The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutI6 MtBaldyZMA.CCPacket082806 W Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Andrew Epple, Planning Director Chris Kukulski, City Manager SUBJECT: Mt. Baldy Lots 21&22 ZMA, #Z-06178 MEETING DATE: Monday, August 28, 2006 BACKGROUND: Two property owners, Don Jackson and Catherine Ebelke, have requested annexation for two tracts totaling 0.74 acres. The property is located at 1521. Bridger Drive. The adjacent rights-of-way has previously been annexed. The property is adjacent to the City of Bozeman and the necessary application and materials have been provided. The Zoning Commission considered this zone map amendment and recommended unanimously in favor of approval. Public comment was received and is attached with the minutes of the Zoning Commission. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None RECOMMENDATION: The City Commission approve the ZMA and direct preparation of an. implementing ordinance. FISCAL EFFECTS: Fiscal impacts from the zone map amendment are minimal. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. CONTACT: Please contact Chris Saunders at esaundersLa)bozeman.net or 582-2260 if you have questions on this item. Respegifidly submitted, ., J � �r F Andrew Epple, Planning l r for Chris Kukulski, City Manager Attachments: Staff Report Zoning Commission minutes and Resolution Application Materials Report compiled on August 16, 2006 STAFF REPORT MT BALDY LOTS 21&22 ANNEXATION ZMA FILE NO. #Z-06178 Item: Zone Map Amendment Application #Z-06178. A request for initial zoning of R-1 on approximately 0.74 acres of property located at 1521 Bridger Drive. Owners/Applicants: Don Jackson& Catherine Ebelke, 1280 Story Mill Road, Bozeman MT 59715 Date: Bozeman Zoning Commission, on Tuesday, August 15, 2006, in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 W. Main Street, and Bozeman City Commission on Monday, August 28, 2006, 6 pm., in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West Main Street. Report By: Chris Saunders,Assistant Director Recommendation: Conditional Approval PROJECT LOCATION The subject property is legally described as lots 21&22 of the Mount Baldy Subdivision. Total area is 0.74 acres. The property is currently in the Gallatin County/ Bozeman Area Zoning District. Please refer to the following vicinity map. ... ......... R-3 R-1 SubjeO Property id e �ny n-R,-d V I/ X #Z-061 78 Mt Baldy Lots 21&22 Annexation ZMA Staff Report 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Based upon the Development Review Committee's consideration, and after evaluation of the proposed zoning, staff finds that the designation of "R 1" is appropriate for the subject property and meet the state law requirements for zone map amendments as set forth in Section 76-2-304 Montana Codes Annotated with the following contingencies: CONTINGENCIES FOR ZONE MAP AMENDMENT 1. That the Ordinance of the Zone Map Amendment shall not be adopted until the Resolution of Annexation is signed by the applicant and formally approved by the City Commission. If the annexation is not approved,the application shall be null and void. 2. That the applicant submit a zone amendment map, titled "Mt Baldy Lots 21&22 Zone Map Amendment", on a 24" by 36" moar, 8 1/z" by 11", or 8 1/z" by 14" paper exhibit, and a digital copy of the area to be zoned, acceptable to the Director of Public Service, which will be utilized in the preparation of the Ordinance to officially amend the City of Bozeman Zoning Map. Said map shall contain a metes and bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property and zoning districts, total acreage of the property and any unannexed adjoining rights-of-way and/or street access easements. 3. That the Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant provides a metes and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed Montana surveyor and map of the area to be rezoned, which will be utilized in the preparation of the Ordinance to officially amend the zone map. IN THE CASE OF PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF EITHER OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED CHANGE; OR THOSE LOTS 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A PROPOSED CHANGE, SUCH AMENDMENT MAY NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT UPON A FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. PROPOSAL The proposed Zone Map Amendment is being reviewed concurrently with the Annexation application. This application will go before the City Commission for a public hearing on Monday,August 28, 2006. The applicant's submittal is attached as Exhibit A. The applicant is requesting an extension of the Bozeman City limits to include the previously described parcels of land that is currently used as a single-household residence. The applicant has submitted the zone map amendment application to be reviewed concurrently with the annexation. The zone map amendment seeks to establish an initial City of Bozeman Zone Map designation of "R-1" (Residential Single Household Low Density District) on approximately 0.74 acres, contingent upon annexation. The intent of the districts is to provide for low density residential and residentially supportive uses. #Z-06178 Mt Baldy Lots 21&22 Annexation ZMA Staff Report 2 The RS, Residential Suburban district has a minimum lot size requirement of 1 acre per dwelling. The R 1, Residential Single-Household Low Density district, has a minimum lot area per dwelling of 5,000 square feet. Application of the Residential Suburban district designation would cause the lots to be a lawful non- conforming use in the district. Based on the findings and conclusions presented herein, Staff recommends approval of the requested zoning district. ADJACENT LAND USES &ZONING The subject property is currently zoned Residential Suburban in the Gallatin County/ Bozeman Area Zoning District. Residential Suburban is typified by detached single-household residences on individual lots. North: Gallatin County/ Bozeman Area Zoning District, Agricultural Suburban, open space and agriculture, East Gallatin River. Approved for annexation to the City of Bozeman and development as single household residences. South: City of Bozeman, Residential Suburban district, single household residential. East: Gallatin County/ Bozeman Area Zoning District, Residential Suburban, single household residences West: Gallatin County/ Bozeman Area Zoning District, Residential Suburban, single household residences REVIEW CRITERIA Planning staff has evaluated the proposed amendment with respect to the required criteria set forth in Section 76-2-304,MCA. A summary of staff's evaluation follows in the discussion below. The application's response to the twelve criteria is provided in attached Exhibit A. 1. Is the new zoning designed in accordance with the growth policy? Yes. The R 1, Residential Single-household Low Density District, is a zoning district which implements the Suburban Residential land use designation. The property being considered for rezoning is planned for residential uses. The current development on the proposed annexation site complies with the description of the Suburban Residential planning designation. "Suburban Residential. This category indicates locations generally outside of City limits but within the Planning Area where the land development pattern has already been set by rural subdivisions. Subdivisions in this area are generally characterized by lots two acres in size or less. It is probable that portions of this area may be proposed for annexation within the next twenty years. Any further development within this area should be clustered to preserve functional open space and allow for more advanced sewage disposal than individual septic tanks. If development is proposed at overall densities in excess of one dwelling per acre, and/or the development proposal lies within the waste water and water treatment planning boundaries, annexation to the City should be completed prior to development." Goal 6.6.1, Objective 1. The landuse map and attendant policies shall be the official guide for the development of the City and shall be implemented through zoning regulations, capital improvements, subdivision regulations, coordination with other governmental entities, and other implementation strategies. #Z-06178 Mt Baldy Lots 21&22 Annexation ZMA Staff Report 3 2. Is the new zoning designed to lessen congestion in the streets? Neutral. The property has been utilized for residential uses for many years. The annexation will not result in additional demand for transportation or changes in use. The long range transportation plans for the City and surrounding area anticipate this area developing and describe needed expansions of the street system to accommodate the additional traffic. The change in zoning is therefore expected to be neutral in effect. Any future redevelopment will be held to the standards of the Cites land use regulations and will be required to mitigate identified impacts. 3. Will the new zoning promote health and general welfare? Yes. The standards of development, and accompanying development review processes established through the City's Title 18, Unified Development Ordinance,BMC,will adequately address the issues of health and general welfare. 4. Will the new zoning secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers? Yes. With annexation, city water services and fire protection will be available which will ensure sufficient fire fighting capacity. The professional firefighting services of the City will be able to provide a faster response to emergency needs than the current volunteer coverage by whom the property is now serviced. 5. Will the new zoning provide adequate light and air? Yes. Building setbacks have been established to allow for adequate light and air. The City's zoning standards have been found to provide for adequate light and air, especially in conjunction with the construction standards of the International Building Code. The use of the property for residential dwellings is not intended to change after entrance in to the City. The proposed zoning simply memorializes the existing uses. 6. Will the new zoning prevent overcrowding of land? Yes. The City Commission has determined that the standards of the R 1 district and development requirements are sufficient to prevent overcrowding. 7. Will the new zoning avoid the undue concentration of population? Yes. The R 1 district is subject to the development standards of Title 18, Unified Development Ordinance, Bozeman Municipal Code, such as minimum parking, landscaping, and height of building limitations. Density is controlled through minimum area per dwelling requirements, lot coverage, building height, parking requirements, and other standards that act as a check on density of development. Municipal water and sewer services will become available which will reduce impacts of population. S. Will the new zoning facilitate the adequate provisions of transportation, water, sewer, schools, parks, fire,police, and other public requirements? #Z-06178 Mt Baldy Lots 21&22 Annexation ZMA Staff Report 4 Neutral. Services currently exist or can be provided as needed to the area being annexed and rezoned. Taxes and fees will be paid according to the standards established by ordinance for all users within the City. Currently water and sewer mains are being developed adjacent to the property and will be available for connection after annexation. 9. Does the new zoning give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? Yes. The proposed zoning gives reasonable consideration to the character of the district by matching the existing uses already on the property. Changes in use are not anticipated. Any development within the R-1 district must provide setbacks from property lines and comply with all other standards. Setback requirements within the R 1 district are less than those within the RS district. 10. Does the new zoning give reasonable consideration to the peculiar suitability of the district for particular uses? Yes. The physical location is surrounded by other properties currently developed for residential uses or under development for residential uses. The surrounding existing and proposed uses are also primarily detached single household dwellings. 11. Was the new zoning adopted with a view of conserving the value of buildings? Yes. The proposed districts are compatible with other adjacent zoning designations and uses expected within those zoning designations. Availability of municipal water and sewer will reduce likelihood of septic failure and possible negative impacts to adjacent owners which would reduce value of existing development. 12. Does the new zoning encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality? Yes. The proposed zoning reflects the existing long term-uses of the property. The growth policy is the means by which land use patterns are evaluated and locations for appropriate uses assigned in a broad fashion. As discussed in several other criteria in this report, the proposed zoning is in compliance with the adopted growth policy and the adopted land use development pattern contained within it. Such restrictions as do exist will be adequately addressed through the development standards of the UDO. Therefore,this proposed zoning does encourage the most appropriate use of land in the municipality. PUBLIC COMMENT No written public comment has been received as of this writing. Any written comment will be forwarded at the hearing. Conclusion Pursuant to Section 76-2-304 Montana Codes Annotated, the Zoning Commission shall review the Zone Map amendment application to determine if the proposed zoning change meets the requirements of the Adopted Growth Policy, state statute, and other adopted state and local ordinances. The Zoning Commission shall act to recommend approval or denial of the Zone Map Amendment application. The recommendation of the Bozeman Zoning Commission will be forwarded to the Bozeman City Commission #Z-06178 Mt Baldy Lots 21&22 Annexation ZMA Staff Report 5 for consideration at its public hearing on August 28S`, 2006. The City Commission will make the final decision on the application. Attachments: Applicant's Submittal ZMA Application Report Sent To: Don Jackson &Catherine Ebelke, 1280 Story Mill Road,Bozeman,MT 59715 C&H Engineering 1091 Stoneridge Drive,Bozeman MT 59718 #Z-06178 Mt Baldy Lots 21&22 Annexation ZMA Staff Report 6 Ou"' RAFT MINUTES THE CITY OF BOZEMAN ZONING COMMISSION COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 311 W. MAIN ST. AUGUST 15, 2006 7:00 P.M. 0:05:56 [18:55:381 ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE President and Chairperson JP Poinnichowski called the meeting to order at 7:02PM. Board Members Present: Staff Present: JP Pommchowski, President & Chair Andrew Epple, Director of Planning Peter Harried and Community Development Nathan Minnick Dave Skelton, Senior Planner Nicholas Lieb Kimberly Kenney- Lyden, Recording Warren Vaughan Secretary Visitors Present: Don Jackson, Applicant Marilyn Collins Margaret Cone Les Jones Bill Dobic 0:06:20 [1,9:01:46] ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (0-15 MINUTES) Seeing none, Chair Pomnichowski closed the public comment portion of the meeting. 0:06:55 [19:01:551 ITEM 3. MINUTES OF AUGUST 1ST, 2006 No changes or additions to the minutes from August 1, 2006. Minutes will stand as distributed. 0:07:10 [19:02:17] ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW 0:07:11 [19:02:311 Zone Map Amendment Application, #Z-06178 -- (Mt. Baldy). A Zone Map Amendment requested by the owner and applicant , Don Jackson and Catherine Eb elke, represented by C & H Engineering, to establish a Residential zoning designation of R-I (Residential Single-Household, Low Density District), to .74 1 acres. The Legal Description of this property is Lot 21 and 22 of Mt. Baldy Subdivision located in a portion of the SW 1/4 SE 1/4 and S % SW 1/4 of Section 32, Township 1 South Range 6 East, PMM, Gallatin County, Montana. (Saunders) 0:07:17 [19:02:55] Staff Presentation Senior Planner Dave Skelton presented the application on behalf of Assitant Planning Director Chris Saunders. Planner Skelton noted this project is running concurrently with an annexation application. He stated on August 28th, this will go before the City Commission. Mr. Skelton noted the City Planning department recommends approval of R-1 zoning in compliance with 2020 plan. He stated that if the annexation and ZMA is approved by the City Commission, there will be a PUD application to follow. Mr. Skelton closed his presentation by stating the planning staff recommends approval of this proposal once the resolution of annexation is approved by the City Commission. 0:11:06 [19:03:06] Discussion Zoning Commissioner Warren Vaughan queried planner Skelton on whether or not these lots are connected to City Services or if they are still on septic systems. Mr. Skelton responded by stating these lots are on private subsurface septic system. Commissioner Nicholas Lieb asked Mr. Skelton if all other lots in this subdivision are currently zoned RS, to which Mr. Skelton noted they all were zoned RS many years ago. Commissioner Vaughan asked Mr. Skelton what the zoning of Legends at Bridger Creek and Mr. Skelton answered R1. 0:13:12 [19:03:081 Applicant Presentation Don Jackson, 1280 Story Mill Road. Mr. Jackson noted these 94 lots were created in 1959 and all are on individual wells and septic tanks. He stated that when these subdivisions were developed, the surrounding areas were not happy with the development as is the case now with the Legends development just north of Mt. Baldy&Ed Vogel subdivisions. City services, water and sewer, are being added just north of his property and are in the process of being installed. He stated the lots in Legends will be R-1. Mr. Jackson has been seeking R-1 zoning in light of an infrll project, a minor subdivision, and has held meetings involving the neighbors of Mt. Baldy subdivision. 0:17:50 119:03:161 Public Comment Marilyn Collins at 1509 Bridger Drive: Mr. Jackson bought the property just east of her, in view of her patio window and plans on building two additional houses on that property. Ms. Collins opposes this idea of an application for a future subdivison of Mr. Jackson's lot. She asked that the Zoning Commission reject this application. 2 0:20:16 [19:14:081 Public Comment Les Jones at 2103 Bridger Drive: Ms. Jones noted that annexation is inevitable. She stated the incentive will be the septic issue. Ms. Jones was not sure what the impact of changing a zone from R-S to R-1 will have on her community. 0:21:50 [19:21:52] Public Comment Margaret Cone at 1413 Bridger Drive. She noted that the ability to build and develop does not mean we always should. Ms. Cone stated the traffic density is worse with all the new development in her area and people going 60 miles an hour or more down Bridger Drive. She requested that the Commission please reconsider this application and slow down. 0:24:19 11.9:24:141 Public Comment Bill Dobie at 1603 Bridger:Drive: Mr. Dobie noted to commissioners that if Mr. Jackson built two more homes in his backyard, there would be nothing to stop himself from building a two or three new homes on his property. Mr. Dobie stated he's been living there for 20 years and is not in favor of his neighbor adding two more homes in his backyard. 0:25:26 [19:29:191 Staff Response Planner Skelton noted that overall, Mr. Jackson's lots are compatible with surrounding land use patterns. He also stated that the entire subdivision issue will be addressed when a PUD application is submitted by the property owner. He further explained the PUD process and addressed the related issues. Commissioner Vaughan noted this type of zoning may add to the traffic in the area that is a current problem and Mr. Skelton stated there will be an added signal in addition to further improvements in this area. He also noted improvements to the Story Mill Road addition off of Bridger Drive in combination with Legends will set a tone for the future plans in the area and provide for other means of access. 0:34:12 119:07:12] Motion and Vote Chair Pomnichowski noted to all attendees that the project to be considered is not a subdivision application, it is for a zoning application of lots 21 and 22 in the Mt. Baldy Subdivision. She noted the criteria for zoning this property is appropropriate for R-1 because the existing property does not meet with the R-S standards. Commissioner Nathan Minnick seconded the motion to approve the:R-1 zoning designation. Commissioner Vaughan noted these lots would benefit from annexation and agreed with Commissioner Minnick. Mr. Vaughan supports the R-1 zoning in that it is in compliance with the future land use in this area. Commissioner Peter Harped also agreed and moves 3 to approve the application. The motion was seconded by .The motion to recommend approval of application#Z-06178 passed, 5 to 0. 0:40:52 [19:08:261 ITEM 5. NEW BUSINESS Seeing none, Chair Pomnichowski closed this portion of the meeting. 0:41:16 [19:08:56] ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 7:41PM. JP Pomnichowski, President & Chair Andrew C. Epple, Director City of Bozeman Zoning Commission Planning & Community Development 4 "ITY OF BOZEMAN ' a -EPARTMENT OF PLANNING AN- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building phone 406-582-2260 �r 20 East Olive Street fax 406-582-2263 "r P.O. Box 1230 m et Bozeman, Montano 59771 -1230 [ w `�� m' et DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION UL 0 3 20 DEF'AR 1. Name of Project/Development: !(°} OF PLANNING ''13 A I-P TWZ o T5 a I 01 AND COMMUN4TY DE -1OPMENT iD 2. Property Owner Information: Name: ->,a JAcpcSo,V 1� C q { �neviv e �� Ike E-mail Address: kQV-0tnwiwy5 (� AASgs.Gor— Nlailing Address: t,;z o o .51-ov Phone: 5-,g 3 - 41t�l FAX: 3.Applicant Information: Name: -Do") E-mail Address: kQ yOLAW';OY3 m� W S'k .600, f Mailing Address: �vD j(} s fOvy /Lf+(( 1%4 P� hone: FAX: [4. Representative Information: Name: � � `f &714y we e VI-9 E-mail.Address: Mailing Address: q 1 S+ode Y i&9 e 136 -te M a 'A M 7- �f g Phone FAX: 5. Legal Description: Lof s 0 l of P-T. 3aa vY ss rvrSrsa+o f0C&4 1c a ov4�vt. r, y Sec, 3 . To�,,.5�; 1 �, asT r 6. Street Address: 7. Project Description: AtAoQ,-a-1`roe` a-f Go (s cp fr C��e�e- -3. 7--P G(41 I cJS ��v�c. �'t�5�u�+ � fZ-5 Cv.,.fy Oo-Fs , s4,, �o T4 ✓Z--W. � K0v'f".erv% oLj0� P5 P1. 9,eev. 5px,,- .-�� i ( 8. Zoning Designation(s): e'OVAdgf 9. Current Land Use(s): / p S iwg(ne I 10. Bozeman 2020 Community Plan Designation: LI1-. ross Area: Acres: /� "��JJ S uare Feet; ry / 12. Net Area: Acres: �// S uare Feet: . y Page 1 Appropriate Review Fee Submitted ❑ 1 3'. Is'the subject site within an u' renewal district? ❑ Yes, answer quest 13a JKNo, go to question 14 13a. Which urban renewal district? ❑ Downtown ❑ Northeast (NURD) ❑ North 71h Avenue 14. Is the subject site within an overlay district? ❑ Yes, answer question 14a RIT�Jo, go to question 15 14a. Which Overlay District? ❑ Casino ❑ Neighborhood Conservation ❑ Entryway Corridor 15. Will this application require a deviation(s)? ❑ Yes, list UDO section(s): o 16. Application Type (please check all that apply): ❑ O.Planned Unit Development-Concept Plan ❑ A. Sketch Plan for Regulated Activities in Regulated Wetlands ❑P.Planned Unit Development-Preliminary Plan ❑B.Reuse,Change in Use,Further Development Pre-9/3/91 Site ❑ Q.Planned Unit Development--Final Plan ❑ C.Amendment/Modification of Plan Approved On/After.9/3/91 ❑ R. Planned Unit Development-Master. flan ❑ D.Meuse,Change in Use,Further Development,Amendment/Cori ❑ S. Subdivision Pre-application I ❑ E.Special Temporary Use Permit ❑T. Subdivision Preliminary Plat ❑ F. Sketch Plan/COA ❑ U.Subdivision Final Plat ❑ G. Sketch Plan/COA with an Intensification of Use ❑V. Subdivision Exemption ❑ II. Preliminary Site Plan/CO,'1 ❑W.Annexation ❑ 1.Preliminary Site Plan I Zonu7g Flap Amendment j ❑ ).Prelimiiaary Master Site Plan ❑Y.Unified Development Ordinance Te-xt Amendment ❑ K. Conditional Use Permit ❑ Z. Zoning Variance ❑L,. Conditional Use Permit./CO.A ❑A°.. Growth Policy Map Amendment ❑ NIL Administrative Project Decision Appeal ❑BB. Growth Policy Text Amendment ❑ Nldmnustra.tve Interpretation Appeal Other: This application must be.accompanied by the appropriate checklist(s),number of plans or plats, adjoiner inforrnatiori and materials,and fee (see Development Review Application Requirements and Fees). The plans or plats must be drawn to scale on paper not -mailer than 81/2- by 11-inches or larger than 24-by 36-inches folded into individual sets no larger than 8'/2-by 14-inches, The name of the project must be shown on the cover sheet of the plans. If 3-ring binders will be used,they must include a table of contents and gabbed dividers between sections. .Application deadlines are 5:00 pin every Tuesday. This application must be signed by both the applicant(s) 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 under the terms and provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code. It is further indicated that any work undertaken to complete a development approved by the City of Bozeman shall be in conformance with the requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code and any special conditions established by the approval authority. I acknowledge that the City has an Impact Fee Program and impact fees may be assessed for my project. Further,I agree to grant City personnel and other review agency representatives access to the subject site during the course of the review process (Section 18.64.050,BMC). I (We) hereby certify that the above information is true and correct to the best of my(our)knowledge. Applicant's Signature: Date: �� Applicant's Signature: Date: I I Property Owner's Signature: C9 Date: Property Owner's Signature: ✓ Date: Page 2 (Development Review Application-Prepared 11/25/03;Amended 9/17/04,S/i/06) ZONING MAP OR UN' D DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TE(- AMENDMENT CHECKLIST This checklist shall be completed and returned as part of the submittal. Any item checked "No" or "N/A' (not applicable) must be explained in a narrative attached to the checklist. Incomplete submittals will be returned to the applicant. A. Amendment Type, What type of amendment is being requested? (check all that apply) Zoning Map Amendment E] Unified Development Ordinance Amendment- Zoning Provisions F1 Unified Development Ordinance Amendment- Subdivision Provisions B. Zoning Map or UDO Zoning Provision Amendment Criteria. For Zoning Map Amendments and Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendments involving zoning provisions, written responses for each of the following criteria shall be provided. Are written responses for the following criteria provided) Zoning Provision Criteria Yes No N/A 1. Is the new zoning designed in accordance with the comprehensive plan? 2. Is the zoning designed to lessen congestion in the streets? IV El 0 3. Will the new zoning promote health and general welfare? .. ......... 4. Will the new zoning secure safety from fire,panic and o.ther dangers? � El 11 5. Will the new zoning provide adequate light and air? P— IEl i El 6. Will the new zoning prevent the overcrowding of land? � El El 7. Will the new zoning avoid the undue concentration of population? 0 El 8 Will the new zonig facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewer, [�r 0 El Lschools,parks, fire, police, and other public requirements? 9. Does the new zoning give consideration to the peculiar suitability of the property for 1:1 El particular uses? 10. Does the new zoning give reasonable consideration to the character of the district? 1:1 El 11. Was the new zoning adopted with a view to conserving the value of buildings? � El El 12. Will the new zoning encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout such county or municipal area? C. UDO Subdivision.Provision Criteria. For Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendments 'involving subdivision provisions,written responses for each of the following criteria shall be provided. Are written responses for the following criteria provided? Subdivision Provision Criteria Yes No N/A 1. Will the amendment provide for the orderly development of the Jurisdictional area? El El El 2. Will the amendment provide for the coordination of roads 'Within subdivided land ❑ [I El with other roads,both existing and planned? 3, Will the amendment provide for the dedication of land for road-ways and for public El El El Utility casements? 4. Will the amendment provide for the Improvement of roads? El D El Page 3 (Zoning Map or Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment Checklist-Prepared 12/05/03,revised 9/20/04) Subdivision Provision C ria, continued Yes No N/A 5. Will the amendment provide for adequate open spaces for travel, light, air and F-1 El El recreation? 6. Will the amendment provide for adequate-transportation,water and drainage? D— E El 7. Will the amendment provide for the regulation of sanitary facilities? El El EJ 8. Will the amendment provide for the avoidance or minimization of congestion? F] El 1:1 9. Will the amendment provide for the avoidance of subdivision which would 'involve El El El unnecessary environmental degradation and the avoidance of danger of injury to health, safety or welfare by reason of natural hazard or the lack of water, drainage, access, transportation, or other public services or would necessitate an excessive expenditure of public funds for the supply of such services? I (We),the undersigned, hereby certify that the 'information contained in this application is true and correct to the best of my(our) knowledge. --2000 Property er's Signature(s) Date State of County of 4-4 C'_U On this day of 20 Q_Lp bef ore me, a Notary Public f or the State of jx4_L".S1_' personally appeared Do is 1 q,c-, -s 0 n Q f\ -Cc, I- fA ei, f,o e- kriown to me to be the person(s) whose name(s) is(are) subscribed to the above instrument and acknowledge to me that lie/she/they executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial Seal the day and year first above written. Notary Public for State of 'n , Residing at A=' My Commission Expires Page 4 NARRATIVE FOk ZONING MAP AMENDMENT MT BALDY SUBDIVISION LOTS 21 & 22, 1521 BRIDGER DRIVE I. New R-I zoning fits with the comprehensive plan. 2. R-I zoning with proposed Parking Lane and Open Space—Tail Corridor will contribute to less street congestion. 3. R-I zoning and infill lots are good for health and general welfare. 4. Proposed City services will secure safety. 5, Adequate light and air will be provided. 6. R-I zoning will provide for less crowding of land than denser R-2 or R-3 zoning. 7. R-I zoning will avoid undue population concentration. 8. Annexation and R-I zoning with City services will facilitate provisions for all public services and requirements. 9. The property is most suitable for R-I zoning. 10. R-I zoning is in keeping with the district's character of R-I zoning adjacent to the property to the north and R-S zoning in other directions. 11. R-I zoning will allow the property's existing single family home to be conserved in place. 12. R-I zoning with infill lots does encourage appropriate use of land. i 1 • \ 0 e. � u a� % v� ; row• .. , . a �o 7717 4 LN ra i 0 N'IA IFNllctIVW .� p -�- i 4aMG C L>" IIV?f tl� i M 5 r a,nala" "S, Uz yv -�-- J N"1 A8'RI8IX7� _� =.aAtl 7SIlON�N CL f' 1 z N a31llflOJ 27f1'INNJ,3F3V'MANLI.VRItlO!i --112]"1VIa1S(1(INI-- 1(, 0 N I �-f L August 25,2006 AUK 2 8 2006 DEPAR MEN T OF PLANNING - AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Bozeman Planning Department and City Commission - P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman,MT 59771 Dear Planning Department and City Commission, I live at 2205 Bridger Drive,with husband Rodney Campbell.We are the last house on the east end of the "old neighborhood". On August 28,you will be reviewing a request for annexation of Mt. Baldy Lots 21 &22 (#A-06007) and I do not have any concerns with the annexation of the single family dwelling. But, though I do not wish to crimp the property rights of a fellow-landowner, I am concerned about the impact on the neighborhood if he is allowed to subdivide his property and add two additional homes in what is now backyard. The addition of Creekwood and Legends subdivisions are already changing the feel of this entry corridor, but I urge you to remember the pleasant feel of the large lots in the Ed Vogel, Mount Baldy, and Headlands subdivisions. Combined with the infill of Creekwood and Legends this will be a comfortable mix of lot sizes. I am concerned about the commission's zeal in pushing small lots often with big houses and postage-stamp sized yards. Please let a few of these neighborhoods with big yards and gardens and trees stay. Now for the specifics: First,I and the great majority of neighbors, do not want any change in zoning from our current RS- Residential Suburban status.With the annexation of land for the new subdivisions of Creekwood and Legends we have frequently voiced concern that our neighborhood as a whole not be annexed. I am very satisfied with the option to allow each owner to annex one at a time.Please leave the rest of us alone and do not consider changing this long standing neighborhood's zoning. Second, and maybe most importantly,we do not want more than an alley along our north property lines. Know that any move to expand the Legends II alley into a full and busy street is very, very much against our wishes. Thank you, Kathy Campbell 2205 Bridger Drive Bozeman,MT 59715 U6 2006 DEPAR'fs'+ E P�A 1N1 IG emu' '.l/LL.- .-�L... ��✓7/�. c9---c. -c..1�-„✓ C _ U�-<.� 1,�`-r -cit,t^c,t.,'v�.� ,��i�..e� LL.L•'`t...hL.�v��' •.6!=��,P.,, 1�.�,,-._.�� d -v At I IV t _, r IV 9--lwlvirj 102-6- //1 69/01 glAl i�s IW C,�� 7s— ��Ilk6 T-S A-4 TC-) tk)ty- tv o a V ke 7(D /-2 3 67 7-4 el AUG r/ ,y 1 1 2006 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING ANCJ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT