Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-18-19 Public Comment - L. Kirk - Downtown Bozeman Improvement PlanFrom: Chris Mehl To: Agenda Subject: FW: Comments on DBIP Date: Friday, January 18, 2019 5:14:32 PM Attachments: image001.png Save Bozeman.docx Chris Mehl Bozeman Deputy Mayor cmehl@bozeman.net 406.581.4992 ________________________________________ From: lisakirk@enviromininc.com [lisakirk@enviromininc.com] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2019 5:00 PM To: bozeman@agencylp.com; Chris Mehl; Martin Matsen Cc: info@savebozeman.org Subject: Comments on DBIP HI Chris, others- Out of time to do more with this under this deadline. Would you please share with the rest of the commission? Lisa Lisa Bithell Kirk, Ph.D., P.Geo. Principal – Biogeochemistry lisakirk@enviromininc.com<mailto:lisakirk@enviromininc.com> [Enviromin-Logo-2015] 524 Professional Drive Bozeman MT 59718 Lab +1-406-581-8261 Cell +1-406-224-5154 www.enviromininc.com<http://www.enviromininc.com/> Save Bozeman 524 Professional Drive Bozeman MT 59718 18 January 2019 To: The Authors of the DBIP Bozeman City Commission The annotated Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan (DBIP) plan recently posted on the city website does little to address neighborhood concerns or historic preservation, though it claims to “enhance residential neighborhoods through context sensitive development.” It also does little to align with the draft results put forward by the NCOD consultants, as is suggested in the plan coordination section. It focuses on commerce, events and festivals, and sustaining a destination restaurant and entertainment scene. Rather than focusing on a true sense of community, with all that implies it focuses on spontaneity and play. It absurdly asserts that the DBIP serves as a neighborhood plan for the entire city….and suggests that it should be used to shape code, guidelines and policies. Though this presentation it cites the value of a strong connection to sense of place, the proposals outlined in this document will forever alter our sense of this place. The “wall around the city” is being advanced, although this plan illustrates that growth in a figure which appears to deliberately downplay its height and intensity. Its map showing projected development is misleading in scale and format – with dark green showing actual height of buildings and pale pink showing potential locations but not probable height for some 20 projects. City zoning should clearly delineate which areas will be taken by downtown expansion. Results from the NCOD consultant and our collective feedback to the city suggest that the NCOD will continue on, but this document suggests that single household detached residual uses are not anticipated downtown. This document does not address the conflict between proposed growth and development and the historic single family neighborhoods. It seems clear that the place needing the most work is revision of zone edges vs. transition zones as they affect property immediately adjacent to the B3; this plan skirts this issue entirely. We have the distinctly uncomfortable feeling that, despite clear public feedback via NCOD consultants, that the DBP is continuing to have its way with our community. Neighborhood character and historic preservation are not being appropriately addressed. The parking plan fails to address protecting on street parking for residents living in proximity to the downtown. These folks often share a driveway and have little off street parking. Parking is valuable – and the cost for creating those resources should lie with those gaining from growth. The 9-day timeline provided for review of this document, due Jan 18, was very short. We request a full 30 day review period. We recognize that there will be future opportunities to comment, but also recognize based on painful past experience that these recommendations are likely to evolve significantly from this point forward – such that no one will listen when we comment later.