Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-18-17 Public Comment - R. Peters and K. Bryan - UDC Update Subchapter 4BPage 1 Randy Peters and Kate Bryan 2607 Spring Creek Drive, Bozeman, MT 59715 September 16, 2017 Public Comment for the September 18, 2017 Bozeman City Commission Meeting RE: Re-adoption of Resolution 4598 and Subchapter4B Dear Commissioners, Until April of this year, citizens of Bozeman and neighborhoods surrounding downtown did not realize the impact of Resolution 4598 and Subchapter 4B of the NCOD (Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District) which you adopted on a temporary basis in May of 2015. While fighting the egregious ambitions of a developer for a massive, out of context 5 story apartment building next to a historic district with 1 and 2 story homes, the question arose, how could this happen. We did the research, documented as follows. To spur development in the downtown (B3) zone, you let a group of (architects and developers) led by a downtown business representative, change the commercial character design rules for B3 zoned commercial properties in close proximity to 1 and 2 story neighborhoods and historic areas. This task force acted in a conflict of interest with City Staff over 2 months without the representation or input from surrounding neighbors, property owners and the general citizenry to change rules which the City (you all) adopted on a temporary basis. (Quote from Staff Report 4-26-15 page 2/123 and Commission Memorandum 5-18-15 page 453) “The resulting convening of a task force and the drafting of an amended chapter to the Design Guidelines is recognized by all participants to be a solution intended to temporarily bridge the gap between currently adopted planning documents and future, more permanent, solutions”. Also from a presentation to the Commission on May 4th, 2015, then Planning Director Wendy Thomas stated, in a description of how the code revisions were created, that the “folks who participated were primarily architects” that offered input based on situations where they had “personally experienced, on behalf of clients, a rub between their client’s vision, their vision and the requirements of the NCOD.” This was a clear conflict of interest. These commercial design rule changes, have led to big money, profit motivated developers planning large scale 5-6 story buildings that are incompatible and out of context with surrounding neighborhood character. This is assaulting the very fabric and character of what made Bozeman such a livable special place. From the start, many of these developers have ignored the input, comments, and complaints of citizens, instead acting to enrich themselves at the expense of the adjacent neighborhoods and historic areas. We oppose the adoption of Subchapter 4B because of the adverse impacts to our property, and our property rights and the surrounding neighborhood. Not all B3 properties are the same as some are located in more sensitive areas as part of historic neighborhoods, while other B3 properties have opportunity to create appropriate transitions to residential zones. As owners of the B3 property at 210 South Black, which is also on the historical register and part of a historic south neighborhood, we are significantly impacted by Subchapter 4B. The temporary rules need to be revised and updated with input of all stakeholders before being readopted and made permanent. Page 2 Randy Peters and Kate Bryan 2607 Spring Creek Drive, Bozeman, MT 59715 From the 5/18/15 City Commission recorded video, in Wendy Thomas’ presentation; she showed the potential for a hard edge between large buildings and adjacent neighborhoods (in the Bozeman B-3 Halo area surround the Downtown Bozeman historic core). In this presentation, Wendy Thomas is quoted as follows.  “It is my firm belief that consideration in the amendment of these guidelines should be given to abutting property owners next to this B-3 District”  “This is a worst possible case scenario.”  “This type of development in a backyard of a residential property owner would have an adverse effect on the residences and the people living there.“  “I also make the supposition that this could possibly have adverse effects on their (i.e., the neighbors) property values.” As noted by City Staff in 2015, “where the B-3 interfaces with the historic neighborhoods in a critical area, Staff recommends that additional text be added to the Task Force Chapter to address this interface in order to allow all property owners the use and enjoyment of their property. It is critical to realize that all property owners within the NCOD have a stake in these guidelines and no property owner(s) should have an unfair benefit or burden due to the revision of the guidelines. (April 26, 2015 City Memo entitled “B-3 Design Guidelines Conflicts”, page 6/127). The NCOD Design Guidelines were adopted in 2006 through an inclusive public process over many months, and we expect the same process for amendments to the Design Guidelines, including Subchapter 4B, which, affects our interests and will continue to have consequential impacts on numerous property owners if affirmed and readopted as is. Time should be given for additional citizen and affected party input with consideration of changes or amendments to Subchapter 4B. See NCOD Guidelines, Introduction, page 3. NOTE: This is a quote from the Design Guidelines. “The City of Bozeman resolved to create an interactive process for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Design Guidelines project, through which the residents of Bozeman, the Historic Preservation Advisory Board (HPAB) and Design Review Board (DRB) expressed their concerns and expectations for the final product. The result has been a cooperative system of dialogue and values-clarification from which the City determined relevant concerns and goals for the District. This was accomplished through several public workshops. At these sessions, participants discussed positive attributes of the City’s historic neighborhoods and identified design issues that cause concern about future development. By completing exercises and discussions, the Bozeman residents took an active role in shaping the guidelines for the District.” In 2015, Subchapter 4B was not adopted by an interactive process through which residents of Bozeman were allowed to participate. It should not be rubberstamped now, furthering that lack of participation. Rather, the same exercises and discussions in which Bozeman residents took an active role in shaping the guidelines for the District in 2006 should be undertaken. As in 2006, a cooperative system of dialogue and values-clarification must take place. Citizens, residents and property owner’s relevant concerns and goals for the District must be considered. Page 3 Randy Peters and Kate Bryan 2607 Spring Creek Drive, Bozeman, MT 59715 The City should take the time to address zone interface issues and conflicts before re-affirming and re- adopting Subchapter 4B. Modifications and amendments could protect sensitive areas in and around the downtown B3 halo and zone interfaces. This could include rezoning some area properties or providing changes to improve and strengthen the design guidelines to resolve such conflicts In December of 2015, a consultant’s report to the City on the NCOD had this to say regarding sensitive zoning areas surrounding downtown and potential conflicts: Based on the development patterns of the area, this type of development and massing could potentially have a negative impact on the historic character of the area and would be visually in conflict with the current massing and scale. Other than the NCOD guidelines that are currently in place and the available historic inventories for these buildings, there is nothing to preclude this area from that type of development and change. (See page 38) The report further states regarding new development infill: There would be little from a zoning position to discourage the high density residential (multi- story apartments) in that location despite its obvious conflict from the established residential, low density context. In this area, the zoning pattern is inconsistent with the current character of the area. Permitted setbacks, height and lot coverage would stand in stark contrast to the surroundings. This type of high density development, while permitted, would likely have a negative impact on the character of the area. The solution would be to rezone the property or at the very least develop stronger design guidelines to ensure context sensitive design. The context of the area is generally single- household homes. (See page 44) The decisions made on the current City Commission’s watch over Bozeman will have lasting impacts. Facing the fast growth we have seen recently, presents complex issues and problems. We are not against infill development if it is compatible and appropriate with existing context and character of the neighborhoods and surrounding structures. Reasonable solutions for infill and density that benefit neighborhoods and developers and the community at large can be achieved with the involvement and input from all parties. The Commission must allow more time for all stakeholders and affected parties to weigh in on Subchapter 4B and NCOD design guideline improvements/changes. Please reject affirming and readopting Resolution 4598 and Subchapter 4B. We all must have a seat at the table regarding these very important issues on how and where we will grow. Thank you. Sincerely, Randy Peters and Kate Bryan Bozeman