HomeMy WebLinkAboutH1 KraftGrowtPolicy Amend.p06045 new U y�
y Commission Memorandum
{rta+co.t►
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Andy Epple,Planning Director
Chris Kukulski,City Manager
SUBJECT: Kraft Growth Policy Amendment File No.P-06045
MEETING DATE: Tuesday,September 5,2006 Agenda Item
BACKGROUND: The Planning Office has received an application plan for a growth policy
amendment for approximately 138 acres on South 19`l'Avenue. The property is currently designated
"Future Urban" and the applicant is requesting a change to a "Residential" land use designation.
The Planning Board held a public hearing and reviewed the proposal at its August 15, 2006 meeting.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: The Planning Board voted 4 in favor to 2 against to forward a
recommendation of approval to the Commission. The Planning Board is required to have the
affirmative vote of at least five members in order to forward a formal recommendation on to the
City Commission. As such, the Planning Board is unable to forward a formal recommendation on
this application. The questions posed by the Planning Board members voting against at the public
hearing were 1) actual need for additional lots in Bozeman and 2) whether or not this application
should be deferred until the formal update to the Bozeman 2020 plan occurs sometime in the future.
Staff has found that according to recent census data Bozeman has added 4,021 individuals in the
past three years. Between July 1, 2004 and July 1, 2005 1,123 people became residents of the City.
During 2005 the Planning Department processed approximately 400 lots for final plat, 1600 lots
were preliminarily approved and staff reviewed and approved 955 building permit applications. The
Following information is excerpted from the Year 2005 Department of Planning and Community
Development Annual Report:
Final Plat Lots be Type:2U45
Niunber of Lots-1996-2005
l adustzial,2,
Commerdal,SA,- {' fl.4°fia
Mixed Use,$.
2004 t
200<'
2-3 units,I I, r
205�0
�99 -
399c
1997
V96
400 600 Wa 17f;0 1290 1400 "D 1800
Ptdimuiaryplat ❑Fai,a?P:,, This pie chart iilusuates lots 17,° t,,ix hyphed for with
final plat applications is 2005.
Residential Units Permitted by Type: 1990-2005
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 V95 1996 1997 199811999 2000 I 2001 12002 2003 2004 2005:Total l Pexcent
Singgle-household 50 101 104 139 130 100 11.3 98 135 155 158 229 259 215 260 265 2,5111 38,0
TOU71111OUSe 0 4 4 38 11 53 52 40 35 26 34 0 28 52 -*0 63 510
DWlex 2 20 32 50 38 24 46 48 40 56 23 51 3- 108 144 141 860 13.0
Triplex 3 19 6 0 6 21 - 21 . 3 6 3 6 3 6 12 45 105 264 +0
Fourplex 12 28 32 24 16 64 24 1 48 52 1361 60 12 16 44 120 100 788 11,9
Multi-household 0 0 0 30 82 160 119 8 60 116 73 1 71 1 132 146 235 281 1.513 219
Manufactured home 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 51 - 0 1 20 1 25 36 0 155 2,4
Total 67 281 2831 423 379 499 3541 3861 503 613 881 95516,6011 IWO
RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the Growth Policy Amendment to modify the land use
designation on the subject property from"Future Urban" to "Residential"with the two terms fisted
in the Staff Report and direct staff to bring back a Resolution of Adoption.
FISCAL EFFECTS: Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission.
CONTACT: Please feel free to contact Brian Krueger at bkruegerabozeman.net with any
questions.
Respectfully submitted,
Andrew Eirple,Planning Director Chris Kukulski,City Manager
Attachments: Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 15,2006
Planning Board Staff Report August 15,2006
Kraft GPA Application Materials
Kraft GPA Aerial Map
Report compiled on June, 19, 2006
CITY OF BOZEMAN
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building (� (� 2-2260
20 East Olive Street D IE V� IE r1 -2263
P.O. Box 1230 panning an.net
Bozeman, Montana 59771-1230 JUN 3 ® 20*w. z nan.net
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATIO DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1.Narne of Project/Development: Kraft Growth Policy Amendment —
2. Property Owner Information:
Name: Karleen Kraft&Ray Kraft Testamentary Trust E-mail Address:
Mailing Address: 5767 Foster Lane,Belgrade,MT 59714
Phone: 581-0625 FAX:
3.Applicant Information:
Name: Land Equity Partners E-mail Address: mike@landequitypartners.com
Mailing Address: 1777 Sun Peak Drive,Park City,Utah 84098
Phone: (435)645-9005 FAX: (435)649-1620
4. Representative Information:
Name: C&H Engineering and Surveying,Inc. E-mail Address: info@chengineers.com
Mailing Address: 1091 Stoneridge Drive,Bozeman,MT 59718
Phone: 587-1115 FAX: 587-9768
5. Legal Description: Located in the NE 1/4 of Sec.26,T. 2 S.,R.5 E.
6. Street Address: 4999 South 19th Avenue,Bozeman,MT 59718
7. Project Description: Growth Policy Amendment to change future land use designation of 138.6745 acre tract from
Future Urban to Residential
8.Zoning Designation(s): R-1,R-3&I 9.Current Land Use(s): Agricultural
10. Bozeman 2020 Community Plan Designation: Future Urban
Page i Appropriate Review Fee Submitted ❑
11. Gross Area: Acres: 138.67z Square Feet: 6,040,661 12.Net Area: Acres: 138.674 Square Feet: 6,040,661
13.Is the Subject Site Within an Overlay District? ❑ Yes,answer question 13a Q No,go to question 14
13a.Which Overlay District? ❑Casino ❑ Neighborhood Conservation ❑ Entryway Corridor
14.Will this application require a deviation(s)? ❑ Yes ❑✓ No
15.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 Plan
❑D.Reuse,Change in Use,Further Development,Amendment/COA ❑ S.Subdivision Pre-application
❑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
❑H.Preliminary Site Plan/COA ❑W.Annexation
❑I.Preliminary Site Plan ❑X.Zoning Map Amendment
❑J.Preliminary Master Site Plan ❑Y.Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment
❑K.Conditional Use Permit ❑ Z.Zoning Variance
❑L.Conditional Use Permit/COA 0 AA.Growth Policy Map Amendment
❑M.Administrative Project Decision Appeal ❑BB.Growth Policy Text Amendment
❑N.Administrative Interpretation Appeal ❑ Other:
This application must be accompanied by the appropriate checklist(s),number of plans or plats,adjoiner information and materials,and fee
(see Development Review Application Requirements and Fees). The plans or plats must he drawn to scale on paper not smaller than 8'/a-
by 11-inches or larger than 24-by 36-inches folded into individual sets no larger than 8'/2-by 14-inches. If 3-ring binders will be used,
they must include a table of contents and tabbed dividers between sections. Application deadlines are 5:00 pm 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. Finally,I acknowledge that the City has an Impact Fee Program and impact fees may be assessed for my project.
I(We)hereby certify that the above information is true and correct to the best of my(our)knowledge.
Applicant's Signature: F T ��} Dater
Applicant's Signature: Date:
Property Owner's Signature:`.. 1 _111 Date:
Property Owner's Signature: _ Dated Z ,
Property Owner's Signature: ! Date: la
Page 2
(Development Review Application—Prepared 11/25/03)
GROWTH POLICY TEXT AND MAP 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 Twe. What type of amendment is being requested? (check all that apply)
❑ Growth Policy Text Amendment
❑✓ Growth Policy Map Amendment
B. Growth Pohl Amendment Criteria. For Growth Policy Text or Map Amendments, 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 amendment cures a deficiency in the growth policy or results in an improved ❑✓ ❑ ❑
growth policy which better responds to the needs of the general community.
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.
3. The proposed amendment must be consistent with the overall intent of the growth policy. ✓❑ ❑ ❑
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 0 ❑ ❑
text and maps of this plan.
b. Requiring unmitigated larger and more expensive improvements to streets,water,sewer, Q ❑ ❑
or other public facilities or services and which, therefore, may impact development of
other lands.
C. Adversely impacting existing uses because of unmitigated greater than anticipated impacts ❑✓ ❑ ❑
on facilities and services.
d. Negatively affecting the livability of the area of the health and safety of the residents. ❑✓ ❑ ❑
Page 3
(Growth Policy Text or Map Amendment Checklist—Prepared 12/08/03;revised on 9/20/04)
GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT CRITERIA
KRAFT GPA
1. The proposed amendment cures a deficiency in the growth policy or results in an improved growth
policy which better responds to the needs of the general community.
The rapid growth experienced in Bozeman over the last several years has pushed the City limit
outward in the vicinity of this project further than anticipated in the 2020 plan. The 2020 plan
recommends that as the City grows,and municipal services become available,that the properties
currently identified as Future Urban be reclassified with urban zoning densities. Reclassifying this
property to Residential is doing exactly what is recommended in the 2020 plan. Doing so responds
to the needs of the community by providing additional housing with an orderly and cost effective
expansion of the City.
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 amendment does not create inconsistencies within the growth policy. The expansion
of the City limits and accompanying municipal services make this a logical place for residential
development as described in the 2020 plan.
3. The proposed amendment must be consistent with the overall intent of the growth policy.
The proposed amendment allows for an orderly and cost effective expansion of the City and its
services.
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 amendment does not significantly alter existing and future land use patterns.
The change from Future Urban to Residential is recommended in the 2020 plan as
annexation occurs and municipal services become available.
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.
Any direct impacts to streets,water,sewer,or other public facilities or services due to this
proposal will be mitigated. The project will undergo a thorough review by the City to
address the impacts and mitigation prior to any construction.
C. Adversely impacting existing uses because of unmitigated greater than anticipated impacts
on facilities and services.
Existing uses should see an increase in most facilities and services with the addition of the
property to the City. Additional impacts on facilities will be reviewed thoroughly during
the development process. Impacts directly attributed to this proposal will need to be
mitigated.
d. Negatively affecting the livability of the area of the health and safety of the residents.
Conversion of the property from an agricultural production facility to a residential use
should increase the livability to the residents of the community. Impacts to health and
safety will be addresses during the development process.
G.\c&h\06\06224\Office\GPACriteria.wpd
KRAFT PROPERTY
GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT
LOCATED IN THE NE 114 OF SEC. 26, T. 2 S., R. 5 E.
OF P.M.M., GAL LA TIN COUNTY, MONTANA
71,
INDUSTRIAL *�
PUBLIC
INSTITUTION E
OTHER
PUBLIC LANDS
COMMUN
COMMERCUtL f
a
Stucky Rood
4 �
RESIDENTIAL
f
1
I m
FUTURE URBAN < �'
L Q
Ui
M
$ 7
{_
Y
AE -
SITE
� RESIDENTIAL
J �9
N
N 0 Goldenstein Lone
PROPOSED
RESIDENTIAL fi
CITY OF BOZEMAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP
2020 PLAN
f
Engineering and Surveying Inc.
205 Edelweiss Drive•Bozeman, Montana 59718
Phone(406)587-1115•Fax (406)587-976B
www.chengineers.com •info@chengineers.com Sheet 1 of 1 #06224
1�
N
N
Qo
O
7'�--� � A4t+T4E4V BIR6 G1R� ��k �Q� ,t�� �.Cf�`£�-w---,,__'61J�3ft7€K3 - '�"'�'�,�•
U.
Li
O
f
UA ;€ m N {o
I
R I
aim
�., 0
- !�
_ -
I r '���Itq{sii7
1 I pR4VE'�'
O O I U T E
O� O I C m O
co
o
I Fi 7 x Ud
E LL °
N C
C E
Aw c)
U Z` C � in aQ1i
m
O O C W C ION � W O a 3
r
ell
t
r.,, `. b g {g g
on
i
3
'
i m
4
County
10
i # Coisi ity
# t s E
3
s
w
i
1
County
Cournty
E
r
E
[ r
E E
E
E
E+
r
E:
r,'
PLANNING BOARD STAFF REPORT
KRAFT GROWTH POLICY AMENDMENT FIIENO. P-06045
Item: Growth Policy Amendment Application #P-06045, to amend the growth
policy land use designation, as shown on the Future Land Use Map of the
Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, from Future Urban to Residential for
approximately 138 acres.
Owner: Karleen Kraft and Ray Kraft Testamentary Trust
5767 Foster Lane
Belgrade,MT 59714
Applicant: Land Equity Partners
1777 Sun Peak Drive
Park City,Utah 84098
Representative: C&H Engineering and Surveying, Inc.
1091 Stoneridge Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Date/Time: Before the Bozeman Planning Board on Tuesday, August 15, 2006 at 7:00
p.m. in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West Main
Street, Bozeman, Montana.
Before the Bozeman City Commission on Tuesday, September 5, 2006 at
6:00 p.m. in the Community Room, County Courthouse, 311 West Main
Street, Bozeman, Montana.
Report By: Brian Krueger,Associate Planner
Recommendation: Approval
PROJECT LOCATION AND MAP
The subject property is located at 4999 South 19`h Avenue and is legally described Tract 2, Certificate of
Survey No. 2177, according to the plat thereof, on file and of record in the office of the Clerk and
Recorder, Gallatin County, Montana, and being a portion of the Northeast Quarter of Section 26,
Township 2 South,Range 5 East of P.M.M Gallatin County,Montana.
The subject property is approximately 138 acres in size.
Please refer to the vicinity map on Page 2.
#P-06045 Kraft GPA Staff Report 1
i -2
R-3 Subject
Property
`Q
rn
r
___...Goldenstein_Lri-
PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The applicants are proposing to amend the growth policy land use designation, as shown on the Future
Land Use Map of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, from Future Urban to Residential for
approximately 138 acres. The property is currently used for agricultural uses.
The property is crossed by a stream and agricultural water user ditches.
ZONING DESIGNATION&LAND USES
The property is located within the Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning District and has a zoning
designation of A-S (Agriculture Suburban District). If successful in obtaining this growth policy
amendment, the applicants will likely propose annexation to the City and seek appropriate urban zoning
designations.
The following land uses and zoning are adjacent to the subject property:
North: Meadow Creek Subdivision. Annexed and zoned R-3 (Residential Medium Density) and R-4
(Residential High Density).
South: Agricultural uses, agricultural residential. Not annexed, Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning
District designation of A-S.
East: Agricultural uses, agricultural residential. Not annexed, Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning
District designation of A-S.
#P-06045 Kraft GPA Staff Report 2
West: Agricultural uses, agricultural residential. Not annexed, Gallatin County Bozeman Area Zoning
District designation of A-S.
GROWTH POLICY DESIGNATION
The subject property is currently designated as Future Urban on the Future Land Use Map of the
Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. This designation is described as follows:
Future Urban. This category designates areas where development is considered to be
generally inappropriate over the 20 year term of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan,
either because of natural features, negative impacts on the desired development pattern,
or significant difficulty in providing urban services. The Residential category contains
adequate area to accommodate over 200 percent of expected residential development over
the 20 year horizon of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. Development within the
Future Urban area would be generally disruptive to the desired compact urban land use
pattern depicted in the Plan. As Bozeman develops over time, it is expected that the City
would expand outward into areas previously designated as Future Urban. As the City's
growth policy is updated from time to time, some areas currently classified as Future
Urban are expected to be reclassified to urban designations.
The land shown with a Future Urban designation is comprised of parcels in a variety of
different sizes, but typically in larger acreages. Suburban or rural density subdivisions
adjacent to the City may impede an orderly and cost effective expansion of the City. In
order to prevent such conflicts and problems in the future, use of land in the Future
Urban land use designation should follow one of three paths,which are listed in order of
the City's preference:
1. Remain as currently utilized, until annexed and municipal services are available to
support a Residential or other urban land use category development as described
in this plan;
2. Develop at a density of a single dwelling per existing parcel,with consolidation of
smaller parcels into single ownerships for development being supported; or
3. If further subdivision is proposed, to develop at urban densities and standards _
with provisions for connection to City services when they become available.
Annexation of most Future Urban areas is unlikely over the term of the Bozeman 2020
Community Plan and final authority to deny or approve development in County areas
shown with this designation remains with the County Commission. As Gallatin County
completes its own county-wide growth policy, additional and more detailed planning is
expected within the County zoning district surrounding the City. This more detailed level
of planning is expected to help identify areas that are preferred for, or inappropriate for,
development and give guidance to the County Commission in their review of individual
development proposals.
The applicants are proposing that approximately 138 acres be given a land use designation of Residential.
This designation is described as follows:
#P-06045 Kraft GPA Staff Report 3
Residential. This category designates places where the primary activity is urban density
living quarters. Other uses which complement residences are also acceptable such as
parks, low intensity home based occupations, fire stations, churches, and schools. The
residential designation also indicates that it is expected that development will occur within
municipal boundaries which may require annexation prior to development. The dwelling
unit density expected within this classification varies. It is expected that areas of higher
density housing would be likely to be located in proximity to commercial centers to
facilitate the broadest range of feasible transportation options for the greatest number of
individuals and support businesses within commercial centers. Low density areas should
have an average minimum density of six units per net acre. Medium density areas should
have an average minimum density of twelve units per net acre. High density areas should
have an average minimum density of eighteen units per net acre. A variety of housing
types should be blended to achieve the desired density with large areas of single type
housing being discouraged. In limited instances the strong presence of constraints and
natural features such as floodplains may cause an area to be designated for development at
a lower density than normally expected within this classification.
All residential housing should be arranged with consideration given to the existing
character of adjacent development, any natural constraints such as steep slopes, and in a
fashion which advances the overall goals of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. The
residential designation is intended to provide the principal locations for additional housing
within the Planning Area.
The following growth policy designations are adjacent to the subject property:
North: Meadow Creek Subdivision. Annexed and designated Residential.
South: Agricultural uses, agricultural residential. Not annexed, designated Future Urban.
East: Agricultural uses, agricultural residential. Not annexed,designated Residential.
West: Agricultural uses, agricultural residential. Not annexed,outside of 2020 planning area boundary.
REVIEW CRITERIA
According to Section 2.4.1 of the 2020 Plan, any proposed amendment must be approved by an
affirmative vote of a majority of the total membership of the City Commission. The burden of proof for
the desirability of a proposed amendment and its compliance with the criteria listed below lies with the
applicant. Unless all criteria are successfully met, and compliance with the criteria below is supported by
demonstrable facts, an amendment shall not be approved.
A. The proposed amendment cures a deficiency in the growth policy or results in an
improved growth policy which better responds to the needs of the general community.
The proposal to designate approximately 138 acres as Residential is appropriate. The property
was likely designated as Future Urban due to the fact that fairly significant infrastructure issues
will need to be resolved with any development of the property (see Criterion D below for a
discussion of infrastructure issues). However, Engineering staff has concluded that money and
#P-06045 graft GPA Staff Report 4
engineering can overcome the infrastructure issues. Given that infrastructure can be provided
and there are no physical barriers to development, and that development in the City would avoid
undesirable impacts on the development pattern, the residential component of this proposal is
supportable. It will respond to the needs of the community by providing additional land for
residential development in our growing City.
B. The proposed amendment does not create inconsistencies within the growth policy,
either between the goals and the maps or between different goals; if inconsistencies are
identified,then additional changes must be provided to remove the inconsistencies.
The proposal to designate approximately 138 acres as Residential is supportable and appropriate.
The land could enhance the City's supply of residential lots, and advance the following goals and.
objectives of the 2020 Plan:
• Goal 5.7.1, Housing- A-amte an adequate supply of safe housing that is dixrse in type, density, and
location,with a special artphasis on maintaining mghborbood character and stability.
• Objaczice 1 - Encourage and support the constrcutcon of a broad range of housing type in prox�nity to
services and transportation options.
• Objavw 4 - Promote the constrcrction of a wide variety of housing types to meet the wide range of
residential needs of Bozeman residents.
C. The proposed amendment must be consistent with the overall intent of the growth policy.
There are six basic ideas which form a foundation for many of the land use policies of the 2020
Plan and seem to best encapsulate the intent of the growth policy. One of these is the concept of
"urban density," of which the plan states the following: "Although Bozeman provides a wide
range of housing styles, types, and densities, it does not provide every option. Bozeman is a city,
and the housing densities are not those of rural areas of Gallatin County. Fundamental to the
efficient and cost-effective provision of urban services, multi-modal transportation, and a
compact development pattern is a concentration of persons and activities."
This proposal is supportive of the overall intent of the growth policy in regards to urban density.
Designating the property as Residential, and allowing it to develop within the City, will help to
ensure that an acceptable level of urban density is achieved. It will also prevent establishment of
low-density, large-lot development in the County which could eventually thwart the orderly
growth and expansion of the City.
D. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the community as a whole or
significant portion by:
1. Significantly altering acceptable existing and future land use patterns, as defined
in the text and maps of this plan.
Staff is supportive of the Residential component of this proposal because it promotes
desired future land use patterns; the entire property should be designated Residential.
Residential development in this area will continue the urban density pattern established by
the Meadow Creek Subdivision.
#P-06045 Kraft GPA Staff Report 5
2. 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.
AND
3. Adversely impacting existing uses because of unmitigated greater than anticipated
impacts on facilities and services.
There are fairly significant sewer,water and street infrastructure issues that are associated
with any development of the subject property. The following is a brief description of the
major items that would need to be constructed to provide service to the area.
Sewer
The property will be served by 8" sewer main extensions from the Meadow Creek
Subdivision. Meadow Creek is installing the trunk sewer mains from their northern
boundary all the way to Blackwood Road They will likely request that paybacks be set up.
If paybacks are approved,this property would be within the district and responsible for
their pro-rata share of the trunk sewer improvements.
Water
At a minimum,this project would be responsible for the installation of the master planned
trunk lines that are within or adjacent to the property. The water facility plan has not
been formally adopted yet,but should be by the time this subdivision is submitted. The
master planned lines that would need to be installed include a 30" main on 19'from
Blackwood to Goldenstein, and a 30 main in Goldenstein from 19t'to the western
boundary of the subdivision. Other master planned trunk mains will likely be required to
provide the domestic and fire flow requirements for the development. This will be
determined through modeling at the time of subdivision. Meadow Creek is likely to set up
a payback district for the trunk water mains they are installing. This property may be
within the limits of the district. If the district is established, and the property is in it,they
would be responsible for their pro-rata share of the improvements.
Streets
South 19`'is a principal arterial, Goldenstein is a minor arterial,and Blackwood and South
27`'are both collectors as shown in the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan. This
project would be responsible to improve their half along their entire frontage of each of
these streets. A traffic impact analysis will be required for the project,and any identified
improvements needed to provide an adequate level of service will be required of this
project. This may include signalization of one or more intersections. Meadow Creek is
likely to set up paybacks for the two signals they are installing for their project. If the
district is established and this property is within the boundary,they will be responsible for
their pro-rata share of the improvements.
The Bozeman Engineering Division concluded that extending the necessary water, sewer
#P-06045 Kraft GPA Staff Report 6
and street infrastructure to the subject property is possible, albeit expensive. However,
the expense would be bore by the developer. Development of the property in the City
would not adversely impact other developments already in the City. If the developer
requested the use of impact fee,and the City approved of the request, fewer dollars would
be available for other projects. The extension of sewer mains and water mains may make
other properties in the vicinity more attractive for development.
4. Negatively affecting the livability of the area or the health and safety of the
residents.
There is potential for this amendment to negatively impact the livability of nearby land
owners, specifically the agricultural operations to the south, east, and west of the subject
property. Urban density development would need to be sited and designed very carefully
to minimize potential impacts upon these rural land uses. These issues would be
addressed when the property is annexed,and again when the property is subdivided.
STAFF FINDINGS/CONCLUSION
Planning staff has reviewed this application for a growth policy amendment against the criteria set forth
in Section 2.4.1 (Criteria for Review and Amendment) of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. Staff
found that this proposal does satisfy all of the required review criteria. Based on the evaluation of said
criteria and findings by the Planning staff, staff recommends APPROVAL of the requested growth policy
amendment.
Should the Planning Board vote to recommend approval of this application, the following contingencies
should be noted
1. The applicant shall submit, with a signed annexation agreement, an 81/z- x 11-inch or 81h- x 14-
inch exhibit entitled"Kraft 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 the Future Land Use Map of the Bozan-m 2020 Carrarna*Plan.
The recommendation of the Bozeman Planning Board will be forwarded to the Bozeman City
Commission for consideration at its public hearing on September 6, 2006. The City Commission will
make the final decision on the application.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment letters had been received when this report was prepared
ATTACHMENTS
Applicant's submittal-The applicant's response to the growth policy amendment criteria and exhibits.
cc: Karleen Kraft&Ray Kraft Testamentary Trust,5767 foster Lane,Belgrade,MT 59714
Land Equity Partners, 1777 Sun Peak Drive,Park City,UT 84098
C&H Engineering and Surveying,Inc., 1091 Stoneridge Drive, Bozeman,MT 59718
#P-06045 Kraft GPA Staff Report 7
DRAFT
MINUTES
CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD
COMMUNITY ROOM,
"GALLATIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE"
TUESDAY,AUGUST 15, 2006
7:00 P.M.
0:04:29 [19:42:361 ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
President and Chair, JP Pomnichoski called the meeting to order at 7:47p.m. She noted the excused
absenses of Liason, Commissioner Kirchhoff and Planning Board Vice President Dave Jarret.
0:04:41 [19:47:081 ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (0-15 MINUTES)
Seeing there was no public comment, Chair Pomnichowski closed this portion of the meeting.
0:05:09 [19:47:131 ITEM 3. MINUTES OF AUGUST 1ST, 2006
Seeing there were no changes or additions to the minutes, Chair Pomnichowski noted the minutes
will stand as written.
0:05:27 119:47:511 ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW
0:05:30 [19:47:561 1. Growth Policy Amendment Application, #P-06045 (Kraft). A
Growth Policy Amendment Application requested by applicant, Land Equity Partners,
representative, C &H Engineering, and property owners,Ray and Karleen Kraft Testamentary
Trust, to change future land use designation of 138.67 acres of land from Future Urban to
Residential on property legally described as Tract 2, Certificate of Survey No. 2177, and being a
portion of NE 1/4 of Section 26, T2S,R5E of PMM, Gallatin County, Montana. (Krueger)
0:05:41 [19:48:17] Staff Presentation
Brian Krueger, associate planner,presented this growth policy amendment application and noted
the 138 acres of property is currently zoned Agricultural Suburban, is not annexed, and under
County Jurisdiction. It includes a stream and ditches. Planner Krueger is recommending to change
its designation from future urban to residential. He noted the surrounding land use is mainly
agricultural. Mr. Krueger stated the future urban designation was given in lieu of future municipal
services coming into the area. The Meadow Creek development is directly north from the
applicant's property and prior to it's annexation, it received approval for a growth policy
amendment from future urban to residential. Mr. Krueger noted to board members that the Planning
Department does see future growth in this area and is part of the 2020 plan. If this project is
approved,the applicant will proceed with an annexation and zone map amendment proposal.
Planning Staff recommends the GPA be approved and will be presented to the City Commission on
September 5th.
1
If approved, they will come back with a Annex &ZMA application.
0:12:30 119:48:181 Applicant Response
Mike Stewart is respresenting Land Equity Partners, 1777 Sunpeak Drive, Park City,Utah. Mr.
Stewart agrees with staffs findings and recommendations. He noted the applicant has a legitimate
proposal and does have the ability to develop this property since the Meadow Creek Subdivision is
brining City services to their property. Mr. Stewart supports the Planning department's endorsement
to recommend approval of this application.
0:13:19 [19:48:281 Public Comment
Bill Quinn, 5100 S. 19th: Mr. Quinn addressed the board and noted they've lived at that location
since 1984. He stated that one of the great advantages of living in the Gallatin Valley is the open
space. Historically,his home is the original Patterson Homestead,which was homesteaded in the
1870's by J.L. Patterson and he farmed 880 acres of land with horses at one point in time. What is
planned is to put a residential designation on prime, agricultural land. Mr. Quinn noted that growth
and development is inevitable, but sprawl is not. He stated the approval of this growth policy would
constitute sprawl. He urged the Planning Board to not further develop this land and prevent sprawl.
0:15:17 [22:31:001 Public Comment
Jane Quinn, Bill Quinn's wife at 5100 South 19th. Mrs. Quinn will be reading a letter from B.
Derek Strahn (copy included in hard copy minutes),Historic Preservation Consultant: Letter read
opposes the Kraft GPA. Approval of this application will unfortunately contribute to the rapid
urbanization of the Gallatin Valley. Gallatin County was listed as the most endangered of the 263
'at risk'counties that were studied. Mrs. Quinn noted there is no way that further development won't
be self destructive? She stated the County offices at least say"no" at some of the new development,
however the City of Bozeman looks forward to it. Mrs. Quinn reaffirmed that she is opposed to the
applicant's request and asked that the Planning Board deny their request.
0:22:00 [19:55:261 Discussion
Board member Brian Caldwell referenced a goal 5.7.1 and that the statement that this application
and how it promotes an adequate supply of safe housing. He wondered what the status of the supply
of housing is relative to the growth policy. Are we ahead or behind and how that impacts the
board's recommendation. Planner Krueger noted the original boundaries of the 2020 plan have
exceeded expectations,which is why we are seeing so many applications for a change from future
urban to residential. The City has not done a new housing inventory. Mr. Caldwell questioned the
payback agreement. Planner Krueger noted the payback system will be created by the Meadow
Creek subdivision and it is completely up to the subdivision. Mr. Andrew Epple noted there is no
statutory guidance or limit on the timeline for paybac, however the engineering department has
allowed a seven year timeline and of recent has entertained a ten year payback period.
2
Mr. Krueger stated when the original 2020 plan was created, there were rational boundaries with
outlying property close to City services. The plan did not envision needing city services this soon,
but reflects the recent growth. Mr. Skelton noted the 2020 plan established a boundary and with the
Bozeman Gateway addition,we have the capacity to extend city services. What's triggering the
needc for GPA, is the growth of the surrounding area and the current extension like bozeman
gateway allowing access by surrounding areas to have City Services.
Mr. Randy Carpenter asked Planner Krueger to elaborate on the 'future urban' designation. Mr.
Krueger noted certain areas were given that designation due to the proximity of their location to
Municipal services. Senior Planner Skelton referenced his project,Meadow Creek,which is
directly north of the Kraft property and that this unanticipated growth at this early stage is due to
the Bozeman Gateway subdivision and with that the surrounding areas west of the college now
have accessibility to City services as well.
Board member Erik Henyon asked Planner Krueger how the traffic will be impacted in the areas of
Kagy,Huffine, and 19th Avenue with this policy change. Mr. Krueger noted the issues will be
addressed during the preliminary plat stage of this process. Mr. Henyon then asked what impact
Meadow Creek will have on the traffic in that area,to which Mr. Krueger noted the most recent
analysis showed it would be most impacted at Blackwood Road and Graph Street and he anticipates
that there might be a need for an additional signal at Goldenstein.
Caren Roberty directed her question to Mr. &Mrs. Quinn and asked them how much land of the
original homestead does their property consisted of,to which they answered 18 acres.
0:31:33 [22:31:261 Motion and Vote
Mr. Erik Henyon questioned the application and how it meets the description of section 241 of the
2020 plan. He noted that we are obviously outpacing the projections of the 2020 Plan and stated
tomorrow is actually today. Mr. Henyon noted we are seeing'future urban' and it is happening now.
He noted it does meet the criteria set forth in the 2020 plan and he supports this amendment.
Mr. Ed Sypinski did not agree and feels this application does not meet the criteria set forth in the
2020 plan, it's affecting the community. He stated the City Commission addressed the issue of
emergency and fire services, however with another new community possibly before us,this would
cause more needed adequate public health and safety services. Mr. Sypinski noted there are several
issues with City Services that cause him concern and this application does not address any of them
right now. He stated he will not support this Growth Policy amendment and commented to the
board the necessity of moving forward so quickly.
Mr. Brian Caldwell noted in Section B,we dont'have a clear vision of what an adequate supply of
housing is. He stated he doesn't see a strong argument supporting this GPA and noted just because
water and sewer is at the gate, doesn't mean we should move forward with further annexations. Mr.
Caldwell does not support this application.
Mr. Randy Carpenter noted he does not think this project is 'sprawl',he stated it is good,logical
development. Mr. Carpenter pointed out that'sprawl' occurs outside of cities and this is not the case
3
here. He noted if the infrastructure constraints can be solved by engineering, he will support the
Growth Policy Amendment.
Ms. Caren Roberty stated that since she works in the housing industry, she would have trouble
saying there is an adequate supply of housing right now. She noted that as much she empathizes for
the neighbors, this application follows the growth policy. Ms. Roberty will be supporting this.
Chair Pomnichowski agreed with Mr. Carpenter in that this amendment application is not
considered sprawl because it is contiguous to city limits. Ms. Pomnichowski reminded all present
that this is only the very first step in a very long process. It only designates what the land use
pattern is going to be called and if the board is in favor of this application, we will call this
'Residential'instead of Commercial or Industrial. Chair Pomnichowski encouraged the applicant to
be sensitive of the surrounding agricultural land ethic in the Gallatin Valley. She noted that the use
of residential is the least impactful that could be found. It meets the criteria for a growth policy
amendment and it does. She recommends approval of the application.
Planning board member Caren Roberty moved to recommend approval of the Growth Policy
Amendment#P-06045, seconded by Erik Henyon. Those voting for approval were Caren Roberty,
Erik Henyon, JP Pomnichowski, and Randy Carpenter. Those voting against approval were Ed
Sypinski and Brian Caldwell.
Chair Pomnichowski noted this proposal will go before the City Commission without any formal
recommendation.
Mr. Andrew Epple stated to all present that the motion to recommend approval did not pass
because five affirmative votes were required.
4
F,UG-29-2006 04 :56 PM J OR BJ UUINN 406 587 8213 P. 01
B. Derek Strahn
Historic Preservation Consultant
412 West Harrison Street
Bozeman, MT 59715
August 11, 2006
City of Bozeman
Department of Planning and Community Development
P.O. Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59771-1230
To Whom It May Concern;
At the request of Jane and Bill Quinn, owners of the historic Patterson Farmstead
at 5100 South 19`''Avenue, I am writing to express sadness and concern about the
proposed Kraft Growth Policy Amendment, #P-0645, In seeking to change the growth
policy land use designation for approximately 138 acres, the proposal in question
highlights, and unfortunately contributes to, a troubling trend in the Gallatin Valley—the
rapid urbanization of our rural landscape.
As you well know, this trend is nothing new in our neck of the woods. A few
years ago, the American Farmland Trust released a disturbing study entitled Strategic
Ranchland in the Rocky Mountain West. The report concluded that modern development
now threatens more than five million acres of prime farm and ranch land in Montana.
Seven Montana counties—including Madison, Park and Gallatin—were found to be
among the twenty-five most at-risk areas in the American West,
Of particular concern for those of us living in the Bozeman area, was that Gallatin
County's farms and ranches were identified as the m= endangered of the 263 counties
studied. These areas represent important natural resources"that could completely
disappear by 2020, leaving a rent in the ecological, economic and cultural fabric of local
communities," according to the Trust.
"The bottom line is that we're sprawling out of control," said Jeff Jones, the
organization's Rocky Mountain Regional Director. "We're replacing working ranches
. , , with low-density residential growth. And the conversion is permanent. You can't
un-develop a subdivision."
More than a cornerstone of our economy, area farms and ranches provide a wide
range of under-appreciated goods and services, including- scenic vistas, reduced fuel
loads and fire danger, noxious weed control, and critical wildlife habitat. in addition,
some of our most historically significant buildings are found on rural landscapes. indeed,
much of our local culture and cherished sense of place is directly derived from an
agriculture heritage that dates back to the 1860s,
HUG-29-2006 04 :57 PM J OR BJ QUINN 406 587 8213 P. 02
Unfortunately, times are quickly changing. Long-term area residents, like the
Quinns, and myself, are well Aware that right here in the Gallatin Valley thousands of
acres of some of the nation's most fertile lands have recently fallen victim to new
developments. In just the last decade, scores of farms that once defined the periphery of
our community have succumbed to permanent transformations that can never be undone.
Bozeman was recently ranked first in the nation for"quality of life" among
micropolitan areas, but it is hard to imagine that we will continue to receive such honors
if ongoing trends are not seriously reconsidered and modified. At what point will we
recognize that the breakneck pace of development now redefining our community's
character and unique identity is, in the long term, self-destructive? When will we allow
ourselves to admit that the ongoing quest for short-term economic gain is destroying the
very amenities that have made the Gallatin Valley so attractive in the first place?
The City seems to pay lip service to long-range planning and the preservation of
open space, but at every opportunity, it instead chooses to amend the very policies that
were designed to guide our actions in order accommodate still more development. The
impression given is that our planners have concluded that rapid growth is inevitable, and
that we will not—and cannot—cease this disturbing trend until the entire Gallatin Valley
is subdivided, paved over, and sacrificed in the name of"progress,"
The City frequently blames the County for the sprawling cancer that now
consumes the valley because the County lacks comprehensive planning and zoning. But
the reality is this: the County at least occasionally says no to new development. In
contrast, the City—armed with the tools of annexation and zone map amendments—
almost never has the backbone to put the breaks on new development.
Growth and preservation are not mutually exclusive choices. The places and
people associated with Gallatin County's agricultural heritage are at the root of what
defines the rural west. These are the very amenities that grant us such a strong sense of
place and help to attract committed newcomers to places like Bozeman. Appropriate new
development that expands economic opportunities, while simultaneously preserving these
desirable amenities, must be our top priority.
Yes, it's true, the proposed Kraft Growth Policy Amendment will only affect 138
acres, and much of the Gallatin Valley thankfully remains undeveloped, But great places
are not destroyed in one fell swoop, they are slowly nicked to death over years, until one
day we finally wake up and realize, tragically, all that has been irrevocably lost, Please
consider this important decision carefully,
Sincerely,
/5
B. Derek Strahn,
Historic Preservation Consultant