HomeMy WebLinkAbout4-02-07-5_250-456_Baxter Meadows Planned Unit Development Phase 4 Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat #P-07004
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Lanette Windemaker, AICP, Contract Planner
SUBJECT: Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision, #P-07004
MEETING DATE: Monday, April 2, 2007
RECOMMENDATION: The City Commission approves application #P-07004 with the
conditions of approval in the staff report.
BACKGROUND: This is a preliminary plat application to subdivide ~ 67 acres into 4 lots for
further subdivision on property legally described as Lot 4A-1 of COS 2202B located in the SE ¼ of
Section 34, T1S, R5E and in the NE ¼ of Section 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin
County, Montana. Since no development is permitted on the lots created by this subdivision until
the property is subject to further subdivision, the City of Bozeman has agreed that this subdivision
is not subject to public improvements at this time. This subdivision will be followed shortly by a
major subdivision for building development.
The property is located west of Davis Lane and on the north and south sides of Baxter Lane, and is
zoned R-3 (Residential Medium Density District), B-2 (Community Business District) and PLI
(Public Lands and Institutions District). There is a zone map amendment under review which will
make the zoning correspond with the property line that was established on February 14, 2007,
through recordation of a boundary relocation exemption between the Regional Park and Baxter
Meadows. Following approval of that zone map amendment, the property will be zoned R-3 and B-
2.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None.
FISCAL EFFECTS: Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time, but will include increased
property tax revenues from new development, along with increased costs to deliver municipal
services to the property.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission.
CONTACT: Please email Lanette Windemaker at lwindemaker@bozeman.net if you have any
questions prior to the public hearing.
APPROVED BY: Andrew Epple, Planning Director
Chris Kukulski, City Manager
555
PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT
BAXTER MEADOWS PUD PHASE 4 MINOR SUBDIVISION FILE NO. P-07004
Item: Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application #P-07004, to subdivide ~ 67
acres into 4 lots for further subdivision on property legally described as
Lot 4A-1 of COS 2202B located in the SE ¼ of Section 34, T1S, R5E and
in the NE ¼ of Section 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin
County, Montana.
Applicant/Owners: Baxter Meadows Development LP, 1500 Poly Dr., Ste. 300, Billings, MT
59102.
Representative: PC Development, 3985 Valley Commons Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718.
Date/Time: Before the Bozeman Planning Board on Tuesday, March 6, 2007, at 7:30
p.m. in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West
Main Street, Bozeman, Montana, and
Before the Bozeman City Commission on Monday, April 2, 2007, at 6:00
p.m. in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West
Main Street, Bozeman, Montana.
Report by: Lanette Windemaker, AICP: Contract Planner.
Recommendation: Conditional Approval.
PROJECT LOCATION
The subject property is described as ~ 67 acres of land located west of Davis Lane and on the north
and south sides of Baxter Lane, is legally described as Lot 4A-1 of COS 2202B, located in the SE ¼
of Section 34, T1S, R5E and in the NE ¼ of Section 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin
County, Montana. The property is zoned R-3 (Residential Medium Density District), B-2
(Community Business District) and PLI (Public Lands and Institutions District). Please refer to the
vicinity map on the following page.
556
PROPOSAL
The applicant is requesting a Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat approval to subdivide ~ 67 acres
into 4 lots for further subdivision. Since no development is permitted on the lots created by this
subdivision until the property is subject to further subdivision, the City of Bozeman has agreed that
this subdivision is not subject to public improvements at this time. The subdivision would have
access from Baxter Lane and Davis Lane.
The necessary Preliminary Plat Supplements were submitted or waived by the Development Review
Committee (DRC).
ZONING DESIGNATION & LAND USES
The subject property is zoned R-3 (Residential Medium Density District), B-2 (Community Business
District) and PLI (Public Lands and Institutions District). There is a zone map amendment under
review which will make the zoning correspond with the property line that was established on
February 14, 2007, through recordation of a boundary relocation exemption between the Regional
Park and Baxter Meadows. Following approval of that zone map amendment, the property will be
zoned R-3 and B-2.
The intent of the R-3, Residential Medium Density District, is to provide for the development of
one- to five-household residential structures near service facilities within the City. It should provide
for a variety of housing types to serve the varied needs of households of different size, age and
character, while reducing the adverse effect of nonresidential uses. The intent of the B-2,
Community Business District, is to provide for a broad range of mutually supportive retail and
service functions located in clustered areas bordered on one or more sides by limited access arterial
streets. The intent of the PLI, Public Lands and Institutions District, is to provide for major public
and quasi-public uses outside of other districts. Not all public and quasi-public uses need to be
classified PLI. Some may fit within another district, however larger areas will be designated PLI.
P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 2557
The subject property is traversed north to south by the Spring Ditch but is otherwise vacant. The
following land uses and zoning are adjacent to the subject property:
North: B-2 (Community Business District) – Baxter Meadows remainders.
East: R-3 (Residential Medium Density District) – West Winds PUD.
AS (County Zoning Agricultural Suburban) – Unincorporated.
South: PLI (Public Lands and Institutions) – Regional Park.
West: PLI (Public Lands and Institutions) – Regional Park.
B-2 (Community Business District) – Baxter Meadows Phase 2.
ADOPTED GROWTH POLICY DESIGNATION
The property on the south side of Baxter Lane is designated as “Residential” in the Bozeman 2020
Community Plan. The R-3 (Residential Medium Density District) and PLI (Public Lands and
Institutions) zoning designations are consistent with this land use designation of the property.
The property on the north side of Baxter Lane is designated as “Community Commercial” in the
Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. The B-2 (Community Business District) zoning designation is
consistent with this land use designation of the property.
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.
Community Commercial. Activities within this land use category are the basic employment and
services necessary for a vibrant community. Establishments located within these categories draw
from the community as a whole for their employee and customer base and are sized accordingly. A
broad range of functions including retail, education, professional and personal services, offices,
P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 3558
residences, and general service activities typify this designation. In the “center-based” land use
pattern, Community Commercial areas are integrated with significant transportation corridors,
including transit and non-automotive routes, to facilitate efficient travel opportunities. Community
Commercial areas are generally 120 to 140 acres in size and are activity centers for an area of
several square miles surrounding them. The density of development is expected to be higher than
currently seen in most commercial areas in Bozeman and should include multi-story buildings. It is
considered desirable to have residences on upper floors in some circumstances.
PRELIMINARY PLAT SUPPLEMENTS
A pre-application was reviewed by DRC in August 2006. The following concerns were noted: the
need for improved multi model connectivity to the east; reverse frontage lots should only be allowed
with superior design; pedestrian safety issues related to school access routes; the need for park and
open space areas to be both physically and visually accessible; the need for street frontage on park
areas; and the need to achieve minimum net density. However, these issues cannot be addressed with
this subdivision, and will need to be addressed at the time of future subdivision.
Provided below is a summary review of the Preliminary Plat Supplements submitted with the
Preliminary Plat application.
A. Surface Water:
The Spring Ditch bisects the subdivision running from the south side to the northern property line.
The Streams and Ditches Map for the City of Bozeman, provided by the Montana Department of
Fish, Wildlife & Parks, identified the watercourse as a “stream/ditch” with associated wetlands. As
a result, any activity within the identified watercourse and/or wetlands area (i.e., road construction)
will require applicable Section 310 and 404 Permits. The applicant proposes to rebuilt a portion of
the Spring Ditch.
B. Floodplains:
No floodplain study was required for this portion of Baxter Meadows.
C. Groundwater:
Groundwater depths in the area of Baxter Meadows vary depending on proximity to the ditch,
watercourse and associated wetlands. The applicant’s supplemental information notes that static
water levels range from 1 to 9 feet below ground level. With the future subdivision, staff will
require a note on the final plat that there is the potential for seasonal high ground water tables within
the area of the subdivision. In addition, buildings proposed for construction with crawl spaces or
basements shall be required to submit with each Building Permit an Engineer Certification regarding
depth of ground water and soil conditions and proposed mitigation methods. Installation of
municipal water and sanitary sewer services will greatly reduce any concerns regarding the potential
of groundwater degradation.
D. Geology - Soils - Slopes:
There are no known geologic hazards associated with this site, with exception to the Seismic Zone 3
for earthquakes, which is common for the Bozeman area. No significant physical features or
topographical conditions have been identified, and no slopes in excess of fifteen percent (15%) grade
P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 4559
are evident.
Of the principle soil types identified by the Department of Natural Resources Conservation Service
in the area several have hydric components, and several have moderate to severe limitations for
building and site development. A geotechnical evaluation was completed in 2001 to further identify
soil limitations.
E. Vegetation:
No significant levels of mature vegetation (trees and large bushes) exist on the site in question, due
to the agricultural history of the property.
F. Wildlife:
Due to the agricultural history of the property and limited mature vegetation in the area, any
potential impacts to wildlife and wildlife habitat are limited to white-tailed deer, small mammals and
birds. No known endangered species or critical game ranges have been identified in the area. The
50-foot watercourse setback along the existing watercourse will protect any riparian environment
already established on the property.
G. Historical Features:
Due to the agricultural use of the property for many years, there is low likelihood of impact on
cultural properties.
H. Agriculture:
Historically, the subject property has been used for agricultural purposes with the majority of the
parcel in cultivated crops or pastureland.
I. Agricultural Water User Facilities:
The applicant has indicated that agricultural water levels in the Spring Ditch will be maintained.
J. Water and Sewer:
An extension of municipal water mains in the area will provide water for domestic and fire
protection services. An extension of municipal sewage lines will provide for sewage collection and
disposal. Final approval of the water distribution system and sewage collection and disposal system
for this subdivision proposal will be obtained through the normal approval procedures of preliminary
and final plat review by the City Engineer’s Office, Superintendent of Water/Sewer, and Montana
Department of Environmental Quality.
K. Stormwater Management:
Stormwater management will be addressed at the time of further subdivision.
L. Streets, Roads, and Alleys:
Access to the subdivision will be from Baxter Lane and Davis Lane. Both Baxter Lane and Davis
Lane are designated as a Minor Arterial. Two future trail corridors are indicated on Figure 6.5 of the
Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2001 Update. One trail corridor runs north / south from Oak
Street to Baxter Lane. The second trail corridor runs east / west from Davis Lane to the north / south
trail corridor.
P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 5560
Access: Required improvements to street and access limitations will be determined at the time of
further subdivision.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Pathways, Lanes and Routes: According to Bike Route Network of the
Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan (Figures 6-3 and 6-4) and the Recommended Street
Standards of the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan (Figures 11-3 and 11-4), bike lanes and
pedestrian facilities are required along both Baxter Lane and Davis Lane.
Trails: The trail system will be addressed at the time of further subdivision.
M. Utilities:
Utilities will be addressed at the time of further subdivision.
N. Educational Facilities:
This subdivision will not have an impact of the educational facilities.
O. Land Use:
Building Permits will not be issued for any lot in this subdivision until all required on and off-site
improvements are completed and accepted by the City of Bozeman. No building or structure
requiring water or sewer facilities shall be utilized on any lot in this subdivision until this restriction
is lifted. This restriction runs with the land and is revocable only by further subdivision or the
written consent of the City of Bozeman.
P. Parks and Recreation Facilities:
Parks and recreation facilities will be addressed at the time of further subdivision.
Q. Neighborhood Center Plan:
The neighborhood center for the Baxter Meadows PUD project is located in the commercial area to
the north.
R. Lighting Plan.
Street lighting will be addressed at the time of further subdivision.
S. Miscellaneous:
The proposed subdivision is adjacent to the regional park on the south and west. However, no direct
impacts to the regional park, or other public lands, have been identified with this subdivision
proposal.
On or near the subdivision, there is no known health, safety hazards or other nuisances, such as
unpleasant odors, unusual noise, dust or smoke, with exception to the typical risks identified with
seismic activity.
STAFF FINDINGS/REVIEW CRITERIA
P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 6561
The basis for the City Commission’s decision to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove the
subdivision shall be whether the preliminary plat, public hearing if required, Planning Board advice
and recommendation, and additional information demonstrates that development of the subdivision
complies with this title, the City’s growth policy, the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, and
other adopted state and local ordinances, including, but not limited to, applicable zoning
requirements. The Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, Section 76-3-608, establishes the
following primary review criteria for the governing body to consider when evaluating subdivisions.
Planning Staff, the DRC, the WRB, the R&PAB Subdivision Review Committee and other
reviewing agencies have made comments in relation to those and other criteria as described below,
and have recommended conditions as outlined at the end of this Staff Report.
A. Effects on agriculture, agricultural water user facilities, local services, the natural
environment, wildlife and the wildlife habitat, and public health and safety.
1. Effects on Agriculture.
Historically, the subject property has been used for agricultural purposes with the majority of
parcel in cultivated crops or pastureland, most recently barley.
2. Effects on Agricultural Water User Facilities.
The applicant has indicated that agricultural water levels in the Spring Ditch will be
maintained.
3. Effects on Local Services.
Water/Sewer: Water/Sewer services can be provided by extension and connection to the
municipal water and sewer systems.
Streets: Access to the subdivision will be from the existing Baxter Lane and Davis Lane.
4. Effects on the Natural Environment.
Stormwater management will be addressed at the time of further subdivision. Applicant has
entered into an agreement for a Noxious Weed Management and Revegetation Plan with the
Gallatin County Weed Board.
5. Effects on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat.
Due to its historical uses and the development of surrounding lands, no significant adverse
effects on wildlife or their habitat have been identified on the property.
6. Effects on Public Health and Safety.
Because municipal sewer will service future development in the subdivision, the threat of
groundwater degradation from onsite sewage disposal will be eliminated. There are no
known, unmitigated natural or man-made hazards on this property.
B. Compliance with the following:
1. The survey requirements provided for in Part 4 of the Montana Subdivision and
Platting Act.
P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 7562
The subdivision complies or will comply with survey requirements of the Act.
2. The local subdivision regulations provided for in Part 5 of the Montana Subdivision
and Platting Act.
The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman
Municipal Code. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions
that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a
waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or
state law. The following requirements are standards of the Bozeman Municipal Code and
shall be addressed on the final plat:
a. Per Section 18.50.090, executed waivers of right to protest creation of special
improvement districts (SIDs) for a park maintenance district shall be filed and of record
with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder prior to final plat approval. A copy of the
executed documents shall be submitted with the final plat.
b. The Final Plat shall conform to all requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code and the
Uniform Standards for Final Subdivision Plats and shall be accompanied by all required
documents, including certification from the City Engineer that as-built drawings for
public improvements were received, a platting certificate, and all required and corrected
certificates. The Final Plat application shall include four (4) signed reproducible copies
on a 3 mil or heavier stable base polyester film (or equivalent); two (2) digital copies;
and five (5) paper prints.
c. Pursuant to Section 18.06.040.D.6, conditional approval of the Preliminary Plat shall be
in force for not more than one calendar year for minor subdivisions, two years for single-
phased major subdivisions and three years for multi-phased major subdivisions. Prior to
that expiration date, the developer may submit a letter of request for the extension of the
period to the Planning Director for the City Commission’s consideration. The City
Commission may, at the written request of the developer, extend its approval for no more
than one calendar year, except that the City Commission may extend its approval for a
period of more than one year if that approval period is included as a specific condition of
a written subdivision improvements agreement between the City Commission and the
developer, provided for in §18.74.060, BMC.
d. The applicant shall submit with the application for Final Plat review and approval, a
written narrative stating how each of the conditions of preliminary plat approval has
been satisfactorily addressed.
3. The local subdivision review procedure provided for in Part 6 of the Montana
Subdivision and Platting Act.
The hearings before the Planning Board and the City Commission have been properly
noticed, as required in the Bozeman Municipal Code. The notice was mailed to all adjoining
property owners by certified mail on February 16, 2007. The proposed project was noticed in
the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on February 21, 2007.
P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 8563
C. The provision of easements for the location and installation of any planned utilities.
All utilities and necessary utility easements will be provided and depicted on the final plat.
D. The provision of legal and physical access to each parcel within the subdivision and the
required notation of that access on the applicable plat and any instrument of transfer
concerning the parcel.
All lots within the subdivision will have direct access to the dedicated public streets or
easements.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment has been received to date. Any public comments received after the date of this
report will be distributed at the public hearing.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Building Permits will not be issued for any lot in this subdivision until all required on and off-
site improvements are completed and accepted by the City of Bozeman. No building or structure
requiring water or sewer facilities shall be utilized on any lot in this subdivision until this
restriction is lifted. This restriction runs with the land and is revocable only by further
subdivision or the written consent of the City of Bozeman.
2. The zoning map amendment shall be approved by the Commission, but the ordinance need not
be finalized, prior to final plat approval.
3. As further subdivision review is required before any portion of this subdivision can be
developed, the provision of water rights or cash in-lieu thereof as required in the Annexation
Agreement, shall be delayed until the property is further subdivided. If, through any relaxation of
this requirement, any portion of this minor subdivision is developed for any reason or use, ALL
water rights or cash in-lieu thereof for the entire minor subdivision must be provided prior to
issuance of final site plan approval and/or a building permit, whichever first occurs. Water
rights, or if water rights are not available cash-in-lieu thereof, are calculated by the City
Engineer.
4. The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman
Municipal Code. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are
not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other
relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law.
5. This property is in the Baxter Lane Signal payback district. The payback shall be made prior to
filing of the final plat.
CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to Section 18.06.040.D of the Bozeman Municipal Code, the Planning Board shall review
the preliminary plat and supplementary information to determine if the proposed plat is in
P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 9564
compliance or noncompliance with the adopted Growth Policy. The Planning Board shall act to
recommend approval, conditional approval or denial of the preliminary plat application. The Board
shall then provide advice and comments to the Bozeman City Commission for its consideration at its
Monday, April 2, 2007, hearing which begins at 6:00 p.m. The Planning Board Resolution #P-
07004 and minutes from the Planning Board’s March 6, 2007, meeting will be forwarded to the City
Commission and made a part of the Commission’s record.
THE BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD WILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE
BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION. THE CITY COMMISSION SHALL MAKE THE FINAL
DECISION ON THIS APPLICATION. THE DECISION OF THE CITY COMMISSION
MAY BE APPEALED BY AN AGGRIEVED PERSON AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 18.66
OF THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE.
cc: Potter Clinton Development, Inc., 3985 Valley Commons Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718.
Baxter Meadows Development LP, 1500 Poly Dr., Ste. 300, Billings, MT 59102.
P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 10565
Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Subdivision Preliminary Plat # P07004
1
RESOLUTION #P-07004
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDING
CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION
ON ~ 67 ACRES TO BE SUBDIVIDED INTO 4 LOTS FOR FURTHER SUBDIVISION.
THE PROPERTY IS ZONED R-3 (RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICT), B-2
(COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT) AND PLI (PUBLIC LANDS AND INSTITUTIONS
DISTRICT), AND IS GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF DAVIS LANE AND ON THE
NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF BAXTER LANE. THE PROPERTY IS LEGALLY
DESCRIBED LOT 4A-1 OF COS 2202B, AND IS LOCATED IN THE SE ¼ OF SECTION 34,
T1S, R5E AND IN THE NE ¼ OF SECTION 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, CITY OF BOZEMAN,
GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA.
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has adopted a Growth Policy pursuant to 76-1-601,
M.C.A.; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board has been created by Resolution of the
Bozeman City Commission as provided for in Title 76-1-101, M.C.A.; and
WHEREAS, the applicant/owner, Baxter Meadows Development LP, 1500 Poly Dr., Ste.
300, Billings, MT 59102; represented by PC Development, 3985 Valley Commons Drive, Bozeman,
MT 59718, submitted a Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application on ~ 67 acres to be subdivided
into 4 lots for further subdivision on property legally described as Lot 4A-1 of COS 2202B. The
property is situated in the SE ¼ of Section 34, T1S, R5E and in the NE ¼ of Section 3, T2S, R5E,
PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application has been properly
submitted, reviewed, and advertised in accordance with the procedures of Section 18.76 of the
Bozeman Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board held a public hearing on Tuesday, March
6, 2007, to receive and review all written and oral testimony on the request for said Subdivision
Preliminary Plat Application; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Staff presented the staff report on the request for
said Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application; and
WHEREAS, the applicant described the reason for the subdivision; and
WHEREAS, no members of the public were present speaking in favor of or opposition to
said Subdivision Preliminary Plat; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board reviewed the application against the
requirements of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, and found that the Subdivision
566
Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Subdivision Preliminary Plat # P07004
2
Preliminary Plat Application would comply with those requirements with the recommended
conditions of approval; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Bozeman Planning Board, on a
vote of 5 to 0, recommends to the Bozeman City Commission that the ~ 67 acres to be subdivided
into 4 lots for further subdivision on property zoned R-3 (Residential Medium Density District), B-2
(Community Business District) and PLI (Public Lands and Institutions District), which is generally
located west of Davis Lane and on the north and south sides of Baxter Lane, on property legally
described as Lot 4A-1 of COS 2202B, and situated in the SE ¼ of Section 34, T1S, R5E and in the
NE ¼ of Section 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana, be approved with
the 5 conditions which follow; and
1. Building Permits will not be issued for any lot in this subdivision until all required on and off-
site improvements are completed and accepted by the City of Bozeman. No building or structure
requiring water or sewer facilities shall be utilized on any lot in this subdivision until this
restriction is lifted. This restriction runs with the land and is revocable only by further
subdivision or the written consent of the City of Bozeman.
1. The zoning map amendment shall be approved by the Commission, but the ordinance need not
be finalized, prior to final plat approval.
2. As further subdivision review is required before any portion of this subdivision can be
developed, the provision of water rights or cash in-lieu thereof as required in the Annexation
Agreement, shall be delayed until the property is further subdivided. If, through any relaxation of
this requirement, any portion of this minor subdivision is developed for any reason or use, ALL
water rights or cash in-lieu thereof for the entire minor subdivision must be provided prior to
issuance of final site plan approval and/or a building permit, whichever first occurs. Water
rights, or if water rights are not available cash-in-lieu thereof, are calculated by the City
Engineer.
3. The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman
Municipal Code. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are
not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other
relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law.
4. This property is in the Baxter Lane Signal payback district. The payback shall be made prior to
filing of the final plat.
DATED THIS 6th DAY OF MARCH, 2007 Resolution #P-07004
_____________________________ ____________________________
Andrew C. Epple, Planning Director Randy Carpenter, Chairman Protempore
Planning & Community Development Dept. City of Bozeman Planning Board
567
1
** MINUTES **
CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD,
COMMUNITY ROOM, GALLATIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE
311 WEST MAIN STREET
TUESDAY, MARCH 6TH, 2007
7:30 P.M.
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
Chairman Pro Tempore, Randy Carpenter called the meeting to order at 7:55PM and directed the
secretary to record the attendance.
Members Present: Members Absent:
Randy Carpenter, Chairman Pro Tempore JP Pomnichowski (excused)
Brian Caldwell Erik Henyon (excused)
Caren Roberty Steve Kirchhoff, Commission Liaison
Ed Sypinski
William Quinn
Staff Present:
Andrew Epple, Director of Planning and Community Development
Jody Sanford, Senior Planner
Lanette Windemaker, Contract Planner
Allyson Bristor, Associate Planner
Kimberly Kenney-Lyden, Recording Secretary
Sean Becker, Commission Liaison
Guests Present:
Kenneth R. MacDonald Eugene Graf
Erin Graf Jim McKenna
Heidi Graf KC Cassidy
Jerry Smania Mike Nornemann
Steve Wagner WW Locke
Lowell Hirlermar Ross Taylor
CG Kress Stephen Johnson
Harley Huestis Jason Leep
Tom Schmidt Paul Brock
Rick Meis Leonard J. Baluski
Noah Poritz Joyce Hynes
Bart Manion Shereen Brock
Meagan Snodgrass Larry Cloninger
Dexter Wester Carol Wester
Colleen O'Quinn Matt Merrill
Susan Bolgiano Kathy Hayner
Donald McBride Chuck Paden
Diane Wheeler Brad Ebel
Martha Wheeler Frank Munshower
Nicolas Grochowski Al Lien
Cheryl Ridgely Carol Anderson
00:05:40 [19:55:39] ITEM 2. PUBLIC 568
2
COMMENT (0-15 MINUTES)
Seeing there was none, Randy Carpenter closed this portion of the meeting.
0:06:00 [19:55:56] ITEM 3. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 21ST, 2007
Seeing there were no changes, additions or corrections, Brian Caldwell recommended approval of the
minutes, seconded by Bill Quinn and Ed Sypinski. All in favor, motion passed 5-0.
0:06:23 [19:56:09] ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW
1. Growth Policy Amendment Application, #P-07003 (Cornerstone) - A
Growth Policy Amendment Application requested by the owner, Alan Fulton, and
applicant, Covenant Investment LLC, and representative, Intrinsik Architecture, to
change the land use designation set by the Future Land Use Map of the Bozeman
2020 Community Plan from Future Urban to Residential for 40 acres of land just
southwest of the existing Laurel Glen Subdivision. This property is legally described
as Tract 1 and 2 of COS No. 1581, NW ¼ , NW ¼, Section 9, T2S, R5E, P.M.M.,
Gallatin County, Montana. (Bristor)
Associate Planner Allyson Bristor stated the applicant has withdrawn the Growth Policy Amendment, it
was withdrawn today, March 6th, 2007. Therefore, there will be no presentation tonight.
2. Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application, #P-07004 (Baxter Meadows PUD,
Phase IV) – A Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application requested by the
owner and applicant, Baxter meadows Development LP, and representative, PC
Development to subdivide ~67 acres into four lots for further subdivision on property
legally described as Lot 4A-1, COS 2202B, in the SE ¼ section 34, T2S, R5E, P.M.M.,
City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. (Windemaker)
0:07:46 [19:57:39] Staff Report
Lanette Windemaker, contract planner, gave the staff report. The applicant is requesting to divide 67 aces.
This is an unusual subdivision request. Ms. Windemaker noted the City has agreed to accept this request
with the provision that there will be nothing developed on these four lots until the rest of this area is
subdivided. She stated this parcel is located west of the West Winds subdivision and on the southeast
corner of Baxter Meadows subdivision. There has been no public comment submitted to date. There are
standard provisions and on page 9 of the staff report and there are five conditions of approval. Contract
Planner Windemaker stated the City has agreed to delay the water rights until the rest of the property is
subdivided. She closed her portion of the report by noting this is in the Baxter Lane signal payback
district.
0:11:43 [19:57:48] Questions for Staff
Bill Quinn asked Ms. Windemaker if this project is a minor subdivision and she replied that technically, it
is five lots meaning it is a minor subdivision. However, this is a re-subdivision so this application gets
thrown into the major subdivision review process.
Brian Caldwell asked how conditions one and three would relate to site plan development. Planner
Windemaker no site plans will be allowed, but they will have to come forward with a subdivision review
process. They may have a site plan concurrently with that, however it is possible to see one lot
subdivision review.
569
3
Randy Carpenter asked Ms. Windemaker to expound on the Baxter Lane Signal payback district. She
responded it is a small amount of all of Baxter Meadows is included in, it is based on acreage and based
on the final plat. It was based off of the improvements made off of Baxter Lane and established during the
time of annexation.
Brian Caldwell asked how this would be affected with any new SID's. Planner Windemaker stated there
aren't any SID's they are involved in. This is the only payback district that engineering said they were
included in.
0:14:46 [20:02:01] Applicant Presentation
Harley Huestis representing PC Development stated the basic purpose of this application is to get it ready
for further subdivision. They are working with Baxter Meadows Development to develop the park south
of Baxter Lane. This is just a legal remedy to transfer land so they can move forward with the subdivision
development.
0:16:23 [20:05:02] Discussion
Brian Caldwell stated it seems like there is a bit of housecleaning with the configuration of the road and it
seems to have transpired with the regional park. He closed by stating this remedies the boundary
description of the property as well as its ability to be transferred. He noted this is an agreeable item and
the Planning Board should move forward with a recommendation of approval.
0:17:11 [20:05:20] Motion and Vote
Brian Caldwell moved to recommend approval of PUD Application #P-07004 with conditions as
recommended by staff, seconded by Caren Roberty. All in favor. Motion passed 5-0.
3. Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development Application, #P-07007 (The
Knolls at Hillcrest PUD) – A Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development
Application, with relaxations, to allow concurrent construction for an 80-lot major
Subdivision that received preliminary plat approval on July 24, 2006. This application
would also permanently protect 3.7 acres of open space in the Bozeman Creek
Neighborhood Plan planning area by transferring the right to develop 12 homes to the
nearby Bozeman Deaconess Health Services (BDHS) Subarea Plan planning area. The
first 3.86 acre property is legally described as Lot 2 of Certificate of Survey No. 203 and
a portion of Tract 1 of Certificate of Survey No. 1557, NW¼, SE¼ of Section 18, T2S,
R6E, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana, is located at 1417 South
Church Avenue and 425 East Lincoln Street. The second 31.56 acre property is legally
described as the south portion of Tract 1, COS 2047, E½ of Section 18, T2S, R6E, PMM,
Gallatin County, Montana, is located just south of the existing Aspen Point complex at
1201 Highland Boulevard. (Sanford)
0:18:25 [20:07:30] Staff Report
Senior Planner, Jody Sanford, gave the staff report. She stated the applicants are seeking no changes in
the layout of the subdivision. This project received preliminary plat approval last July. They want to do a
planned unit development to achieve concurrent construction approval. They are also trying to get two
PUD relaxations from Sections 18.44.060.D and Section 18.74.020.B of the UDO which is related to the
level of service standards for street intersections. The City does not allow a level of service below level
D.
570
4
There are some issues at Highland and Kagy that need to be addressed. Planner Sanford stated they
would be required to put in a right in, right out at that intersection. Staff is supportive of granting this
relaxation because there will only be minimal construction traffic impacts to the current neighborhood
using that route. The improvement agreement relaxation is not supported by the Engineering Department
and Planning Staff is recommending denial of this relaxation. The applicants are proposing to satisfy their
performance points by proposing open space and protecting a small amount of open space in the Bozeman
Creek Neighborhood.
Ms. Sanford noted this proposal wants to transfer development rights out of the Soman property in the
Bozeman Creek Neighborhood. She stated they would be adding nine lots in locations previously
approved for open space in the Knolls property in exchange for the Soman Property. Planner Sanford
stated they have received two letters of public comment. One letter is from a New Hyalite View resident
which opposed the addition of these lots. The other letter was from GVLT and they had some
recommendations.
Senior Planner Jody Sanford stated the only two conditions were that the PUD be approved with the
relaxation of Kagy and Highland intersection, and the second relaxation be denied. If the Planning Board
approves the lots that will be transferred for development rights, she asked they pass on their
recommendations about height blockage of the proposed development and the obstruction of view.
0:27:24 [20:08:21] Questions for Staff
Ed Sypinski asked Planner Sanford about the TDR itself, he wanted to know if that applies to townhome
units or acreage. If it is units, the original plan was much lower than 12 units and asked how that applies
to this transfer. She responded Soman Development was initially proposing 12 units, but it was denied.
Ms. Sanford noted that Planning Staff is not looking at this in a unit per unit transfer, but as an acre for
acre transfer.
Brian Caldwell followed up on Mr. Sypinski's thoughts. He wanted to know if the acreage based on the
net buildable lot area or the gross acreage. Ms. Sanford stated they are proposing to protect that entire
3.83 acres of the Soman property by the Bozeman Creek. This area is actually larger than the property in
the Knolls property. This would leave us with a net gain of open space. Mr. Caldwell ask if the reason
why staff is recommending denial of the improvements agreement by the applicant is due to the length of
time and relation in dealing with MDT for this area. Ms. Sanford stated that since the applicant will have
to go through MDT, they know this will take a long time and the developers do not want to wait that long
to get started on this project. Not supporting the relaxation request; we need to treat all developers
equally. It was more of an equity issue from the Engineering Department.
Ms. Sanford stated that during the review process of the original Knolls project, the applicant did a traffic
impact study, but these specifications are not being reviewed in a timely manner. She stated the
improvements that need to be made, need to be made for the subdivision. It is important to bring this to
the Planning Board because it involves two neighborhood plans and subdivisions.
Caren Roberty asked for clarification about concurrent construction. She wanted to know what staff's
rationale if for thinking it would be okay to achieve approval at this time. Planner Sanford stated that in
this case of concurrent construction, the Hillcrest Group is going to be in charge of overseeing the
subdivision improvements, they will be doing all the building themselves and will not be selling
individual lots. Ms. Roberty asked if there anything in this proposal that deals with the impact on the
neighborhoods. Ms. Sanford replied the applicant cannot receive occupancy permits until all the
infrastructure is completed. Therefore, there will not be any residential traffic until the streets are done.
571
5
She closed by stating the City has requirements in place regarding construction routing and cleanliness
that will help with these concerns.
Bill Quinn stated that in the improvement procedure that allows street improvements, staff is
recommending denial of this. He wanted to know the difference between Highland and Kagy
infrastructure improvements versus what is considered concurrent construction at the Knolls site. Ms.
Sanford the only problem the City has with everything the applicant is proposing to do at this site, is that
Staff feels like the plans at Main and Highland could end up bringing drastic changes that MDT would
require the Hillcrest Group to add to their plans.
Randy Carpenter wanted to make sure the Board is clear on the PUD application because it is somewhat
convoluted since it has been eight months since the subdivision was approved. He stated that the applicant
should limit the building heights on those nine additional lots that could obstruct the views of the New
Hyalite residents or that those nine lots possibly be moved someplace else. Mr. Carpenter asked if there
has been any discussion on this subject with the applicant. Planner Sanford stated the applicant is only
looking at getting approval from the Planning Board of these modifications to their original subarea plan.
She added that the next pre-application process, there is significant reduction in the original density
proposed. She closed by stating the Board can make recommendations during the pre-application process.
Ms. Sanford stated that this application is only dealing with the modifications to the subarea plan.
Suggestions on how to better deal with those nine lots can be addressed during the subdivision pre-
application which is the next item to follow.
0:43:26 [20:08:31] Applicant Presentation
Jason Leep representing PC Development, the Bozeman Deaconness Health Services Group, and the
Soman Development group. He stated this is a unique application. The Edgewood Townhouse project
would have left a bad taste in the community's mouth because the townhouses could have been brought
forward as a potential legal conflict and the neighborhood was very uncomfortable with the eight
proposed units next to the Bozeman Creek. He stated the Manion and Sobrepena family withdrew their
prior application in November 2006 and looks forward to the outcome of this application. Mr. Leep stated
the Deaconness Group was contacted about a transfer of development rights. He added they are trying to
advance the goals of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, trying to get the Manion and Sobrepena
Families to realize the value of their property, and Deaconess is trying to proceed with its project through
the lengthy MDT process.
Mr. Leep stated there are three recipients who benefit in this proposal; the City of Bozeman gets their
open space and trail goals advanced, the Soman Group receives the fair market value for their land and
improved neighbor relations, and the Bozeman Deaconness Health Services will hopefully get concurrent
construction to begin on four model homes. The Soman Group will be placing a deed restriction on their
ground so that no development can occur on their property by the Bozeman Creek. Each party is giving to
the other.
Mr. Leep stated that all they are asking for is to start construction on the four model homes because
Deaconness has developed eight floor plans for this area. None of these homes have ever been built
before with new designs. They would like to start on these plans to improve the quality of construction in
the other homes. He stated the only related traffic will be construction vehicles. There are safeguards in
the application during the construction process and they will not interfere with public health and safety.
There will be no residential traffic allowed until the improvements are in. He stated the Engineering
Department
572
6
recommended denial of the improvements relaxation because they feel that every developer will be asking
for this. Mr. Leep noted this proposal is advancing the City's goals in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood
Plan which is why it should be approved.
Mr. Leep presented his intersection modifications to Highland and Main that were presented to MDT.
They have proposed a center left hand turn lane so people going north down highland and are waiting at
the signal could turn left at the light as people who wish to make a right onto Main Street can do so at the
same time without Highland backing up during peak traffic hours. He closed by noting the wait time at
that intersection which is currently five minutes will end up being reduced to thirty seconds.
1:03:55 [20:18:22] Questions for Staff
Brian Caldwell asked if the only reason why Highland was created was due to the hospital. Mr. Leep
stated he did not know. Director Andy Epple stated there is an old Highland Boulevard that was the old
platted boulevard. The decision was made to locate the new Highland Boulevard the way it currently runs.
Mr. Leep responded the new Highland Boulevard was made because of the hospital access issues.
Mr. Caldwell stated that regarding the transfer of development rights of usable, developable, and
buildable land should be more like 1 to 2 acres. He noted there is an additional community benefit
because of the current storm water management plan on Sourdough. He just wanted to make sure that
they are not running storm water down the hill. Mr. Leep stated there is a current storm drain line that
dumps the water directly into the creek. They want to reserve a portion of the Soman's property to install
a wetlands storm water treatment area. That way the water gets treated prior to landing into the creek.
Caren Roberty asked why they are requesting a relaxation on the financial guarantee with submitted plans
instead of approved plans. Mr. Leep replied that with the project sitting in wait for a prolonged period of
time to have MDT respond, they could use that time very constructively to try to make the construction
process more efficient. It's an opportunity to get something productive done while waiting for the
Montana Department of Transportation to do whatever it is they do with their plans since that is the only
department that does not have a state mandated timeline by law. If they were like DEQ that has laws that
require them to complete their review in 30 days, this situation would not be part of the request.
Bill Quinn asked if the TDR location on the Hillcrest property is the only location the developer could
determine to put the twelve lots. Mr. Leep responded this is what they could fit into the preplanned areas
already taken. Mr. Quinn then asked if they have exhausted all possible ideas. Mr. Leep answered that
multifamily lots will not be accepted in the preplanned pods.
Ed Sypinski asked what the sizes of the areas would be that Hillcrest is willing to do the transfers on. Mr.
Leep stated that they are roughly at 100 to 120,000 square feet total.
Randy Carpenter asked why they are going forward with a deed restriction instead of a conservation
easement on the Soman's property. Mr. Leep responded they spoke with GVLT and the outcome was the
current conservation easement rules do not work well for properties under 10 acres. Mr. Carpenter asked
why they did not ask for a PUD when they originally came forward with the subdivision. Mr. Leep stated
that at that time, they would not be asking for any relaxations other than concurrent construction like they
are now. Mr. Carpenter stated the TDR does have some public benefits, however these are equal lot
exchanges given to Soman as what was in the original Edgewood plan. Mr. Leep responded this was a
legitimate exchange and Soman gets paid for their ground.
573
7
Ed Sypinski asked how this reduces the number of open space of the subarea plan since those areas being
given to Soman were not planned for development. Mr. Leep stated there is no problem with the open
space in the subarea plan. There will be over 100 acres of open space and legally, they will easily meet
the City's requirements.
Randy Carpenter asked if the City is allowed to do a Transfer of Development Rights. Ms. Sanford stated
they are not literally proposing to do a TDR because this would be considered a private matter between
the two parties. The only thing they need from the Planning Board is to agree to the amendment to the
subarea plan. Mr. Carpenter stated that if the City does not want to allow street improvements prior to
receipt of plans, what does staff consider to be the downside of this of approving this type of relaxation.
Planner Sanford stated that Mr. Leep's assessment of public safety and health issues is accurate because
they built enough safegaurds in their proposal. However, Engineering is opposed to this application
because it would set a precedent. The City does not feel comfortable with granting exceptions to this rule
at this time.
Planning Director Andy Epple stated that on the issue of precedent, it is an issue that City Staff is
concerned with. However if it does set a precedent for land or a corridor that needs to be protected, he
would welcome this opportunity.
1:25:28 [20:33:34] Public Comment
Chuck Payton lives at 507 Ice Pond Road and is speaking on behalf of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood
Advisory Council. He noted their group has discussed this and does support the protection of this Soman
area and applaud the parties involved to find a positive outcome. Mr. Payton stated they should be
protecting the character of the Bozeman Creek Corridor to preserve that natural area. He stated they
support adoption of condition two of the staff report to preserve the open space and also support the
exchange of property between the two parties. Mr. Payton noted the neighborhood would like to know
how the analysis was done and what values were give to the property. He stated that although this is a
private agreement, it could help others in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood as to how they could have a
dedicated conservation easement on their property. In conclusion, he stated they are not raising these
questions to shoot down this proposal because it is good. We believe it is in the public's best interest to
resolve the prior problems.
Ed Montos from Bridger Engineers representing Jimmy Pepper. He noted the Pepper family lives just
north of the donor property along Bozeman Creek. The Peppers live at 1322 South Rouse and have
approximately 3 acres just north of the Soman properties. The Peppers want to say they fully support what
is going on here in order to support the Bozeman Creek Corridor, but they have three concerns. One of
them is that even though this is not a TDR program, it is the start of the City of Bozeman doing similar
things like this and they just want to make sure there is some process where they can participate in case
they want to do a conservation easement on their property. Mr. Montos stated the Pepper Family does not
want this to reduce their property value. In closing, he stated whatever procedure is done, the City needs
to think about the next participants involved with this type of transaction. They, the Pepper family, just
want a mechanism in place so other property owners along the corridors can participate.
Steven Johnson, on behalf of GVLT stated the two prior speakers spoke eloquently about their support for
this. GVLT supports the creativity and initiative of this proposal and is in support of it as well. They
would like to see the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan advanced. Mr. Johnson stated they do have a
concern for the precedent, but do not see a problem with the change in density of the subarea plan. They
are requesting this proposal move forward.
574
8
Noah Poritz lives at 1418 Maple Drive. He stated he feels this might be a direct impact to his home. He
opposes the TDR because if you look at the significant changes in the Bozeman Creek property and the
equity of the Hillcrest property. The benefit analysis does include the costs and impacts to the New
Hyalite View residents. Mr. Poritz stated that to put nine homes directly across from a park which
happens to be native ground with native brush would not be appropriate. He noted that the fact the
applicant did not notify any of the residents of the Hyalite View Subdivision because they were not
required to really speaks to the character of the developer. Had we been formally notified other than the
announcement in the paper, we would be hearing more voices on this subject who would be opposed. In
closing, Mr. Poritz suggested that the Planning Board reject this proposal.
Bart Manion lives at 425 East Lincoln Street stated that the comments made by Andy Epple summed this
up perfectly because this does set a precedent. It shows we can come up with a remedy to a real problem.
They have tried three application processes to develop the Soman Property of which all were denied. This
is an agreeable outcome. Both Mr. Leep and Director Epple were the ones who proposed this to the
Soman group since we had so many issues with the prior three applications. Mr. Manion stated he'd be
glad to answer the questions from the Bozeman Creek group and the surrounding neighbors. He would be
happy to share all his information and be more than happy to help them if they want to do this. For five
years, they have been trying to develop our property and for once, we have come to a positive result.
Scott Creel lives at 1430 Cherry Drive in the New Hyalite View subdivision. He stated there is a lot to
like and dislike in this proposal. A year ago, when they were discussing the plan, the room was full of
people. Mr. Creek stated that twelve lots does not seem like a lot of new homes, but some of these lots are
directly adjacent to the Hyalite View property. So there has been a huge compromise made and he feels
the details are what matters. He is not opposed to putting twelve lots in the Hillcrest area, but would like
them to be put somewhere else because of the adjacent park. There is a trail running through that park
area and directly through the proposed 12 lots that is highly used. This would not be a great use of that
area and is not in support of this application.
KC Cassidy lives at 1316 South Rouse stated she is excited about the TDR. She stated this is a precedent
setting situation of which everyone would benefit. Ms. Cassidy stated there has been such a good effort
on the part of PC Development and the Manions to have an amicable outcome and would not like to see
policy roadblocks. She will be supporting this application.
1:51:34 [20:56:13] Discussion
Brian Caldwell noted that this precedent in the transfer of development rights, it is important to recognize
the watercourse areas, setbacks, and floodplains. On a good day, there is only an acre and a half of good
buildable property on the Manion property and feels that the transfer to 3 acres is an over value. Mr.
Caldwell stated that this is something we should be supporting. He would strongly suggest the board
should reduce the transfer of ground by half. As far as the public benefit, this is most certainly something
we should support.
Mr. Jason Leep stated that reason they came to a result of 12 lots, this was the calculation of buildable
area zoned R2. While they are looking at gross acreage versus gross acreage, however the zoning of the
Soman Property is what caused the number of 12 lots. Mr. Caldwell noted they need to not look at this
transfer from a unit standpoint, but square footage of buildable space. The issue that MDT is going to pull
some magic expense out of their hat will not likely happen. He added that Mr. Leep does have safeguards
in their proposal to make sure that improvements are made.
Mr. Caldwell noted the overall approval of this PUD are very much worth supporting, but the issue 575
9
of the TDR and red areas need to be equivalent.
Ed Sypinski stated his concern is not about the land value, but the location of the TDR's. He noted he is
afraid they are putting two neighborhoods against each other. They can look at a conditional use as to
where the development can take place. He is supportive that the new construction could occur on Kagy
intead of next to the New Hyalite residences. Mr. Sypinski agrees that the TDR is good first step in the
process. They could, however, relocate these nine units and distribute them amongst this development.
With the relaxations, he disagrees because during the subarea plan, the Planning Board agreed that a
traffic impact study had to be done. Therefore, Mr. Sypinski stated he can approve this conditionally if
they take out some of the recommendations of this PUD.
Caren Roberty stated she does not want to vote against this application because she agrees that the
Bozeman Creek Corridor area needs to be preserved. The TDR lots adjacent to the Painted Hills Road
across from the park will have significant aesthetic impacts, eliminate usable open space, and will have
driveways crossings to a shared used path. She stated this is a lot to deal with at this stage of the process.
Ms. Roberty stated there has to be another place to put these units. She would like to make a
recommendation reflecting this. There is a way to tailor this project to meet everyone's needs. Concurrent
development will not hurt anything and does not have a problem with the financial guarantees.
Bill Quinn stated that the board is considering two proposals. If they vote to approve this, are they voting
to approve the locations in the preliminary plat. Ms. Sanford noted that the pre-application is an informal
review, but if the board approves this application with the change in the subarea plan, they are saying they
can have those twelve lots in that particular area in that application. If it is declined by the board, they
would be required to remove those lots. She noted they could state they are okay with squeezing in those
extra lots, but perhaps find another location.
Mr. Caldwell stated he is hopeful there is a greater exchange than just wanting to get construction started
early.
Bill Quinn stated that in that regard, he is very much in favor of protecting that Bozeman Creek area and
is in favor of the concurrent construction since we have a financial guarantee. Mr. Quinn noted the only
issue he has is the location of where the TDR's are going to end up.
Mr. Caldwell stated the board to recommend approval of this application, but put a condition that the
exchange be 1 and 1/2 acres instead of 3 acres. This would help address the issues raised by adjacent
property owners. Mr. Sypinski stated the Planning Board is only allowed to recommend approval of the
modifications to the plan and they cannot approve the TDR because that is a private matter.
Director Epple stated that the TDR is a private negotiation between two property owners. If the board is
comfortable with two out of the three major aspects of this project; the protection of land in the Bozeman
Creek Corridor and the concurrent construction. However, the problem is where the receiving areas of the
TDR are that were originally planned for open space. Mr. Epple stated there are two times they will be
able to address this issue because of this application, modifications to the original plan, and the next
agenda item where the informal subdivision pre-application will be discussed.
Chair Pro Tempore, Mr. Carpenter agreed with the rest of the board. They can vote to approve the
concurrent construction, approve the TDR to preserve the Bozeman Creek Corridor, but they can put a
condition on the location of those lots by coming up with new ideas of where they can put these lots.
Mr. Carpenter noted that if the board were to support this, he would hope they are not entitling
the applicant to having these lots in the locations they are currently in. He could approve this with the 576
10
9 lots to the north of Hyalite View being reduced and building height restricted. They can deal with this
portion of the issue during the next agenda item.
2:17:00 [21:17:19] Motion and Vote
Brian Caldwell stated it is important to note the land will have to come from somewhere. It will come
from what is shown as open space on this plan. His motion will speak specifically to the amount of TDR,
to be addressed in acreage and not unit. In addition to this, he will give a favorable opinion of the other
conditions.
Brian Caldwell moved to recommend approval of the CUP/PUD Application #P-07007 amended that the
receiving area be reduced by 1.5 acres along Painted Hills Road as well as recommending approval the
relaxations as proposed by the applicant. The motion was seconded by Bill Quinn.
Mr. Carpenter asked for discussion on the motion. Mr. Sypinski stated he has trouble with the amended
transferrable acres. He noted the board has no authority to do that. Ms. Roberty stated the board is only
making a recommendation.
Those in favor of Mr. Caldwell’s motion being Brian Caldwell, Bill Quinn, and Caren Roberty. Those
against being Ed Sypinski and Randy Carpenter. The motion failed.
Ed Sypinski moved to approve the CUP/PUD Application of #P-07007 as conditioned by staff and with
the added condition that the nine units proposed along Painted Hills Road be removed to an area
designated for development and to reduce lot sizes. The motion was seconded by Caren Roberty. Those in
favor being Caren Roberty, Bill Quinn, and Ed Sypinski. Those against being Brian Caldwell and Randy
Carpenter. The motion failed.
Randy Carpenter recommend approval of CUP/PUD Application #P-07007 as conditioned by staff and
the added condition of the Planning Board and City Commission to consider reducing the building height
of the new lots along Painted Hills Road be limited to 24 feet. The motion was seconded by Ed Sypinski.
Mr. Carpenter stated he believes the board can address the issues in the pre-application that is coming up
next with the motion given. With the recommended conditions of approval by staff and with the new
condition to restrict the building height on the newly added lots, Mr. Carpenter stated they can better
address the pre-application of the subdivision next. Mr. Caldwell stated the conditions approved are not
clear in the relaxations requested by the applicant in the recent motion.
Mr. Carpenter stated he wishes to amend his previous motion and moved to recommend approval of
CUP/PUD Application #P-07007 to allow street improvements to be financially guaranteed based on
submitted plans instead of approved plans.
Those in favor being Caren Roberty, Bill Quinn, Randy Carpenter, and Brian Caldwell. Those against
being Ed Sypinski. The motion failed.
Senior Planner Jody Sanford stated the Planning Board does not have to make an official
recommendation. She further noted that not every board member is present tonight to help give additional
input. This project is going before the City Commission without a formal recommendation from the
Planning Board.
4. Subdivision Pre-Application #P-07002 (The Knolls East and Highland South) - A
Major Subdivision Pre-Application on behalf of Bozeman Deaconess Health Services
to allow the subdivision of 216.95 acres into 374 single household lots, 2 attached 577
11
Mr. Leep noted he does want to ensure the Planning Board that there will be an excellent trail in this
proposal. There will be two improved park areas on each end and then a long linear park in between. He
added the park is natural ground, it is not a "park". It is intended to be a controlled access park that
includes parking and restrooms. They are okay with most of the conditions outlined by staff except
single household lots, 1 multi-household lot, and 1 mixed use lot for a total of 460
dwelling units on property located east of Highland Boulevard and the New Hyalite
View Subdivision. The property is annexed with a zoning designation of R-1
(Residential Single Household, Low Density District) and R-S (Residential Suburban
District). (Sanford)
2:29:40 [22:09:58] Staff Report
Senior Planner Jody Sanford gave the staff report. She stated there are a variety of residential zones and
possibly some B2 in this informal application. This property totals 216.95 acres in size. The applicant will
dedicate 60 acres for a public park. She noted the applicant would also set aside approximately 37 acres
for dedicated public open space. Ms. Sanford noted they are creating 5 single household lots for
affordable housing. The total dwelling units will be 460. She noted this pre-application has considerable
less density than the subarea plan, but this is due to the topography. The UDO requires they have 6 units
per acre and Planning Staff found that they would only have about 5 1/2 units per acre. They will need to
do a PUD to relax that standard or find a way to put more housing units here to meet the approved
subarea plan.
Senior Planner Sanford stated the UDO requires the applicant have 100% street frontage along city parks,
and it could never be less than 50% street frontage. This proposal does not meet the 50% criteria. She
noted that Planning Staff is recommending that they have street frontage along the proposed park. The
Parks and Recreation advisory board also made the same finding. She noted that the lots that were
approved for open space are being encroached upon on the east and west sides. Staff would like to see
more connectivity along the east and west sides of Painted Hills Road. The lots proposed on Painted Hills
bring some safety concerns to the Planning Department. She stated there are an awful lot of driveways
facing that busy street and a better plan would to have those lots accessed by installing an alley and it
would give more visual appeal. If the applicant cannot install an alley, those developments would need to
have a shared driveway.
Ms. Sanford stated the Affordable Housing Board reviewed this and CAHAB suggested the RSL's be
scattered throughout this development instead of in one localized area. The comments were received from
the Bridger Ski Foundation, GVLT, and Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
2:39:34 [22:22:12] Questions for Staff
Ed Sypinski stated that on the Preliminary Plat Application, it is clearly noted where the 9 TDR lots will
be located. However on this application, it is not clear and he asked if there is an indicator on this
application of where the alternative location would be for these lots.
Planner Sanford stated it is hard to tell and Mr. Leep stated it is too early to tell. She was only able to
indicate the general area of their locations.
2:40:35 [22:22:26] Applicant Presentation
Jason Leep representing PC Development and the Deaconness Group. He stated the trails and the nature
of the community park are two large issues that are going to have to be resolved. The trail on the subarea
plan is general in nature and not intended to show trail configuration.
578
21
Brian Caldwell commented this plan shows the skill taken and is a better proposed plan that what was
presented to planning staff originally. He added this land was already given to the hospital for future
lining park space with a road because of the steep grade next to it. The 9 lot TDR area is part of the
original open space plan. Mr. Leep stated they are 64 residential lots short of what was approved in the
subarea plan. He noted they feel it is not right to cram those 64 extra lots into this plan. There is a total of
58 affordable housing units in this plan to include some rental lots. This project is split into five phases.
Mr. Leep noted the affordable housing plan eliminates the Restricted Size Lots.
Jason Leep commented they have added additional road connection between the pods and met the intent
of pedestrian pass through with this design. The pedestrian corridors are aligned with streets and they are
going to put in a Nordic Ski Trail System. There is a new lot configuration that allows for trail corridor
widening that intertwine with the pods. He noted they now have access onto Kagy and added alleyways
which will allow for garage access. Mr. Leep closed by stating they are not in the position to try and get
road frontage along the park because of access control and added this park is not Cooper Park because it
is a natural park, but agrees with staff on all the other issues.
2:53:40 [22:33:05] Questions for Staff
Caren Roberty asked Mr. Leep if they added the connections to the streets specified by Planner Sanford.
He responded they did comply with her direction in two spots.
2:54:41 [22:33:58] Public Comment
Ted Lange representing GVLT stated his firm has enjoyed working with PC Development and the
Bozeman Deaconess Group. He noted the biggest problem, in that area along the park land, it that there is
a 50 degree drop along some of those areas so there was no choice but to move the homes up another 25
feet. That 'Rim Trail' is gone, there is no Rim Trail at its specified site because it is completely gone and
the lots extend completely to the slope. There is no way one could build a trail there. This does however
provide for a great Nordic Track for the City of Bozeman. Mr. Lange noted this new plan looks like
significant improvements were made overall. His biggest concern is the lots along Rim Trail. He closed
by stating the jury is out on the nine TDR lots.
Noah Poritz lives at 1418 Maple Drive and noted that if the board looks at the original adopted subarea
plan, there is a different street alignment now. He stated he does not want a road that shines headlights
right into his living room window. Mr. Poritz stated if they could change that, the New Hyalite View
residents do not become victims to light pollution.
Scott Creel lives at 1430 Cherry Drive. He noted he keeps hearing "we can change this later". He is
aware that they are not approving anything at this time. However, a decision is being made. Mr. Creel
stated the UDO says that PUD's must keep to the existing character of the adjacent neighborhoods. He
encouraged the board to not get lost in the details and compare it to the existing neighborhoods that this is
adjacent to. Even though the changes are individually small, they all add up in the end. Mr. Creel stated
he understands the city wants to get six units per acre, the City has some obligations to meet in
considering the neighborhood right next to this property.
3:05:31 [22:47:24] Discussion
Ed Sypinski stated he appreciates the responsiveness that Mr. Leep and the Deaconness Group have
shown in the master plan. He also appreciates comments from the adjacent neighborhoods to keep the
board on track.
579
13
development for the City. Mr. Caldwell closed by stating the nine TDR lots that are added are in his
opinion, not necessary.
Randy Carpenter noted he these changes are appreciated and are good ideas. He likes the numerous park
lands in this plan. Mr. Carpenter closed by stating we need a better regulation on street frontage in regards
to parks. This particular park in question does not need street frontage.
3:07:58 [22:48:34] ITEM 5. ADJOURNMENT
Ed Sypinski motioned to adjourn the Planning Board meeting, seconded by Randy Carpenter and Brian
Caldwell. All in favor, the meeting was adjourned at 11:04 PM.
_____________________________________ __________________________________
Randy Carpenter, Chair Pro Tempore Andrew C. Epple, Director
Planning Board Dept. of Planning & Community Dev.
City of Bozeman City of Bozeman
*City of Bozeman Planning Board meetings are open to all members of the public.
If you have a special need or disability, please contact our
ADA Coordinator, Ron Brey, at 582-2306 (voice) or 582-2301 (TDD).
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
Baxter Meadows Subdivision, P.U.D.
Preliminary Plat Application
for a
Minor Subdivision
Prepared: January, 2007
602
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION
DESCRIPTION TAB #
Development Review Application........................1
Pre-Plat Checklist ....................................1
Pre-Plat Checklist Narrative ............................1
Preliminary Plat (11x17)...............................2
Existing Topography (11x17)...........................2
Vicinity Map ........................................3
Land Use Concept Plan ................................3
Zoning - Current and Proposed ..........................4
Weed Control Plan....................................5
Preliminary Platting Certificate..........................6
Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements ........7
Surface Water; Floodplains; Groundwater; Geology, Soils & Slope;
Vegetation; Wildlife; Historical Features; Agriculture; Agriculture Water User
Facilities; Water & Sewer; Stormwater Management; Streets, Roads & Alleys;
Utilities; Educational Facilities; Land Use; Parks & Recreational Facilities;
Neighborhood Center Plan; Lighting Plan; and Miscellaneous.
Adjoiners List and Certificate ...........................8
Preliminary Plat (24x36)...............................9
Existing Topography (24x36)...........................9
603
BAXTER MEADOWS SUBDIVISION, P.U.D. – MINOR SUBDIVISION
Preliminary Plat Application
January 2007
Preliminary Plat Application Checklist Narrative
D. Preliminary Plat Requirements
1. All information required with the pre-application plan, as outlined in Section
18.78.030 (Subdivision Preapplication Plan), BMC.
See all included drawings.
2. Name and location of the subdivision, scale, scale bar, north arrow, date of
preparation, lots and blocks (designated by number), the dimensions and area of
each lot, and the use of each lot, if other than for single family.
See information on plat exhibit.
3. All streets, roads, alleys, avenues, highways, and easements; the width of the
right-of-way, grades, and curvature of each; existing and proposed road and
street names; and proposed location of intersections for any subdivision requiring
street access to arterial or collector highways.
See information on plat exhibit.
4. The names of adjoining platted subdivisions and numbers of adjoining certificates
of survey.
See information on plat exhibit.
5. An approximate survey of the exterior boundaries of the platted tract with
bearings, distances, and curve data indicated outside of the boundary lines.
When the plat is bounded by an irregular shoreline or a body of water, the
bearings and distances of a closing meander traverse shall be given.
See information on plat exhibit.
6. The approximate location of all section corners or legal subdivision corners of
sections pertinent to the subdivision boundary.
See information on plat exhibit.
7. If the improvements required are to be completed in phases after the final plat is
filed, the approximate area of each phase shall be shown on the plat.
N/A
8. Ground contours at 2-foot intervals if slope is under 10 percent; 5-foot intervals if
the slope is between 10 and 15 percent; and 10-foot intervals if slope is 15
percent or greater.
See information on site survey.
604
9. List of waivers granted from the requirements of Section 18.78.060 (Additional
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements), BMC during the preapplication
process.
None granted.
10. Request for exemption from the Montana Department of Environmental Quality
Review as described in Section 18.78.040.K (Request for exemption from MDEQ
Review), BMC.
N/A – No improvements associated with this minor subdivision will be
constructed until it has undergone futher review.
11. All appropriate certificates (refer to Chapter 18.12, BMC).
See information on plat exhibit.
E. Preliminary Plat Supplements Required for All Subdivisions
1. A map showing all adjacent sections of land, subdivision, certificates of survey,
streets and roads
See vicinity map, and preliminary plat.
2. Map of entire subdivision on either an 8.5-inch x 11-inch, 8.5-inch x 14-inch, or
11-inch x 17-inch sheet
See information on plat exhibit.
3. A written statement describing any requested subdivision variance(s) and the
facts of hardship upon which the request is based. Refer to Chapter 18.66
(Variance, Deviation, and Appeal Procedures), BMC.
No variances requested.
4. Covenants, Restrictions, and Articles of Incorporation for the Property Owners’
Association.
N/A – No POA will be formed until the subdivision undergoes futher review.
5. Encroachment permits or a letter indicating intention to issue a permit where new
streets, easements, rights-of-way or driveways intersect State, County, or City
highways, streets or roads.
N/A – No improvements associated with this minor subdivision will be
constructed until it has undergone futher review.
7. A letter of approval or preliminary approval from the City of Bozeman where a
zoning change is necessary.
Please see Tab 4.
8. A draft of such other appropriate certificates.
N/A
605
9. Provision for maintenance of all streets (including emergency access), parks, and
other required improvements if not dedicated to the public or if private.
N/A – No improvements associated with this minor subdivision will be
constructed until it has undergone futher review.
10. Profile sheets for street grades greater than 5 percent.
N/A
11. If an authorized representative signs on behalf of an owner of record, a copy of
the authorization shall be provided.
N/A
12. A Noxious Weed Management and Revegetation Plan approved by the Weed
Control District for control of noxious weeds.
See approved Weed Control Plan.
13. A preliminary platting certificate prepared by a Montana title company.
See included preliminary platting certificate.
F. Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements
1. Surface Water.
Tab 7
2. Floodplains.
Tab 7
3. Groundwater.
Tab 7
4. Geology, soils and slope.
Tab 7
5. Vegetation.
Tab 7
6. Wildlife.
Tab 7
7. Historical features.
Tab 7
8. Agriculture.
Tab 7
9. Agriculture water user facilities.
Tab 7
10. Water and sewer.
N/A
11. Stormwater management.
N/A
12. Streets, roads and alleys.
N/A
13. Utilities.
N/A
606
14. Educational Facilities.
N/A
15. Land Use.
N/A
16. Parks and recreation facilities.
N/A
17. Neighborhood center plan.
N/A
18. Lighting plan.
N/A
19. Miscellaneous.
N/A
20. Additional relevant and reasonable information.
N/A
607
608
609
610
611
612
BAXTER MEADOWS SUBDIVISION, P.U.D. – MINOR SUBDIVISION
Preliminary Plat Application
January 2007
Zoning
The zoning of this minor subdivision will be B-2 and R-3 prior to submitting the
Final Plat. Portions of Lots 3 & 4, south of Baxter Lane, currently are zoned PLI, as a
result of the boundary adjustment between this property and the Gallatin County
Regional Park. A zone map amendment application has been submitted concurrently
with this preliminary plat application. An exhibit showing details of the zone change is
shown on the following page.
613
Total increase in useable (non-ROW) PLI: 1.06
Total decrease in useable (non-ROW) R-3: -0.22
Total net change in zoning acreage - PLI to R-3: 3.01
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
BAXTER MEADOWS SUBDIVISION, P.U.D. – MINOR SUBDIVISION
Preliminary Plat Application
January 2007
Adjoiners List
Physically Contiguous:
Cascade Development, Inc.
c/o Wayne Jennings
125 W. Mendenhall St.
Bozeman, MT 59715-3586
WBC LP
AD% Baxter Meadows Development
6780 Trade Center Ave.
Billings, MT 59101-6294
William R. & Dianne Peterson
5001 Baxter Ln. East
Bozeman, MT 59718-9797
Gallatin County
311 W. Main St.
Bozeman, MT 59715-4594
Ben W. & Diane E. Rogers
6724 Davis Lane
Bozeman, MT 59718-8865
Within 200 ft:
Cecilia K. Reiner
106 Erik Dr.
Bozeman, MT 59715-6633
Warbler Development, LLC
P.O.Box 10968
Bozeman, MT 59719-0968
Carolyn M. Nistler
48 Crescent Point
Bozeman, MT 59715
625
626
APPENDIX A
UPDATED BAXTER MEADOWS WETLANDS
IMPACT/MITIGATION MAP
CURRENT U.S.A.C.E. 404 WETLANDS PERMIT
ORIGINAL WETLANDS STUDY - JUNE 2000
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
APPENDIX B
310 PERMIT - GALLATIN CONSERVATION DISTRICT
656
657
658
659
APPENDIX C
NRCS SOILS INFORMATION
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
APPENDIX D
GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA
695
696
697
698
APPENDIX E
VEGETATION MAP
699
700
APPENDIX F
SOILS REPORT
701
MEMORANDUM
TO: Neil Poulsen
Building Inspection Department
FROM: Harley Huestis
Project Manager
DATE: July 31, 2006
RE: Baxter Meadows Soils Report
Please find attached the soils report for Baxter Meadows. The report was done by SK
Geotechnical and Peccia Engineering, and included 37 test bores. The report concludes that there
are three categories of soil types anticipated at the footing level (4’ deep) – undisturbed gravel,
undisturbed clay, and soft alluvial clays, which should be subexcavated and backfilled. The report
also discusses the presence of groundwater. The entire report including all bore logs is included.
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
APPENDIX G
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION SOCIETY LETTER
749
750
BAXTER MEADOWS SUBDIVISION, P.U.D. – MINOR SUBDIVISION
Preliminary Plat Application
January 2007
Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements
(Per Section 18.78.060 of U.D.O.)
Contents:
1 - A. Surface Water
2 - B. Floodplains
3 - C. Groundwater
4 - D. Geology; soils and slope
5 - E. Vegetation
6 - F. Wildlife
7 - G. Historical features
8 - H. Agriculture
9 - I. Agriculture water user facilities
10 - J. Water and sewer
11 - K. Stormwater management
12 - L. Streets, roads and alleys
13 - M. Utilities
14 - N. Educational facilities
15 - O. Land use
16 - P. Parks and recreation facilities
17 - Q. Neighborhood center plan
18 - R. Lighting plan
19 - S. Miscellaneous
Appendix:
A. - Updated Baxter Meadows Wetlands Impact/Mitigation Map
- Current U.S.A.C.E. 404 Wetlands Permit
- Original Wetlands Study – June 2000
B. 310 Permit – Gallatin Conservation District
C. NRCS Soils Information
D. Groundwater Monitoring Data
E. Vegetation Map
F. Soils Report
G. State Historic Preservation Society Letter
The information contained herein borrows from the “Environmental Assessment,
Community Impact Report and Flood Hazard Evaluation for Baxter Meadows
Subdivision”, prepared by Wetlands West, Robert Peccia & Associates, and Mithun Inc.,
Oct. 17, 2001
751
A. Surface Water
The property, commonly known as Baxter Meadows Minor Subdivision, is
approximately 4,700 feet above sea level, encompassing 167 acres that slope gradually
from south to north as is characteristic of the Gallatin Valley. The historic and current
land use is agricultural, primarily hay and crop production. The property has been leased
by a dairy operation for approximately 50 years.
One surface waterway, the Spring Ditch, traverses the property, flowing in a south
to north direction. Waterways in the greater Bozeman area have been mapped and
classified as streams, stream/ditch combinations, or ditches by the Montana Department
of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (FWP) on the 1993 AStreams and Ditches@ map.
Stream/ditches are typically naturally occurring streams that have been historically
channelized for irrigation purposes. Ditches convey water only during the irrigation
season and are dry otherwise. According to the FWP system, Spring ditch is classified as
a stream/ditch.
The Spring ditch (Stream/ditch): The original source of this waterway was
apparently a natural spring located at the south property boundary (i.e., within the
Regional Park). Currently the water is collected underground (presumably via a french
drain system) and discharged to a pipe placed in the bottom of the man-made channel.
The channel flows north from the southeast section of the property, crosses Baxter Lane,
then flows into a wetland (W-1) located on the north property boundary.
Water Body Alteration
Approximately one thousand feet of the Spring Ditch is planned to be rebuilt,
similar to the section of Baxter-Border Ditch that has already been rebuilt in Phase 3.
This will allow for expansion of the wetlands, and make the stream more wildlife-
friendly and aesthetically pleasing. A 310 permit from the Gallatin Conservation District
has been obtained and is included under Appendix B.
Wetlands
The existing wetlands are shown on the preliminary plat. They are also further
described in the delineation report in Appendix A.
In regard to the entire project site (original Baxter Meadows property boundary)
progress has been made to mitigate for the unavoidable wetland losses. As of October,
2005 greater than 3 acres of wetlands have been created or enhanced or 80% of the
required total mitigation acreage. North of Baxter Lane the wetlands adjacent to the
Spring Ditch have been enhanced (planted with shrubs) and in approximately half of that
distance the wetlands along the stream were expanded. The large emergent/shrub
wetland in the northeast corner of the property has been expanded and planted with trees,
shrubs, and emergent wetland seed and plugs (sedge, rush and bulrush species). The
emergent wetland bench around the circumference of Kendeda Lake south of Baxter
752
Lane was finished during the spring of 2005; wetland trees, shrubs, and emergent plugs
were planted at that time. In July, 2005 the COE visited the entire project site to check
progress toward the mitigation goals. The COE was very satisfied with the mitigation
areas and progress.
B. Floodplains
There do not appear to be any portions of the subdivision that are within two
thousand horizontal feet and less than twenty vertical feet of a watercourse draining an
area of twenty-five square miles or more. No official floodplain delineation study has
been made for the ditches in this area. The watercourses that cross the proposed
subdivision are man controlled irrigation ditches and serve to collect groundwater and
spring discharge.
C. Groundwater
[The information in this section is taken from a groundwater study of the entire
Baxter Meadows P.U.D. project done in 2000-2001. We do not expect a substantial
change in groundwater conditions since that time. Furthermore, groundwater
degradation is not expected due to the use of City of Bozeman public water and sewer
systems.]
Water-bearing materials in the area are predominantly quaternary and tertiary
alluvial fan deposits. Groundwater flows in a north-northwest direction, roughly
paralleling the slope of the ground surface (USGS 1995).
Eighteen (18) monitoring wells were installed at the site in May and June of 2000
to measure groundwater levels for design and construction purposes. Three nested
piezometers were subsequently installed in September to more accurately characterize
groundwater depths in the general location of the proposed ponds (Regional Park).
Monitoring well and piezometer locations are shown on the map included in Appendix D.
Static water levels were measured once in May/June and again in August.
Beginning in September 2000, groundwater levels have been, and will continue to be,
measured every two to three weeks until July 2001. The monitoring frequency may be
reduced from December through March once the levels stabilize. Static water level
readings measured from May through November are also included in Appendix D.
The highest groundwater level was measured at 1.6 inches below ground surface
(bgs) in MW-27 on October 17th. This well is located in the south central portion of
Section 3. (*This reading was taken where the ponds are now). Current data indicates
that static water levels (SWLs) within the subdivision development range from less than
one foot bgs in the south portion of the property (Section 3) to 9.5 feet bgs in the north
portion (Section 34). Water features for the development, such as the ponds, will be
designed to take into account existing groundwater levels.
753
Well logs from residential wells indicate well depths ranging from 40 to 72 feet
and static water levels from 6 to 14 feet. The lithologic logs identified a silt loam topsoil
layer extending from 0 to 3 feet followed by alternating layers of sand and cobbles to 72
feet with intermittent narrow lenses of clay. Production rates measured in surrounding
residential, fire protection, and irrigation wells ranged from 5 to 1000 gpm.
Steps to Avoid Degradation:
No improvements will be installed in conjunction with the platting of this minor
subdivision. However, the water system for future development of the subdivision will
be constructed to Montana Department of Environmental Quality and City of Bozeman
standards, and water will be supplied by the City. Irrigation wells will be drilled for open
space areas, in order to ease the demand on treated water. Records from existing wells in
the area indicate that the aquifer is capable of providing sufficient water quality and
quantity for irrigation needs.
Again, for future development, wastewater will be collected in a system
constructed to MDEQ and City of Bozeman standards. The system will connect to the
City=s existing system, and the wastewater will be piped to the City=s treatment facility.
D. Geology – Soils – Slopes
Geologic Hazards
There are no known geologic hazards or areas of instability within or adjacent to
the proposed subdivision site. The entire Gallatin Valley is classified as a Seismic Zone
3. Zone 0 has the least earthquake potential, Zone 4 has the greatest potential.
Protective Measures
All new utilities will be buried, reducing the risk of property damage or personal
injury in the event of an earthquake. Buildings will be designed to withstand Seismic
Zone 3 earthquake loadings, in accordance with applicable regulations.
Unusual Features
No significant or unusual geologic features are evident on the property. The
landform is an alluvial deposit typical of the north side of Bozeman, featuring deep soils
and variable depths to sand and gravels. Slopes range from 0% to 4% (NRCS 2000).
The property does exhibit high groundwater levels and isolated layers of impermeable
clay. Engineering measures that will be taken to overcome potential limitations are
discussed in the soils report – Appendix F.
754
Soils
Soil characteristics and a Gallatin County Soil Survey map of the site were
obtained from NRCS (Appendix C). Ten map units were identified within the project
area. Map units with hydric components and/or inclusions are: Threeriv-Bonebasin
loams (NRCS soil type 556A), Blossberg loam (542A), Enbar loam (509B), and
Meadowcreek loam (510B). Non-hydric soils were identified as Amsterdam silt loam
(53B), Blackdog silt loam (50B), Amsterdam-Quagle silt loam (453C), Quagle-Brodyk
silt loam (451C), Turner loam (457A), and Danvers-Quagle complex (458C).
The Enbar, Threeriv, Bonebasin, Blossberg, Meadowcreek, Turner and Danvers
soil types were identified as having severe limitations for septic system absorption fields
as a result of wetness, slow percolation, and/or poor filtering. The remaining soil types
exhibited moderate limitations. Limitations for building site development were listed as
severe for the Enbar, Bonebasin, Blossberg, Meadowcreek, Turner and Danvers soil
types as a result of wetness, caving on cut slopes, flooding, and/or shrink/swell potential.
These soil types also had severe limitations for local roads and streets as a result of the
potential for frost action. Building site and road construction limitations on the
remaining soils were rated as slight to moderate.
Design Methods to Overcome Limitations
Again, no improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision. However, for future development…
A geotechnical evaluation has been completed site-wide to identify potential soil
limitations. (Please see report by SK Geotechnical and Peccia Engineering dated October
19, 2001, included in Appendix F). Building foundations and footings will be
constructed to account for soil limitations and high groundwater conditions. Where
necessary, topsoil layers containing clay will be over-excavated and replaced with
structural fill. Typical cross-sections of the roadway will be designed to account for site-
specific soil types. Site buildings and residences will not be constructed with basements
to accommodate high groundwater conditions, unless approved by an engineer
Cuts and Fills
Due to the flat topography of the site, areas of excessive cuts and fills are not
anticipated. If they become necessary, approprate erosion control measures and storm
water runoff mitigation measures will be taken.
755
E. Vegetation
Vegetation Map
Major vegetation types are depicted on the map in Appendix E. The acreages and
type of crop and grazing land have been approximated (pers. commun. Tom Kingma).
The site has historically been hay and barley, but is now dormant.
Major vegetation types
There are four major vegetation categories within the Baxter Meadows property:
cropland (historically barley, alfalfa hay, and mixed-grass species hay), grazing land
(mixed grass species), emergent/shrub marsh (Carex spp.), and riparian stream corridors.
Cultivated crops within the property include barley and alfalfa. Grazing lands are
comprised of a variety of grass species, including fescue (Festuca spp.), orchard grass
(Dactylis glomerata), timothy (Phleum pratense), foxtail (Hordeum jubatum), and
bluegrass (Poa spp.). These species are excellent forage grasses, widespread in the
Gallatin Valley where moisture is sufficient or supplemental irrigation is available.
The riparian stream corridors have been channelized for irrigation and heavily
impacted by unrestricted cattle grazing. Although species diversity is low, the majority
of species are native and include wild celery, beaked sedge, and a few black cottonwood
trees. Broad-leafed cattail (Typha latifolia) inhabits the borrow ditches along Baxter
Lane.
Critical plant communities
The Natural Heritage Program was contacted for information on species of
concern in the vicinity of Section 3, T2S, R5E and Section 34, T1S, R5E. A survey of
the Program=s databases identified reports for three plant species of concern. The reports
are the result of a search for species of concern and communities that occur in the area
defined by the legal description with an additional one-mile buffer surrounding the
requested area.
The first plant species of concern listed is dwarf purple monkeyflower (Mimulus
nanus) observed last in 1894 in Section 34. The location accuracy for this siting is within
a five mile radius. The species is considered critically imperiled in Montana because of
extreme rarity. According to the Vascular Plants of West-Central Montana Identification
Guidebook (USDA 1991), the dwarf monkeyflower has been found in the Montana
region only on a dry gravelly slope above Sheephead Creek in the southern Bitterroot
Mountains. These habitat conditions do not currently exist within the property
boundaries. The project site consists of primarily level cultivated crop and pasture land
with no areas of gravel exposed on the ground surface. The species was not observed
during the onsite survey conducted as part of the wetland delineation.
756
The second plant species identified is slender wedgegrass (Spenopholis
intermedia), a state critically imperiled species last observed in 1926 in Section 2 of T2S,
R5E. This short-lived perennial grass has been found in wet areas of valleys and
foothills, specifically the Gallatin River valley. This species has not been observed in
this region in recent history. The last known observation occurred at a site greater than
one-half mile outside the project boundaries. Its presence would not be expected on the
project site.
Small dropseed (Sporobolus neglectus) is an annual grass that is possibly
imperiled but whose status is uncertain. It was last observed in this region in 1927 at the
Montana State University (MSU) Bozeman Experiment Station Farm located in the SE 3
of Section 14, T2S, R5E. It is typically found in grasslands of the valleys and plains in
both natural and disturbed habitats although it was likely planted in this region as part of
the Station=s widespread cultivation of native species. The MSU Experiment Station is
located approximately two miles from the project. The presence of this species would
not be expected within the property boundaries.
Noxious Weeds
Canada thistle (Circium arvensis, Category I), houndstongue (Cynoglossum
officinale, Category I), musk thistle (Carduus nutans, Category IV), and poison hemlock
(Conium maculatum, Category IV) were observed within the project site. A Gallatin
County Weed Management Plan was approved by the county on May 16, 2002, and is
included in Tab 5.
Protective Measures
For now, no improvements are being constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision. However, future development plans call for several measures to ensure that
vegetation is preserved or enhanced. The stream corridor will be enhanced/restored to
create a more natural and diverse vegetation community with a riparian floodplain
consisting of emergents, shrubs, and trees. Setbacks of 50’ from either edge of the
wetlands will be utilized to protect the waterway. Portions of the development will be
preserved as open space.
F. Wildlife
Species
As a result of the heavy agricultural use and openess of cropland, few signs of
wildlife were observed within the project boundaries. Surrounding properties are
frequented by white-tailed deer, skunk, muskrat, and raccoon. A red-tailed hawk was
observed in the cottonwoods along the Spring ditch and common snipe were seen in the
emergent/shrub marsh. Neotropical migrant bird species within the area include
bobolinks, yellow warblers, song sparrows, and tree swallows. The diversity of birds is
limited by the lack of tree and shrub species within the property. Fish species in area
757
waterways are expected to include brown and brook trout, although an onsite survey was
not conducted.
Critical Areas
The Natural Heritage Program was contacted for information on species of
concern in the project vicinity. The Program=s survey identified one animal species of
concern in Section 31 of T1S and R6E at the MSU Experiment Station. The status of the
stonefly (Isocapnia crinita) is considered imperiled in Montana because of rarity. No
information was given on the date of the last observation or preferred habitat. The
Experiment Station is located over two miles from the project area.
Protective Measures
Wildlife habitat and protection will be enhanced through the creation of open
space areas consisting of conservation parks, trail systems, and streams. The 100-foot
riparian corridors will facilitate wildlife migration. Fisheries habitat will be enhanced
with the creation of pool and riffle complexes and restoration of cover habitat via willow
plantings on the stream corridors. The FWP will be consulted for their input on the
stream enhancement designs as part of the 310 permitting process.
Fish Wildlife and Parks will be contacted before doing any further development
of the property.
G. Historical Features
Please see letter from the State Historic Preservation Office, Appendix .
H. Agriculture
Former agricultural practices at the site included crop production, dairy farming,
and cattle ranching on the entire 167 acres. However, the land has been out of production
since being purchased several years ago. Adjacent land includes the Regional Park and
development in the near future – i.e., no farmland in production.
I. Agricultural Water User Facilities
Spring Ditch is a stream/ditch that currently flows through the project site. The
stream will be “rebuilt” for a portion of it, and will have to flow through several culverts
to accomodate road construction. However, in all instances of modification, it will be
designed to maintain the same flow and quantity to downstream users. As stated above,
a 310 permit from the Gallatin Conservation District, as well as a 404 permit from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have already been obtained.
758
J. Water and Sewer
N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision.
K. Stormwater Management
N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision.
L. Streets, Roads, and Alleys
N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision.
M. Utilities
N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision.
N. Educational Facilities
N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision.
O. Land Use
N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision.
P. Parks and Recreation Facilities
N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision.
Q. Neighborhood Center
N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision.
R. Lighting Plan
N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision.
759
S. Miscellaneous
N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor
subdivision.
760