HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-15-16 Public Comment - B. Segal - Black OliveRE: Black/Olive: Neighbor Comments on Design Review Meeting 11-
09-16: “Dream Big”
Dear Mayor Taylor, City Council Members, Planning and Design Review
Board members,
I am looking out my son’s bedroom window, putting on the storm windows,
and realizing that my beautiful view of the Bridger’s, from my house at 315
S. Black, is going away. There is no view of the Bridger's in the rendering of
the proposed project, drawn from about the same spot. In my current view
there is. My realtor tells me that a view is worth $100,000. Will I be
compensated for the loss of this view? And what about the folks who dwell in
the shadow of the proposed building? Will they be compensated for loss of
Solar access?
My other main concerns surrounding this project are the overall height and
scale in comparison to the adjacent houses, as well as parking/traffic issues.
What if we were to allow the houses that fall within the view shed to raise
their height limits and density to help provide a buffer zone? Or, some how,
convince the Federal Government, that it would be in their best interest to
get a brand-new covered parking garage for receiving and packing mail, add
3 more stories for federal government employees, and parking for this and
other up coming downtown projects? We could waive the “off street"
requirement altogether, and drop this entire project by one story. Planning
for the future may require doing things that have not been done before.
Then, there is the architecture itself. We are in an historical overlay district.
My neighbors and I are all required to pay close attention to historical details
in our renovations and new projects So far, the elevations we have seen
from the developer look like any building anywhere USA. We should hold
ourselves to a higher standard. “Home Base” should pay the same attention
to detail as the rest of us. The lack of a setbacks, though to code, show no
respect for the neighborhood. If we are going to have an historic overlay
District it should be applied uniformly throughout. Unfortunately, for Mr
Holloran, we can all look at the Element and say “you call that historic?
Looks a lot like any town, any where USA.” We must have guarantees in
place that the final renderings and plans stamped by the city planning
department and design review committee, will be what we actually see at
the end of the process.
As for me personally, I would like to get rid of the historical district all
together, and make it a voluntary system, giving those homeowners and
businesses that would like to take part in the historic society some kind of a
tax break. That way, we can let the architects and designers of “our time”
have their own “his/her story.” If this is the case, then we must look at the
project from the point of architectural review. Does the building delight?
Does the building have interest? Is it complementary to its surrounding
environment? To what degrees is it energy and water self sufficient?
Green Building is the way of the present and future. If this is a “cornerstone”
building, then let’s take the opportunity to go “way green.” Huge
underground storage tanks could store rainwater for reuse in landscaping,
toilet flushing, and overflow could be used to help recharge ground water
that is being starved at the surface by our buildings. This would also reduce
the amount of city water consumed and stormwater produced. Oh, and the
Multi Story Dream Big parking Structure could also be designed for 50 years
from now when individual car usage is down, and be engineered to morph
into future housing projects. A win win situation for the city and the
developer. Eco-turism is big these days. What if we became the Greenest
Developing Town in the Rockies? We are on the way already. Why not help
“Home Base” Dream Big with us? Once they see that “green is good” for
them and the city, they might just say, “Why not Dream Big?”
I urge you to vote no, on the current proposal for all or any of the reasons
above. Or, postpone making a decision for 6 months, so that we may
generate hew ideas based on community prosperity.
My objections in brief:
- Loss of mountain views and solar access
- Lack of long term and realistic parking solutions
- Lack of Architectural value, setbacks
- Lack of trust with Design Enforcement
- No effort to create a buffer zone in between drastically different zoning
areas.
- Not a high enough “Green Quotient “
Thanks so much for considering my opinions, and remember this is only one
project in a line of many, so let’s keep the bar high. I urge all of you to
“Dream Big.” Please vote no on the current Black/Olive Project Proposal.
Brian Segal
315 S Black Ave.
Bozeman, MT 59716
496-580-5760