY APPLICATION OF EXISTING
ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS AND AUTHORIZING RECORDING OF ACTIONS TO
RESOLVE NON-COMPLIANCE; CREATE A NEW SECTION 18.80.1945 DEFINING A
MURAL; AND AMEND SECTION 18.80.3210 THE DEFINITION OF WINDOW SIGN.
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has adopted zoning regulations and a zoning map
through its Unified Development Ordinance pursuant to Sections 76-2-301, and 76-2-302
M.C.A.; and
WHEREAS, Section 76-2-305, M.C.A. allows local governments to amend zoning
regulations if a public hearing is held and official notice is provided; and
216
Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, Section 76-2-307, M.C.A. states that the Zoning Commission must conduct
a public hearing and submit a report to the City Commission for all zoning regulation
amendment requests; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Zoning Commission has been created by ordinance
and definition in Section 18.80.3250; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 18.68 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance sets forth
the procedures and review criteria for amendments to the text of Title 18, Unified Development
Ordinance; 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 Title 76, Chapter 2, Part 3, M.C.A.; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Zoning Commission held two public hearings on June
7, 2011, to formally receive and review all written and oral testimony on the proposed text
amendments contained in draft ordinances 1804 and 1809; and
WHEREAS, no members of the public submitted written or oral testimony on the
proposed text amendments and two public agencies reviewed the draft text and supported the
changes; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Commission discussed the offered comments and Staff’s
suggested response and the proposed amendments; and
WHEREAS, after considering staff’s recommendation and discussion amongst Zoning
Commission members, the Zoning Commission found that the application complied with the
Review Criteria;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Bozeman Zoning Commission
officially recommends on a vote of 3 to 0 to the Bozeman City Commission that the City
Commission adopt the recommended amendments in draft Ordinance 1804; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Bozeman Zoning Commission officially
recommends on a vote of 3 to 0 to the Bozeman City Commission that the City Commission
adopt the recommended amendments in draft Ordinance 1809.
DATED THIS DAY OF , 2011, Resolution #Z-11021
217
Page 3 of 3
_____________________________ ____________________________
Tim McHarg, Director Ed Sypinski, Chairperson
Dept. of Planning & Community Development Bozeman Zoning Commission
218
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
219
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
220
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
221
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
222
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
223