Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout181031_Bozeman_Planning Week 2 Summary_DraftBOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN PHASE 2: ANALYSIS + VISION | 1 31 October 2018, PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR STAFF REVIEW, V1 BOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN PLANNING WEEK 2 | OUTREACH SUMMARY 31 October 2018, PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR STAFF REVIEW, V1 Notification The public was notified through a number of different marketing efforts. Numerous methods were used to spread the word of Planning Week 2, including: direct emails to those who have supplied their contact info as part of this process; social media outlets, including the City’s existing Facebook and Twitter accounts; postcards at highly trafficked locations and events; the City’s website and event calendar. Purpose The purpose of Planning Week 2 was to review and refine six preliminary vision statements while developing opportunities that can help the City realize those vision statements. This stage is meant to dive deeper into the components that were touched upon during the first phase of public outreach. Getting the Community Involved The following events were scheduled to build upon the great input received during Planning Week 1. A large-scale community event will take place at the Bozeman Public Library on November 29th. Date Name Event & Location 10/15/2018 One-on-One Interviews #1 Community Development, 20 E Olive St 10/15/2018 City Commission Presentation City Hall, Commission Chambers, 121 N Rouse Ave 10/16/2018 City Staff Session Community Development, 20 E Olive St 10/16/2018 Group Session #1 Masonic Lodge, 14 S Tracy Ave 10/16/2018 Group Session #2 Masonic Lodge, 14 S Tracy Ave 10/16/2018 Planning Board Work Session City Hall, Commission Chambers, 121 N Rouse Ave 10/17/2018 Group Session #3 Masonic Lodge, 14 S Tracy Ave BOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN PHASE 2: ANALYSIS + VISION | 2 31 October 2018, PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR STAFF REVIEW, V1 10/17/2018 Group Session #4 Masonic Lodge, 14 S Tracy Ave 10/17/2018 One-on-One Interviews #2 Community Development, 20 E Olive St On Going Online Questionnaire #2 https://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/4612945/Bozema n-Thinks-Big Between all of these events, approximately 214 people were able to participate. Planning Week 2 Comments, Summarized by Vision Theme The Shape of the City:  Create height guidelines by neighborhood to create diversity and reflect neighborhood character  Support County open space conversation easement in strategic locations outside of the City  Ensure compatible infill development  Identify open space areas to protect critical viewsheds  Building heights must be taller  Increase density requirements and de-emphasize single household  Height minimums in designated growth areas  Require residential with new commercial development  Maximize mid-rise development in appropriate districts  Create a housing authority – focus on affordable housing  Lower stories in Downtown but higher in Midtown. Don’t design to “close in” neighborhoods  Show people what affordable housing looks like  Off-street bike paths to get around town  Encourage development in City’s undeveloped land  Promote and encourage development that supports mobility choices  Commercial buildings built to sidewalk and parking is on side or back  Annex inholdings  Integrate transportation options with areas of highest intensity  Plan around MSU’s undeveloped land  Retain the historic core of Downtown – maintain low – to mid-rise  Align new growth with existing infrastructure  The shape of the City should be diverse and flexible  Keep historic districts safe from over-development  Establish progressive parking requirements  Plan for a population of 100k BOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN PHASE 2: ANALYSIS + VISION | 3 31 October 2018, PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR STAFF REVIEW, V1 A City of Neighborhoods  No neighborhoods exist here  Include commercial so that services are walkable and bikeable  Consider resort and 2nd home taxes  Neighborhood to neighborhood connectivity is important  Low & middle income mixed together  Pedestrian oriented signage that identifies which neighborhood you’re in  Coffee shops, bakery, restaurant, small grocery, boutiques to create DT feel in neighborhoods  Mixed zoning to decrease congestion of major roads (19th, 7th, Huffine)  Current zoning prohibits the creation of new neighborhoods to look like the Northeast or South Side historic districts  Incentivize coffee shops where this is no commercial to catalyze a sense of community  Initiatives to improve our “degrees of separation” score  Infill projects  Subarea planning for neighborhoods to identify node locations and appropriate sizes  Plan neighborhoods to be dense on a grid pattern  Connect the west side to commercial nodes as well  Develop a functional definitions of areas  The 5-10 acre tracts in County but surrounded by City land should be created as neighborhoods or included in existing neighborhoods  Form-based zoning  Ensure parks are within a ten minute walk of each home  Intensify current neighborhood nodes with upzoning on perimeters  Preserve historic buildings and neighborhoods A City Bolstered by Downtown and Complementary Districts:  Move the County fairgrounds outside of the core and redevelop with high intensity  Keep areas around parks and trails light of traffic and uncongested  Extend mixed-use, walkable downtown area to North 7th  Develop list of unique places around world that Bozeman might aspire to be (Portland’s Pearl District)  Improve development processes  Signage indicating points of interest and how far they are from you (walking)  Strengthen commercial nodes and mobility options around MSU  Focus on growth and zoning that supports self-sufficient districts  Don’t only focus on Downtown, Midtown and University  Reduce B-3 heights to 4 stories  Provide incentives for more diverse development  Build path to connect Bozeman and Belgrade  Connect districts via shuttles and mobility options  Build up density downtown and up North 7th  Downtown businesses should establish private parking and shuttles for employees to relieve parking pressure  Support density and infill in these districts and others (NE and W) BOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN PHASE 2: ANALYSIS + VISION | 4 31 October 2018, PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR STAFF REVIEW, V1  Incentives to not destroy historic homes & structures  Shared art that builds distinct neighborhood identity  Implement a sales tax  Multimodal transportation to, and within these districts  Plan for connectivity between districts A City Influenced by Our Mountains, Parks, Trails, and Open Space:  Incentivize infill development  Respect animal corridors when planning  Better connected trail system/Fill in gaps  Signage/Maps to indicate connections  Envision the parks of the future  Improve park design  Hire a parks planner  Improve funding methods  Map and publicize animal migration patterns  Incorporate local agriculture into park spaces and subdivisions (agri-hoods)  Quality over quantity  Parks within 10 min walk of every home  Bus routes to favorite mountain places (similar to ski buses)  Don’t have open space islands or barriers  Make parks more functional  Connect neighborhoods to mountains, open space, and parks with mobility options  Pave more trails so they can be used in winter  Work with GVLT to secure trails to rivers & mountains from west and central areas of town (not just the east side)  Open up Bozeman Creek for recreation  Define economic value of outdoors – both quality of life and marketability for businesses  Embrace trails as transportation corridors for in-town commutes  Mandate that parcels of land be dedicated to open space  Park to park connectivity A City Influenced by Regional Coordination and Defined Edges:  Work with the County even though it can be difficult  Adopt joint infrastructure plan for Triangle region  Start preparing for the creation of the MPO  Revert to a City/County Planning Board  Work with neighbors & County to identify places within the triangle that need to be preserved as Bozeman grows  New 5 County Commissioner system by district  Coordinate on a regional bike system  Valley-wide infrastructure plan, growth plan, open space plan (include MSU)  Regional water/wastewater system plan  Use open space easements to create a natural border of the City, focusing density in the core  Elect leadership that works well with diverse views and interests BOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN PHASE 2: ANALYSIS + VISION | 5 31 October 2018, PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR STAFF REVIEW, V1  Edge development is required to provide further efforts in parks and transportation  Create policy to annex and absorb water/sewer districts on fringe when appropriate  Create shared development standards between City and County  Build trail to connect Bozeman and Belgrade with cafes/restaurants along the way  Change or adjust the regulatory environment to make Bozeman the best place to build and do business  Maintain urban and rural separation to retain area identity  City/County cooperation on transportation and public safety facilities  City, County, MSU, and BSD need to work together and get committed to regional planning  Urban growth boundary, reverse impact fees, density credits etc.  Identify wildlife corridors at city & regional levels  Green belt and core density to reduce environmental impact A City that Prioritizes Mobility Choices:  Stop prioritizing automobiles  Create a transit agency for the valley with options from buses, shuttles, scooters, and bikes  Allocate some infrastructure funding towards transit  Emulate European cities transportation approaches  Implement a gas tax  Establish protected bike lanes connecting east & west and Downtown & MSU  Scale up the Streamline Bus system through increased access and frequency  Light rail, bus, other with a dedicated right of way connecting Downtown, Midtown, and University  Improve parking management (meters, lining, etc)  Remove free parking Downtown  Consider a bike-share program  More trails in the central part of town  Improve and increase public transportation outside City limits to help employment issues and congestion  Develop true bike infrastructure with cycle tracks  Develop charging stations for scooters, bikes, and cars throughout  Bus rapid transit between Bozeman, Belgrade, and Four Corners  Mobility for all ages  Connect existing bike lanes  Improve bike safety and expand the paths  Focus on public transit instead of single-vehicle congestion  Buffers for bike lanes on busy roads  Prioritize alternative options (bike, walk, bus) over cars)  Plan regionally so development can be efficiently served by transit  Reduce parking minimums, especially Downtown  We need more bike parking  Focus on making biking easier in the winter  Focus infrastructure money on infill, not on new roads at City edges BOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN PHASE 2: ANALYSIS + VISION | 6 31 October 2018, PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR STAFF REVIEW, V1  Require paved, shared-use paths with major street improvements  Do professional scenario planning to gain an understanding of the future of transportation Visioning/Opportunities Exercise Online survey results have shown: Participants were instructed to choose up to three of the total six vision statements that best represent Bozeman’s future. The Mountains, Open Space, Trails, and Parks vision was the most widely selected of the group at 70%. The Shape of Our City vision statement was the least selected at 25% with the remaining four between 40% and 47%. Figure 1: Vision Themes The following is a summary of comments made about methods to achieving the vision statements. This is not an exhaustive list. The Shape of the City: Responses indicated a divide amongst participants regarding building heights. The responses in favor of increasing or incentivizing building heights were nearly even with the comments that suggested creating height limits, preserving views, and zoning appropriately to confine building heights. Other comments spoke to containing commercial nodes to both 7th and 19th and enforcing building standards that reflect a low to mid-rise skyline and placing an economic value on ecosystem service that the natural environment provides. A City of Neighborhoods: Participants want to see greater connectivity between neighborhoods, improved feasibility of developing commercial nodes, the preservation of historic neighborhoods, increased walkability and bikeability within neighborhoods that also include affordable housing and a mix of incomes. Increased density and a variety of housing in neighborhoods were mentioned as well. A City Bolstered by Downtown and Complementary Districts: Online survey responses desired better multimodal connection to, and within these districts that feature higher densities, infill redevelopment, and individual character. There were also comments suggesting that the BOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN PHASE 2: ANALYSIS + VISION | 7 31 October 2018, PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR STAFF REVIEW, V1 City channel some of Downtown’s growth into surrounding districts, eliminating minimum parking requirements and height restrictions, and making Midtown both pedestrian and car friendly. A City Influenced by Our Mountains, Parks, Trails, and Open Space: One comment read “Build Bozeman up, not out.”. That comment sums up a majority of the statements relating to growth, as individuals want to see the City focus on looking inward and avoiding sprawl. Additionally, a focus on improving connectivity within the already well-liked and existing trail system was suggested, as were ideas regarding the identification and protection of wildlife corridors, a more complete east/west and north/south bike lane connection, and the addition of smaller parks and multi-purpose parks instead of sport facilities that are not used as frequently. A City Influenced by Regional Coordination and Defined Edges: There was much to say about the difficult nature of the County and how the City needs to continue working with them, MSU, and the Bozeman School District to become committed to regional planning. Widely mentioned was a desire to create joint infrastructure, growth, and open space plans for the valley & triangle region. Some wanted to see shared development standards between the City and County, improved planning and regulation of fringe developments, better zoning in unincorporated areas, and some form of an urban growth boundary, reverse impact fees, or density credits to limit sprawl. A City that Prioritizes Mobility Choices: A great deal of comments centered on scaling up the Streamline Bus system with increased access and frequency, as well as increasing funding. Another idea for the transit system was to charge fares for service with reduced fares to select populations. Participants want to see alternative modes of transportation prioritized over automobiles, the development of protected bike lanes, implementation of a bike-share program, and improved bike lanes along Main Street, 7th, 19th, and along east/west corridors. Furthermore, reducing parking minimums, creating pedestrian-only areas Downtown, implementing a gas tax or congestion tolls, and making public transit throughout the triangle area more feasible were suggested. Event Photos [TO BE INSERTED] Group Session #1 Group Session #2 Group Session #3 Group Session #4 BOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN PHASE 2: ANALYSIS + VISION | 8 31 October 2018, PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR STAFF REVIEW, V1 Who We Have Heard From Within the online questionnaire, respondents were asked to answer key demographic questions in order to track general response rates comparing residency, location, and age. Are you a resident of Bozeman or do you work in Bozeman? Nearly 78% of respondents stated that they live and work in Bozeman. What is the general location of your neighborhood and/or business? The Northeast quadrant was home to nearly 36% of participants, followed by the Southeast at 29%, the Northwest at 20%, and the remainder living outside of Bozeman. The Southwest quadrant was not represented. BOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN PHASE 2: ANALYSIS + VISION | 9 31 October 2018, PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR STAFF REVIEW, V1 How long have you lived in Gallatin County? Residents that have lived in the County 21 or more years represented 45% of the respondents, while those who have lived in the county between 1 and 5 years accounted for 11.4% of responses. What is your age? The three age groups between 30-39, 40-49, and 50-59 represented 76% of all participants with the 40-49 and 50-59 age groups being the largest at 26.7% each. Respondents between the ages of 20-29 only accounted for 2.2% of responses.