HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-06-17 Public Comment - J. Wilkinson - Black Olive IIFrom:Jeanne Wilkinson
To:Carson Taylor; Cyndy Andrus; Chris Mehl; Jeff Krauss; I-Ho Pomeroy; Agenda
Cc:Martin Matsen; Brian Krueger
Subject:Black Olive II 17265
Date:Sunday, August 06, 2017 3:58:37 PM
To: Mayor Taylor and Commissioners Andrus, Mehl, Krauss, and Pomeroy
CC: Community Development Director and Staff
Re: Black Olive II 17265
Thank you for your previous denial of the Olive and Black project. I urge you to deny the
second iteration of this project -Black Olive II 17265.
The issues remain the same. The issue I am now emphasizing is the fact that this project site,
despite what the staff report states, is in fact located within such close proximity to the South
Tracy Historic District, that historic preservation principles should have been applied and the
Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Code and Guidelines should have been strongly
enforced. Furthermore, the single family and two family residential uses surrounding the
project site should have been considered.
Instead, the staff report completely ignores preservation principles in favor of over-
emphasizing density and infill arguments. It cites at least a dozen specific growth policies that
rationalize infill but list not one that emphasizes preservation of which there are many (See G-
1.3,LU-1.3, LU-3.1, LU-4.2, C-1.4, C-4.4, HP-1.1, HP-1.3. HP-1.4). It’s as if the policy goal of
achieving infill rests completely on this project and its proposed height, mass, scale and
number of units. It does not. There are many other projects in more appropriate locations
that provide density – like East Main Street, and others.
The staff report states (see page 21 ) the proposal is in compliance with the Bozeman
Guidelines for Historic Preservation and the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District
(NCOD Guidelines) Introduction and Chapter 2 and Sec 38.16.050 of the UDC. This is simply
not true. How can the proposed sixty- plus foot tall structure, that is more than twice the
height of neighboring residential historic properties, comply with this section of the UDC
which requires focus upon height, building mass, shape, and scale when determining
compatibility with neighboring structures and properties? Further, how can it be that this
proposed project complies with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Rehabilitation
of Historic Properties which is specifically required in the same UDC section and states:
“Recommended - New work should be compatible with the historic character of the setting in
terms of size, scale, design, material, color, and texture. Not Recommended - Introducing new
construction into historic districts that is visually incompatible or that destroys historic
relationships within the setting.”
Not only does the staff report ignore the fact this project overlaps a historic district and the
related guidelines such proximity brings, it emphasizes all the planning documents that
rationalize density and infill. Such either/or interpretations are contrary to a healthy
community. Saving everyday places, like the Olive and Black neighborhood, play a role and
matter not only to the people that live there, but to the economic and cultural vitality of the
entire community. I urge you to deny this project.
Jeanne Wilkinson
415 South 3rd Ave