HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-08-17 Public Comment - T. Crawford - DensityDear Mayor Taylor and Bozeman City Commissioners,
Many thanks for your vote to reject Andy Holloran’s Black Olive project. While the general consensus
and reasons expressed for the project’s rejection were insufficient parking, I cannot but believe that the
overwhelming reaction of the residents against the mass of the development in relation the surrounding
neighborhood played a significant part in the commission’s reasoning.
While not a resident of the city, I think the validity of my views and concerns about Bozeman are borne
out by my being one of the first to reconstitute an older building and thereby incubating the current
state of resurrection extant today. While my vision and belief in Bozeman is still strong, it has not and
does not entail nonfunctional density in order to thwart inevitable sprawl beyond the city core which
arguably exists today. Doubters are welcome to tour the developments to the west of 19th Avenue and
experience for themselves what poorly planned development without adequate financial requirements
and the resulting infrastructure includes. I do not think that the necessary retrograde costs should be
borne by a citizenry neither desirous nor welcoming of them. I cannot imagine that had they known,
would they have voted for such an outcome?
Now back to the old city core; when and with what degree of citizen involvement was the decision that
five stories should become a determinant of buildings integrated into or immediately adjacent to
established city neighborhoods? Will five-story buildings help provide functional density in the
downtown core? Is caution perhaps a good idea in finding a density level acceptable to the current
residents? Could a lack of restraint in this indeterminate density goal result in a city mainly attractive to
those moving from super urban areas with densities such that most anything somewhat less is
appealing? Comparison of Bozeman with other places like Portland bring this to mind.
Now I read that the city Commission is considering disposal of the minimum parking requirements for
development in the “midtown” area. Apparently the commission considers bigger and sooner of more
importance than better and more carefully considered. Perhaps the whole city commission suffers from
the same confusion about the “free market system” as would-be Mayor Chris Mehl as shown in the
statement quoted in the Chronicle:
“The market is a major driver in this and people are not going to build there without some
greater incentive”.
I do not like to presuppose the thoughts of another, but perhaps he meant less restriction rather than
greater incentives. I understand that those who believe in a “free market” loathe restrictions and
oppose incentives except when receiving direct benefits. Many citizens/residents regard the creation of
regulations for parking as protection from the community imposition resulting from an excessive
number of cars resulting from overdevelopment. Restriction or protection is in the senses of the
impacted.
Sincerely,
Tim Crawford
585-9333
crawdadt@aol.com