The Bozeman Transportation Board reviewed a draft community plan for a 3,000-acre growth area northwest of the city, focusing on how to design streets and infrastructure while protecting natural resources like wetlands and creeks. The plan proposes a modified street grid that deviates from traditional rectangular patterns to avoid sensitive areas, a departure from the 2017 Transportation Master Plan's straighter alignments.
Staff presented the plan's rationale: the area contains multiple wetland complexes and creeks that the city's recently adopted wetland code requires development to avoid first, minimize second, and mitigate only as a last resort. Principal arterials, minor arterials, and collectors shown as dashed lines reflect these constraints. The plan also envisions potential regional amenities such as a wetland mitigation bank and a regional stormwater park—features the consultants noted would be difficult to pursue elsewhere in the valley.
Community Input on Growth Area Plan
Board members voiced general support for the approach. One member raised concerns about the necessity of the Gooch Hill road segment, noting it creates a sharp 90-degree jog near two large wetland complexes and questioned whether the route could shift west away from existing homes. A public commenter also objected to the Gooch Hill placement, citing existing diesel truck traffic and exhaust pollution affecting nearby residents, and suggested the area would be better suited for a wetland mitigation bank.
Board members emphasized the importance of active transportation connections, particularly east-west trails that could complement the road network. They also discussed how infrastructure like parks and water lines would be built incrementally as properties annex and develop, driven by private development rather than upfront city investment.
E-Device Policy Work Begins
Transportation Engineer Taylor Lonsdale presented initial framework for updating city policies on electric bikes, scooters, and other e-devices. He outlined the project's purpose: reviewing existing codes and policies to align with best practices and the city's active transportation goals. The focus is public right-of-way—streets, bike lanes, shared-use paths, and sidewalks—though parks will pursue parallel policy updates.
Key topics for future discussion include clarifying the definition of "shared-use path," establishing maintenance responsibility for such paths, and regulating the expanding array of e-devices. Lonsdale noted that since 2020-2021 when Bird scooters arrived, higher-powered e-motorcycles and other devices have proliferated, requiring refined definitions. He emphasized the need to balance safety with not restricting access to transportation alternatives that keep people out of single-occupant vehicles.
Device versus Behavior Debate
Lonsdale posed a central policy question: should the city regulate the device itself or the behavior of the user? He offered an extreme example: is a Harley-Davidson traveling at 3 miles per hour on a sidewalk more or less problematic than a pedal bicycle going 18 miles per hour on the same sidewalk? This framing sparked board discussion about the importance of distinguishing between pedal-assist e-bikes (requiring pedaling) and throttle-only e-motos without pedals.
Board members identified several key concerns. Multiple members stressed that enforcement would be difficult—unlike motor vehicles, e-device riders can escape traffic enforcement easily. They suggested leaning on community partners like Gallatin Valley Land Trust to use trail ambassadors for education rather than relying solely on police citations. Board members also noted that public messaging about e-bike classes and distinctions between device types must reach populations not typically engaged in cycling education.
One member proposed working backward from desired outcomes: define what behavior and device types belong on each facility type (shared-use path, bike lane, sidewalk), then develop definitions and enforcement mechanisms to support those use cases. Another suggested keeping shared-use path definitions expansive to preserve flexibility for future funding and design constraints.
Timeline and Next Steps
For the growth area plan, the draft is scheduled for public release in early October, with work sessions with other city boards and the county planning board in October. A Community Development Board public hearing and recommendation is tentatively set for mid-November, with City Commission consideration for adoption as a community plan amendment in mid-December.
For active transportation policy, Lonsdale said staff will bring draft code language and specific proposals to the board in October for deeper discussion. Assuming progress, the city aims to present proposals to the City Commission in December, with first reading of revised ordinances in January. The goal is adoption by spring to enable education and enforcement before active transportation use increases seasonally. Legal staff is also reviewing what regulatory authority the city has under state law.