HomeMy WebLinkAbout039 - Appendix W.2 - PUDP Findings of Fact19028; City Commission Findings of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 1 of 78
19028; City Commission Findings of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson
Farms II Preliminary Planned Unit Development (P-PUD) Application.
Decision Date: City Commission Public Hearing on the Findings of Fact and Record
of Decision, Tuesday, March 28, 2023, City Commission Room, Bozeman City Hall, 121
North Rouse Avenue Bozeman, MT 59715
Project Description: A Preliminary Planned Unit Development (P-PUD) application, as a
“Legacy planned unit development” application, for a proposed commercial development to
grant 26 deviations and waivers to the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter 38 Unified
Development Code (UDC) zoning and engineering regulations in the following general
groupings [Table 1 on page 17 lists each requested Deviation]:
(1) Specific additional commercial uses as-of-right; (2) to exempt the development from
Urban Mixed Use (UMU) district requirements for specific mixes of use; (3) to increase
building heights; (4) to waive minimum and maximum parking requirements; 5) to amend
bicycle parking requirements; (6) to change current Block Frontage designations and
designate new ones for new internal streets; (7) to reduce setback requirements for the new
Block Frontage designations; (8) to reduce parking lot landscape screening requirements;
(9) to reduce trash enclosure screening requirements; (10) to amend Article 4 Streets
engineering standards to allow back-in angled street parking and alternate street design and
construction materials; and (11) to request the Director of Transportation and Engineering
Department to allow alternate water, sanitary sewer and stormwater design and location
standards and to allow concurrent construction of streets and on- and off-site public
improvements.
Staff noted that one of the requested deviations, Number 22, is to allow signs on all
facades of a building. This is not needed as a deviation because Section 38.560.060 of
the Bozeman Unified Development Code (UDC) allows such placement of signage in the
UMU District. However, Table 38.560.060.1 and Section 38.560.080.A requires a
comprehensive sign plan for multi-tenant Sites (see Condition of Approval No. 10).
Staff noted that Deviation request No. 5 seeks to allow six individual lots within the Site
to not have legal and physical access to a public or publicly-accessible street per UDC
38.400.090.B.2. However, State Statute requires this legal access to each lot within a
subdivision and, therefore, this standard cannot be waived or approved (see Condition
of Approval No. 3 and Code Provision No. 11).
Staff noted that the staff report erroneously described Deviation No. 10 as not being
supported by staff, as not being recommended for approval. This is an error based on a
misunderstanding by the author about the December 5, 2022 Community Development
Board (CDB) recommendation. Staff clarified at the March 7th hearing that the criteria
for a PUD was positively addressed by the requested deviation which would allow 100%
surface parking along Landscaped Block Frontage designated streets. Although the CDB
did not agree with the staff recommendation that Deviation No. 10 met the criteria and
should be approved, staff stands by their evaluation of the criteria being met by this
deviation and continues to recommend approval.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 2 of 78
The P-PUD is accompanied by a separate Preliminary Plat application to subdivide the 31-
acre parcel into 72 lots to accommodate the new development; Application No. 19027.
Project Location: 4250 Fallon Street, located at the northwest corner of Ferguson
Avenue and Huffine Lane. The 31-acre parcel is bordered by Huffine Lane, Ferguson
Avenue, Fallon Street and Resort Street and is legally described as Lot 5 of Minor
Subdivision 295, proposed to be replatted as Ferguson Farms II Subdivision located in
the SW ¼ of S10, T2 S, R5 E of the P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana.
Development Review Committee (DRC) Recommendation: The application is deemed
adequate for further review. Staff had no objections to 24 of the 26 requested deviations
from the BMC/UDC standards and regulations and found that, with recommended
conditions and code provisions, 24 of the deviations and waivers would conform to other
relevant UDC standards and would be sufficient for approval.
The 2 requested deviations that cannot be approved, even with mitigation or conditions of
approval are:
Deviation No. 5 which seeks to create 6 parking garage lots without legal and physical access to a
public street or alley [this is not permitted by State Statute and Condition of Approval No.
4 requires proof of legal and physical access to those lots prior to Final PUD approval];
and
Deviation No. 18 which seeks to allow a trash enclosure on Block 4 to not be screened from view
from Huffine Lane on its two sides [this does not provide a superior outcome and Condition
of Approval No. 6 requires all trash enclosures within the PUD Site to meet UDC
standards.
Community Development Board (CDB) Recommendation, acting as the Design
Review Board (DRB):
On December 5, 2022, the DRB met to review, discuss and make recommendations on
the proposed Ferguson Farms II Preliminary Planned Unit Development (P-PUD) and
Preliminary Plat applications.
The Board first reviewed the P-PUD application after a staff presentation and Applicant
presentation. There was no public comment. The Board Members discussed the
proposed deviations from UDC standards in relation to:
vehicle and bicycle parking; it is hard to park in the Ferguson Farms I
development to the west; need to incorporate structured parking and drop condo
parking; surface lots kill the feel they are trying to accomplish, support decked
parking approach;
more and better landscaping choices needed;
the skybridge amenity is too small for its function, the relocation of the irrigation
ditch for the skybridge needs more and better landscaping of the ditch area under
the skybridge;
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 3 of 78
the lack of design of proposed 8 story buildings to review;
the location of the tall buildings in relation to smaller existing neighboring
buildings, need taller buildings in the center not the edges;
the lack of housing for this mixed use district; Applicant should incorporate a
residential component; supports permanent residential component in the
development;
100% surface parking on the most pedestrian-oriented corridors; street frontage
treatments, pedestrian-oriented streetscape where there is 100% surface
parking; do not agree with staff report on 100% surface parking; parking takes
away walkability; provide parking other ways with decks or parking above-
ground with street frontage still engaged for the pedestrian; walkability relies on
the ability to get to the site which will be mostly cars, time to start stacking
parking; and
agreement with staff report regarding deviation # 18 (trash enclosures to be fully
screened)
After discussion, the Board made a Motion to support the staff report motion except for
the recommendation to approve deviation # 10; to wit:
CDB Motion: “Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public
comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in
the staff report for application 19028 and move to recommend approval of the Ferguson
Farms II Preliminary Planned Unit Development application to the City Commission with
the exception of Deviation No. 10, subject to staff-recommended conditions and all
applicable code provisions and further subject to the determination on Article 4
standards modifications by the Director of Transportation and Engineering.”
The Board Members voted unanimously, 8 to 0, to approve the amended Motion.
Board Members in attendance: Henry Happel, Jerry Pape, Nicole Olmstead, Jennifer
Madgic, Chris Egnatz, Allison Bryan, Brady Ernst and Padden Guy Murphy.
See Attachment 7 for a summary of the CDB comments on this application.
March 7, 2023 City Commission Decision.
After reviewing the application materials, staff report and public comment; after listening to
the staff presentation, asking questions and hearing response from staff about the staff
evaluation; after hearing the presentation from the Applicant and his representative, asking
questions about the proposed project and PUD deviations of the Applicant and hearing their
response; after asking if there was any new public comment, of which there was none; the
City Commissioners began their deliberations on the application by making a Motion.
Commissioner Cunningham made a Motion from the staff-suggested “Alternate Motion”
noted below, which was seconded by Commissioner Pomeroy. Summary of the discussion is
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 4 of 78
below. A summary of points expressed by at least one member is noted below, the bullets
don’t necessarily represent the thoughts of the entire board.
Commissioner Cunningham expressed his concurrence with the staff report that, overall,
the proposal addressed the City’s Growth Policies; he expressed how this project would
be a commercial node within the neighborhood that has significant housing and how
those residents could walk or bike to patronize businesses within this commercial node.
He expressed hope that this project would be walkable internally and externally and
would provide connectivity to other commercial notes and to the nearby residential
neighborhoods. He characterized this development as an infill development supported
by growth policies.
Commissioner Pomeroy agreed with Commissioner Cunningham’s comments and
expressed hope that this project would be walkable and bikeable. She commented that
the Ferguson Farms I development is a popular destination.
Commissioner Madgic noted that the PUD process allowed for flexibility and creativity
in designing and building new developments. The PUD process facilitates that flexibility
for this development. She thought that this proposal would be pedestrian-friendly. She
supports the request for no minimum or maximum parking requirement. She expressed
hope that the Applicant takes advantage of other opportunities with the PUD including
the provision of affordable housing, sustainability in building and site design and in
landscaping with native species. She hope that the Applicant keeps existing trees and
native plants on the Site and uses native trees and plants with new landscaping. She
mentioned aspen, birch and alders as suitable species to use.
Commissioner Coburn stated that he does not support the Motion or the proposal. He
does not understand the Applicant’s intentions for building residential or commercial
uses on the Site.
Mayor Andrus supports the Motion and proposal. She acknowledges the Applicant’s
creativity in the proposal but is concerned with the request for 100% surface parking
along the street frontages. She is concerned with the lack of connectivity within and to
the neighboring properties.
The Commission voted 4 to 1 in favor of the Motion. The Motion is as follows:
“Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment,
Community Development Board/Design Review Board recommendations, and all the
information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for
application 19028 and move to approve the Ferguson Farms II Preliminary Planned Unit
Development application as a Legacy Preliminary PUD, subject to the staff-
recommended conditions and all applicable code provisions with the exception of
Condition 13, thereby approving Deviation No. 10.”
The link to this public hearing is:
https://bozeman.granicus.com/player/clip/1976?view_id=1&redirect=true&h=2072e091d947939
95cd1c573c700fa53
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 5 of 78
Report Date: March 21, 2023
Staff Contact: Susana Montana, Senior Planner, Development Review Division
Executive Summary
On August 29, 2019, Boardwalk Properties, Inc. and Combs Capital, LC, the property
owners and Applicants, submitted a Preliminary Planned Unit Development (P-PUD)
application and a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat (PP) application for the
development of a 31-acre undeveloped parcel in the City’s Urban Mixed Use (UMU)
zoning district on the west side of the City. Revisions to this application were made in
January 2020, November 2021, April 2022, July 14, 2022 and August 24, 2022. This
report evaluates the August 24, 2022 P-PUD revision which was deemed complete and
“adequate for further review” on September 2, 2022.
The Preliminary Plat application is the subject of a separate evaluation and staff report;
Project No. 19027. The PP cannot be approved unless and until the PUD is approved
because the PP does not meet UMU zoning standards as well as other UDC zoning and
engineering standards which the PUD seeks to amend or waive.
It is noted that this application, originally submitted in 2019, now qualifies under the
current UDC provisions for a “Legacy planned unit development”, pursuant to Section
38.440.010.A because the application was deemed “adequate for further review” on
September 2, 2022, prior to the City’s October 27, 2022 replacement of UDC PUD
standards with new Planned Development Zone (PDZ) District standards. The new PDZ
regulations established new procedures for review of older PUDs and PUD applications,
now deemed “legacy” PUDs. This application is being reviewed and evaluated by the
previous PUD review criteria as well as by relevant process and review criteria for
“legacy” PUDs. Should this Preliminary PUD be approved by the City Commission, it
would be deemed a Legacy Preliminary PUD and a Legacy Final PUD would follow the
procedures and standards of UDC 38.440.020, Legacy Final Plan Review and Approval.
Individual lot development proposals, such as a site plan, would be measured by the
approved Legacy Final PUD and relevant UMU District and UDC standards in effect at the
time of such an application. Any amendment to an approved Legacy Final PUD must
meet the standards for “minor amendments” pursuant to UDC 38.440.030. Changes
greater than minor amendments must be processed as a new Planned Development Zone
(PDZ) application subject to UDC 38.430 standards.
The Applicant proposes a wholly commercial development within the UMU district, per
UDC 38.310.050. The Applicant seeks to develop this land as an extension of his similar
Ferguson Farms I commercial development lying immediately to the west of this Site
and which is zoned B-2, Community Business District.
The PUD Site was annexed to the City in 2000 by the Applicant and it was initially-zoned
Business Park (B-P) District. In March 2006, the Applicant submitted a zoning text
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 6 of 78
amendment application to create a new zoning district called Urban Mixed Use District
(UMU). This application set forth the standards and regulations for the UMU District. In
August 2007, by Ordinance No. 1681, the Urban Mixed Use District (UMU) was
established. In April 2008, at the request of the Applicant, the 31-acre subject property
was rezoned from B-P, Business Park District to the new UMU District by Ordinance No.
1745. This 31-acre Site is the only UMU-zoned land in the City.
This PUD development proposes a mix of commercial uses including hotels, offices,
retail, restaurants, medical facilities, sale of alcohol for consumption on-site, and both
surface and structured parking as principal permitted uses. Although a mix of land uses
is required in the UMU District, residential use is not a required component of this mix
of uses and, although allowed by the UMU and this PUD, is not one of the land uses
proposed within this development.
The Applicant is seeking approval of this Preliminary Planned Unit Development (P-PUD)
application because this proposal for development of the Site does not conform to 24 of the
standards and requirements of the UDC for the Urban Mixed Use (UMU) zoning designation
of the Site and other UDC standards. The 26 requested deviations/waivers/relaxations from
the UDC that are sought by this PUD are loosely grouped as follows and are listed in Table 1
of Section 2 of this report and in the Applicant’s Narrative found in Attachment 1:
(1) Allowing various commercial uses as principal uses which are either a special use or
are not otherwise permitted in the UMU district per use Tables 38.310.040.A through
E;
(2) Exemption from Section 38.310.050 UMU zone supplemental use requirements for:
(a) Subsection A requiring a mix of uses within each site plan;
(b) Subsection C-- the 70% maximum gross square footage limitation for a single use,
such as office, for the entire Site;
(c) Subsection D-- the requirement that a minimum of 70% of the ground level block
frontages must be occupied by non-residential uses with a depth of at least 20 feet and,
also, parking garages must include ground floor “liner” uses for at least 40% of the
façade that faces a street or greenway;
(3) Exemption from the 20% minimum ground floor commercial space requirements of
38.330.010.E.2 for mixed use buildings within the UMU District;
(4) Allow building height increases over the 60’ maximum for the UMU district per Table
38.320.050 to a maximum height of 90’ and 6 stories throughout the Site;
(5) Exemption from the minimum and maximum number of parking requirements of
38.330.010.F for the UMU district and from the vehicle parking requirements of Tables
38.540.050-1 through 3;
(6) Exemption from the 38.540.050.A.4.b requirement that bicycle racks must be located
within 100 feet from the building it serves;
(7) Allowing angled back-in on-street parking spaces, modifications to the street design
and materials standards, modifications to water, sanitary sewer and stormwater
facility location standards, and exemption from the requirement that all lots must have
legal and physical access to a public street [most of these requests are under the
purview of the City’s Director of Transportation and Engineering Department, per
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 7 of 78
38.200.010.D. State Statute does not allow an individual lot to not have legal and
physical access to a public street.];
(8) Allowing alternate Block Frontage designations per 38.510.030.L;
(9) Allowing surface parking along 100% of a Landscape Block Frontage street frontage per
38.510.030.C;
(10) Reduce the required landscaped buffer between surface parking and the street from
10’ to 6’ for Block 3;
(11) Waive the requirement for landscaping separating a building façade and a walkway per
38.520.040.D.3;
(12) Front setback waivers per 38.510.030.C allowing buildings to be built to the front
property lines);
(13) Parking screening waiver per 38.510.030.C for the 1.7-acre Block 3 parking lot; and
(14) Deviation from 38.520.070.C.2 to allow reduced trash enclosure screening on Lot 4,
Block 4 from 3 sides to 1 side.
Attachment 1 to this report is the Applicant’s list of specific relaxations sought, along with
justifications for the UDC deviations/relaxations and his description as to how each
relaxation meets the criteria for a PUD per the previous PUD criteria of Sections
38.430.030.A.4.c and 38.430.090. Attachment 2 is the Applicant’s PUD Design Manual.
Attachments 3 through 6 provide supporting maps.
Preliminary PUD as a Conditional Use
Per the previous UDC Section 38.430.020.C, any PUD is deemed a Conditional Use (CU)
within the zoning district in which the PUD lies. If this Legacy PUD application is granted
approval, the conditions of approval for the PUD would be recorded with the County
Clerk and Recorder and a subdivision preliminary plat must be approved to create the 9
blocks and 72 lots accommodating the PUD. Of the 72 lots, the new subdivision would
create 49 buildable lots, 14 open space lots and 9 lots for parking garage use. The
Preliminary Plat application includes a request for concurrent construction of on- and
off-site water, sanitary sewer and street improvements and, if granted, the Applicant
would submit an Improvements Agreement and Financial Surety for completion of those
improvements. Any proposed development on any lot within the Legacy Final PUD
would require a separate and specific site plan application for review and approval.
However, the adopted Final Legacy PUD would represent a Master Site Plan for the
phased development of the Site.
A PUD is a discretionary approval and the review authority must find that the overall
development is superior to that offered by the basic existing zoning standards as required in
UDC 38.20.030.A.4. The intent of a PUD is to promote maximum flexibility and innovation in
development proposals within the City. The Applicants can request relaxations from the code
in exchange for a higher quality of design. The obligation to show a superior outcome is the
responsibility of the Applicant. The Applicant asserts that the overall outcome of this PUD
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 8 of 78
proposal is superior to what would be obtained from the application of the underlying UMU
district.
The Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed the application and its several
revisions. Based on its evaluation of the application against the UDC criteria, on
September 2, 2022, the DRC found the August 2022 revised application to be adequate
for continued review. The DRC supports the granting of concurrent construction for this
project with the satisfaction of all code requirements related to concurrent construction
with the final planned unit development application which would be reviewed under the
standards of UDC 38.440.020 for a Legacy PUD.
The Site currently has no vehicular access from its surrounding streets. The Site is
undeveloped with the exception of a portion of the Maynard Border Ditch agricultural
irrigation ditch which flows through the western portion of the Site in a north-south
orientation. The vegetation bordering the ditch consists of mature cottonwood, willow
and wild rose species. This watercourse would be relocated 30- to 50-feet to the west
as part of this development with new plantings bordering the ditch and a pedestrian
“skybridge” built overhead (see Attachment 5).
Public Comment The first public notice and comment period was September 9th to
October 18, 2022. The Site was posted and mail notice sent on September 9th and a legal
notice in the newspaper was published on September 11th and 18th. No public comment
was received during this public notice period. However, the Applicant had not
adequately updated the mailing list for adjacent properties and some properties had
changed hands since the original submittal. Therefore, a second public notice period
was established from November 4, 2022 to December 20, 2022 with a second posting of
the property and a proper mailing. On December 29, 2022, after the December 5th CDB
meeting, a member of the public commented that he objected to the proposed 90 foot
height limits as being out of scale to this neighborhood and asked if the Fire Department
could service an 8-story building or if taxpayers would need to purchase a new ladder
truck. No other public comment has been received as of March 7, 2023.
Unresolved Issues
There are four unresolved issues with this P-PUD application:
1. In order to qualify for a PUD, the Applicant must demonstrate that the relaxation
standard proposed provides a superior quality and character for the development than
the UDC standard. Deviation No. 18 would relax UDC Section 38.520.070.C.3 (Screening
of ground related services) to minimize the screening of a trash enclosure on Block 4, Lot
4. The Applicant would screen with vegetation only one side, rather all three sides. This
trash enclosure on Lot 4 of Block 4 would be placed against the Huffine Lane lot line and
would be highly visible from this Gateway Block Frontage. Staff opines that in this 31-
acre PUD Site, sufficient land is available to provide a UDC-complying screen wall or
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 9 of 78
vegetative screen of all three sides of this trash enclosure visible from Huffine Lane (see
Figure 14). Therefore, staff recommends Condition of Approval No. 6 which requires the
Applicant to meet the UDC standard for screening trash enclosures throughout the Site.
2. As noted above on page 2, the Community Development Board, acting as the City’s Design
Review Board, reviewed this application on December 5, 2022 and provided comments
to staff and the Applicant on the proposal, including (i) suggestions to the Applicant to
provide more substantial landscaping of the proposed “skybridge” design element to
make it more functional as an amenity and as a north-south pedestrian corridor; (ii)
suggestions to include permanent housing within the development; and (iii) suggestions
to provide structured parking above the ground level of lots within the Site rather than
surface lots.
The Board also supports the staff-recommended conditions of approval including
Condition No. 6 which would deny the trash enclosure Deviation No. 18 for Block 4, Lot
4 along the Huffine Lane Gateway Block Frontage.
The Board voted unanimously, 8 to 0, to recommend approval of the PUD application
with the staff-recommended conditions of approval and required UDC code provisions
with the exception that the Board does not support the granting of Deviation No. 10 which
would allow 100% surface parking for lots fronting on Landscape Block Frontage
designated streets. The Community Development Board recommends denial of this
deviation from the Landscape Block Frontage requirement that no more than 50% of a
lot’s street frontage shall be devoted to surface parking. The Board discussion notes that
such a vast amount of surface parking is an inefficient use of land and suggested that
parking above the ground floor would be a more efficient use of the Site and individual
lots within the Site. The Board also expressed a concern that surface parking along the
street frontage of the proposed 72 lots on this 31-acre Site reduces the “walkability” of
the Site and reduces the overall visual and land use coherence of the development for its
users. The Board Members commented that this deviation does not appear to provide a
superior result than the UDC standard requiring a 10-foot wide landscaped buffer
between surface parking on individual lots and the limitation that surface parking areas
may not exceed 50% of the lot’s street frontage for streets designated a Landscape Block
Frontage. Therefore, this deviation was found by the Board to not meet the criteria for
granting the deviation per UDC 38.430.030.A.4.c, nor does it appear to promote the public
health, safety and general welfare of the City’s residents, workers and visitors or of the
Site’s workers and visitors. A summary of the Board’s comments is presented as
Attachment 7.
Should the Commission agree with the Board’s recommendation to deny Deviation No.
10, the maximum 50% surface parking for lots fronting on Landscape Block Frontage-
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 10 of 78
designated streets would apply. Required compliance with the maximum parking lot
frontage would likely have a material impact on the design and amount of provided
parking on the PUD Site unless multi-level parking garages are provided. Should the
Commission choose to support the Board’s recommendation to deny Deviation No. 10, a
staff-recommended Condition of Approval No. 13 requires that surface parking not
exceed 50% of street frontages. A suggested Motion by staff in the March 7, 2023
Commission meeting staff report included that CDB recommendation for denial of
Deviation 10. That Motion was rejected by the Commission in favor of an Alternate
Motion by staff in that report recommending approval of 24 of the requested deviations,
including Deviation 10, with the staff-recommended conditions and code provisions.
That Motion was approved by the Commission on March 7th.
3. It is noted that both the UDC Section 38.400.090.B and State Statute does not allow lots
to be created that do not have legal and physical access via one of the following options:
B. Drive access from improved public street, approved private street or alley required.
1. For purposes of this Code, "improved" public street, approved private street, or alley means
and includes:
a. Any street or alley within the city constructed to a standard which meets or exceeds
standards established by this chapter, the city design standards and specifications policy,
and the city modifications to state public works standard specifications;
b. Constructed public streets which may not meet current city standards but which are
constructed to a standard that has historically provided an adequate level of service to
adjacent properties, which level of service would not be degraded as a result of a pending
development proposal.
2. Unless otherwise allowed by this chapter, all lots must be provided with legal and physical
access via one of the following options:
a. Twenty-five feet of frontage on a public or approved private street;
b. Twenty-five feet of frontage on a public or approved private street and an improved alley;
or
c. Twenty-five feet of frontage on an improved alley and a greenway corridor or trail corridor
with public access. This option may require additional improvements to the alley to
accommodate emergency access, snow removal and storage, and the provision of utilities.
The alley may also require signage for the provision of emergency services.
Therefore, this Deviation No. 5 request may not be granted and Condition of Approval
No. 4 requires code-complying legal access to be provided to those lots along with a land
use restriction limiting the use of these lots to parking use. Furthermore, the Preliminary
Plat that accompanies this P-PUD must provide code-complying access to each lot which
may take a form different than the alternatives in subsection B.2. This appears as
Condition of Approval No. 4 and as Required Code Provision No. 11, Lot Access.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 11 of 78
4. The proposed P-PUD is accompanied by a Preliminary Plat subdivision which divides the
31-acre parcel into 72 lots. This P-PUD is not clear as to what
deviations/waivers/exceptions are applicable to which individual lots or to a
combination of lots as a development site plan. Condition of Approval No. 14 would
require the Final PUD application to provide illustrations and other clarifying statements
or images to indicate which deviations are to apply to which lots.
Alternatives
1. Approve the application with the staff and CDB recommendations and with staff
recommended conditions and report findings;
2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended conditions and
modifications to the report findings;
3. Deny the application based on findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria
contained within the staff report; or
4. Open and continue the review on the application with the concurrence of the Applicant,
with specific direction to staff or the Applicant to supply additional information or to
address specific items.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 12 of 78
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 5
Unresolved Issues ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Alternatives ............................................................................................................................................. 11
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES ......................................................................................................................... 13
SECTION 2 - REQUESTED DEVIATIONS/RELAXATIONS/WAIVERS ...................................... 17
SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ..................................................... 20
SECTION 4 - REQUIRED CODE PROVISIONS .................................................................................. 23
SECTION 5 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ............................................................................... 24
SECTION - 6- FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION ................................................ 74
APPENDIX A –PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY ................................................. 77
APPENDIX B – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF .......................................... 77
APPENDIX C –PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT INTENT ........................................................... 77
ATTACHMENT LIST ................................................................................................................................... 78
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 13 of 78
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES
Figure 1: Location Map
Figure 2: Zoning Map
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 14 of 78
Figure 3: Ferguson Farms II PUD Master Plan
Figure 4: Conceptual Land Use Map
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 15 of 78
Figure 5: Circulation Network
Pedestrian Pathways
Bicycle Pathways
Shared Pathways
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 16 of 78
Figure 6: Open Space Network
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 17 of 78
Figure 7: Proposed 72-lot Preliminary Plat
SECTION 2 - REQUESTED DEVIATIONS/RELAXATIONS/WAIVERS
Deviations to the zoning code may be granted with a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The
criteria for granting PUD deviations/relaxations/waivers are included in UDC Section
38.430.090.E. Staff has reviewed the criteria and finds that they are met for 24 of the 26
requested deviations with the recommended conditions of approval and the adoption of the
staff analysis and findings below for justification. Deviation No. 18 (trash enclosure
screening) does not meet established criteria for approval is addressed in staff-
recommended condition of approval number 6. Also, Deviation 5, lot access, is not a
deviation that can be granted due to overriding State Statutes; this is addressed in Condition
of Approval No. 4 and Code Provision No. 11.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 18 of 78
Table 1.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 19 of 78
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 20 of 78
SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this
report.
1. 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.
2. Owners of lots facing a public street, including Block 3, Lot 3, and seeking to locate
parking spaces facing the street must mitigate potential safety hazards associated
with vehicle headlight glare to passing motorists by providing a minimum 6-foot wide
landscape buffer between the parking spaces and the street-facing lot property line
which shall be planted with densely-spaced evergreen shrubs which are a minimum
5-feet tall at planting.
3. The existing Class I shared use trail abutting the Site along the Ferguson Avenue
frontage shall be widened from 8 feet to 10 feet by the Applicant and the Applicant
shall install 8 feet wide Class I trails along the Fallon Street and Resort Drive
frontages, concurrent with any first phase construction of this PUD Site.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 21 of 78
4. Prior to approval of the Final PUD and approval of the associated Final Plat for this
PUD Site, the Applicant shall record proper legal lot access and a land use deed
restriction for the following 8 lots to provide adequate legal and physical access to
public or publicly-accessible streets or alleys: Lot 1A, Block 7; Lot 1A, Block 3; Lot 1B,
Block 8; Lots 1B and 1C, Block 3; Lots 1B and 1C of Block 7; and Lot 4 of Block 6. The
deed restriction for Lot 1A, Block 7 and Lot 1A, Block 3 shall limit the use of the land
to surface parking to assure physical access to the interior garage lots to address State
law requirements for access.
5. To mitigate the heat island effect of the large expanse of pavement, to provide
enhanced visual cues to parking areas for customers, workers and visitors, and to
increase the comfort and relief from heat for those parking lot users, the Applicant
shall ensure that the landscape plan provides a visually-prominent, deciduous tree-
lined pedestrian corridor throughout the Site linking all parking lots to the Valley
Commons Drive commercial corridor and to the Skybridge commercial corridor. An
example of this design, which may differ from the concept landscape plan provided
with this P-PUD submittal, is a plan that places small trees on the north sides of
parking lots and places large shade trees along the south and west sides of parking
lots and along a pedestrian walkway through the middle of the parking lot that
connects to a network of similarly shaded pedestrian walkways. The design of this
landscape plan should be coordinated with the City Forester to ensure the best
environment for both pedestrians and for the health of the trees over time and shall
be approved by the Director of Community Development.
6. The Applicant shall ensure that all trash enclosures within the PUD Site are properly
screened to City standards per 38.520.070.
7. Pursuant to Section 38.550.050.M, Planned Unit Development Open Space, the
landscape plan provided with the Final PUD application shall show what trees and
shrubs are meeting this requirement and where they are to be located.
8. Public access easements must be provided for as shown on the P-PUD plans for all
publicly accessible open space areas prior to Final PUD approval.
9. No property may be removed from the Final PUD covenants without written approval
of the City of Bozeman.
10. Per UDC 38.560.060 and 080, a Comprehensive Sign Plan must be submitted with the
Final PUD application and must be approved by the Director of Community
Development with the Final PUD application submittal.
11. The City of Bozeman has relied upon the overall design and design standards
submitted with this PUD application and shown as Attachment 2: Ferguson Farm II
Draft Design Manual. This Design Manual shall be updated and submitted with the
Final PUD application and, if approved, may not be altered without consent of the City.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 22 of 78
12. The Final PUD plan and Subdivision Final Plat must be submitted, reviewed, and
approved prior to the approval of any subsequent site plan.
13. Lots that front on streets that are designated a Landscape Block Frontage must meet
the parking location standards of UDC Table 38.510.030.C. Surface parking areas may
not exceed 50% of the individual or development site street frontage. [The Motion of
approval of the P-PUD negates this condition of approval because the Commission
approved of Deviation No. 10 allowing 100% surface parking along street frontages
designated Landscape Block Frontage.]
14. [new 13] The proposed P-PUD is accompanied by a Preliminary Plat subdivision
which divides the 31-acre parcel into 72 lots. The Final PUD application shall provide
sufficient illustrations and other clarifying statements or images to indicate which
granted deviations would apply to which individual lots.
15. [new 14] The Final PUD landscape plan submittal shall show the locations of covered
and uncovered bicycle parking within the street and/or streetscape.
16. [new 15] In order to qualify for a performance point towards this PUD, per UDC
38.430.090.E.2.a (7), the details of the sheltered bus stop shall be provided with the
Final PUD application. The Applicant shall submit with the Final PUD application the
following materials regarding this facility: (i) a site plan for the shelter showing its
location and design which has been approved by the transit provider (Streamline); (ii)
an encroachment permit for the location of the facility if it is to be located within a
public right-of-way; and (iii) an ownership and maintenance agreement between the
owner of the facility, the owner of the land upon which it rests, and the transit
provider. The facility must be completed concurrent with any first phase development
of the PUD Site.
17. [new 16] Former PUD Section 38.430.090.E.2.a (7) outlines “performance points”
needed to qualify for a PUD designation. On Table 2 of this report, the Applicant
identifies streetscape improvements, wayfinding signs and a sheltered bus stop that
are to qualify as this PUD’s “performance points”. The locations and designs for these
improvements have not been provided with this Preliminary PUD. To qualify for the
points, the Applicant shall provide details for these amenities and assets with the Final
PUD application. The details of those performance point elements shall be approved
by the Director prior to approval of the Final PUD.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 23 of 78
SECTION 4 REQUIRED CODE PROVISIONS
1. BMC 38.220.050. A final approved weed control plan must be submitted prior to
Final PUD plan approval.
2. BMC 220.080. Irrigation water. Clarify proposed water demand for irrigation system.
The Applicant shall clarify the nature of the existing well and water right to support
the new demand. Provide letter from DNRC confirming water right or intent to issue
right to support the project prior to approval of the planned unit development final
plan.
3. BMC 38.220.300 and 310. The property owners’ association documents pertaining
to the maintenance of common areas, the back-in street parking and shared parking
areas must include the requirements of Section 38.220.300 and 320. The proposed
documents must be finalized and recorded with the Final PUD plan and its
accompanying subdivision Final Plat.
4. BMC 38.230.020.A and C. a subsequent site plan application is required to be
reviewed and approved for all phases of this development prior to building permit
issuance.
5. BMC 38.270.030. For concurrent construction provide a full response to the
required items in BMC 38.270. Provide response to PUD concurrent construction and
finalize all of the required code elements prior to the approval of the planned unit
development final plan, approval of concurrent construction and prior to building
permit issuance.
6. BMC 38.430.040.A.3, Final plan review and approval. The final plan must be in
compliance with the approved preliminary plan and/or development guidelines.
Upon approval or conditional approval of a preliminary plan and the completion of
any conditions imposed in connection with that approval, an application for final plan
approval may be submitted. For approval to be granted, the final plan must comply
with the approved preliminary plan. This means that all conditions imposed by the
City Commission as part of its approval of the preliminary plan have been met; the
final plan does not change the general use or character of the development; the final
plan does not increase the amount of improved gross leasable non-residential floor
space by more than five percent, does not increase the number of residential dwelling
units by more than five percent and does not exceed the amount of any density bonus
approved with the preliminary plan; the final plan does not decrease the open space
and/or affordable housing provided; the final plan does not contain changes that do
not conform to the requirements of this chapter, excluding properly granted
deviations, the applicable objectives and criteria of section 38.430.100, or other
objectives or criteria of this chapter; the final plan must not contain any changes
which would allow increased deviation/relaxation of the requirements of this
chapter; and the final plat, if applicable, does not create any additional lots which
were not reviewed as part of the preliminary plan submittal. Final plan approval. The
final plan may be approved if it conforms to the approved preliminary plan in the
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 24 of 78
manner described above. Prior to final plan approval, the review authority may
request a recommendation from the DRB, DRC, ADR staff, or other entity regarding
any part of a proposed final plan.
7. BMC 38.550.050.I. Irrigation plans are required to be submitted with the Final PUD
open space landscape plan with the subsequent site plan application.
8. BMC 38.550.060.A.1. The Final PUD open space landscape plan must meet the
requirements of 23 performance points and be finalized and completed with the
subsequent site plan application.
9. BMC 38.400.050.A1. The accompanying subdivision property owner’s association
must maintain the proposed on street angled parking allowed on internal streets,
including snow plowing and maintenance of the parking surfaces. The property
owners’ association documents must include language to this effect and be reviewed
and approved prior to final PUD approval.
10. BMC 38.430.070.A a. All public infrastructure, both on and offsite, must be installed
with the first phase of development.
11. BMC 38.400.090.B, Lot Access. All lots within the Site must meet the lot access
standards of the UDC and of relevant State Statutes for legal and physical access to a
public or publicly-accessible street or alley. This shall be demonstrated as part of the
Final PUD application.
SECTION 5 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application
materials, municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, Community Development
Board recommendations, and all other materials available during the review period.
Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis in this report is a
summary of the completed review.
Applicable Plan Review Criteria, Section 38.230.100, BMC.
The Applicant is again advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not
specifically listed as conditions of approval, do not in any way create a waiver or other
relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or State law.
In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the advisory boards and City
Commission shall consider the following:
1. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy;
The PUD Site is designated “Community Commercial Mixed Use” in the Bozeman Community
Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM).
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 25 of 78
Per this Plan, this category is intended to “promote commercial areas necessary for economic
health and vibrancy. This includes professional and personal services, retail, education, health
services, offices, public administration, and tourism establishments. Density is expected to be
higher than it is currently in most commercial areas in Bozeman and should include multi-story
buildings. Residences on upper floors, in appropriate circumstances, are encouraged. The urban
character expected in this designation includes urban streetscapes, plazas, outdoor seating,
public art, and hardscaped open space and park amenities. High density residential areas are
expected in close proximity.”
Staff Evaluation: The proposed PUD development is a wholly commercial development
which allows a mix of commercial uses consistent with this Community Commercial Mixed
Use designation. The current proposal has no residential component although the
underlying UMU District zoning allows a variety of housing types. The Applicant intends this
Site to be an extension of his Ferguson Farms I development located immediately west of
this Site. Within the development’s “core” along the extension of Valley Commons Drive are
storefronts along the ground floors of multi-level buildings. There are plazas interspersed
along this commercial street with seating and landscaping.
Neighborhood Context. Medium-density residential neighborhoods (duplex and triplex
homes) are found north of the Site. A manufactured home park is located south of the Site,
across Huffine Lane. One- to three-story commercial buildings are located immediately
north, east and west of the Site.
Per the Plan, “Developments in this land use area should be located on one or two quadrants of
intersections of the arterial and/or collector streets and integrated with transit and non-
automotive routes. Due to past development patterns, there are also areas along major streets
where this category is organized as a corridor rather than a center. Although a broad range of
uses may be appropriate in both types of locations, the size and scale is to be smaller within the
local service areas. Building and site designs made to support easy reuse of the building and
site over time is important. Mixed use areas should be developed in an integrated, pedestrian
friendly manner and should not be overly dominated by any single use. Higher intensity uses
are encouraged in the core of the area or adjacent to significant streets and intersections.
Building height or other methods of transition may be required for compatibility with adjacent
development.”
Staff Evaluation: This is a wholly commercial development and the requested PUD
deviation numbers 2, 3, 4, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15 would enable buildings to be built to the lot lines,
rather than setback 10’ with landscaping separating the building from the sidewalk. These
deviations would produce an urban rather than suburban streetscape. PUD deviation No. 4
would allow an increase of building height from 60’ to 90’ throughout the Site.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 26 of 78
Deviation Number 10 would allow surface parking lots to encompass 100% of the lot’s
street frontage and Deviation 12 would reduce the landscape buffer between the street and
parking lots from 10’ to 6’. These two deviations would produce a Site that is distinctly
suburban in design and character. Parking lots facing the street could produce nighttime
headlight glare to passing motorists which would pose a safety hazard. Headlight glare
could also disturb residents living in housing along Fallon Street to the north of the Site.
Condition of Approval No. 2 would address this safety concern by mitigating headlight glare
with dense plantings of evergreen species within the required landscape buffer zone
between the parking lot and the street lot lines. This Condition states: “Owners of lots
facing a public street, including Block 3, Lot 3, and seeking to locate parking spaces facing
the street must mitigate potential safety hazards associated with vehicle headlight glare to
passing motorists by providing a minimum 6-foot wide landscape buffer between the
parking spaces and the street-facing lot property line which shall be planted with densely-
spaced evergreen shrubs which are a minimum 5-feet tall at planting.” However, if the
Commission chooses not to grant the reduced landscape buffer of Deviation No. 12 (from
10’ to 6’), this Condition should remain as mitigation for headlight glare to residents and
motorists traveling abutting streets.
The Bozeman Community Plan states: “Smaller neighborhood scale areas are intended to
provide local service to an area of approximately one half-mile to one mile radius as well as
passersby. These smaller centers support and help give identity to neighborhoods by providing
a visible and distinct focal point as well as employment and services. Densities of nearby homes
needed to support this scale are an average of 14 to 22 dwellings per net acre.”
Staff Evaluation: The residential neighborhood surrounding the Site is expected to support
neighborhood-serving businesses within the PUD development. Businesses within the Site
are expected to offer employment opportunities to area and City residents. The up to 90’feet
tall 6-story tall buildings within the Site would provide a visible and distinct focal point in
the area.
Relevant Bozeman Community Plan Policies:
Theme 2 - A City of Unique Neighborhoods
Goal N-1: Support well-planned, walkable neighborhoods
N-1.5 Encourage neighborhood focal point development with functions, activities, and
facilities that can be sustained over time. Maintain standards for placement of community
focal points and services within new development.
N-1.7 Review and where appropriate, revise block and lot design standards, including
orientation for solar power generation throughout city neighborhoods.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 27 of 78
N-1.8 Install, replace, and maintain missing or damaged sidewalks, trails, and shared use
paths.
N-1.9 Ensure multimodal connections between adjacent developments.
N-1.10 Increase connectivity between parks and neighborhoods through continued trail and
sidewalk development. Prioritize closing gaps within the network.
N-2.3 Investigate and encourage development of commerce concurrent with, or soon after,
residential development. Actions, staff, and budgetary resources relating to neighborhood
commercial development should be given a high priority.
Goal N-4: Continue to encourage Bozeman’s sense of place.
N-4.2 Incorporate features, in both public and private projects, to provide organization,
structure, and landmarks as Bozeman grows.
Applicant’s statement: “Ferguson Farm II is envisioned as a well-planned and walkable commercial
neighborhood. From the skybridge and the Maynard Border Ditch to the food court pod [Public Open
Space Lot 2] to the off leash dog area [Public Open Space Lot 8], the site has been designed to have
numerous neighborhood focal points and activity areas. Multimodal connections are shown within
and through the site. Lots have been designed to be oriented to the prevailing solar path. The project
will contribute to the sense of the place in this area of the community.”
Staff Evaluation: This Goal, Support well-planned, walkable neighborhoods, is positively
addressed by the Applicant’s provision of a reduced width Class I trail along the Fallon Street
and Resort Drive frontages of the Site. The City Engineer has granted an 8-foot wide shared
use trail along those street frontages, provided the Applicant increases the width of the
existing shared use trails along the Huffine Lane and Ferguson Avenue frontages from 8-feet
to 10-feet per Condition of Approval No. 3. These trails must be provided concurrent with
any first phase construction of the PUD Site. This trail system would connect the Site to
adjacent neighborhood destinations. However, the abundance of surface parking lots
fronting the Site along its north, east and west frontages would not present the Site or
development therein as particularly “walkable”; rather, it would be perceived as auto-
dominated. Condition No. 2 would partially mitigate this auto-dominance streetscape by
requiring the planting of densely-spaced evergreen shrubs which are a minimum of 5 feet at
planting, along the minimum 6-feet landscape screening of the parking lot(s).
One of the ways in which this application qualifies as a PUD is by the provision of
“performance points” pursuant to the former PUD criteria 38.430.090.E.2.a (7). This
application proposes to provide “one on-site covered bus stop” as noted in Table 2 found on
page 69. In order to qualify for this one “performance point”, details of the location, design
and permits for this sheltered transit stop must be provided with the Final PUD application
as noted in Condition of Approval No. 16. The provision of this sheltered bus stop would
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 28 of 78
facilitate the walkability of the Site and would support commuting to and from the Site by
workers and visitors.
Theme 3 - A City Bolstered by Downtown and Complimentary Districts
Goal DCD-1: Support urban development within the City.
DCD-1.5 Identify underutilized sites, vacant, and undeveloped sites for possible development
or redevelopment, including evaluating possible development incentives.
DCD-1.12 Prioritize the acquisition and/or preservation of open space that supports
community values, addresses gaps in functionality and needs, and does not impede
development of the community.
Goal DCD-2: Encourage growth throughout the City, while enhancing the pattern of
community development oriented on centers of employment and activity. Support an
increase in development intensity within developed areas.
DCD-2.4 Evaluate revisions to maximum building height limits in all zoning districts to
account for contemporary building methods and building code changes.
DCD-2.5 Identify and zone appropriate locations for neighborhood-scale commercial
development.
Goal DCD-3: Ensure multimodal connectivity within the City.
DCD-3.1 Expand multimodal accessibility between districts and throughout the City as a
means of promoting personal and environmental health, as well as reducing automobile
dependency.
DCD-3.2 Identify missing links in the multimodal system, prioritize those most beneficial to
complete, and pursue funding for completion of those links.
DCD-3.3 Identify major existing and future destinations for biking and walking to aid in
prioritization of route planning and completion.
DCD-3.4 Support implementation of the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan strategies.
DCD-3.5 Encourage increased development intensity in commercial centers and near major
employers.
DCD-3.6 Evaluate parking requirements and methods of providing parking as part of the
overall transportation system for and between districts.
Applicant’s statement: “The project is an infill project located within the current City limits. The
PUD and the associated relaxations address the regulatory challenges that are likely as a result of
this project, such as required parking and allowable building height. The project includes significant
open space to compliment the project’s commercial design. The site is envisioned as a center for
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 29 of 78
employment and activity, and a variety of transit options are proposed to connect this site to the
existing transit system including bus and trail connections. Parking requirements for the project are
proposed in a similar fashion to that allowed in the Midtown Urban Renewal District.”
Staff Evaluation: The UDC has a specific definition of “infill” development, as adopted by
Ordinance 2111 addressing zoning “departures” for additional housing. That definition is:
“Infill. The development or redevelopment of vacant, abandoned, or underutilized properties within
or wholly surrounded by the City, and where water, sewer, streets, and fire protection have already
been developed and are provided. Infill is development proposed or located within land that has been
subdivided for at least 35 years.” Although this PUD Site is undeveloped and is surrounded by
development, it does not qualify as “infill” per this definition as it has not been subdivided
for 35 years. This PUD is accompanied by an application to divide the 31 acre Lot 5 of Minor
Subdivision No. 295 into a 9 block, 72 lot subdivision to accommodate this development.
However, development of this Site as proposed in this PUD application would address the
policies of the above Theme 3 as a commercial center complementary to the Bozeman
Downtown District.
Theme 4 - A City Influenced by our Natural Environment, Parks, and Open Lands
Goal EPO-2: Work to ensure that development is responsive to natural features.
EPO-2.1 Where appropriate, activate connections to waterways by creating locations,
adjacent trails, and amenities encouraging people to access them.
Applicant’s statement: “The Ferguson Farm II project has been designed to protect the integrity
of the Maynard Border ditch that flows through the western side of the site. Trails have been
proposed adjacent to the ditch, as shown on the proposed Landscaping plans.”
Staff Evaluation: The agricultural irrigation ditch that transects the Site is not a natural
waterway. It would be relocated as part of this PUD application and designed to be a north-
south pathway at grade and above-grade. The Community Development Board (CDB)
expressed concern that the width and landscaping proposed for this “skybridge” feature of
the Site would need to be more robust to provide an effective pedestrian pathway and
amenity. They expressed concern that the ground level landscaping, next to the ditch, would
remain in shadow. Please see Attachment 7 for a summary of CDB comments on the
skybridge.
Staff finds that the skybridge, with enhanced landscaping and seating amenities as suggested
by Board Members, would positively address the Theme 4 goal.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 30 of 78
Theme 5 - A City That Prioritizes Accessibility and Mobility Choices
Goal M-1: Ensure multimodal accessibility.
M-1.4 Develop safe, connected, and complementary transportation networks for pedestrians,
bicyclists, and users of other personal mobility devices ( e-bikes, electric scooters, powered
wheelchairs, etc.).
M-1.5 Identify locations for key mobility hubs (e.g. rideshare drop off/ pick up areas,
bike/scooter share, transit service, bike, and pedestrian connections).
M-1.9 Prioritize and construct key bicycle infrastructure, to include wayfinding signage,
connections, and enhancements with emphasis on completing network connectivity.
M-1.11 Prioritize and construct key sidewalk connections and enhancements.
M-1.12 Eliminate parking minimum requirements in commercial districts and affordable
housing areas and reduce parking minimums elsewhere, acknowledging that demand for
parking will still result in new supply being built.
Goal M-2: Ensure multimodal safety.
M-2.5 Develop safe crossings along priority and high utilization pedestrian and biking
corridors.
Applicant’s statement: “The project provides multimodal access to and through the site. The site
is adjacent to the existing Streamline Purple line, and future route modifications are likely to include
direct service within this project site. Key pedestrian and multimodal connections are proposed, with
covered bike parking shown adjacent to key site amenities. Wayfinding signage is also shown for this
site to assist with navigation and safe site connections across the large site area.
Parking is proposed in a similar manner as within the Midtown Urban Renewal District. Please see the
Relaxations for additional details on this proposal.”
Staff Evaluation: Table 2 identifies streetscape improvements, wayfinding signs and a
sheltered bus stop that are to qualify as this PUD’s “performance points”. The locations and
designs for these improvements have not been provided with this Preliminary PUD. To
qualify for the points, the Applicant must provide details for these amenities and assets with
the Final PUD application per Condition of Approval No. 16. Those performance point
amenities are expected to positively address Theme 5 goals.
Theme 6 - A City Powered By Its Creative, Innovative, and Entrepreneurial Economy
Goal EE-1: Promote the continued development of Bozeman as an innovative and thriving
economic center.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 31 of 78
EE-1.1 Support the goals and objectives outlined in the Bozeman Economic Development
Strategy.
Goal EE-2: Survey and revise land use planning and regulations to promote and support
economic diversification efforts.
Applicant’s statement: “The project will create approximately 850,000 square feet of commercial
space, contributing to Bozeman’s continued goal of being an economic center. The relaxations to
the land use regulations are essential to meeting this goal.”
Applicant’s statement: “As has been described within the application documents and plans, the
proposed Ferguson Farm II project supports multiple components of the City’s Strategic Plan as
described above.”
“All [private] open spaces and all common portions of the PUD will be owned and maintained by
the Ownership Organization. Please see the draft governing documents for additional details.
Approximately 1,713 employees possible at this site, likely employed working on multiple shifts.
The precise number of employees will be determined with subsequent Site Plan submittals.”
Staff Evaluation: The above-cited policies of the Bozeman Community Plan and Strategic
Plan are relevant to this PUD and, as expressed by the Applicant’s narrative, are positively
addressed by this proposal.
2. Conformance to this chapter, including the cessation of any current violations
There are no known documented violations of the UDC for this property.
The Site is zoned Urban Mixed Use (UMU) which is an implementing zoning district for the
Community Commercial Mixed Use Future Land Use designation.
According to the Bozeman Municipal Code/ Unified Development Code: “Urban mixed-use
zoning district (UMU) The intent and purposes of the UMU urban mixed-use district are to
establish areas within the city that are mixed-use in character, and to set forth certain
minimum standards for development within those areas which encourage vertical mixed-use
development with high density. The purpose in having an urban mixed-use district is to provide
options for a variety of employment, retail and community service opportunities within the
community, with incorporated opportunity for some residential uses, while providing
predictability in uses and standards to landowners and residents. There is a rebuttable
presumption that the uses set forth for each district will be compatible both within the
individual districts and with adjoining zoning districts when the standards of this chapter are
met and any applicable conditions of approval have been satisfied. Additional requirements for
development apply within overlay districts.
1. It is the further the intent of this district to:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 32 of 78
a. Allow complementary land uses which encourage mixed uses on individual floors
including, but not limited to, retail, offices, commercial services, restaurants, bars,
hotels, recreation and civic uses, and housing, to create economic and social vitality
and to encourage the linking of trips;
b. Foster the development of vertically oriented mixed uses, in contrast to single use
development distributed along high vehicle capacity roadways;
c. Encourage development that exhibits the physical design characteristics of vibrant,
urban, pedestrian-oriented, storefront-style shopping streets with pedestrian
amenities;
d. Provide roadway and pedestrian connections to residential areas;
e. Provide appropriate locations and design standards for automobile and truck-
dependent uses;
f. Create central urban gathering places such as community squares or plazas;
g. Allow for urban oriented recreational activities consistent with the standards and
intent of the district; and
h. To encourage and support the use of sustainable building practices.
2. To accomplish the intent of the district, the UMU district should ideally be located at
the intersections of major traffic corridors; that is, at the intersections of two
arterials, or, less frequently, an arterial and a collector street. The major
intersections should have or be planned to have a stop light or other active traffic
control. While placement at major intersections is a necessary precondition, not all
major intersections should have the UMU district adjacent to them. Additionally,
placement of this district should be adjacent or near to dense residential
development to enhance walking and bicycle use.”
[These UDU zone objectives and criteria for development are expected to be met by the
current concept plan for this PUD and the accompanying Ferguson Farm II Major
Subdivision Preliminary Plat application.]
Sec. Sec. 38.310.050. Supplemental use provisions for the urban mixed-use zoning
district.
“Mixed uses required and limited:
A. Development must include a mix of uses. [Deviations 2 and 3 waives this requirement.]
B. Uses must be grouped as commercial, industrial, office, institutional, and residential. A
combination of at least two different groups of uses must be provided within each site
plan. [Deviations 2 and 3 waives this requirement.]
C. No use group must exceed 70 percent of the total gross building floor area in the entire
site development. Multiple buildings may be shown on a single site plan as allowed in
division 38.230 of this chapter. For the purposes of calculating the percentage of a use
within the site development the gross square foot floor area of building for each use
must be utilized. Single use buildings are allowed provided the entire site meets the
required use mix standard. [Deviations 2 and 3 waives this requirement.]
D. At least 70 percent of the ground level block frontages (see division 38.510) must be
occupied by non-residential uses. To meet this requirement, the depth of non-residential
floor area must be at least 20 feet deep. Ground level lobbies for residential uses on
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 33 of 78
upper floors may qualify as a non-residential use for the purpose of this standard
provided such lobby occupies no more than 50 feet of the block frontage. Structured
parking is classified as a non-residential use. Structured parking at the ground level
must include liner buildings of usable proportions along at least 40 percent of the
building façades facing a street or greenway.” [Deviations 2 and 3 waives this
requirement.]
38.330.010. UMU district—Special standards.
A. A UMU district is anticipated to generally be not less than 20 acres in area. The city may
approve a lesser area of not less than ten acres upon finding that a smaller area will still
provide for adequate transition between adjacent districts, provide a reasonable
community setting for the intensity of the district, and that a smaller area will not
constitute spot zoning.
B. The district must be surrounded by perimeter streets unless precluded by topography.
C. Block frontages and building orientation. See division 38.510 for applicable standards for
all development types [Deviation 9 through 15 waive these standards].
D. Site planning and design element standards. See division 38.520 for applicable standards
for all development types [Deviation 16 would exempt development from having 3’ wide
landscaping between the building and sidewalk, per 38.520.040.D.3. Deviation 17
would waive the requirement to provide 12’ wide sidewalks with trees and landscaping
along buildings 100’ or more in length, per 38.520.040.D.4].
E. Building standards.
1. Building design. See division 38.520 for applicable standards for all development
types.
2. Floor-to-floor heights and floor area of ground-floor space.
a. All commercial floor space provided on the ground floor of a mixed-use building
must have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 13 feet. [Changed to 15 feet
floor to floor height]
b. All commercial floor space provided on the ground floor of a mixed-use building
must contain the following minimum floor area:
(1) At least 800 square feet or 25 percent of the lot area (whichever is greater) on
lots with street frontage of less than 50 feet; or
(2) At least 20 percent of the lot area on lots with street frontage of 50 feet or
more. [Deviations 2 and 3 would exempt development from these mixed use
standards.]
3. Street-level openings on parking structures must be limited to those necessary for
retail store entrances, vehicle entrance and exit lanes, and pedestrian entrances to
stairs and elevator lobbies. Parking structures adjacent to streets must have
architectural detailing such as, but not limited to, standard size masonry units such
as brick, divided openings to give the appearance of windows, and other techniques
to provide an interesting and human-scaled appearance on the story adjacent to the
sidewalk. [This standard would remain.]
F. Special parking standards
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 34 of 78
1. Maximum surface parking.
a. In order to achieve the intent of the district and achieve efficiency in the use of
land, surface parking provided for the sole use of an individual development must
not exceed 100 percent of the minimum parking requirement for the subject land
use based upon the requirements of division 38.540 of this chapter. The UMU
district may utilize the parking reductions authorized in section 38.540.050.2.c.1.
All qualifying reductions must be included in determining the 100 percent
requirement.
b. Exemptions to section 38.330.010.G.1.a, to allow unstructured surface parking
up to 100 percent of the minimum parking requirement exclusive of reductions
may be approved through the development review process for developments that
provide shared parking to other development, valet parking spaces, parking for
off-site users for which an hourly or other regular rent is paid, or similarly
managed parking facilities.
2. Structured parking incentive. A floor area bonus of one square foot may be granted
for each square foot of area of parking provided within a building. Additional height
of building is allowed to accommodate this additional building area per Table
38.320.050.
3. Bicycle parking. Covered bicycle parking must be provided. The covered spaces must
be at least one-half of the total minimum bicycle parking. The minimum number of
covered spaces must be the greater of either ten bicycle parking spaces or five percent
of motor vehicle parking provided on-site.
Applicant’s statement: Please note that UDC 38.430.070, Phasing of PUDs, requires details of
the proposed development within the PUD as a concept master plan. The following
descriptions should be deemed illustrative of potential future development within the PUD
Site and are not deemed a “fixed” development plan. The development of individual lots and
the phasing of blocks within the PUD are expected to be proposed by individual lot owners,
over time, once the public infrastructure and private streets are built. The Applicant states
that all surface parking lots would be built by him and would be available in common to all
lot owners, their tenants, workers and visitors. A property owners’ association would
maintain all common areas such as surface parking, private streets and alleys, open space
and stormwater management facilities. The square footage of land uses and the parking
spaces noted below are illustrative of potential development of the Site.
Applicant’s statement: “In the 9 Blocks within the PUD Site (and subdivision), the following building
square footages are anticipated by the Applicant to be built:
135,464 sf - Retail, Restaurant, Commercial, Bar
246,081 sf - Office
368,072 sf - Hotel
95,200 sf - Medical
27,235 - Structured Parking
22,125 sf - Garage Condo Units
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 35 of 78
Approximately 1,713 employees are anticipated by the Applicant to be possible at this site, likely
employed working on multiple shifts.
Parking required for this development would be approximately 1555 spaces, (after reductions for
adjacency to transit routes, adjacency to Storefront Block Frontages, and joint use reductions of 30%
as specified in the TIS). Total parking provided for this project is 883 total spaces, and includes on
street parking and the proposed garages (one space per garage). The required bike parking would be
155 - 226 spaces. The project is proposing to provide 304 bike parking spaces across the site (112 x 2-
bike racks (uncovered); 40 x 2-bike racks (covered)). The covered bike parking exceeds the required
UMU standards. Please note, the parking calculations for this project do not consider the full range of
uses that are possible at this site. For example, assuming one-third of projected office space as shown
on the 3-D map (land use map Attachment 7) becomes hotel units and/or one-half of retail is
developed as restaurant space, the project could be required under the existing UDC to provide 2,264
required spaces. It is therefore difficult for the Applicant to discern the precise parking that would be
required under the UDC for this project at this initial stage. Block by block analysis of initial
assumptions for parking can be provided upon request.”
“Related to site parking and circulation, please also note that with this submittal the Applicant is
requesting an exception to the prohibition to backing into the alley by non-residential development
(UDC Sec. 38.540.020.D). Function of the alley will not be impeded with the City’s grant to this
request.”
Staff Evaluation: Deviation 19 exempts the development from minimum and maximum
parking requirements. If granted, the maximum parking standards of subsection F.1.a would
also be waived. The provisions of F.1.b would not apply to this development as all surface
parking would be shared by all development within the Site. Parking spaces in garages may
be individually sold or condominiumized and, therefore, not shared. The provisions of F.2
would not apply as there is no maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the UMU zone and the
maximum building height, with or without structured parking, would be 90’ if granted by the
PUD.
Based on the estimated building square footage noted above by the Applicant, the 1,555
parking spaces to be provided within the Site would represent about 88% of the required
parking for this development per the Applicant’s proposed mix of commercial land uses. This
PUD, proscribing no minimum or maximum parking requirement, would allow the
developers of the 49 buildable lots to determine and provide for their own demand for
parking.
The covered bicycle parking provision of F.3 is not waived by Deviation 20 which seeks
relaxation from the requirement that required bicycle parking must be located within 100’
of the building it serves. If Deviation 20 is granted, there would be no maximum spacing or
distance for covered bicycle racks from the building they are to serve. However, Condition
of Approval No. 14 requires the location of bike racks to be shown on the Final PUD
landscape plan submittal.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 36 of 78
In the interest of facilitating development of this long-vacant former farmland site, per the
Community Plan Growth Policies of Theme 3, DCD 1 through 3.6, staff has no objections to
minimum and maximum parking requirement deviations and waivers. Staff anticipates that,
to be a workable, efficient and successful development, the developers of lots within the PUD
Site will provide adequate parking to serve their development. If, over time, there is too
much surface parking, new development could fill that space. If there is insufficient on-site
parking, surface lots could be developed with multi-level garages that would be “wrapped”
with commercial or residential uses at the ground floor streetfront.
G. Lighting. All building entrances, pathways, and other pedestrian areas must be lit with
pedestrian-scale lighting (e.g., wall mounted, sidewalk lamps, bollards, landscaping
lighting, etc.). Alternative lighting meeting the intent of the design guidelines and other
criteria of this chapter may be approved through site development review.
Staff Evaluation: There is no PUD exemption from this standard.
H. Public spaces. The UMU district is urban in nature. Public parks and recreational areas are
likewise expected to be urban in nature. This will include elements such as plazas or other
hardscapes, landscaping with planters, furniture, developed recreation facilities such as
basketball and tennis courts or indoor recreation facilities, and will be more concentrated
in size and development than anticipated in a less urban setting. The requirements of this
section give direction in the development of park plans and the application of the
standards of division 38.420 of this chapter. The parkland dedication requirements of
division 38.420 of this chapter may be satisfied by a cumulative contribution of land and
the value of on-site improvements to create spaces with the characteristics and functions
described in this section. Development within the UMU district may also utilize any of the
options of sections 38.420.030 and 38.420.100 to satisfy the requirements of section
38.420.020.A. The requirements of this section must prevail if these standards conflict with
the application of the standards of article 4 of this chapter.
1. Public spaces must be designed to facilitate at least three of the following types of
activities to encourage consistent human presence and activity.
2. Public spaces must be designed to:
a. Facilitate social interaction between and within groups;
b. Provide safe, pleasant, clean and convenient sitting spaces adaptable to
changing weather conditions;
c. Be attractive to multiple age groups;
d. Provide for multiple types of activities without conflicting;
e. Support organized activities;
f. Be visually distinctive and interesting;
g. Interconnect with other public and private spaces; and
h. Prioritize use by persons.
Staff Evaluation: There is no proposed PUD deviation from these standards. Since there is
no residential component to this development, these standards would apply to the
commercial open space requirements of 38.520.060.C.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 37 of 78
Although the Applicant requested the 2006 creation of the UMU zone and in 2008 he
requested that this Site be rezoned from its initial B-P (Business Park) District designation
to the UMU district designation, he now seeks to waive many of the UMU District Special
Standards of 38.330.010 as noted above. Therefore, the Applicant seeks waivers,
exemptions, deviations and relaxations to the UMU standards as well as other UDC
provisions via this P-PUD. The 26 requested relaxations to the UDC standards are listed in
Table 1 above as well as in Attachment 1 which also has the Applicant’s rationale for each
requested deviation.
The Applicant states that the PUD would allow all land uses that are permitted in the UMU
District to be principal uses on any of the 49 buildable lots in the Ferguson Farms II
subdivision. The Applicant describes the concept plans for each block in Attachment 1. This
PUD evaluation does not analyze those lot-specific development proposals as they are
deemed “concept plans” at this stage of the PUD review process. This evaluation of the P-
PUD and its block-by-block concept plans does not approve or “vest” any specific
development for those lots. Any development proposal for any lot within the PUD and
subdivision must go through a separate site plan application and review. This PUD qualifies
as a Phased PUD pursuant to 38.430.070 and the block and lot details proposed in this PUD
qualify as a Master Site Plan for this Site. When the Final PUD and subdivision Final Plat have
been approved and the Final Plat is recorded, the development proposals for individual lots
may submit a site plan application that is consistent with the adopted PUD Master Site Plan
for that lot. Site plan applications of individual lots would be reviewed by staff and brought
before the Community Development Board, as the Design Review Board (DRB), only if the
proposed development reaches the DRB review thresholds of 38.230.040, such as a parking
lot with more than 90 spaces or a 4-story or taller building.
38.430.010. Intent of a Planned Unit Development
Relaxations to the City’s zoning standards may be sought with a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) application. A PUD approval is a discretionary approval and the review authority (City
Commission) must find that the overall development is:
(1) superior to that offered by the underlying zoning district as well as basic existing zoning
standards per 38.430.030.A.c;
(2) consistent with the intent and purpose of the UDC 38.430 PUD chapter;
(3) consistent with the adopted goals of the City’s Growth Policies and with any relevant
adopted design objectives plan per UDC 38.20.030.A.4.c; and
(4) promotes the public health, safety and general welfare per UDC 38.100.040.B.
The intent of a PUD is to promote maximum flexibility and innovation in development
proposals within the City. The Applicant can request deviations/relaxations from the code
in exchange for a higher quality design of his development. The obligation to show a superior
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 38 of 78
outcome is the responsibility of the Applicant. In Attachment 1 the Applicant describes how,
in his view, the overall outcome of the proposal would be superior to what would be obtained
from the application of the underlying UMU district and basic zoning standards. The criteria
for granting a PUD are found in UDC 38.430.090 and the staff evaluation of the Applicant’s
application is shown below. Generally, this PUD proposal would allow:
nearly 900,000 gross square feet of commercial space;
building heights of up to 90 feet;
no minimum or maximum parking or loading standards—each lot owner or
developer may determine what amount of parking s/he needs to meet her/his
demand;
internal circulation with alternate street widths,
street design and construction standards and public streets maintained by the
subdivision property owner association;
alternate municipal water, sanitary sewer and storm water systems and locations;
public and private open space facilities;
signage on all sides of a building;
PUD-specific design standards as shown in Attachment 1; and
20 PUD-specific Performance Points needed to qualify for the PUD submittal.
It is noted that the street design alternatives proposed by Deviation Numbers 6, 23, 24, 25
and 26 are not “zoning” standards that can be addressed by a PUD but, rather, are under the
purview of the City’s Director of Transportation and Engineering, per 38.200.010.D, and
must be evaluated and approved separately by the Director.
Staff Evaluation: It is staff’s opinion that not all of the 26 requested relaxations qualify for
PUD consideration because they do not meet the “superior quality” standard of UDC
38.430.030.A.4.c which states:
“The review authority must make a determination that the deviation will produce an
environment, landscape quality and character superior to that produced by the existing
standards of this chapter, and which will be consistent with the intent and purpose of this
division 38.430, with the adopted goals of the city growth policy and with any relevant
adopted design objectives plan. Upon deciding in favor of the deviation request, the review
authority may grant deviations, above or below minimum or maximum standards
respectively as established in this chapter, including the complete exemption from a
particular standard. If the review authority does not determine that the proposed modified
standards will create an environment, landscape quality and character superior to that
produced by the existing standards of this chapter, and which will be consistent with the
intent and purpose of this division 38.430 and with any relevant design objectives plan,
then no deviation will be granted.”
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 39 of 78
The relevant question posed by staff in evaluating each of the 26 proposed relaxations is
“would the relaxation produce a superior development than the BMC standard would, and
would it positively address or advance Community Plan/Growth policies and protect the health,
safety and general welfare of the community?”
Most of the Applicant’s requested deviations to the UDC would meet the PUD review criteria.
In the staff evaluation of each deviation request, some could meet the criteria if specific
mitigation conditions are met by the Applicant; those mitigating conditions are noted above
in the Conditions of Approval section of this report. Deviation No. 18 cannot meet the PUD
criteria of a superior product even with a mitigating condition of approval as it seeks to
reduce the screening of a highly visible trash enclosure on one lot to only one side. This
enclosure is to be located on Block 4, Lot 4 which lies within the Gateway Block Frontage of
Huffine Lane viewscape. Condition of Approval No. 6 addresses the trash enclosure impacts
by denying the deviation request to screen the trash enclosure abutting the Huffine Lane
property line on only its south side, facing Huffine Lane. Staff, through Condition No. 6,
requires the enclosure, and all other trash enclosures within the Site, to be screened on all
three visible sides.
As noted earlier, the Community Development Board recommends denial of Deviation No.
10 which allows surface parking lots to front on 100% of streets designated as Landscape
Block Frontages. To address the Board’s recommendation, should the Commission agree
with the CDB, Condition of Approval No. 13 is offered to require lots within the PUD Site to
meet the maximum 50% street frontage devoted to surface parking areas. [Since the March
7, 2023 Commission action to support Deviation 10 in their Motion for approval of the
P-PUD, Condition No. 13 has been removed as a condition of approval, noted on page
21 by strike-out text.]
Staff recommends approval of 24 of the 26 the proposed deviations and recommends
approval of the Ferguson Farms II Preliminary PUD with the conditions of approval noted
above and standard code provisions applicable to the PUD process in effect at the time this
application was deemed “adequate” for further review and public notice (September 2,
2022). The other deviation requests are deemed either (1) approved because they could be
deemed to demonstrate a superior result or product; or (2) they can be approved with
mitigation as a condition of approval so that each would mitigate a potential adverse impact
to the Site or environs or would result in a superior development than the UDC standard
would produce.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 40 of 78
The 2 requested deviations that cannot be approved, even with mitigation or conditions of
approval are:
Deviation No. 5 which seeks to create 6 parking garage lots without legal and physical access to a
public street or alley [this is not permitted by State Statute]; and
Deviation No. 18 which seeks to allow a trash enclosure on Block 4 to not be screened from view
from Huffine Lane on its two sides [this does not provide a superior outcome.]
Staff clarified to the Commission at the March 7th hearing that staff does find that Deviation
10 is positively addressed by Growth Policies and meets PUD criteria and, therefore, is
supported by staff.
In addition to the recommended Conditions of Approval, UDC code provisions are provided
related to final planned unit development plan approval and subsequent site plan approval.
38.230.100. Plan Review Criteria continued:
3. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations
Deviation 1 would allow sale of alcohol for consumption on-premises as a principal use. If
granted, Applicants for this use would still be required to meet State Liquor License laws
and regulations.
4. Conformance with special review criteria for applicable permit type as
specified in article 2
Most proposed uses would be principal uses per Deviation 1. However, owners or
developers of each lot would be required to submit a site plan that is consistent with the
PUD master site plan.
5. Conformance with the zoning provisions of article 3, including permitted uses,
form and intensity standards and requirements, applicable supplemental use
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 41 of 78
criteria, general land use standards and requirements, and wireless facilities if
applicable
Deviation 1 would waive most of the supplemental use standards and requirements of the
UMU zoning resulting in stripping the UMU zone of most of its requirements for a mix of
land uses.
6. Conformance with the community design provisions of article 4, including
transportation facilities and access, community design and element provisions,
and park and recreational requirements
Deviations 8, 17 and 23 through 26 would amend the City’s standards for street widths, on-
street parking design, street section design and construction materials, shared-use pathway
widths, and design and locations of water, sanitary sewer and stormwater facilities. These
deviation requests would be decided by the Director of Transportation and Engineering.
As noted below under Criterion 7, the current Storefront Block Frontage designations for the
bordering streets would be substituted for the “Other” Block Frontage designations and the
new interior Landscape BF landscaped setback standards would be reduced from 10’ to 6’ in
width.
7. Conformance with the project design provisions of article 5, including:
(a) compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the site and
adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development relative to architectural design,
building mass, neighborhood identity, landscaping, historical character, orientation of
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 42 of 78
buildings on the site and visual integration;
Figure 8: Current Block Frontage (BF) Designations. Red line indicates Storefront BF;
orange indicates Gateway BF; green line indicates Landscape BF and purple indicates
Mixed BF designations.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 43 of 78
The Applicant seeks to replace the current Block Frontage designations for Ferguson, Fallon
and Resort streets from Storefront Block Frontage (BF) to “Other” BF. The “Other” BF
designation allows parking lots to be built along street frontages with just a 10’ wide
landscaped buffer whereas the Storefront BF requires parking to be placed to the side or rear
of structures and parking lots are limited to 60 feet of the street frontage with a minimum 6’
landscape buffer between the parking areas and the street. Both the Storefront and Other
Storefront BF
Landscape BF
Other BF—including Ferguson, Fallon and Resort streets
Gateway BF
Figure 9: Proposed Block Frontage
Designations for the Ferguson Farms II
PUD
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 44 of 78
BF have similar transparency standards—60% of the ground floor façade between 30” and
10’ above the sidewalk.
The interior north-south streets would be designated Landscape BF. The Landscape BF
designation requires parking to be provided to the side, rear, below or above the street
frontage and it limits surface parking to no more than 50% of the street frontage. If parking
garages are provided, 38.510.030.M would require “lining” the street-facing façade with
commercial floor space with a minimum depth of 20 feet.
The Applicant’s requested Deviation 10 would allow surface parking on 100% of the street
frontage of individual development sites facing a Landscape Block Frontage. The Community
Development Board, acting as the City’s Design Review Board per 38.230.040, voted
unanimously on December 5, 2022 to recommend denial of this Deviation. They commented
at their meeting that such surface parking would be unsightly to all who visit the Site and
would provide an unappealing and perhaps unsafe pedestrian experience and streetscape
along that frontage. In the CDB opinion, Deviation 10 would not induce “walkability” for this
neighborhood, nor would it appear to provide a “superior” development than the UDC
Landscape BF standard would. Therefore, the Board recommended denial of this Deviation
No. 10.
Staff finds that Deviation 10 positively addresses PUD criteria and, with the mitigation
vegetative screening of Condition of Approval No. 2 and 5, would provide a complementary
if not superior development than the UDC parking lot screening standard would.
The interior east-west streets would be designated Storefront BF. The east-west Valley
Commons Drive within the Site would be the core commercial street and would likely have
4- to 6-story tall buildings built to the property line on the north side of the street with no
landscape buffer between the building and the sidewalk if Deviation 16 (Pathway Design) is
granted. If Deviation 12 is granted, the landscape screening of parking areas would be
reduced from 10’ to 6’ in width (please see Condition of Approval No. 2 for mitigation of
headlight glare for this Deviation).
Criterion 7(b) design and arrangement of the elements of the plan so that
activities are integrated with the organizational scheme of the community,
neighborhood, and
The surface parking lots bordering the frontage streets of Fallon, Ferguson and Resort do
not foster an integrated development with the surrounding neighborhoods. The buildings
proposed along the Huffine Lane major arterial roadway would be built to the lot line but
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 45 of 78
would border a 30’ public access easement lying between the road and the Site’s southern
lots.
other approved development and produce an efficient, functionally organized
and cohesive development;
The development proposed for this PUD would be similar to the development of the
Ferguson Farms I lying to the west, although with taller, up to 90’, buildings.
7(c) Design and arrangement of the plan in harmony with the existing
natural topography, natural water bodies and water courses, existing vegetation,
and to contribute to the overall aesthetic quality of the site configuration;
The 31-acre PUD Site is part of a larger Ferguson Farm property purchased by the
Applicant years ago. This property was in agricultural use in years past and is relatively
flat with one irrigation ditch traversing the western portion of the Site in a north-south
orientation. The irrigation ditch would be relocated with the permission of the ditch owner
and would be re-landscaped with a “skybridge” walkway above it (see Attachment 5).
7(d) Landscaping, including the enhancement of buildings, the appearance
of vehicular use, open space and pedestrian areas, and the preservation or
replacement of natural vegetation;
This criterion is not positively addressed, as landscaping would be eliminated against
buildings along the Storefront Block Frontages of Valley Commons Drive and would be
reduced from 10’ wide to 6’ wide along the internal Landscape Block Frontage roads per
Deviations 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16. Foundation plantings separating the building from
pedestrian pathways would be waived by Deviation 16. The existing trees and shrubs along
the Maynard Border Ditch alignment would be replaced with decorative landscaping.
Although, this landscaping criterion is not positively addressed by those requested
Deviations, overall, on balance, the PUD positively addresses other review criteria as noted
previously and below.
38.230.100. Plan Review Criteria continued
7(e) Open space;
Applicant’s Discussion:
“Ferguson Farm II contains fourteen (14) open space lots. The fourteen qualifying open space areas
account for approximately 4.69 acres (204,432 square feet) of open space. A portion of this open
space area (.62 acres or 27,031 square feet) is provided to meet the commercial open space standards
for the entirety of the site, while 4.07 acres (177,400 square feet) is provided and has been applied
towards the calculation for required PUD performance points. The open space areas will support
trails, plazas, an event area, the skybridge, covered bicycle parking, a food truck court, dog walk areas,
and picnic areas (see the Landscape plans L10 - L13 for additional design details for each of these open
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 46 of 78
space areas). The open space applied to the PUD points does not include the pathways between
buildings. All open space areas, with the exception of the skybridge itself (which has not been counted
toward the meeting the required performance point minimums) will be constructed with
infrastructure. The skybridge will be built as the adjacent buildings are constructed.
The total area of qualifying onsite open space is 204,432 square feet. Deducting the required
commercial open space area leaves 177,400 square feet of open space available to account for PUD
performance points. Of this total, 140,669 square feet is proposed to have public access, while 36,731
is non-public (Open Space Lots 4, 6, and 7). The total site area is 1,351,559 square feet. Public open
space counting toward the required PUD open space is 10.41% of total site area, which equates to
13.01 performance points. Non-public open space area accounts for 2.72% of total site area.
Therefore, 15.73 rounded to 15 performance points are accrued for the provision of onsite open space
as described in this section.
The location of each open space area was planned to integrate seamlessly into the
development and to encourage greater use of the onsite outdoor spaces. Throughout the site
additional a variety of open spaces have been planned offering wide range of users options
to utilize these amenitized spaces. From dog walk areas to the ~1 mile PUD perimeter trail,
the open space is meant to be available to more than just the site’s human occupants. The
perimeter areas area is also ideal for multimodal transit to and through this site. Taken as a
whole, the proposed open space more than meets the needs of employees and visitors to
this site.
The primary focal point of the PUD is the open space, trail corridor, and skybridge proposed along the
Maynard Border Ditch (See Appendix A.8 & Appendix I). The skybridge area will include a tiered
system, with a 12-foot-wide trail on the ground and a 10- to 12-foot wide skybridge above. This tiered
system will allow pedestrians safe dry passage north and south during winter snow or rainy weather
when walking below the skybridge. The skybridge will be accessed via stairs in Open Space Lots 4, 5,
and 6, with an elevator in Open Space Lot 5. At 18 feet tall from the ground to the bottom of the
decking, the trail will extend over Field Street, Valley Commons, and the alleys. Once on top of the
bridge, pedestrians will have a view of the surrounding area and mountains. The lots abutting the
skyline bridge trail corridor can offer patio seating adjacent to the surface trail. A half-acre open space
lot is planned at the intersection of the skyline bridge trail corridor and Valley Commons Drive. This
park like setting will be the perfect venue for events on the lawn in the summer and ice skating in the
winter.
Another unique open space amenity will be the picnic area planned near the geographic center of the
subdivision. Open Space Lot 2 lies at the intersection of Brookfield Avenue and Valley Commons Drive,
and is to be developed as a food truck court with space for picnic tables. A paved surface is provided
with adjacent roll top curb to allow for easy access of food trucks to this open space area.
Staff Evaluation: The proposed open space areas appear to meet the Site’s commercial
development requirements. However, in order to qualify for Performance Points,
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 47 of 78
Condition No. 16 requires details of these elements with the Final PUD application
submittal.
38.230.100. Plan Review Criteria continued
7(f) Lighting; There are no proposed changes to the City’s lighting standards.
7(g) Signage.
Deviation 22 would allow business signs on all sides of a building. This is already allowed
by UDC Section 38.560. Condition of Approval No. 10, requires the Applicant to submit a
Comprehensive Sign Plan with the Final PUD application in order to clarify the UDC sign
standards to be applied within the PUD Site and to specify which of those are to be
amended.
38.230.100. Plan Review Criteria continued
8. Conformance with environmental and open space objectives set forth in
articles 4—6, including:
(a) The enhancement of the natural environment; There is no “natural environment”
remaining on the Site as it has previously been in agricultural use and for years has been
fallow with just an irrigation ditch flowing through the Site.
(b) Watercourse and wetland protections and associated wildlife habitats; and
Although deemed an “aquatic resource” and “water body” in various sections of the
UDC, agricultural irrigation ditches in 38.700.210 are not defined as a watercourse
requiring setbacks, although they do require easements for sufficient maintenance or
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 48 of 78
inspections, per 38.410.060.D. The subdivision covenants would establish these
commitments.
8(c) if the development is adjacent to an existing or approved public park
or public open space area, have provisions been made in the plan to avoid
interfering with public access to and use of that area;
The closest park is a half-acre Valley Commons Park located approximately 800 feet
east of the Site along Fallon Street. The Class I trails required by Condition of Approval
No. 3 would facilitate public access to the nearby park.
38.230.100.
9. Conformance with the natural resource protection provisions of article 4 and
article 6
There are no “natural resources” located on the Site or proposed for new development.
10. Other related matters, including relevant comment from affected parties
On December 29, 2022, one public comment was received. The commenter objected to
the 90’ building heights of the PUD as being out of scale with the neighborhood and may
require taxpayers to purchase a new Fire ladder truck to service the tall buildings.
11. If the development includes multiple lots that are interdependent for
circulation or other means of addressing requirement of this title, whether the
lots are either:
a. Configured so that the sale of individual lots will not alter the approved
configuration or use of the property or cause the development to become
nonconforming; or
b. The subject of reciprocal and perpetual easements or other agreements to
which the City is a party so that the sale of individual lots will not cause one or
more elements of the development to become nonconforming; and
There are six lots that do not meet Article 4, Section 38.400.090, Access requirements to
have legal and physical access to a public or publicly-accessible street or alley. Those
lots are to be restricted to parking use by the Applicant in a recorded deed restriction,
must provide legal and physical access on the subdivision plat map, and must be
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 49 of 78
similarly limited in the Property Owners’ Association Conditions, Covenants and
Restrictions (CC&R) document and per Condition of Approval No. 4.
Figure 10: Lots restricted to parking structure use
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 50 of 78
38.230.100.
12. Phasing of development
Figure 11: Phasing Plan
There are 7 phases of development over a 10 to 20-year period, depending upon market
demand for the commercial spaces. The Applicant is requesting Concurrent Construction of
all on-site and off-site street improvements and public infrastructure needed to
accommodate this development. In this way, the lots would be “ready” for development
when they are sold. The PUD, as the master site plan, would guide development over each
phase of development. Although the application provides detailed drawings of each Block,
the Applicant is advised that Community Development is deeming the phases and block
drawings as “concept plans” on the scale of a master site plan; no development of a lot is
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 51 of 78
“vested” or deemed approved. A subsequent site plan application will be required for each
lot to be developed.
Conditional Use Permit Review Criteria, Section 38.230.110.
E. In addition to the review criteria of section 38.230.100, the review authority shall, in
approving a P-PUD as a conditional use permit, determine favorably as follows:
1. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and topography to
accommodate such use, and all yards, spaces, walls and fences, parking, loading
and landscaping are adequate to properly relate such use with the land and uses
in the vicinity;
The 31-acre Site is large enough to accommodate a development that meets the UMU
standards. However, by his choice, the Applicant is ‘filling up” the Site with development and
parking such that he states he is not able to meet landscape setbacks, landscape buffers or
trash enclosure screening requirements. The purpose of this PUD application is to seek
deviations from UDC requirements to allow greater building heights, greater or lesser
parking, less landscaping and a greater mix of land uses as principal uses within the
development that would produce a superior environment in function and character.
Likewise, the purpose of the PUD legislation is to offer greater flexibility to develop
properties while exempting them from certain City standards. Although the PUD Site is
heavily designed and programmed and requires deviations and relaxations of UDU and other
UDC standards, the 31-acres is generally an adequate size to accommodate this development
and, therefore, satisfies this criterion. It is noted that the P-PUD, as a master plan, provides
a concept of development of the Site. Lesser development of each lot would be allowed as
each site plan is submitted for review and approval.
2. That the proposed use will have no material adverse effect upon the
abutting property. Persons objecting to the recommendations of review bodies
carry the burden of proof;
The land uses proposed in the PUD relaxations are not expected to be out of character with
commercial land uses in the area. The structures, at 87’ or 90’ in height, would be taller than
buildings in the area. Although highly visible, there is no zoning protection of an existing
“viewscape” by an adjacent property versus a new viewscape with taller buildings blocking
distant vistas. The viewscape of distant mountains does not come with purchase of a
property unless, prior to development, the “air space” is purchased by the interested
neighboring property owner. The PUD’s Deviation 4, allowing buildings up to 90’ in height
throughout the PUD Site, is not expected to have a “material adverse effect” on abutting
properties, most of which are zoned commercial (B-2) or mixed-use (R-O) residential and
commercial. The development opportunities of those properties would be unchanged.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 52 of 78
Section 38.230.110
3. That any additional conditions stated in the approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. Such conditions may
include, but are not limited to:
a. Regulation of use;
b. Special yards, spaces and buffers;
c. Special fences, solid fences and walls;
d. Surfacing of parking areas;
e. Requiring street, service road or alley dedications and improvements or
appropriate bonds;
f. Regulation of points of vehicular ingress and egress;
g. Regulation of signs;
h. Requiring maintenance of the grounds;
i. Regulation of noise, vibrations and odors;
j. Regulation of hours for certain activities;
k. Time period within which the proposed use shall be developed;
l. Duration of use;
m. Requiring the dedication of access rights; and
n. Other such conditions as will make possible the development of the city in
an orderly and efficient manner.
Conditions of Approval 1 through 16 are deemed necessary to (1) protect the public health,
safety, and general welfare of the community; (2) to clarify provisions of the PUD deviations
to assist in enforcement measures; (3) to mitigate potential safety impacts or concerns
associated with approved or granted deviations; and (4) ensure that the PUD meets the
criterion to provide a superior product or outcome over that which would occur under the
applicable UDC standard..
As a reminder, the two requested deviations that staff does not support are:
Deviation No. 5 which seeks to create 6 parking garage lots without legal and physical access to a
public street or alley [this is not permitted by State Statute]; and
Deviation No. 18 which seeks to allow a trash enclosure on Block 4 to not be screened from view
from Huffine Lane on its two sides [this does not provide a superior outcome].
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 53 of 78
Section 38.230.110
F. In addition to all other conditions, the following general requirements apply
to every conditional use permit granted:
1. The right to a use and occupancy permit shall be contingent upon the
fulfillment of all general and special conditions imposed by the conditional use
permit procedure; and
2. All of the conditions shall constitute restrictions running with the land use,
apply and be adhered to by the owner of the land, successors or assigns, are
binding upon the owner of the land, his successors or assigns, must be consented
to in writing, and must be recorded as such with the county clerk and recorder's
office by the property owner prior to the issuance of any building permits, final
plan approval or commencement of the conditional use.
The necessary recording of documents will be addressed as part of the final PUD plan
process. Conditions 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15 and 16 are related to this issue.
Planned Unit Development Review Criteria, Section 38.430.090.E.
The application presents the Applicant’s response to these criteria.
2. In addition to the criteria for all site plan and conditional use reviews, the
following criteria will be used in evaluating all planned unit development
applications.
a. All development. All land uses within a proposed planned unit development
must comply with the applicable objectives and criteria of the mandatory "all
development" group.
(1) Does the development comply with all city design standards, requirements and
specifications for the following services: water supply, trails/walks/bike ways,
sanitary supply, irrigation companies, fire protection, electricity, flood hazard
areas, natural gas, telephone, storm drainage, cable television, and streets?
The following PUD designs do not comply with City design standards for pedestrian trails
and walkways and, therefore, the Applicant requests these deviations and waivers.
Deviation 11 allows buildings to be built to the lot lines along the Landscape Block
Frontage (BF) areas which eliminates the 10’ landscaped buffer between the
street right-of-way (ROW) and the building façade;
Deviation 12 allows for a waiver from the minimum 10’ landscape buffer between
the street and the Block 3 parking lot;
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 54 of 78
Deviation 13 allows for a waiver from placing a landscaped private porch, patio
space and/or pedestrian-oriented space between the street and the building;
Deviation 14 waives the 25’ landscaped setback from the property line along the
Gateway Block Frontage and allows buildings to be built to the property lines;
Deviation 15 allows buildings to be built to the edge of trails, easements and
property lines rather than be setback 20’;
Deviation 16 waives the requirement for “foundation plantings” (3’ landscaping
against the building façade) where sidewalks or pedestrian pathways border a
building; and
Deviation 17 waives the requirement that sidewalks must be a minimum of 12’
wide along buildings of 100’ feet in length or more and that abut parking lots
Deviation 26 does not comply with City design standards for water, sanitary sewer and storm
sewer systems. The Applicant seeks alternate water, sewer and storm water facility
locations. This deviation would be evaluated by the Director of Transportation and
Engineering.
The PUD would waive landscaped setbacks from property lines for all buildings and,
particularly, for the 64’ tall and 90’ tall buildings. The concept site plans and concept
landscape plans show sidewalks and trees within the sidewalk.
Figure 12: Block 7 Valley Commons Drive streetscape
Building footprint
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 55 of 78
Applicant’s Justification
Deviation 9. The Applicant is requesting to reclassify the external Storefront streets
to the block frontage standard “Other” using the Community Design Framework
Master Plan UDC 38.510.030.L.
“The Applicant is requesting a relaxation to invoke the Community Design Framework Master Plan to
reclassify the external streets (Resort Drive, Fallon Street and Ferguson Avenue) block frontage from
Storefront to Other. These streets were originally designed prior to the formulation of any design intent
for this project. Since that time our design intent has changed to draw people into the center of the district
and to create a walkable district within our site. The current Storefront Block Frontage standards require
the opposite of our design philosophy in that they want buildings fronting the external streets and parking
lots interior to the site.
When looking at the site as a whole it become very difficult to create a walkable district along the
perimeter streets due to the sheer length of frontage. When you focus development on this site inward it
allows for buildings to be closer together and thus creating a more walkable mixed use area. As a result
of this the parking lots are required to be located on the outside of the site which isn't currently allowed
on the storefront block frontage. We believe that reclassifying these block frontages as “Other” will allow
for a more walkable, human scaled design.“
“Reclassifying the Block Frontage to “Other” allows for the parking lots to be adjacent to the street when
they are adequately screened. This reclassification would allow us to realize our design vision of creating
a mixed-use district. The parking lots that border the external streets would be designed to incorporate
adequate screening as required in the “Other” block frontage standards.”
“Finally, this proposed change meets the criteria for change outlined in 38.510.030.L. The site has been
configured with the pedestrians in mind. The main principal is to pull people into the center of the site
toward Valley Center Drive. Valley Center will act as the Main street for this project. Another reason why
we choose this center main street approach is the large nature of the site. With the Storefront Block
frontage on the exterior of the site it makes a really unwalkable environment because of the long distances
one would have to travel to get from business to business. Additionally these road are major throughfares
through town and don’t offer a pleasant pedestrian experience. Additionally, the design regulations and
the community plan look to show that our project will be more successful and a better community asset
if these block frontages are reclassified. The design regulations require a specific level of detail and finish
to make this buildings nice on all sides. The regulations also require that that the buildings meet the
setbacks and block frontage standards for each lot.”
Staff Evaluation: The UDC Block Frontage Section 38.510.030.L, Community Design
Framework Master Plan, allows the Applicant to request a change to the existing Storefront
Block Frontage designation for the streets bordering the Site—Fallon Street, Ferguson Drive,
Huffine Lane and Resort Drive. The Applicant submits this P-PUD as the Community Design
Framework Master Plan for the Site to change the Storefront Block Frontage (BF)
designations for those bordering streets to an “Other” Block Frontage designation. The main
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 56 of 78
new east-west internal street, Valley Commons Drive, would be designated a Storefront BF.
All other internal streets would be designated as Landscape BF (see Figure 9). Staff finds
that this P-PUD meets the design standards and criteria for a Community Design Framework
Master Plan which supports the change in BF designations for this Site. Therefore, the
request is not actually a deviation but is a request for approval of the change in BF
designations per the master plan. Staff supports this request.
Deviation 10. Code Reference Table 38.510.030.C - Landscaped Block Frontage
Standards:
Allow surface parking up to 100% of the street frontage.
“Justification: The Applicant is requesting a relaxation to waiver the requirements for the location of
parking to allow for parking lots to front 100% adjacent to the street. We believe that with proposed
landscaping around each of the parking lots the visual impact of them will be greatly reduced. We believe
the intent of limiting the parking to a percentage of the frontage is to control the visual impact of the
parking. We believe that the added landscaping will effectively mitigate that concern.”
Staff Evaluation: The Community Development Board recommends denial of this deviation
from the Landscape Block Frontage requirement that no more than 50% of a lot’s street
frontage shall be devoted to surface parking. The Board discussion notes that such a vast
amount of surface parking is an inefficient use of land and parking above the ground floor is
a more efficient use of the Site and lots within the Site. The Board also expressed a concern
that surface parking along the street frontage of the proposed 72 lots on this 31-acre Site
reduces the “walkability” of the Site and reduces the overall coherence of the development
for its users. The Board Members commented that this deviation does not appear to provide
a superior result than the UDC standard requiring a 10-foot wide landscaped buffer between
surface parking on the lot and the street and surface parking may not exceed 50% of the lot’s
street frontage if the street is designated a Landscape Block Frontage. Therefore, the CDB
opines that it does not meet the criteria for granting the deviation per UDC 38.430.030.A.4.c
nor does it promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the City’s residents,
workers and visitors or of the Site’s workers and visitors. Staff does not share the opinion of
the CDB and continues to find that Deviation 10 meets PUD criteria for approval.
It is noted that proposed Deviation No. 19 would exempt individual development site’s,
consisting of one or more lots, from a minimum or maximum parking requirement. The
Applicant has stated that parking would be shared in common with all tenants of all
developments within the PUD Site with the exception of lots that are developed as structured
garages. Under Deviation 19, some lots or development sites would be allowed to be built
without any on-site parking.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 57 of 78
Deviation 11. Code Reference Table 38.510.030.C - Landscaped Block Frontage
Standards:
Allow buildings to be placed to the edge of the property lines.
“Justification: The Applicant is requesting to be exempt from the Landscaping block frontage building
placement standards. The lot lines have been strategically drawn to show a possible building footprint to
give a perspective buyer a better understanding of what can be built on this lot. All lots have been drawn
to incorporate a 10’ landscaping buffer from the front of the building to the back of the sidewalk.
Additionally, this shifts the maintenance responsibility from the Property Owner to the HOA. This will
ensure that all landscaping will be maintained and have a cohesive feel. All lots will still have a landscape
buffer between the back of the sidewalk and the front of the building.”
Deviation 12. Code Reference Table 38.510.030.C - Landscaped Block Frontage
Standards:
Allow for a reduction in the minimum 10’ landscape buffer between the street and off-
street parking areas for block 3 (Hotel & Parking lot).
“Justification: the Applicant is requesting a 4’ reduction in the required 10’ landscape buffer to screen
parking lots. This location is bound on both sides by road ways that line with other access points or are
fixed by access distance standards. This finite space makes it challenging to balance the need to screen
the parking and also provide parking. We believe that this 4’ reduction will allow both goals to be achieved.
We can still adequately screen the parking lot in the 6’ landscaping strip and also not lose any parking.
Additionally, in several locations where we need this reduction, the addition of personal garages in the
middle will also help break up the visual scale of the parking lot. These garages will, visually, cut the parking
lot in half and will create a denser environment. We believe that this area will feel dense with the provided
landscaping and the garages and will force driver to slow down. This result will create a safer pedestrian
and driver experience.
If this relaxation cannot be supported we would request that this be added as a condition of approval as
it will require significant redesign work that will causes us to miss the tight adequacy window.
Deviation 13. Code Reference Table 38.510.030.C - Landscaped Block Frontage
Standards:
The area between the street and building must be landscaped, have a private porch or
patio space, and/or pedestrian oriented space.
“Justification: The Applicant is requesting a relaxation to exempt block 7 from requiring landscaping
between the Valley Commons Drive and the building on the east and west side. Block 7 is envisioned as a
one of the commercial hubs within the district. The intention for this area is to have a dense urban feel.
The Applicant is committed to providing trees and benches in the 10’ sidewalk to help with visual interest
at the pedestrian and motorist scale. We imagine these two sections (along Ravalli and Brookfield) will
have a similar feel to say the downtown Co-Op building along South Black Avenue. The street will be
activated with the street trees, benches and bike racks and the buildings will likely have great architectural
detailing and glazing. We believe that these street trees and streetscape improvements will further the
identity of our project, truly making this a district.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 58 of 78
All other landscape block frontages will have a 10’ landscaped buffer between the lot line and the back of
the sidewalk. This is built into the plan because of the way the lot lines are drawn. The intention for
drawing the lot lines that way allows for all the maintenance and upkeep to be controlled by the HOA.
This will allow for the district to have a very cohesive feel. While the HOA will maintain these landscaping
buffers, the landscaping will be installed when each individual lot owners goes through the site planning
process.”
Deviation 14. Code Reference Table 38.510.030.E - Gateway Frontage:
Allow buildings to be built to the property lines.
“Justification: The Applicant is requesting to be exempt from the gateway block frontage building
placement standards. The lot lines have been strategically drawn to show a possible building footprint to
give a perspective buyer a better understanding of what can be built on this lot. Exempting these buildings
from the building placement standards shifts all of the landscaping and open space maintenance onto the
HOA, which intern ensures that it is kept in a nice condition. The Gateway standards require a minimum
building setback of 25’. All of our proposed buildings are currently separated from Huffine Lane by an
open space tract of land that is 47’ wide. This 47’ strip of open space is almost double the required building
placement standard.”
Deviation 15. Code Reference Table 38.510.030.I - Block Frontages - Trail/Park
Frontages:
Be allowed to place buildings to the edge of the trail, easements and property lines.
“Justification: The Applicant is seeking an exemption to the required setback from a trail, easement or
property line. The Applicant team is seeking to place buildings up to the edge of the trail easement and
property line. The lot lines have been strategically drawn to show a possible building footprint to give a
perspective buyer a better understanding of what can be built on this lot. Additionally allowing buildings
to be built to the property line will help with the creation of a unique district similarly to what is seen
around the country near rivers. A successful example of this occurs, in Reno, Nevada (Reno River Walk)
where several businesses front along the Truckee river creating this unique walkable district. In that
district pedestrians are able to walk along the river for miles where they are able to interact with nature
in certain locations and also frequent businesses. We believe that allowing building to be placed at the
edge of the easement will allow for a creative and innovate approach to commercial development. It will
prioritize the pedestrian over the car and will create a much safer and vibrant district.”
Deviation 16. Code Reference 38.520.040.D.3 - Pathway Design:
Eliminate pathway separation standard.
“Justification: The Applicant is requesting a relaxation to place buildings up to the edge of sidewalks
thereby eliminating the pathway separation standard of the UDC. We believe that the intent of that
standard is to enhance the overall character of the walkway. We believe that this overall dense nature of
this district will create character for these walkways. In looking around town at the other dense
commercial districts this standard does little to create character. The character of the pathways is defined
by the architecture and the street furniture placed along the road. We believe that the architecture and
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 59 of 78
dense nature of the commercial district will create enough character for the pathways. Furthermore the
3’ of landscaping will likely be a waste of space when trying to create a dense environment. Additionally,
it would be challenging to get enough light for landscaping to survive on pathways along the north side of
the buildings.
If this relaxation cannot be supported we would request that this be added as a condition of approval as
it will require signification redesign work that will causes us to miss the tight adequacy window.”
Deviation 17. Code Reference 38.520.040.D.4 - Pathway Design:
Provide sidewalks of less than 12-feet in width.
“Justification: The Applicant is requesting a relaxation to modify the sidewalk width for multi-tenant
commercial buildings larger than 100’ abutting a parking lot. This request is specifically tied to block 7 and
8. The current pathways are drawn at 10’ which matches and the current Ferguson Farm I. The way these
lot are drawn, it is possible that a potential buy would purchase all of the lots in this block and building a
single large building, which could result in a building being over 100’ long. For these 2 blocks the 10’
pathway is envisioned to be the rear of the building. The main entrance would have a 18’ wide sidewalk.
We believe the intent of this standard is to apply to larger strip mall style developments, where several
buildings are located on the same site only connected by parking lots and drive isles. In the case of block
7 and 8 each lot would have a primary entrance facing Valley Commons Drive. We believe that 10’ is more
than ample width for a secondary entrance abutting a parking lot. Finally, just to reiterate, it is the
intention to match the pathway width already constructed at Ferguson Farm I.”
Staff Evaluation: Except for those standards proposed for deviation or waivers, and those
subject to staff-recommended conditions of approval to mitigate potential adverse impacts
to the City or vicinity, the application conforms to remaining applicable UDC PUD criteria
and standards.
Section 38.430.090.E
(2) Does the project preserve or replace existing natural vegetation?
Staff Evaluation: Partially. The project requires relocation of the agricultural irrigation ditch
that transects the Site in a north-south orientation. Existing trees, shrubs and grasses along
the water’s edge would be removed. The new location of the ditch would be landscaped per
the concept landscape plan. The Class I trails along Ferguson and Huffine frontages of the
Site would be enlarged from 8’ to 10’ rather than the Class I trail standard of 12’ width.
However, the grasses that border those paved trails, and their replacement “native species”
grasses, are not deemed “natural vegetation”.
The PUD concept landscape plan shows landscaping, including trees, along pedestrian
corridors and within the substantial number of surface parking lots. The concept landscape
plan shows landscaping along street corridors, common parking lots and open space areas.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 60 of 78
(3) Are the elements of the site plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and
landscaping, etc.) designed and arranged to produce an efficient, functionally
organized and cohesive planned unit development?
Staff Evaluation: Perhaps. The Applicant proposes a 7-phased PUD development and asks
that all phases be approved simultaneously with the PUD pursuant to UDC 38.430.070. To
request this phased approval, the Applicant has provided detailed “concept plans” for each
Block and Lot within the PUD Site. The Applicant is seeking waivers from setbacks,
landscaping and, even, trash enclosure screening in order to “fit” the development within the
31-acre Site. Nonetheless, the August 24, 2022 revised PUD phasing plan proposal appears
cohesive and has a variety of coordinating elements ranging from design standards to
physical site, circulation, open space and landscape designs. The UDC waivers and deviations
affecting the Site’s cohesiveness and organization are noted below along with the Applicant’s
justifications for each.
Deviation 1: Allow convenience uses, sales of alcohol for on-premise consumption, outdoor
sale of goods in common open space areas, and allow food courts within common open space
areas as principle uses. These uses are new uses to the UMU District as principal uses and
are added to the PUD to support both indoor and outdoor food service and entertainment
venues within the Site.
Applicant’s Justification: “UDC Table 38.310.040.A requires a Conditional Use Permit for
convenience uses, and a Special Use Permit for sales of alcohol for on-premises consumption uses within
the Urban Mixed-Use District (UMU). The Applicant is requesting these uses be designated as Principal
uses within the PUD boundaries.
The overall intention of this project is to create a mixed-use district that draws and retains customers for
multiple purposes. The Community Plan indicates a way to bolster districts around town to encourage
more mixed use developments. We believe that adding these uses by right will help further this goal of
creating. Furthermore this project is within the Community Commercial Mixed Use Future Land Use
Category, which stresses that, “Mixed use area should be developed in an integrated, pedestrian friendly
manner and should not be overly dominated by any single use.” These additional uses are fundamental
to the creation of this district. When you look at similar thriving districts (Cannery District, Downtown,
North East Neighborhood, and Ferguson Farm) the majority of them all share similar uses. Furthermore,
in terms of compatibility of adjacent uses, none of the proposed additional uses will negatively impact
another use. We believe that the inclusion of these uses will in fact help in the creation of a vibrant
district.”
Deviation 2: The UMU zone requires a mix of uses and a minimum of two different uses
within each site plan. The Applicant seeks a waiver from this standard of 38.310.050.B to
allow a single use, such as a wholly office or retail building on a specific lot.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 61 of 78
Applicant’s Justification: “The Applicant requests that the entire development be exempt from
requirements that two different user groups of uses must be shown within each site plan. We believe the
intention of this standard is require a mix of uses across a site. This site is unique in that it is much larger
than your typical lot going through the site plan process. The intention for this project to have a wide
range of compatible uses across the entire site. Furthermore, it is envisioned that lots will be sold and
each individual owner will be required to go through the site planning process for their project. In doing
this each owner would be required to demonstrate that there is a mix of uses within each building. We
believe the intention for this standard will be met across the whole site over the life of the project. Adding
this flexibility to each lot allows for the possibility of a single anchor tenant to come to the site. We believe
that as a whole this project will have a variety of uses similar to Ferguson Farm II and it will be vital to the
success of the district. That said the added flexibility allows for the creation of this district to happen
organically.”
Deviation 3: Within the UMU zone, no use group may exceed 70% of the total gross floor
area of the Site.
“Justification: Similarly, to the relaxation above the Applicant is requesting a relaxation to allow the
calculation of use groups percentage be over the total project area and not on an individual site by site
basis. Allowing this to happen will allow flexibility in how each lot is developed. By our square footage
estimates no single use would be any where close to the 70% threshold but by relaxing this requirement
will allow for flexibility in how each site is developed, which ultimately will allow for this mixed use
environment to occur naturally.”
Deviation 4: Increase the maximum building height from 60’ to 90’ throughout the PUD Site.
“Justification: Maximum allowable building height within the Urban Mixed-Use District is 60’ for
buildings that do not provide structured parking, or 85’ for those when structured parking is present and
provided per UDC Section 38.330.040.E.2 (please note, this reference standard does not appear related
to this note for height expectations within UMU zones). The Applicant is requesting that the maximum
allowed building height for this project be 90’ feet regardless of the presence of structured parking.
This increase in allowable height offers opportunities for creative site design, a broader mix of uses and
increased density. Additionally, the added height and density will ensure that the more commercial uses
in nature will further the design objective of creating a district. By increasing the height and density it will
allow for the creation of a more walkable district that can support the residents of this project but also
the residents of adjacent neighborhoods. Goal DCD—2.4 of the Community Plan states, “Evaluate
revisions to maximum building heights limits in all zoning districts to account for contemporary building
methods and building code changes.” in several locations the Community Plan indicates both directly and
indirectly that added height (with good transitions) is better for creating walkable, more sustainable
districts.” [Note: there are no residents of this “project”]
Deviation 5: Allow six lots dedicated to parking structures and located within parking lots
to not have legal and physical access to a public street, approved private street or alley (see
Figure 10 on page 48).
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 62 of 78
“Justification: The Applicant is proposing to construct a bank of garages in Blocks 3, 6, 7, and 8. These
garages will be available (to be purchased) for property owners or building tenants within the
development, and each garage is envisioned to be able to provide the possibility to utilize mechanical
automobile lifts to allow for additional garage parking. As shown on the Preliminary Plat and Preliminary
PUD Plan, Block 3, Lots 1B & 1C; Block 6, Lot 4; Block 7 Lots 1B & 1C; and Block 8, Lot 1B do not meet the
access requirements of the UDC. A relaxation to this standard is requested to allow for these lots to be
plated without meeting the legal and physical access standards. There is a public access easement across
the parking lots allowing the potential owners of those lots to have both legal and physical access to the
garages. These lots will be deed restricted as required by the City of Bozeman.”
“These lots will only be used for the creation of garages, and therefore traditional access standards are
not necessary for these structures. Once these lots and the adjacent lots are developed, these garages
will be served by access drives within developed parking lots, which will ensure drive access is provided in
some manner to these buildings.”
“The creation of these lots and ultimately the construction of these garages will help break up these
parking lots and create a more urban environment. The garages themselves will also act as a traffic calming
measure in the parking lots due to the height and narrowing effect. The addition of these garages will also
promote pedestrian safety because it will force pedestrians to walk to a designated pathway instead of
cutting through the parking lot spaces. A similar idea was implemented in the parking lot of the Jacobs
Crossing building on Main Street.”
Staff Evaluation: As noted above on page 8 of Unresolved Issues, State Statute requires all
lots to have legal and physical access to a public or publicly-accessible street or alley. This
deviation cannot be granted.
Deviation 6: Allow back-in angle parking along all internal streets and alleys.
Justification: The Applicant is requesting to utilize back in angled parking for Valley Commons Drive,
Brookfield Avenue and along the Alleys. The Traffic Impact Study indicates this type of angled parking will
provide additional traffic calming and it further identifies successful examples of back-in angled parking
in the right of way. Furthermore, the Applicant has agreed to sign a maintenance agreement and put a
note on the plat identifying that the HOA is required to maintain the back in angled parking areas. Finally,
all transition curb radii are 25’. [Note: This is not a zoning standard and must be evaluated and
addressed by the Transportation and Engineering Department.]
Deviation 7: 38.510.020.F, Multiple Frontages. When a lot or building fronts onto multiple
block frontages or internal frontage designations, each building must comply with the
standards for the block frontage upon which it is located such as building setbacks, entrances
facing the street, and windows and other transparencies. This deviation would waive the
requirement that the building(s) have an entrance facing each street.
“Justification: The Applicant is requesting that buildings not be required to meet the requirements of
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 63 of 78
subsection 4 which requires buildings to be placed at the corner of an intersection and present a front
and primary façade to both street frontages. There are a few locations where we proposed public open
space at the street corners. The design intent with these public open spaces was to create a small
gathering space for people to stop sit at. The way the street intersects in these locations create really
awkward triangle pieces of land. Rather than expand the overall building footprint we thought this would
be a great spot for some placemaking. These inviting landscaped areas will enhance the overall feel of the
intersection and will offer some green space in this dense urban environment. We believe that these small
placemaking efforts will help in the creation of a unique vibrant district. We believe that this area would
function similarly to Sir Optimist Park but on a different scale.”
Deviation 8: 38.510.020.F, Multiple frontage lots. Each building on a lot must “address”
(have an entrance on and primary façade treatments on) each street frontage. Surface
parking adjacent to a street corner is not allowed.
“Justification: The Applicant is requesting an exemption to subsection 7, which would allow for the
placement of surface parking adjacent to a street corner. Subsection 7 allows for parking lots to be
adjacent to the street corner if there is a combination of block frontages and if the Applicant can
demonstrate that they are adequately satisfying the departure criteria. We believe that there will be
adequate landscaping surrounding the parking lots reducing the visual impact of the parking lot. The
exterior parking lots are planned to be screened via a variety of trees and shrubs. We believe that the
visual impact of the parking lot will be fairly minimal given the significant landscaping proposed.”
Deviation 18: exempt trash enclosures from the minimum 5 feet landscape screening
requirement for all four sides (see Figure 13 below).
“Justification: The sides and rear of service enclosures must be screened with landscaping at least five
feet wide in locations visible from the street, parking lots and pathways. The refuse areas on Block 4, Lot
4 does not meet the minimum width of landscape screening on all sides. The proposed refuse collection
areas have been located where they will be easily accessible for trash pickup; support the surrounding
uses; and far enough from buildings to not be noticeable. The trash enclosures will be fully enclosed,
covered and will include adjacent landscaping where possible.
For Block 4, Lot 4 there will be landscaping on 1 of the 3 sides. We believe that this trash enclosure will be
adequately screened from Huffine lane due to the adjacent buildings as well as the landscaping proposed
behind the dumpster. This dumpster will also be enclosed in the required enclosure virtually screening
the dumpster from all sides. Please see the landscape plans for demonstration of how this dumpster will
be adequately screened.
We believe that the intent of this standard to minimize the visual impact that dumpsters can have on a
site design. We believe that this standard is achieved by creating a home for the dumpsters to live in.
If this relaxation cannot be supported we would request that this be added as a condition of approval as
that dumpster is not pivotal to the design of this project and can be removed prior to final PUD and Plat.”
Staff Evaluation: The rear of the trash enclosure is placed at the lot line of Lot 4, Block 4 and
is visible from the Gateway Block Frontage area of Huffine Lane. There is no assurance that
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 64 of 78
buildings would be situated to screen this trash enclosure from view from Huffine Lane. Staff
does not support this deviation; please see Condition of Approval No. 6.
Figure 13: Proposed trash enclosure screening per Deviation No. 18
Section 38.430.090.E
(4) Does the design and arrangement of elements of the site plan (e.g., building
construction, orientation, and placement; transportation networks; selection and
placement of landscape materials; and/or use of renewable energy sources; etc.)
contribute to the overall reduction of energy use by the project?
Deviation No. 19: Waiver of the minimum and maximum parking requirement of the UMU
District’s 38.330.010.F 1 and Table 38.540.050-3 for all uses within the PUD.
“Justification: The Applicant is requested a 100% relaxation to the City’s of street parking
requirements. The relaxation request would allow the PUD to self-regulate uses based on parking demand
and the PUD offers 660 off street parking spaces within the surface parking lots and 175 on street parking
spaces for a total of 835 spaces available. While the precise uses for this project are TBD, the total square
footage potential shown in the 3-D exhibit is approximately 894,177 sf. This includes:
135,464 sf - Retail, Restaurant, Commercial, Bar
246,081 sf - Office
368,072 sf - Hotel and Hotel Units
95,200 sf - Medical
27,235 - Structured Parking
22,125 sf - Garage Condo Units
Parking required for this project would be approximately 1555 spaces, (after reductions for adjacency to
transit routes, adjacency to Storefront Block Frontages, and joint use reductions of 30% as specified in the
TIS). Additional details on the parking assumptions are included in the overall project narrative. Total
trail
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 65 of 78
parking provided for this project is 883 total spaces, and includes on street parking and the pro-posed
garages (one space per garage).
Parking minimums often have dramatic impacts on the way we plan projects and are often not based on
any science. We believe that not requiring a parking minimum allow us to provide parking based on what
we believe the demand will be. As we know, the demand for current and future parking is shifting
throughout Bozeman with services like Uber and Lyft, the expansion of Streamline services, and the vast
network of active transportation pathways.
Exempting Ferguson Farm II from parking requirement will also further several goals and policies of the
community plan including:
M-1.12- Eliminate parking minimum requirements in commercial districts and affordable housing areas
and reduce parking minimums elsewhere, acknowledging that demand for parking will still result in new
supply being built.
DCD-3.6 - Evaluate parking requirements and methods of providing parking as part of the overall
transportation system for and between districts.
Theme 3 - A City is bolstered by downtown and complementary districts. Our city is bolstered by our
downtown, midtown, university and other commercial districts and neighborhood centers that are
characterized by higher densities and intensities of use.
Ferguson Farm II is located within the Cottonwood district and is in a prime location for infill development.
Infill development can reduce the demand on the transportation network by creating employment
opportunities near residential neighborhoods. Encouraging infill development also improves the
efficiency of public services and reduces the outward expansion of the city. Specifically, the efficiency of
the use of land within our district will increase with the reduction of the amount of on-site parking spaces.
Allowing this relaxation will allow for greater flexibility for Ferguson Farm II and it reflects best practices
in the provision of parking by allowing property owners to building only the number of parking spaces
needed to meet parking demand.”
Deviation 20: Waive the 38.540.050.A.4.b requirement that bicycle parking be located
within 100 feet from the building to which they serve.
“Justification: The Applicant is requesting a relaxation to exempt this project from the bicycle parking
location standards. The Applicant has strategically placed the bike parking throughout the project but
rather than have each building provide its own bike parking we are proposing to have it in centrally located
locations. Exempting from this requirement will ensure that the HOA maintains keeps in working order
these bike parking areas. We envision the bike parking areas to function similarly to how the downtown
blue bike parking works in the summer. These logical locations for bike parking help to ensure pedestrian
safety and limit the number of bikes on busy pedestrian and vehicle travel ways. Furthermore, several
sidewalks have been strategically drawn to accompany a bike rack, bench and tree.”
Staff Evaluation: This request for bike rack location does not include an exemption or waiver
from the UMU District Section 38.330.010.F.3 requirement that 50% of the bicycle parking
provided within the PUD be covered; that requirement remains. The Applicant stated to the
Community Development Board at their meeting of December 5th that bicycle parking would
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 66 of 78
be placed along the internal streets. Condition of Approval No. 14 would require these
locations to be shown on the Final PUD landscape plan application.
Deviation 21: Waive the requirement for loading zones within the PUD Site per 38.540.080.
“Justification: The Applicant is asking to not provide for loading berths for individual buildings. Should
loading berths be necessary to serve the development, the Applicant will propose such berths during
future Site Plans. The alleys are designed to be 26’ wide and have back-in angle parking. We believe there
is adequate room for a lot or building to take deliveries off the alley and not disrupt the district.” In order
to ensure that deliveries to the site will not impact site circulation or traffic, the Applicant will be willing
to include in the CCRs that deliveries would only be allowed overnight or during appropriate off hours.
Furthermore, the Applicant is willing to restrict parking in those back-in angle spots along the allow to not
allow overnight parking, allowing larger trucks a spot to pull off the travel lane and conduct their delivery.”
[Note: Since the August 24, 2022 revised PUD application, the Applicant has withdrawn the
mitigation described in the strike-through text above.]
Deviation 22: Allow signs on all visible sides of the building, not just street frontage facades,
allowing wall signs on walls adjacent to streets, interior pedestrian walkways, alleys, parking
lots and open space lots.
“Justification: The Applicant is requesting a relaxation to allow signage to be visible on all sides of
buildings not just the street frontages. One of the main themes in the Community Plan indicates Bozeman
is bolstered by its downtown and the supporting districts and signage plays an important role in creating
and defining a district. We believe that allowing signage on all sides of buildings will help create this unique
vibrant district. Allowing signage on all sides of the buildings can used as enhanced placemaking
opportunities. Examples of this can be found in the alleys of downtown Fort Collins, or the River Walk
District in Reno. Furthermore, the Bozeman Downtown Plan documented the importance of activating
spaces along alleys and one way to achieve this was through signage. We believe this relaxation will allow
us to further our vision for this district and truly create a unique district in Bozeman.
Due to the unique nature of our project we believe that people will be accessing each building from all
sides which makes signage very important. Signage on all sides of the building has potential for better
building façade design. With more room to allocate the allowed signage allows for better sign placement
without creating visual pollution. Additionally, we are not requesting the allowance to allocate more
signage per building so there will potentially be less signage on each side of the building reducing any
visual concerns. Signage on all sides of the building will play a huge part in creating this unique place.”
Staff Evaluation: Allowing signs to be placed on all sides of a building is already allowed by
UDC Section 38.560. In order to clarify signage standards for this PUD Site, a Comprehensive
Sign Plan is required per Condition of Approval No. 10 to be submitted with the Final PUD
application and shall be approved with the Final PUD.]
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 67 of 78
Deviation 23: Allow alternate street and road right-of-way width and construction
standards.
Deviation 24: Allow alternate street section designs.
Deviation 25: Allow 8’ wide Class I shared use path along the Fallon Street and Resort Drive
alignments instead of the standard 12’ wide.
Deviation 26: Allow alternate water, sewer and stormwater facility locations.
[Note: Deviations 23 through 26 must be evaluated and addressed by the Director of
Transportation and Engineering prior to Final PUD approval. There was no objection by the
Director and, therefore, the deviations may be approved by the Commission.]
Applicant justifications:
The Applicant is requesting to vary from the standard ROW widths.
“Justification: The Applicant requests the relaxation from standard Right-of-way widths to
accommodate the reverse crown street drainage and angled-in parking. The variable right-of-way widths
are also designed to accommodate the variable sidewalk widths and street trees along storefront (north
side of Valley Commons Drive) block frontages. Additionally, the Applicant is requesting to utilize a reverse
crown cross section for all roadways within this project. A reverse crown cross section has been proven
to be a good design with examples of Ferguson Farm I and also in Grand Lake Colorado. The intention is
to provide positive drainage away from the sidewalk and parking areas. This creates safer and more
walkable conditions especially in the spring months.
“In summary, the required ROW width is 60 feet for Local Streets. The proposed ROW widths all meet or
exceed this requirement with the one exception of Ravelli Street, which has a 51-foot-wide ROW. It should
also be noted that the proposed ROW widths have been reviewed and deemed acceptable by the City
Engineering Department.”
The Applicant is requesting to vary from the standard Street Section design.
“Justification: The alternate street sections proposed throughout the subdivision are designed to
provide enhance drainage to the center valley gutter and allow water to flow out of the angled back-in
parking. The variable sidewalk widths and boulevards are designed to promote the walkability of the
development while meeting the City of Bozeman’s requirements for parking screening and block
frontages. Additionally, the reverse crown drainage of the road is designed to be similar to the commercial
development west of the property – Ferguson Farm. It is intended to provide a more contiguous feel
between the development and promote walkability and internal capture rates for traffic within the
development.”
Application is requesting to vary the shared use path width proposed along Fallon
Street and Resort Drive to match existing trails across the street.
“Justification: This relaxation has been requested to provide a more contiguous feel with the adjacent
developments. The existing shared use paths along Resort and Fallon are currently paved at an 8-foot
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 68 of 78
width. The intent is to provide the shared use paths without creating awkward and unnecessary
transitions and promote the overall walkability from surrounding developments. Additionally, this 8’ wide
path will match what is existing across the street. Finally, we have request that the block frontage on these
street be reclassified to “other” through a PUD Relaxation. In the Block Frontage Other, the required
sidewalk width is 6’.
On November 29th, the Applicant team met with the engineering department to go over their comments
in that meeting it was agreed that Resort and Fallon could match the 8’ pathway on the other side of the
street and the pathway along Ferguson would be widen to 10’ with the ability to make it wider.
If required a 12’ pathway is now required by the engineering department we would request that this be
a condition of approval. “
Municipal water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems.
Proposing alternate water, sewer, and storm locations.
“Justification: The alternate locations of the proposed utilities is required to accommodate the
alternative storm sewer locations as a result of the reverse crown street section. Although the layout of
the water, sewer, and storm mains is somewhat unconventional, all the design standards are still met and
11 feet of separation between mains is maintained. It should also be noted that the proposed utility
configuration has been reviewed and deemed acceptable by the City Engineering Department.”
[It is also noted that the design and arrangement of the lots and streets do not address energy
use or reduction of energy use by the project. The substantial amount of surface parking
would result in a “heat island” effect. The placement of shade trees, as noted in Condition of
Approval No. 5, would partially mitigate such heat island impacts to parking lot users. The
Street network within the Site would be integrated into the existing and developing
surrounding pedestrian and bicycle network which will enable travel for nearby residents
without motor vehicles.]
Staff Evaluation: The numerous surface parking lots produce a design that does not
contribute to the overall reduction of energy use by the project. However, with the
recommended Conditions of Approval and UDC code provisions for the Final PUD submittal,
particularly Condition No. 5 addressing the heat island effect of the multiple paved parking
lots, the proposed design would produce a more comfortable, safer and marginally less
energy consumptive project.
Section 38.430.090.E
(5) Are the elements of the site plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and
landscaping, etc.) designed and arranged to maximize the privacy by the residents
of the project?
Staff Evaluation: There are no residential uses proposed for this PUD although they are
permitted by the UDU zoning. The PUD does not seek a waiver from the 38.510.030.J Special
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 69 of 78
Residential Block Frontage Standards that assure privacy, safety and security for any ground
floor dwelling unit that may, in the future, be provided within the PUD Site.
(6) Park land. Does the design and arrangement of buildings and open space areas
contribute to the overall aesthetic quality of the site configuration, and has the area
of park land or open space been provided for each proposed dwelling as required by
section 38.420.020?
Staff Evaluation: Commercial development is not required to provide parkland. No parkland
is proposed with this development. The open space areas shown in Figure 6 appear to be
spread out throughout the Site to be enjoyed by visitors, customers and employees of the
Site.
Section 38.430.090.E
(7) Performance. All PUDs must earn at least 20 performance points.
With a PUD, Section 38.430.090.E.2.a. (7) requires at least 20 performance points for the
subject property. There are 11 options provided in the Unified Development Code (UDC) to
meet this requirement. The Preliminary PUD must specify how the performance points are
being met. The Applicant provides the following details on how the performance points are
met for this P-PUD.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 70 of 78
Section 38.430.090.E
(8) Is the development being properly integrated into development and circulation
patterns of adjacent and nearby neighborhoods so that this development will not
become an isolated "pad" to adjoining development?
Staff Evaluation: The application proposes to expand an existing Ferguson Farm I (FF-I)
located immediately west of the Site. That commercial development and this proposed PUD
development will be heavily automobile dependent.
The proposed development focuses commercial development interior to the Site with
surface parking lots bordering the Site along public street frontages. This design does not
facilitate integration into adjacent neighborhoods nor does it improve connectivity and
integration into the community.
Table 2
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 71 of 78
38.430.090.E.e. Mixed Use. Planned unit developments in mixed-use areas
(REMU, UMU, and NEHMU zoning districts) may include commercial, light
industrial, residential and mixes of various primary and accessory uses. The
particular types or combination of uses are determined based upon its merits,
benefits, potential impact upon adjacent land uses and the intensity of
development.
(1) Is the project substantially consistent with the intent and purpose statements
for the underlying zoning district?
Staff Evaluation: Yes, The UMU district requires mixed uses but does not require housing to
be one of the uses within the mix. The PUD proposes a mix of non-residential uses, primarily
office, retail and food service uses similar to that found in Ferguson Farms I (FF-I).
(2) Is the project located adjacent or within proximity to an arterial or collector
street that provides adequate access to the site?
Staff Evaluation: The project lies at the intersections of Huffine Lane and Ferguson Avenue,
at Ferguson Avenue and Fallon Street, at Fallon Street and Resort Drive, and at Resort Drive
and Huffine Lane. Huffine Lane is a principal arterial, Ferguson Avenue is a collector, and
both Fallon and Resort are local streets. The Applicant requests deviations to street designs
which would be evaluated by the Director of Transportation and Engineering.
Section 38.430.090.E.e
(3) Is the project on at least two acres of land? Yes, the Site is 31 acres.
(4) Do the uses relate to each other in terms of location within the PUD,
pedestrian and vehicular circulation, architectural design, utilization of common
open space and facilities, streetscape, etc.?
Staff Evaluation: Yes, with the conditions of approval.
(5) Does the overall project achieve or exceed the FAR "floor area ratios" envisioned
for the underlying district?
Staff Evaluation: Yes, the minimum floor area ratio (FAR) for the UMU zone is 0.50 and the
900,000 gross square feet of commercial space on the 31-acre Site results in a FAR of 0.66.
(6) Is it compatible with and does it reflect the unique character of the surrounding
area?
Staff Evaluation: Yes and no. The PUD is intended to reflect the commercial use “character”
of Ferguson Farms I (FF-I) located immediately west of the Site. The FF-II proposed
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 72 of 78
“expansion” of FF-I would solidify that character. However, Deviation No. 4 would allow
building heights of up to 90’ throughout the Site. This scale would not reflect the one-to
three-story scale of the neighborhood.
(7) Is there direct vehicular and pedestrian access between on-site parking areas
and adjacent existing or future off-site parking areas which contain more than ten
spaces?
Staff Evaluation: Yes, with mitigation. The large expanse of the dark, highly absorptive
asphalt paving of the surface parking lots that dominate the Site creates a “heat island”
effect for customers and workers walking from their parking spot to their commercial
destination. Tree-lined pedestrian pathways through the parking lots would create a
safer, more comfortable experience for the pedestrian, providing shelter, beauty,
lessening the heat island effect of the surface parking, and providing pedestrians safe
separation from vehicle traffic. This tree-lined pathway would also provide a visual cue
indicating a safe passage for pedestrians linking all parking lots to commercial and open
space areas which would minimize vehicle/pedestrian conflicts and would facilitate
access between destinations within the Site. Such an element would address the Bozeman
Community Plan goal of Theme 2—A City of Unique Neighborhoods which states: “Our
City desires to be diverse, healthy, and inclusive, defined by our vibrant neighborhoods,
quality housing, walkability, excellent schools, numerous parks and trails, and thriving areas
of commerce.” Goal N-1 states: “Support well-planned, walkable neighborhoods.” This
design would also address Focus Area 3—Vibrant & Resilient Neighborhoods; Increasing
Resiliency to Climate Hazards objective of the Bozeman Climate Plan which states:
“Development can be designed to reduce pavement and incorporate trees and green
infrastructure to mitigate potential urban heat island impacts”, “Replacing or shading
parking areas can mitigate urban heat island impacts” “Robust greenspaces and urban
forests provide cooling benefits and decrease urban heat island effect”.
As such, Staff recommends Condition of Approval No. 5 to mitigate this heat island effect
and to provide comfort and visual cues leading patrons and workers from their parked
vehicle to their destination within the Site.
Section 38.430.090.E
(8) Does the project encourage infill, or does the project otherwise demonstrate
compliance with the land use guidelines of the city growth policy?
Staff Evaluation: Yes, this is a 31-acre undeveloped site surrounded by commercial
development and some residential condominium apartments. The project demonstrates
compliance with the land use guidelines of the City growth policy with 16 recommended
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 73 of 78
conditions of approval. In particular, Goal N-2 of the 2020 Community Plan states:
“Pursue simultaneous emergence of commercial nodes and residential development
through diverse mechanisms in appropriate locations. The PUD Site is a long vacant,
formerly agricultural “farm” that the Applicant is now prepared to develop as a
commercial node to the adjacent neighborhoods. Staff recognizes that surface parking lots
can be converted to garages with apartments or retail and offices “wrapped” around them,
making the Site more robust and efficient, and providing a more pedestrian-friendly
streetscape. The UMU standards would support such a development and the proposed
PUD deviations would not prohibit such redevelopment or “infill” development of the Site
in the near or distant future.
(9) Does the project provide for outdoor recreational areas (such as urban plazas,
courtyards, landscaped areas, open spaces, or urban trails) for the use and
enjoyment of those living in, working in or visiting the development?
Staff Evaluation: Yes, please see the open space discussion above.
(10) Does the project provide for private outdoor areas (e.g., private setbacks,
patios and/or balconies, etc.) for use by the residents and employees of the project
which are sufficient in size and have adequate light, sun, ventilation, privacy and
convenient access to the household or commercial units they are intended to serve?
Section 38.430.090.E
(11) Does the project provide for outdoor areas for use by persons living and
working in the development for active or passive recreational activities?
Staff Evaluation: Yes, please see the open space discussion above.
(12) Is the overall project designed to enhance the natural environment, conserve
energy and provide efficient public services and facilities?
Staff Evaluation: Yes, with the recommended conditions of approval and if the Director of
Transportation and Engineering approves the Applicant’s Article 4 deviations and waivers.
(13) If the project is proposing a residential density bonus as described below, does
it include a variety of housing types and urban styles designed to address
community-wide issues of affordability and diversity of housing stock?
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 74 of 78
Staff Evaluation: No housing is proposed for this PUD development although the deviations
do not prevent housing in the future should a PUD Modification application seek some.
(14) Residential density bonus. If the project is proposing a residential density
bonus (30 percent maximum) above the residential density of the zoning district or
building type within which the project is located and which is set forth in division
38.310 of this chapter, does the proposed project exceed the established regulatory
design standards (such as for setbacks, off-street parking, open space, etc.) and
ensure compatibility with adjacent neighborhood development? The number of
dwelling units obtained by the density bonus is determined by dividing the lot area
required for the dwelling unit type by one plus the percentage of density bonus
sought. The minimum lot area per dwelling obtained by this calculation must be
provided within the project. Those dwellings subject to division 38.380 must be
excluded from the base density upon which the density bonus is calculated.
Staff Evaluation: Not applicable as no housing is proposed for this PUD master site plan.
SECTION 6 – FINDINGS OF FACT AND ORDER, RECORD OF DEVISION AND
APPEAL PROVISIONS
A. PURSUANT to Chapter 38, Article 3, BMC, and other applicable sections of Chapter 38,
BMC, public notice was given, opportunity to submit comment was provided to affected
parties, and a review of the preliminary planned unit development (P-PUD) described in
these findings of fact was conducted.
B. The purposes of the P-PUD review were to consider all relevant evidence relating to
public health, safety, welfare, and the other purposes of Chapter 38, BMC; to evaluate the
proposal against the criteria and standards of Chapter 38 BMC, BMC; and to determine
whether the P-PUD should be approved, conditionally approved, or denied.
C. The matter of the P-PUD application was considered by the City Commission at a
public hearing on March 7, 2023 at which time the Department of Community Development
Staff reviewed the project, submitted and summarized recommended conditions of approval,
and summarized the public comment submitted to the City prior to the public hearing.
D. The Applicant acknowledged understanding and agreement with the recommended
conditions of approval, code provisions.
E. The City Commission requested public comment at the public hearing on March 7,
2023 and no one sought to offer comment.
F. It appeared to the City Commission that all parties and the public wishing to examine
the proposed P-PUD and offer comment were given the opportunity to do so. After receiving
the recommendation of the relevant advisory bodies established by Article 38.210, BMC, and
considering all matters of record presented with the application and during the public
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 75 of 78
comment period defined by Chapter 38, BMC, the City Commission has found that the
proposed P-PUD would comply with the requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code if
certain conditions were imposed. Therefore, being fully advised of all matters having come
before her regarding this application, the City Commission makes the following decision.
G. The Ferguson Farms II P-PUD has been found to meet the criteria of Chapter 38, BMC,
and is therefore approved, subject to the conditions listed in Section 3 of this report and the
correction of any elements not in conformance with the standards of the Chapter including
those identified in Section 4 of this report. The evidence contained in the submittal materials,
advisory body review, public testimony, and this report, justify the conditions imposed on
this development to ensure that the final PUD plan, complying site plans and subsequent
construction complies with all applicable regulations, and all applicable criteria of Chapter
38, BMC.
H. This City Commission order may be appealed by bringing an action in the Eighteenth
District Court of Gallatin County, within 30 days after the adoption of this document by the
City Commission, by following the procedures of Section 76-3-625, MCA.
I. Pursuant to BMC Section 38.440, this P-PUD is deemed a “Legacy” Preliminary
Planned Unit Development (P-PUD). Per 38.440.040.A.1, the approval of this Legacy P-PUD
shall be effective for one (1) year from the date of the signed Findings of Fact and Record of
Decision (FOF) approval. Pursuant to subsection A.2, at the request of the applicant, the
Director of Community Development may extend the time period for submittal of a Final PUD
plan for another six (6) months from the date of approval of this FOF. Pursuant to subsection
3, if no Final PUD is submitted within this time period, the P-PUD will expire and the Legacy
PUD status will expire.
DATED this ________ day of _____________________, 2023
BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION
_________________________________
CYNTHIA L. ANDRUS
Mayor
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
March28th
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 76 of 78
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Mike Maas
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
GREG SULLIVAN
City Attorney
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 77 of 78
APPENDIX A –PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY
Zoning Designation and Land Uses: The property is zoned UMU as described in detail above
on page 30.
Adopted Growth Policy Designation: The property is designated as Community Commercial
Mixed Use as described above.
APPENDIX B – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Owner: Boardwalk Properties, Inc. and Combs Capital LC
Applicant: Michael Delaney
Representative: Tyler Steinway, Intrinsik Architecture
Report By: Susana Montana, Senior Planner
APPENDIX C –PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT INTENT
Sec. 38.430.010. Intent. A. It is the intent of the city through the use of the planned unit
development (PUD) concept, to promote maximum flexibility and innovation in the
development of land and the design of development projects within the city. Specifically,
with regard to the improvement and protection of the public health, safety and general
welfare, it shall be the intent of this chapter to promote the city's pursuit of the following
community objectives:
1. To ensure that future growth and development occurring within the city is in accord
with the city's adopted growth policy, its specific elements, and its goals, objectives
and policies;
2. To allow opportunities for innovations in land development and redevelopment so
that greater opportunities for high quality housing, recreation, shopping and
employment may extend to all citizens of the city area;
3. To foster the safe, efficient and economic use of land and transportation and other
public facilities;
4. To ensure adequate provision of public services such as water, sewer, electricity,
open space and public parks;
5. To avoid inappropriate development of lands and to provide adequate drainage,
water quality and reduction of flood damage;
6. To encourage patterns of development which decrease automobile travel and
encourage trip consolidation, thereby reducing traffic congestion and degradation of
the existing air quality;
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A
19028; City Commission Finding of Fact and Record of Decision for the Ferguson Farms II
Preliminary PUD Page 78 of 78
7. To promote the use of bicycles and walking as effective modes of transportation;
8. To reduce energy consumption and demand;
9. To minimize adverse environmental impacts of development and to protect special
features of the geography;
10. To improve the design, quality and character of new development;
11. To encourage development of vacant properties within developed areas;
12. To protect existing neighborhoods from the harmful encroachment of incompatible
developments;
13. To promote logical development patterns of residential, commercial, office and
industrial uses that will mutually benefit the developer, the neighborhood and the
community as a whole;
14. To promote the efficient use of land resources, full use of urban services, mixed uses,
transportation options, and detailed and human-scale design; and
15. To meet the purposes established in section 38.01.040.
ATTACHMENT LIST
The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development
Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715.
Attachment 1: Applicant’s Preliminary PUD Application Narrative
1-A Relaxation Requests and Rationales
1-B Performance Points and Justifications
Attachment 2: Applicant’s Ferguson Farm II Draft Design Manual
Attachment 3: Relaxation Graphic Map
Attachment 4: Landscape Plan
Attachment 5: Neighborhood Center Plan and Skybridge elevation map
Attachment 6: Conceptual Land Use Distribution Map
Attachment 7: Community Development Board summary comments
Attachment 8: Public Comment
DocuSign Envelope ID: 27A49789-DDD0-4585-98AC-796EDDD7683A