Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bozeman board narrows recommendations on new land-use code: feet not —stories,— support for stepbacks and building-width caps, further study for size caps
Summary
The Community Development Board reviewed proposed mass-and-scale elements of Bozeman—s draft uniform development code and reached preliminary agreement on several tools: measure height in feet rather than stories, keep setbacks, study and adjust RB wall-plate heights, support building-width caps and stepbacks, and direct staff to analyze a graduated square-foot incentive.
The Bozeman Community Development Board spent a portion of its June 16 meeting on detailed development-code issues referred to as —mass-and-scale— tools in the draft UDC (Unified Development Code). Board members and city staff focused on ways the new code could control perceived oversized buildings while enabling more housing types.
Key consensuses and requests for follow-up included:
- Measure vertical limits in feet, not by number of stories: Board members favored using a fixed height measured in feet rather than a —stories— convention. Members said measuring by feet produces clearer, more predictable building envelopes and avoids confusing outcomes caused by variable floor-to-floor heights across construction types.
- Keep setbacks and dimensional controls: The board signaled support for retaining setbacks and other lot-dimension controls that manage building placement in the public right-of-way and respect neighborhood character.
- Wall-plate height: A majority supported retaining a wall-plate-height control in the RA (residential) district but asked staff to re-evaluate the RB (residential) wall-plate number. Architects and board members said RB—s current wall-plate limit is too low to accommodate common three-story, affordable housing modules; board members suggested raising that RB number (for example, from 25 to 32 feet) or removing the RB-specific plate if not revisable.
- Building-width maximums and horizontal massing: Board members expressed support for a building-width cap (horizontal massing limit) as a tool to avoid single long walls that create an outsized appearance on the street. The board asked staff to include a reasonable width cap and to consider how that interacts with rowhouses and narrow-townhome prototypes.
- Floor-area ratio (FAR): The board confirmed a preference against using FAR as the primary mass-control tool in the UDC; several members argued the combination of setbacks, height limits and lot coverage is a more readable and enforceable approach for the city—s context.
- Graduated square-foot cap (Portland-style sliding scale): Board members asked staff to investigate a graduated square-foot maximum tied to unit count (an approach used in Portland that limits single-family square footage while allowing larger aggregate square footage for duplexes, triplexes, etc.). The board did not adopt specific numbers; members requested a staff analysis of local applicability and legal considerations, including links to existing affordability or bonus provisions.
- Stepbacks: The commission endorsed the concept of required stepbacks for taller buildings (a horizontal offset at a defined height), with a preference for simple, fixed stepback dimensions rather than complex angled daylight planes. Members cautioned against a one-size-fits-all rule and supported tailoring stepback rules by district.
Public comment: Eva Killenberg, speaking during the meeting—s public-comment period, urged the board to permit housing types that encourage middle housing and referenced the Fowler housing project as an example where narrow, three- or four-story townhomes and similar designs yield useful density. Killenberg supported staff study of the Portland sliding square-foot approach and pointed to early evidence from Portland showing it helped shift investment away from large single-family remodels toward more middle-housing production.
Why it matters: The board—s guidance will shape how the city balances predictability for neighbors, design standards for developers, and the city—s ability to meet housing and affordability goals. Several board members said the mass-and-scale rules must be precise enough to produce predictable outcomes while flexible enough to allow multiple, smaller housing prototypes that support neighborhood-scale commercial uses and increased housing variety.
Next steps: Staff was asked to prepare analyses and draft code language for the City Commission and to evaluate the Portland-style graduated square-foot approach for legal and practicable fit in Bozeman.
