HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Hearing and Consideration of Crescent Cross Growth PolicCommission Memorandum
REPORT TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
Honorable Mayor and City Commission
Chris Saunders, Assistant Director
Tim McHarg, Director
P- 11003, Crescent Cross Limited Partnership Growth Policy Amendment
Monday, October 10, 2011
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action Item
RECOMMENDATION: Conduct the advertised public hearing and continue to a date certain
with the date to be set to a time after the Commission has considered the larger issue of
development along Huffine Lane.
BACKGROUND: The City adopted its current growth policy in the summer of 2009. One of the
elements of the document is the future land use map, Figure 3 -1, which shows how the various
types of land use designations are geographically located in the community. An application has
been submitted to amend Figure 3 -1 at the southeast corner of South Cottonwood Road and
Huffine Lane for approximately 20 acres. The property is currently planned as residential and the
application requests community commercial mixed use. The purpose of the application is to
facilitate subsequent annexation and development of the site.
The Commission adopted a resolution of intent to amend the growth policy on September 26,
2011 and setting a public hearing date of October 10, 2011. This meeting is to consider the
formal amendment package. The Planning Board conducted their public hearing on September
20 At that time they voted to recommend to the City Commission that the appropriate
development of the larger Huffine corridor be examined before the Commission acts on this
individual application. The minutes of the Planning Board discussion are attached.
The Planning Board recommendation is scheduled for discussion by the Commission on
November 7 If the City Commission does not wish to conduct the larger study prior to action
on this application, the Commission may act this evening to approve or deny the application and
still carry forward with a larger area discussion later.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: Is a larger discussion of the development of the Huffine Lane
corridor necessary in order for the Commission to make the correct decision on this application.
FISCAL EFFECTS: None at this time
ALTERNATIVES: Four alternatives for Commission action have been identified. These are:
20 Pagel of 2
1. Approve the application. If implemented by the City Commission, this would have the
effect of changing the designation to Community Commercial Mixed Use and future
development on the site would be subject to a zone map amendment to establish the
standards of a commercial zone, likely the B -2 district.
2. Deny the application. This would have the effect of leaving the Residential future land
use designation in place and future development on the site would be subject to the
standards of one or more of the residential zoning options.
3. City Commission can direct that a larger analysis of the Huffine corridor be conducted to
identify the best designation for the site prior to acting on this application. This may
result in an eventual determination that either option 1 or 2 is best or may identify another
option like industrial is the best choice. A Commission discussion on this item is
presently scheduled for November 7 th .
4. City Commission can act to approve or deny the present application with a larger
discussion of the development of the Huffine Lane corridor to follow.
Attachments: Planning Board minutes and resolution
Staff report
Application materials
Public Comment
Report compiled on: September 29, 2011
Page 2 of 2
21
Crescent Cross Growth Policy Amendment
RESOLUTION #P -11003
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD REGARDING AN
AMENDMENT TO FIGURE 3 -1, FUTURE LAND USE MAP, BOZEMAN
COMMUNITY PLAN FOR APPROXIMATELY 20 ACRES WHICH IS A PORTION OF
TRACT 2, CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY 2229 LOCATED IN THE W 1/2 OF SECTION
15, T2S, RSE, PMM, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA AND GENERALLY LOCATED
AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF COTTONWOOD
ROAD AND HUFFINE LANE.
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has adopted a growth policy pursuant to Section 76 -1-
601, M.C.A.; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board has been created by ordinance by the
Bozeman City Commission as provided for in Title 76 -1 -101, M.C.A.; and
WHEREAS, the property owners, Crescent Cross Limited Partnership and their
representative, Madison Engineering submitted a growth policy amendment to change the future
land use designation depicted on Figure 3 -1 Bozeman Community Plan on 20 acres at the
southeast corner of the intersection of Huffine Lane and Cottonwood Road from Residential to
Community Commercial Mixed Use; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Growth Policy Amendment Application has been properly
submitted, reviewed, and advertised in accordance with the required procedures; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board held a public hearing on Tuesday,
September 20, 2011, to review the application and any written public testimony on the
application; and
WHEREAS, two members of the general public provided written testimony, one in favor
and one opposed to the application but no oral public testimony was received on the matter of the
preliminary plat application; and
WHEREAS, members of the City of Bozeman Planning Board discussed the proposed
change and its possible effects on the community; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board reviewed the application against the
criteria for amendments established in Chapter 17 of the Bozeman Community Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board considered three possible alternative
actions outlined in the staff report by the Planning Staff, and
22
Crescent Cross Growth Policy Amendment
WHEREAS, a motion having been made to recommend approval of the application the
City of Bozeman Planning Board voted 2 -4 on the motion which therefore failed; and
WHEREAS, a motion was made to forward a recommendation to the City Commission
to discuss the type of development planned for the Huffine Lane corridor which passed upon a
vote of 3 -2;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Bozeman Planning Board,
having heard and considered public comment, application materials, and staff recommendations,
recommends that the City Commission consider the future development for the overall Huffine
Lane corridor prior to acting upon application P- 11003.
DATED THIS DAY OF , 2011 Resolution 4P -11003
Tim McHarg, Planning Director
Department of Planning & Community Development
Ed Sypinski, President
City of Bozeman Planning Board
23
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2011
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
President Sypinski called the regular meeting of the Planning Board to order at 6:07 p.m. in the
Commission Meeting Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana and
directed the secretary to take attendance.
Members Present:
Ed Sypinski, President
Jodi Leone
Eugene Graf
Bill Quinn
Jeff Krauss
Staff Present:
Tim McHarg, Planning Director
Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning Director
Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary
Trever McSpadden, Vice President
Members Absent:
Erik Garberg
Adam Fruh
Guests Present:
Dayle H. Kountz
Kaylee Kountz
I TEM 2. PUBL I C COM M ENT
{Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Planning Board and not scheduled on
this agenda. Three - minute time limit per speaker. }
Seei ng no generad pubs i c comment forthcomi ng, Presi dent Sypi nski d osed the pubs i c comment
portion of the meeting.
I TEM 3. M I NUTES OF JUNE 7, 2011
M OT I ON: M r. Qui nn moved, M r. Graf seconded, to approve the mi nutes of June 7, 2011 as
presented. The motion carried 5 -0. Those voting aye being President Sypi nski , Vice President
McSpadden, Ms. Leone, Mr. Quinn, and Mr. Graf. Those voti ng nay being none.
ITEM 4. GENERAL DISCUSSION
President Sypinski stated he had sent an e -mail requesting input from the Board regarding their
working with other advisory boards or commissions. He asked for comments from Board
members.
Vice President McSpadden stated that at some point, while going through the work session
meetings, three big topics had been identified. He stated the last of the three was to incentivize
the TIF and Urban Renewal Districts; after that discussion, the President and Vice President had
met with the Northeast Urban Renewal Board as well as the North 7 th Avenue Urban Renewal
Board to gauge their interest in discussions with the Planning Board. He stated there would be
Page 1 of 7
City of Bozeman Planning Board2*nutes of September 20, 2011.
some information forwarded to the Planning Board for a future meeting.
President Sypinski stated there was a formal invitation for the Urban Renewal Boards to attend
the second Planning Board meeting in October to present their priorities. He stated the big
concern for both Urban Renewal Boards had to do with parking but for different reasons in each
area. He stated the N. 7 t Board was also concerned with signage requirements. He stated
setbacks had also been discussed though he knew there were fire safety reasons for separation of
structures.
Mr. Krauss joined the Board.
President Sypinski stated the Northeast Urban Renewal Board were concerned that parking
would no longer be available and some concerns regarding the mixed uses in the neighborhood.
He stated if the Northeast Urban Renewal District could be used as a model and development
standards could be implemented.
Vice President McSpadden stated that he thought the bigger implication would be incentivizing
and bolstering infill development; not creating an administrative nightmare through the creation
of specific development standards. President Sypinski added that it was easier to look at the
specifics when the area was being developed such as North 7 th Avenue is. Vice President
McSpadden suggested the Board should attempt to maintain the focus to create a larger infill area
and use the existing districts to that end; were there ways to make it desirable for people to
develop within the district and if there was success, would there be a recipe for a larger district.
President Sypinski suggested using their plan to review proposals while still referring to the
UDO to provide the requirements; more of a streamlining effect.
Mr. Krauss apologized for being late. He stated he had met with the N. 7 t Board and noted they
were a little more advanced in their plans due to one of the members being an ex planner. He
stated the N. 7 th Avenue would not mind becoming a zoning district; it had a plan, a board, and a
funding source. He stated a set of regulations could be designed to relax parking requirements,
relax setbacks, and ultimately provide general regulations and guidelines as well as offer funds
for projects within the district. He suggested a specific plan for the district could also include
bonuses for excellence in design. He suggested the Board members had a laundry list of the
items they would like to see addressed but would like to have a separate zoning district that was
performance based; it seemed to be the Board's biggest concern at the meeting. He asked the
Planning Director to comment.
Director McHarg stated he thought Mr. Krauss was correct in his recollection of the concerns of
the N. 7 th Board. He stated it would be important to provide a plan for the corridor. President
Sypinski responded there was already a plan in place and it had been implemented which would
make it easier to implement an official N. 7 th district. Vice President McSpadden noted that the
N. 7 t and Northeast Districts had a leg up as they already had plans in place as neighborhood
plans and were not far from a regulatory document. Director McHarg stated there was a level of
planning and the character of the zoning district would be more straightforward; the goal of the
discussion would be to determine how different the district would be. Mr. Krauss added the
Page 2 of 7
City of Bozeman Planning Board2inutes of September 20, 2011.
grant for the study of the intersection of 7 th Avenue and Griffin Drive was a good example and
noted they had been under the jurisdiction of two conflicting design standards. President
Sypinski added two competing codes required a decision on which would take precedent. Mr.
Krauss suggested trying incentives on N. 7 th Avenue and if it worked there, it would work
anywhere; he added he was not opposed to implementing the same all over the City if it was
successful.
Mr. Graf asked for clarification of whether the N. 7 t plan would be developed by the N. 7 t
Board itself. Director McHarg responded the plan was developed by the N. 7 t Board and had
been adopted by the City Commission. Mr. Graf stated he saw no problem with the district
governing itself.
Vice President McSpadden agreed with Mr. Graf and suggested it wasn't just a couple of places
in the community and he did not see why the district couldn't be the test subject. He stated he
was supportive of the recommendation.
President Sypinski stated Ms. Riggs of the N. 7 t Board would be forwarding their laundry list to
the Planning Board members. He suggested the Northeast Board could follow the same template
to solve some of their own problems. Vice President McSpadden suggested his only concern
was adding another layer of guidelines and suggested caution should be exercised and the
advisory body could be the only review agency prior to the City Commission.
Mr. Krauss stated both Boards were staffed with an engineer and a planner to help them through
the process but they did not want to change the regulations for the City as a whole; it would be a
good test case for self governance and character based zoning districts. He stated N. 7 t was not
nearly as mixed use as the Northeast District.
Mr. Quinn suggested the Planning Board should recuse themselves from the process to prevent
making layers of requirements. He asked if anyone had a plan or idea of what the sticking points
were in the Districts. Mr. Krauss responded there were some ideas regarding sticking points such
as parking concerns he had mentioned earlier; he added urban landscaping requirements,
setbacks, signs, and right of way requirements had also been mentioned. Vice President Sypinski
added signs had been discussed with regard to sidewalk expansion as well; some existing signs
were located in the right of way for the sidewalk. Mr. Quinn stated it was not the Planning
Board's rule to choose between a sidewalk and a sign; he added he was having a hard time
figuring out where the Planning Board fit into the discussion.
Director McHarg responded the way it had been presented would be for the Planning Board to
listen to the proposal and decide whether or not to support their suggestions and to forward a
decision to the City Commission. If a separate zoning district was decided upon, the Zoning
Commission would play a stronger role than the Planning Board.
President Sypinski suggested other Board members should develop relationships with other
advisory boards or commissions to bring to the Planning Board to help move things along. He
stated he had invited both Boards to submit information for the Planning Board meeting on
Page 3 of 7
City of Bozeman Planning Board2inutes of September 20, 2011.
October 18, 2011.
Vice President McSpadden suggested that if the whole thing was pursued, they should consider
input from the City Engineering Department would be wise during review some of the laundry
list items.
President Sypinski stated the Watershed Council would also be presenting to the Planning Board
the first meeting in November.
The Board took a ten minutes recess.
ITEM 5. PROJECT REVIEW
1. Growth Policy Amendment #P -11003 (Crescent Cross) —A Growth Policy Amendment
Application requested by the property owners, Crescent Cross Limited Partnership, 5550
Blackwood Road, Bozeman, MT 59718, and representative, Madison Engineering, 895
Technology Blvd., Suite 203, Bozeman, MT 59718, requesting a change in Land Use
Designation on —20 acres from Residential to Community Commercial Mixed Use for property
I egal I y descri bed as a porti on of Tract 2, Certi f i cate of Survey 22291 ocated i n the W 1/2 of
Secti on 15, T2S, R5E, PM M, Gad I ati n County, M ontana and general I y I ocated southeast of the
intersection of Cottonwood Road and Huffine Lane. (Saunders)
Assi scant R anni ng Di rector Chri s Saunders presented the Staff Report noti ng the proposed was
f or a change i n Land Use Desi gnati on that woul d modi fy the Land Use M ap on —20 acres f rom
Reed denti ed to Communi ty Commerci ed M i xed Use. He noted the adj acent propery es were a
b1 end of uses and noted those uses. He di rected the Board to the current Land Use M ap and
noted adjacent land use designations. He noted the property to the north was zoned primarily as
Business Park and noted the University owned much of the property to the east; the University
di d not know what woul d be devel oped i n that I ocati on. He noted the adj acent agri cul tured uses
as wel I as the Loyal Garden Subdi vi ed on that was currentl y bui I di ng out. He stated there had
been two public comments received; one letter in favor and one in opposition. H e stated Staff
was supportive of the proposed as 20 acres would not substantial I y impact the Growth Policy. He
stated the bi ggest concern was f or the corri dor as a whol e, the best way to proceed was somewhat
undef i ned at thi s ti me though they di d not thi nk the appl i cati on shoul d wad t unti I the other i ssues
were sorted out along Huffine Lane. He stated Staff was supportive of the proposed as presented
but there woul d be I arger i ssues that woul d need sorted out wi th regard to H uff i ne L ane.
Mr. Krauss stated he thought the City Commission would like to have a discussion about the
development along Huffine Lane and he suggested property owners should be invited to the
discussion. Director McHarg suggested he thought sooner would be better than later and asked
for clarification on whether or not a round table setting should be pursued. Mr. Krauss suggested
a larger discussion concerning the plans for West Main Street would be added to a future City
Commission agenda.
Chris Budeski, Madison Engineering, addressed the Planning Board. He stated he was the
representative of the owner for the current proposal. He stated it was fairly well known that a
Page 4 of 7
City of Bozeman Planning Board27inutes of September 20, 2011.
potential client was looking at purchasing the property for commercial development and was
driving the request. He stated that currently three of the four corners at the intersection were
commercial development and there was quite a lot of activity at the intersection. He stated he
understood the concerns put forth in the negative public comment, but there would be a buffer of
open space between the residents in Loyal Garden Subdivision and the commercial development.
He stated the 20 acres had been requested specifically due to the minimum requirements of the
County for subdivision of land. He stated the fourth leg of the intersection would be appropriate
for commercial zoning on the corner.
Ms. Leone asked if the owner would disclose the company seeking the land. Dayle Kountz, 5550
Blackwood Road, responded that Town Pump was looking at the property.
President Sypinski opened the item for public comment. Seeing none forthcoming, the public
comment period was closed.
Mr. Krauss stated that, as he had asked of Staff, the City Commission was reviewing what they
wanted to see as far as development along Huffine Lane. He stated they had attempted to avoid
the appearance of strip mall development in the corridor but it would be difficult due to the
nature of the corridor. He stated the Community Commercial designation was vastly different
than those land use designations adjacent. He stated the Commission had long said they did not
want to see commercial development in that area. He stated he saw a sufficiency of Community
Commercial designated property in that location; there was a lot of this type of development. He
stated he did not know that he could see a need to put a Community Commercial designation in
that part of Bozeman; he was looking for something compatible with the way the rest of the
neighborhood was being developed until a larger discussion has taken place.
President Sypinski stated he concurred with Mr. Krauss that commercial development had not
been intended for along Huffine Lane. He stated the review criteria for Growth Policy
Amendments included changes that should only occur in five year intervals and care should be
taken in reviewing the amendments unless an extremely compelling case was brought forth
which he did not see in this instance. He stated he was supportive of the 3 rd option to have the
City Commission investigate further the development types they would like to see along Huffine
Lane.
Vice President McSpadden stated the proposal was still in the early stages of review. He stated
he had gone through the charrette process for the review of the Growth Policy and suggested that
smaller commercial nodes to support surrounding residential uses had been intentionally
included. He stated the individual application was creating a commercial node at an intersection
as the Community Plan had anticipated. He stated some items would be discussed during zoning
and annexation application review.
Mr. Graf stated he just appreciated someone wanting to build in Bozeman and contribute to the
community. President Sypinski clarified that the property was currently in the County. Mr.
Krauss added that their assumption was that the interested party wanted to annex into the City.
Page 5 of 7
City of Bozeman Planning Board2&nutes of September 20, 2011.
MOTION: Mr. Graf moved, Vice President McSpadden seconded, to forward a
recommendation of approval to the City Commission for Growth Policy Amendment 4P -11003
with Staff findings as outlined in the Staff Report. The motion failed 2 -4. Those voting aye
being Vice President McSpadden and Mr. Graf. Those voting nay being Mr. Krauss, Ms. Leone,
Mr. Quinn, and President Sypinski.
MOTION: Mr. Krauss moved, Mr. Quinn seconded, to forward a recommendation to the City
Commission to discuss the type of development planned for the Huffine Lane corridor.
Mr. Graf suggested a time frame be included in fairness to the applicant. Mr. Krauss responded
he was at the first week of November on City Commission agendas. Mr. Graf countered that Mr.
Krauss could schedule the City Commission discussion without the Planning Board being
involved and suggested the hearing could take place on the date the application had been
scheduled to be heard.
Vice President McSpadden stated he agreed with Mr. Graf and added that the motion was sort of
open ended. Mr. Krauss responded he could check into getting the discussion on an October
agenda. Vice President McSpadden stated the Board was tasked with reviewing the application
on its merits alone; he could not begin to think about what could happen to the east or west of the
site. He stated his view was that a Community Commercial node was being created and Staff
had recognized that the review criteria had been met. President Sypinski responded the Board
should not be relying on Staff's recommendation and he found that the application did not meet
one of those criteria.
Mr. Graf suggested the Board should not inhibit an application to provide for a study that should
have been done in anticipation of future development.
Ms. Leone stated she owned a lot in Loyal Garden Subdivision and asked if she should recuse
herself from the decision. President Sypinski clarified that it would not be necessary if she did
not have a specific interest in the project site.
The motion carried 3 -2. Those voting aye being President Sypinski, Mr. Krauss, and Mr. Quinn.
Those voting nay being Vice President McSpadden and Mr. Graf with Ms. Leone abstaining.
Mr. Krauss added that though the project was in limbo, it had not been denied and he would
place the item on the November 7, 2011 agenda.
ITEM 6. NEW BUST NESS
N o i terns were f orthcomi ng.
ITEM 7. ADJOURNMENT
Seeing there was no further business before the Planning Board, President Sypinski adjourned the
Page 6 of 7
City of Bozeman Planning Board2onutes of September 20, 2011.
meeting at 7:38 p.m.
Ed Sypinski, President
Planning Board
City of Bozeman
Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning Director
Planning & Community Development
City of Bozeman
Page 7 of 7
City of Bozeman Planning Board3onutes of September 20, 2011.
CRESCENT CROSS GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT
FILE # P -11003
PLANNING BOARD STAFF REPORT
Item: Planning Application 4P -11003 —An application to amend Figure 3 -1 of the Bozeman
Community Plan to change the future land use designation on 20 acres from Residential to Community
Commercial Mixed Use.
Owner /Applicant: Crescent Cross Limited Partnership, 5550 Blackwood Road, Bozeman MT 59718-
7665.
Representative: Madison Engineering, 895 Technology Blvd. Suite 203, Bozeman MT 59718
Date /Time: Before the Bozeman Planning Board on Tuesday, September 20, 2011 at 7:00 PM in
the Commission Meeting Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Avenue Bozeman, Montana; and before
the Bozeman City Commission on Monday, October 10, 2011 at 6:00 PM in the Commission Meeting
Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Avenue Bozeman, Montana
Report By: Chris Saunders, Assistant Director
Recommendation: Approval
LOCATION
The property is 20 acres of land located at the South East corner of the intersection of Huffine Lane
and S. Cottonwood Road. The property is legally described as: A portion of Tract 2, Certificate of
Survey 2229 located in the W 1/2 of Section 15, T2S, R5E, PMM, Gallatin County, Montana.
Please refer to the vicinity map below.
- Huff'inetn
. ..................... L.........
-
Subject
-
Property
R.
0
0
r_
r T17
RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES
Based upon review and consideration by the Development Review Committee and Planning Staff, and
after evaluation of the proposed amendment against the criteria set forth in Chapter 17, Bozeman
Community Plan, the Planning Staff recommends approval of the requested Amendment.
Crescent Cross GPA Staff Report #P -11003 Page 1 of 7
31
In the event that the Planning Board finds differently, Staff recommends the following contingencies to
be included with any recommendation or action of approval:
1) The applicant shall submit, within forty -five (45) days of approval by the City Commission, an
8 /z- x 11 -inch or 8 /z- x 14 -inch exhibit entitled "Crescent Cross Growth Policy Amendment" to
the Planning Department containing an accurate description of the property for which the
growth policy designation is being amended. The exhibit must be acceptable to the Planning
Department.
2) The resolution for the growth policy amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant
provides an exhibit of the area to be re- designated, which will be utilized in the preparation of
the resolution to officially amend Figure 3 -1, the Future Land Use Map of the Bozeman
Community Plan.
PROPOSAL
The property owner has made application to the Bozeman Department of Planning and Community
Development for a Growth Policy Amendment to amend Figure 3 -1 of the Bozeman Community Plan
on approximately 20 acres SE of the intersection of Huffine Lane and South Cottonwood Road. The
subject property is currently located outside the corporate limits of the City of Bozeman. The proposal
is made with the intent to annex and zone the property for future development.
LAND CLASSIFICATION AND ZONING
The subject property is presently used for agriculture. A minor subdivision has been proposed in
Gallatin County to divide the area subject to the map amendment from the larger 140+ acre parent tract
the majority of which will remain outside of the City. The following land uses and zoning are adjacent
to the subject property:
North: Community Commercial Mixes Use; Business Park zone; Bank, offices, car sales,
vacant
South: Residential, located outside the City; agriculture
East: Residential, located outside the City; Solid waste collection and shop, agriculture;
West: Community Commercial Mixed Use, B2 (Community Business), vacant and roofing
supplier. Residential; mixed residential districts, single homes and vacant
Please see the maps below to show the vicinity of the Figure 3 -1 Future Land Use map overlaid with
existing zoning and a vicinity map with the current land uses as of Dec. 31, 2010.
Crescent Cross GPA Staff Report #P -11003 Page 2 of 7
32
Vicinity Map — Growth Policy Future Land Use and Zoning
Crescent Cross GPA Staff Report #P -11003 Page 3 of 7
33
Vicinity Map — Current Land Use
REVIEW CRITERIA
A change in the growth policy is a legislative act to set policy relating to future development proposals.
There are no statutory criteria for evaluation of a growth policy amendment other than the general
purposes for a growth policy. The City of Bozeman has locally established through its growth policy
four specific criteria for amendment. The Bozeman Department of Planning and Community
Development has reviewed the application against the locally established criteria of the Bozeman
Community Plan, and as a result offer the following summary- review comments for consideration.
1. The proposed amendment must cure a deficiency in the growth policy, or improve the growth
policy, to better respond to the needs of the general community;
The amendment is for a small area and is unlikely to of itself materially change the growth policy.
However, the proposal does raise questions about the development of the Huffine corridor and what
types of development are appropriate. The needs of the community change from time to time and since
the development of the Bozeman Community Plan the health of the national economy has significantly
altered. One of the items recently discussed in various situations has been the need for more accessible
industrial property. The majority of the land planned for industrial use in Bozeman is presently not
accessible due to lack of resources to develop the property and /or environmental restrictions. There is
Crescent Cross GPA Staff Report #P -11003 Page 4 of 7
34
presently a long established an industrial use to the east of the current proposed amendment. It may be
more beneficial to the community as a whole to consider the application site and additional area for
industrial rather than commercial uses. This is an analysis and discussion beyond the scope of this
individual application. Although Huffine Lane is an entryway corridor there are mechanisms in place
to work with site and subdivision design for industrial development to be suitable to the site.
2. The proposed amendment does not create inconsistencies within the growth policy, either
between the goals and the maps or between different goals and objectives.
The proposed change does not appear to cause any material inconsistencies in the growth policy.
3. The proposed amendment must be consistent with the overall intent of the growth policy;
The proposed change does not appear to be inconsistent with the growth policy.
4. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the community as a whole or significant
portion by:
Significantly altering land use patterns and principles in a manner contrary to those established
by this plan,
The most significant potential impact is to the residentially planned area to the south. Presently the
Huffine Lane corridor provides a separation from commercial uses. The perimeter area to the east is
adjacent to an existing industrial use and change in impacts is considered negligible in this area. The
Huffine corridor is presently an area with numerous projects in various stages of conceptual
development which if brought to construction will significantly change the lightly developed character
now along the area. The final character of those developments will be subject to review to the City's
design standards. The City does have established standards to address the interface between residential
and non - residential development.
Requiring unmitigated larger or more expensive improvements to streets, water, sewer, or other
public facilities or services, thereby impacting development of other lands,
The site is located at the intersection of two primary arterials. The intersection is presently signalized.
The evaluation by the DRC indicates that adequate sewer and water can be made available to the
parcel. Other services such as police and fire are already provided to the area north and west of the site.
The site is presently planned for urban development. Prior to any urban development the site must be
first annexed and zoned. The proposal is for a different category of urban use. It is not expected than
the proposal would negatively affect this criterion. If an unusually service intensive use is proposed for
the development of the site the subdivision and /or site plan review process will allow for identification
and mitigation of such impacts.
Adversely impact existing uses because of unmitigated greater than anticipated impacts on
facilities and services, or
No extraordinary impacts on facilities or services are anticipated from the potential change in land use.
Negatively affect the livability of the area or the health and safety of the residents.
Crescent Cross GPA Staff Report #P -11003 Page 5 of 7
35
The development of this site will be subject to the standards of the adopted land use regulations. These
will be adequate to address concerns of health and safety. The livability of the area is unlikely to be
materially affected by the change in such a small area. The same land use category is already present
on the north and west.
PUBLIC COMMENT
One written comment in favor of the amendment has been submitted, no verbal testimony has been
received as of the writing of this report.
SUMMARY & CONCLUSION
The Department of Planning and Community Development and the Development Review Committee,
have reviewed the application and have provided summary review comments as outlined above in the
staff report; and as a result, recommend approval of the application.
The recommendation of the Planning Board will be forwarded to the Bozeman City Commission for
consideration at its public hearing scheduled for Monday, October 10, 2011. The City Commission
will make the final decision on the application.
The Planning Board has three possible actions to consider in forming their recommendation to the City
Commission on this application:
1. Recommend to the City Commission to approve the application. If implemented by the City
Commission, this would have the effect of changing the designation to Community
Commercial Mixed Use and future development on the site would be subject to the standards of
a commercial zone, likely the B -2 district.
2. Recommend to the City Commission to deny the application. If implemented by the City
Commission, this would have the effect of leaving the Residential in place and future
development on the site would be subject to the standards of one or more of the residential
zoning options.
3. Recommend to the City Commission that a larger analysis of the Huffine corridor be conducted
to identify the best designation for the site.
All motions should be phrased in the positive. If the motion does not receive a favorable vote by a
majority of the quorum present the motion fails. To act on option 2 the Planning Board will need to
elaborate their findings where they differ from those contained in the staff report. Suggested motion
language for the three options listed above:
1. Having heard and considered public comment and all submitted materials and staff findings, I
hereby find the applicant satisfies the applicable criteria and move to recommend that the City
Commission approve the growth policy amendment requested in application P -11003 changing
Figure 3 -1 of the Bozeman Community Plan subject to the contingencies listed on page 2 of the
staff report.
2. Having heard and considered public comment and all submitted materials and staff findings, I
find that the applicable criteria are not met because (insert alternate findings) move to
recommend to the City Commission that Figure 3 -1 of the Bozeman Community Plan remain as
presently adopted.
3. Having heard and considered public comment and all submitted materials and staff findings, I
hereby find that it is uncertain what is the most appropriate land use designation for the
applicant's site and recommend to the City Commission that they request Staff to conduct a
larger study of the Huffane corridor.
Crescent Cross GPA Staff Report #P -11003 Page 6 of 7
36
REPORT SENT TO
Crescent Cross Limited Partnership, 5550 Blackwood Road, Bozeman MT 59718 -7665.
Madison Engineering, 895 Technology Blvd. Suite 203, Bozeman MT 59718
ATTACHMENTS
GPA Application & Map
Public Comment
Crescent Cross GPA Staff Report #P -11003 Page 7 of 7
37
� r
good
I 1 1 1 A NO Of Rib 0 2117
Gr owth Policy Ma
A •
1
ID '
895 Technology B lvd., Suite 20i3
Bozeman +
"0 586-026
a-]
MADISON
ENGINEERING
July 27, 2011
Mr. Tim McHarg
City of Bozeman Planning Director
20 East Olive
Bozeman, NIT 59715
RE: Cresent Cross Minor Subdivision — Growth Policy Map Amendment
J.O. 11-118
Dear Mr. McHarg:
On behalf of our client, Cresent Cross Limited Partnership,, we are submitting an application for
a Growth Policy Map Amendment for a 20 acre portion of Tract 2 of C.O.S. 2229, bordered to
the west by Cottonwood Road and the north by Huffine Lane located in Gallatin County. See
Vicinity Map.
The proposed 20 acres Map Amendment has a current County land use designation of
Agricultural Suburban (A-S). Future land use designation in the Bozeman Community Plan is
Residential. This application is proposing a Map Amendment for the subject property to
Community Commercial Mixed Use which would provide land use continuity with the
surrounding neighborhood. See Land Use Exhibit. The addition of this Mixed Use land area
would help integrate the subject property with the surrounding neighborhood, creating a
`suburban' type feel that promotes pedestrian use throughout the area while providing a higher
intensity employment and services environment necessary for a 'vibrant community.
In addition, further basis supporting this proposed Map Amendment is the existing controlled
intersection at Cottonwood Road and U.S. Highway 191/Huffine Lane. This intersection would
help mitigate, if any, increased traffic patterns associated with this proposed land use type.
Please find attached the following items:
• 20 copies of the Development Review Application, Checklist, Narrative and Exhibits.
* 2 copies of the Growth Policy Map Amendment Application on CD-ROM
* Certificate of Adjoining Properties and Adjacent Property Owner List
* Addresses and Stamped Envelopes
* Check for the Review Fee in the amount of $3,200.
* Application Fee - $2,500
* 20 acres @ $25/acre - $500.00
* Advertising - $200.00
G:\MA[)I SON FNG1N1 t\1 1-118 KOMItz Mill 01 SU b \C0lTespondence\Tim Md4irg G PA Lettei"07.201 I Am
39
Tim McHarg
June 27 2011
Project: Cresent Cross Minot r Sub GPA
Page 2 of 2
We thank you for your time and consideration in reviewing the enclosed application. If you have
any questions or need further information please feel free contact us at 586-0262.
Sincerely:
Chris G. Budeski, OE
Project Engineer
Cc: Dayle Kountz w/Attachments
file
895'Feclinology Blvd, Suite 203 Bozenian, MT 59718 (406) 586-0262 (406) 586-5740 Fax
us]
IN=
41
CITY OF BOZEMAN
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building phone 406-582-2260
20 East Olive Street fax 406-582-2263
P,O, Box 1230 planning@bozemon.net
Bozeman, Montana 59771-1230 www,bozeT
--------------- -- - ---- -------
1. Name of Project/ Development: Cresent Cross Minor Subdivision Growth Pohq rriendinent
2. Property Owner Information:
Namc Cresent ("ross Limited Partners-hip Adclress:.
Mailing Address: 5550 Blackwood Road, flowilan, MT 59718-7665
Mione: 406-580-1731 FAX:
3. Applicant Information:
Narne: Same as Property Owner F-i-nail Address:
Mailing Address:
Phone: I AT
4. Representative Information.
Name: Madison 1" Attn: Chris G. 13udcs]6, PF" l -mall ./.Nddress: chris@)inad-eng- coin
Mailing; Address: 895'1'ccl-inolog) 59718
Phone: 406 586-0262
FAK 406-586-5740
5. Legal Description: Section 1 5J 02S, 1i0 E", 'J.'ract 2 W2 COS 2229
..... .... . . .. .
6. Street .Address: SOLitliEfist("orticeof(,ottonwood Road atidtJSIIWY191/Iltiffiiicl,,
......... . ........
7. Project Description: (..Trowtl)l Map Ariieiidrnctitfr.()niRcsi(leritialtc)CoIllll-IUIlit)rCoI-yiiiict lMixei
Us c
8. Zoning Designation(s): No Current Zonin8 Current Land Use(s). Agricultural
H—Urrent L
10. Bozeman 2020 Cornnilanity Plait Designation: Rcsidenfial
11. Gross Area: Acres: 156 Square Feet: 6,795,387 112. Net Area: Acres: 20 Square Feet: 871,203
Page 1 Appropriate Review Fee Subi ❑
W,
13. Is the subject site within an urban renewal district?
❑ Yes, answer question 13a
F
-- - - - ---- ---- ------ --------
No, go to question 14
13a. Which urban renewal district? F] Downtown
❑ Northeast (NC RD)
❑
North 7 Avenue
14. Is the subject site within an overlay district?
❑
Yes, answer question 14a
❑
No, go to question 15
14a. Which Overlay District? ❑ casino
❑
Neighborhooe! Conservation
. . ........... . .
✓❑
L`Intq way Corridor
15, Will this application require a deviation(s)? I ❑ Yes, list UD section(s): F No
16. Application Type (please check all that apply):
F Sketch plan for RegLilatedActivities it) Regulved Wohirlds
❑ 13. Rcuse, Change in Use, further Development Prc-9/3/91 Site
F C. /'4ilik!lltitylcllt/Modific of Phill iApproved 0ii/A fits r 9/3/91
R 1). Reuse, Chan iii Use, Vurther Development, Amciidmeiit /C'0A
❑ E. SpecialTerilporaty Use Pertmit
El F. Sketch
[:] Cl. Sketch Plan/(.',0A with an Intensification of Use
E] 1-1. preliminary Site I)hin/C0A
E] 1. I)reliminary Site Mail
J. P.rclimitiary 'Master Site Plan
❑ K, Conditiorial Use Pert
❑ L. Coiiditional Use Permit /C OA
❑ M. Administrative Project Decision AppeRl
F N-Administrative Interpretation Appeal
❑ 0. Planned Uiiit Development Collcept Phill
El I'. Planned unit D-clopmelit -- f'relii-ni-lry Plan
E] Q Manned Unit Developrilent: - I"imil Man
] 1t. Planned Unit Developmeiit - Master Plan
❑ S. Subdivision Pre-1prilicatio-
[] 'I', SLII)(livision Preliminary Mat
❑ U. Silldivision Fil-11 Mat
❑ V. Subdivision Excluption
W Annexation
❑ X. Zoning Map Amendment
❑ Y. Unified Development Or(limmcc.Text Amendment
❑ z. zolling Varia lice
❑ i \A. Growth Policy Nlap Arneridtilent
❑ BB. Growth I)olicy'lext Amendment
[:] Other:
This application must be accompanicd by the appropriate checklist(s), number of plans or plats,adjoitier iiifort an(1 materials, and fee
(see Development Review Application ReqUirements and Fees), The plains or plats, must be drawn to scale oil paper riot sm than 86-
by 1 1-inches or larger than 24-- by 36 inches folded into individual sets no larger than 8/z- by 14- inches. The name of the project: must
be shoNvii on the cover sheet of the plans. If 3-riiig binders will be used, they must include ii table of coractits and tabbed dividers between
sections. Application deadlines are Wednesdays at 5:00 pirl. This application must he signed by both the applicants) and the property
owner(s) (if different) before the submittal will be accepted,
As indicated by the signature(s) below, the applicant(s) and property owner(s) submit this application For review Lill der the terills and
provisions of the l3ozeimin Municipal Co(le. It is fLirther indicated that �iny work wiclermkcli to complete a development ,ipprovc(l by the,
City of Bozeman shall be iii corifornimice. with the requirements of the Bozeman Mujiicipal Code and any spccisal conditions cstablisheci by
the approval authority. I acknowledge that the City has all Itnixict F'cc I)rografn acid' irnIxict fees n be assessed for my project. Furilier, I
ap representatives to the subject site during the course of (lie rcview process
,ree to grant; Clity personnel and offier review agency i s, ,i
(Section 18,64.050, M4C). I (We) kereby certify t11alt the above, information is true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge.
Applicant's Signature: Date:
Date: D
Applicant's Signature: F
Property Owner's Signature:
..........
Date:
Property Owner's Signature:
Date:
Page 2
(Development Review Applicatimi — Prepared 11/25/03; Amended 9/17/04,5/t/06; 9/18/07)
43
This checklist shall be corripleted and returned as part of the subt-nittal. .\it) item checked "No" or "N /E\" (tior applicable)
MUSt be explained in a narrative attached to the checklist. Incomplete submittals will be rettirticd to the applicant.
A. ArriendmentType. What type of arriendritent is being reilLICStCd? (check all that apply)
F Growth Policy Text Amendment
Fvl Growth policy Map Atriendiricrit
B, Girowth policy Amendment Criteria, Vor ('3rowth Policy 'next or Map Arriendments, written responses for each of
the following criteria shall be provided.
Are written responses for the following criteria provided?
Growth Policy Amendment Criteria
Yes
No
N/A
1, The proposed arnerich cures a deficieiicy in the growth policy or results it, au improved
11
El
grokvt h policy which better responds to the needs of the general c(=iriunity.
2. The proposed ameridi-new does nor create iricolisistcticies kvithin the growth policy, either
ID
❑
❑
hetweeri the goals and (lie inap or h e t weeri goa if inconsist mcics are idetifified then additional
changes must be provided to remove the i ricon s is tell cies,
3. The proposed arnendment must be consistent with the overall ititetit of the growth policy.
4. The proposed anieudl-nerlt: will not adversely affect the cotrununity as ,i whole or siguificalit
pollion by:
a. Signific"llifly altering acceptable existing and future land use P',ItteruS, as defined ill the
lextasid maps of this plan.
1). Requiring unmitigated larger and morc cxperisive improverrielits to streets, water, sewer,
Or other Public facilities or services and which, therefore, inay irripact development of
other lands.
a
El
D
C:. '\dverscly 'Unpactifig existing, use" bcCaUSC Of 1,1111-nitig'.1tCd grrcaier tlianatiricil)Ated impacts
on facilities and services.
d. Negatively affectiiig the livabihiA o f the area of the health and safety o,f the residents.
. . . . .
In/
. .
n
. .................. . .
F1
Page 3
(Growth Po,licy Text or Map Atneoidnient Checklist — Prepared 12/08/03; revised an 9/20/04)
me
M /
45
Cresent Cross Limited Partnership
Growth Policy Map Amendment Application Narrative
A. Amendment.Tyl2c: Growth Policy Map Amendment
B. Growth Policy Amendment Criteria:
I The proposed amendment cures a deficiency in the growth policy or results in all
improved growth policy which better responds to the needs of the general
community.
The proposed Growth 1 Amendment will result in an improved growth
policy which better responds to the needs of the general community by allowing
the opportunity for Cresent Cross Limited Partnership to change its future land
use of Residential to Community Commercial Mixed Use which would provide
land use continuity with the surrounding neighborhood. See Exhibit 2. The
addition of this Mixed Use land area would help integrate the subject property
with the surrounding neighborhood with similar uses, creating a 'Suburban'
type feel that promotes pedestrian use throughout the area while providing a
higher intensity employment and services environment necessary for a 'vibrant
community'.
In addition, further basis supporting this proposed Map Amendment is the
existing controlled intersection at Cottonwood Road and U.S. Highway
19111Iuffine Lane. This intersection would help mitigate, if any, increased traffic
patterns associated with this proposed land use type.
2. The proposed amendment does not create inconsistencies within the growth policy,
either between the goals and the map or between goals; if inconsistencies are
identified then additional changes must be provided to remove the inconsistencies.
The proposed Map Amendment does not create inconsistencies within the
growth policy between the goals and the map. The proposed amendment allows
for the integration of the subject property with the surrounding neighborhoods
providing continuity in land use designation.
3. The proposed amendment must be consistent with the overall intent of the growth
policy,
Cresent Cross Limited Partnership
Growth Policy Map Amendment Application Narrative
Page I of 3
0.
The proposed Map Amendment is consistent with the intent of the growth policy
by integrating the subject property with the surrounding neighborhoods,
providing continuity within the area.
4. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the community as a whole or
significant portion by:
a. Significantly altering acceptable existing and future land use patterns, as defined
in the text and maps of this plan.
The proposed Map Amendment will not adversely affect the community as a
whole or significant portion by altering acceptable existing and future land
use patterns but instead create continuity within the existing neighborhood.
The change in use from Residential to Community Commercial Mixed Use
will help to fulfill the needs of the greater Bozeman area and the adjacent
residential and business areas. The proposed Land Use change will also
create a buffer between the residential area to the south and the high traffic
volume Huffine Lane.
b, Requiring unmitigated larger and more expensive improvements to streets, water,
sewer, or other public facilities or services and which, therefore, may impact
development of' other lands.
The proposed Map Amendment will not adversely affect the community as a
whole or significant portion by requiring unmitigated larger and more
expensive improvements to streets, water, sewer, or other public facilities or
services. The services will be designed according to the principal arterial
standards and existing sewer and water is available along the property
frontage in Huffinc Lane.
c. Adversely impacting existing uses because of unmitigated greater than anticipated
impacts on facilities and services.
The proposed Map Amendment will not adversely affect the community as a
whole or significant portion by adversely impacting existing uses because of
unmitigated greater than anticipated impacts on facilities and services. The
existing sewer and water mains have been sized to accommodate this
property.
Cresent Cross Limited Partnership
Growth Policy Map Mmidnient Applicatim Narrative
Page 2 of 3
47
d. Negatively affecting the livability of the area of the health and safety of the
residents.
The proposed Map Amendment will not adversely affect the community as a
whole or significant portion because the proposed land use change would
provide continuity with the surrounding properties by allowing a pedestrian
friendly 'suburban' type environment, which is being sought after by the
City and residents in the immediate area, and as outlined in the Community
Development Plan. In addition, an existing controlled intersection at
Cottonwood Road and U.S. Hwy 191/Huffine, Lane will aid in mitigating any
increased traffic patterns and also offers the means for safe pedestrian
crossing between the north and south neighborhoods.
Cresent Crow Limited Parfliership
Growth Policy Mal) Ainmdment Applicatioii Narrative
Page 3 cat` 3
ff.]
M e ]
On December 10, 2007 the Bozeman City Commission adopted the Neighborhood Recognition Ordinance as part of the
Bozeman Municipal Code. This new ordinance contains the following requirement.
Section 2,82.020, Responsibilities of Individuals or Entities Submitting an Application to the Department of Planning and
Community Development.
A. In order for the City Liaison to effectively perform their duties esecuting the intent and purpose of this chapter, as defined in
2.92,020, the following shall he performed:
1. As part of any application to the 17cpatlmcnt of planning and Community Development, the applic:mt shall provide written
notice via certified inail, e-mail, facsiinile transmission, and/or personal delivery to the City Liaison if notification goidelille's
(Bi'VIC 18.70) require that notice be posted "on-site", published in the local newspaper or mailed first class.
2. Such notice shall contain a complete set of apph�cation materials as submitted to the Department of planning and
Community Development.
13. Failure to provide proof of such mailing via certified mail, c-mail and/or facsitnile transmission report to the most recent. City
Liaison address, e-rnail address and/or fax number of record, or an affidavit attesting hand delivery, shall result in an incomplete
application.
1, - C hris G, PE , hereby certify that I have delivered via certified mail, c-
inail, facsimile transnli,"ion or hand delivery written notice and a complete set of application materials for the project known
a I - nt - ipliarice with Section 2.82.02 of the
s Cresent Cross Growth Policy Map Amendm, in con
Bozeman Municipal Code. I further understand that failure to comply will result in this application being deerned incomplete
and may result in a delay in the 17C this project,
Signature Date
(Neighborhood Recognition Ordiriance Compliance Certificate - Prepared 1/7/08)
On December 10, 2007 the Bozeman City Commission adopted the Neighborhood Recognition Ordinance as part of the
Bozeman Municipal Code. This new ordinance contains the following requirement:
Section 2.82.020, Responsibilities of Individuals or Entities Submitting an Application to the Department of Planning and
Community Deyelopi
A. In order for the City Liaison to effectively perform their duties executing tile intent and purpose of this chapter, as defined in
2.82.020, the following shall be performed:
1. As part of any .application to the Department of planning and Community DeVelopi-TICIIL, tile applicant shall provide written
notice via certified mail, c -ri-lail, fiacsjniilc transt'nission, And/or personal delivery to the Cit 5 liaison if notific"16on guidefilles
(KNIC 18.76) require that notice be posted "oil site published in the local newspaper or nillilcd first class.
2. Such notice shall contain a cornplete set of application materiatS as SUI)mitted to the Deparmlem of Planning and
Community Development.
B. Pailurc to provide proof of such rnatling via certified mail, c-mail and/or facsin-rile transmission report to the most recent City
Liaison address, e-rnail address and/or fax number of record, or an affidavit attesting hand delivery, shall result in an incomplete
application.
1, Chris G. Budeski , hereby certif Y that I have delivered via certified mail, e-
mail, facsimile transmis.,ion or hand deliver) written notice arld a complete set of application materials for tile. project known
Its Cresent Cross Growth Po Map Amendm ent in Compliance with Section 2,82.02 of the
13ozen-tan Municipal Code, I further understand that failure to comply will result in this application being deemed incomplete
and trilly result: in a delay in. t " lie, I o this project.
Sigl-11tUre Date
(Neighborbood Recognition Ordinance Compliance Certificate - Prepared 1/7/08)
50
Sao-joiners
51
CERTIFICATE OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS LIST
1, Chris G. BudeskiPE , hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the attached name
and address list of all adjoining property owners within 20O feet ofthe property located at
Tract 2 COS 2229, is true and accurate list from the declared Gallatin County tax records. I
,further understand that an inaccurate list may delay review of the project.
Signature
D 4a 1
52
• •
Patrick & Gail M. Pierzina
4302 Stucky Load
Bozeman, MT 59718 -6946
Va
1550 Blackwood '" a
Bozeman, " ••
Bozeman High School
District No. 7
P.O. Box 520
Bozeman, MT 59771 -0520
Wilber : Marjorie e
3980 Stucky Road
w •
Ken Shepherd'
3508 Laramie Drive, Suite 1
Bozeman, MT 59718
Richard Frank & Kristie Kountz
8606 Huffine Lane
Bozeman, MT 59718 -9012
Robert F. (Hager
13440 Skunk Creek Road
Bozeman, MT 59715
Cheri A. Larsen
6111 West. Shadow Derive
Bozeman, MT 59
Dianne M. Ducello
3270 Hart Lane
Helena, MT 59602
Kenneth C. & Priscilla Walcheck
5551 Cottonwood Road'
Bozeman, MT 59718 -9048
WINTREW y •
Bozeman, 5591 Cottonwood Road
w •0 .;
Jeffery William & Sarah Day Ho
5611 Cottonwood Road
Bozeman„ MT 59718 -9049
Michael Nelson
5631 Cottonwood Road
Bozeman, MT 59718 -9049
Larry D. Jr & Stacy L Dufee
5655 Cottonwood Road
Bozeman, MT 59718- 9049
Randall Wesley & Diane Marie Todd
5695 Staffanson Road
Bozeman, MT 59718
J'acquie Tressler &
Michael Bud'de
3981 Stucky Road
Bozeman, MT 59718 -6907
Ruth A. Taylor
1,887 Cottonwood Road
: IVIT 59718
Kathy Ellen rww.
1 Cottonwood "wow
Zo MT 5971
Anthony P Tye. & Barbara Ann Clarke
P.O. Box 6184
Bozeman, MT 59771 -6184
Fay C. Peck Trust
5801 Cottonwood Road.
Bozeman, MT 59718 -9050
53
Mark & Addie Calbick Barbara Bscher
5769 Cottonwood Road 5495 Cottonwood Road
Bozeman, MT 59715 Bozeman, MT 59718
P.O. Amy E. Knowles
Box •r1.w
Redding, CA 96099-0861
Betty Madilll
403 Slough ^• Drive
Bozeman, * : OM1
Covenant Investments Inc
642 Cottonwood Road, Suite 3
Bozeman, MT 59718 -9203
Haggerty Kevin
5100 Patterson 'o.+
Bozeman,
Montana Department of Transportation
27431 Prospect Avenue / P.O. Box 20143431
Helena, MT 596243- 104311
SpringCreek Village, LLC
1431 Bast Main Street, Suite D
Bozeman, MT 59715 -4796
First Security Bank
Box s
Bozeman,
STP, LLC
1432 Village Downtown Blvd
Bozeman, MT 59715 -3815
Billion Family Limited
Partnership
#1 Auto Plaza Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
54
Exhibits
61ul
Durston Rd.
ai
Beaverhead
Toole St.
L
°
Cascade St.
O
>
Broadwater
p St.
abcoc
- o
�
a
o
�
lis
>
C
1V W
N
V)
R i°
avalli
0
°
v
o
°
0
o °
j
Competition Dr.
FALLON ST.
w
�`
C�o;�
°
Q 3
o
a°
o
ive
�tredo
Drive
v
N
a
E
a'
o
°
ry
0
r
Fallon St.
Ginella
Way Laramie Dr.
V)
w
of
Valley Commons Dr.
Ll
0
O
3
LOYAL GARDENS
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION > LL��
Q
°
TRAILER COURT
O LL
:Z�
SUBJECT PROPERTY
LOYAL
DR
0
z
0
V)
z
V)
Stucky Rd.
CRESENT CROSS 1LI PARTNERS
N
MADISON ISON ENGINEERING ENGINEERING
EXHIBIT 1
DRAWN BY: RFC
MA
�7RO Y1l1A POLIC]I P AMEN1J
10
E V T
895 TECHNOLOGY BLVD., SUITE 203
DATE: 7/27/11
VICINITY MAP
56 PHONE (406) 586 -0262 FAN (406) 586 -5740
PROJECT P 11 -118
STUCKY ROAD jGALLATIN COUNTY)
im ow
OF PI
CRESENT CROSS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP MADISON ENGINEE E XHIBIT 2
GROWTH POLICY MAP AMENDMENT 89 1 'l ECfiPJ0L0C,)l ELVU ;Ul I E 2103 DRAWN BY: RFC
DATE: 7/27/1 1
BOZE MAN, MIT rAX�43E)5S&5740
PROJECT# 11-118
Cl I Y Zo - IG
.IL E)OSTING NOW US H)VY 191 / HI FFINE LANE
E)STINO
PROPOSED GRIDIVI'll POLICY MAP
AMENDMENT TO COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL MIXED USE
IS C LE
20.0 ACRES
are 41)) a00
1 ilAch = 400
OF PAVEMENT
'fffjf)l)
Exro Doi
WITTER
IRRIGATION
PROPERTY
ol LINE
fell
*('00�ffjmwl
TRACT
2 OS 2229
'0�11�1(; A�
N
ZONING IS
k r
EXTO 30' HIDE
A CCESS EASEMENT
TRACT 1, COS 2229
I FIELD 701 AS
DDAL
DITCHES
LOCAL.
FIELD
DITCWS
D
I EDDE
OF PAVEMENT
NN
STUCKY ROAD jGALLATIN COUNTY)
im ow
OF PI
CRESENT CROSS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP MADISON ENGINEE E XHIBIT 2
GROWTH POLICY MAP AMENDMENT 89 1 'l ECfiPJ0L0C,)l ELVU ;Ul I E 2103 DRAWN BY: RFC
DATE: 7/27/1 1
BOZE MAN, MIT rAX�43E)5S&5740
PROJECT# 11-118
✓ /�, /� �� �e;'� / / / /"�'� , / / �� , IV�� " �W?'' 'IV- �IWNU• ISWU�PJ� f
J E f� µ2Imm CITY LIMITS
ANI I"
j I I
R (
p g � y�
Iw,unw h �aK , yry IN1'4& 4Y ," A
�% "V �« ✓ww,y S'a .. asarw.wwa r " o
CZ
/
fOft m f
CORNNIIN S1 Pill ➢
T. 1111 MID
2a E ull wl r E ��M �, 6' w" llw 11
SPARKS, wrw � �a� �Ywa�l
OPEN SPACE
p RECREATIONAL
RESIDENTIAL LANDS �)�III w �, w" C�
rA F'IBS S � � � � !
°�
C,I
in 00
w v�� w ° °• ,m
�,, ". � urwl eA' n I m
P•
� W4 ray
Aff w ' w
J ,.ti wH famrem n r �"
vrov
p �
V6 dm'i �� p'N� L l SA 1..)E D R Grp VI `.
A r J 1k T
" V u
Xf
2 0
RESIDENTIAL
u COMMUNI
�wr COMMERC L�w���°
COMMUN
« rw
MIXED US
BUSINESS COMMERCI
PARK MIXED MIXED USE „
CITY LIMITS
USE
n� mmlm� �allimni�wm�o(` rtmu�uouuuvulo��i °,Iw�wuwlwwro8 "" � �°'"�� "�" �:
�, , r �,� "" I"liumil8l` �ulNluumlliuwuwWmlooloo�lol�wmuw >�111ioiivlm louon� "ouu �
RESIDENTIAL,
PUBLIC INSTITUTION A6
III
POLICY MAP AMENDMENT
RESIDENTIAL
!% �'/ %' /"' %! RESIDENTIAL
COUNTY
( COUNTY )
RESIDENTIAL
CT . w a
�I «� «,,, ...« �NVM °° ".� „vvm„« ,....
( W,o-w,w "" '.
INSTITU TION
r�t'41f1 <,c s� ) �» 9( iN6J i°,'!. .Ja %rN)IDJ�J''G�(x��Gd�1s411�r� rfi�rkl�aCi;Gl�ni!at«
CRESENT CROSS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP MADISON ENGINEERING EXHIBIT 3
C7RO'vYTHI POLICY MAP AMENDMENT DRAWN BY: RFC
895 TECHNOLOGY BLVD., SUITE 203 DATE: 7/27/11
ADJACENT LAND USE MAP 58 PHONE ( 406) 586-0262 FAN ( 406) 586-5740 PROJECT P 11 -118
5591 Cottonwood Rd
Bozeman MT 59718
September 17, 2001
City of Bozeman
Department of Planning and Community Devel
PO Box 1230
Bozeman MT 59771-1230
SEP 2011
-
CE � P - 1 ,
AND com
rt
. _WPMEIVT'
Re: Notice of Public Hearings for a growth policy Amendment for Figure 3-1 of
Bozeman Community Plan
I bought 5591 Cottonwood Rd August 9, 2007 and have lived there for the last 4
years. I would like to object to the reclassification from Residential to Community
Commercial Mixed Use Proposed by Crescent Cross Ltd Partnership.
I object to reclassification of the land that is opposite to the Loyal residential
development or to other family dwellings in South Cottonwood Rd as this will
definitely alter the residential/agricultural nature of this road and devalue
residential properties causing hardship to existing owners. On the other hand there
is a precedent for commercial buildings on Huffine Lane and I can find no logical
reason for objecting to a change in the plan to include adjacent land to the East of
the proposed section of the plan on Huffine Lane to compensate for limiting the
South most part of the proposed new plan to just North of the first Road into the
Loyal development.
Yours sincerely
E. Jean Cornish
59
CITY OF •
COMMUNITY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND • 11 ,
Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building phone 406 - 582 -2260
20 East Olive Street fax 406 -582 -2263
P.O. Box 1230 planning @bozeman.net
Bozeman, Montana 59771 -1230 www.bozeman.net
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
FOR A GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT
An application has been submitted for an amendment to Figure 3 -1 of the Bozeman Community
Plan that would change the future land the classification from esidential to Community
Commercial Mixed Use upon property located at the South East corner of the intersection of
.Huffme Lane and S. Cottonwood Road.
The amendment to the City of Bozeman future land use map, is proposed by the property owner and
applicant, Crescent Cross Limited Partnership, 5550 Blackwood Road, Bozeman MT 59718 -7665
and representative Madison Engineering, 895 Technology Blvd., Suite 203, Bozeman, MT 59718.
The proposal would affect —20 acres of land. The property is legally described as: A portion of Tract 2,
Certificate of Survey 2229 located in the W 1/2 of Section 15, T2S, R5E, PMM, Gallatin County,
Montana.
PUBLIC HEAR „I „NG
PLANNING BOARD
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
7:00 p.m.
Commission Meeting Room
Bozeman City Hall
121 N. Rouse Avenue
Bozeman, Montana
PUBLIC HEARIN
BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION
Monday, October 10, 2011
6:00 p.m.
Commission Meeting Room
Bozeman City Hall
121 N. Rouse Avenue
Bozeman, Montana
The City invites the public to comment in writing and to attend the public hearings. Written
comments may be directed to the City of Bozeman, Department of Planning and Community
Development, P. O. Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771 -1230. The application materials may be reviewed
in the City of Bozeman Department of Planning and Community Development, Alfred M. Stiff
Professional Building, 20 East Olive Street, 582 -2260. For those who require accommodations for
disabilities, please contact James Goehrung, City of Bozeman ADA Coordinator, 582 -3200 (voice), 582-
3203 (TDD). #P11003 Crescent Cross GPA
MAP ON BACK
community zoning subdivision annexation historic neighborhood urban GIS
planning review 61 preservation planning design