Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-01-19 Public Comment - L. Semonese - NCOD ReviewFrom: Linda Semones To: Agenda; Linda Semones Subject: NCOD Review Date: Friday, March 01, 2019 5:03:35 PM I attended the Historical Preservation Committee and the Planning/Zoning Committee meetings this week. I stayed for both meetings, for a total of around 5 hours of listening to the presentations and discussions. After listening to many opinions on the NCOD review, I would like to support the review and aplaud their consultations with as many of the public as possible. During the Planning/Zoning Committee meeting, there were 2 discussions that caught my attention. First, that the sample of public opinions presented by the consultants only represented 1% of the population of the area, and that led the committee member to question their validity. It was also implied that the sampling only represented people over 65. I myself am over 65, but when making comments at the meetings I was also carrying in the opinions of my adult children, as were others. The meetings were held at times that were very difficult for working young professionals to attend, and those of us who did attend were carrying the opinions of others. Stereotyping members of the public for their age, and assuming that older people have all the same conservative voice is wrong. One particular board member even blamed people over 65 for the increasingly unaffordable home prices in Bozeman. We all know that there are many factors that play into the increasing home prices. It is complicated. Publicly blaming one segment of the population for this is simply simplistic and deceptive. I have heard this idea touted about in more than one debate, usually from the Build Bozeman group. But to hear it at a public meeting of city representatives was disheartening. Those who attended the public forums should be thanked, not berated, for their service. Also, at the same meeting, there was discussion of the viability of private citizen boards and their quality. While discussing whether the Historic Preservation Board should have judicial input on designs, or just be able to recommend on designs, it was mentioned that the citizen boards were full of volunteers, who often didn't have any qualifications to be on them. There was discussion around limiting the number of citizens on the board without professional training or degrees, as well as providing training for the volunteers. Obviously there is a need for communication between the Historical Preservation Board and the Planning/Zoning Committee. The relationship between these three entities is crucial in the COD review plan. Yet, these two boards have never met face to face. The Planning/Zoning Committee is unaware that there are very qualified and professional members on the Historical Preservation Committee. I would highly recommend some kind of meet and greet between the two boards, a social and professional mixer, before the City Commission meets on April 8 to listen to the NCOD Review presentation. I would also suggest that the members of the City Commission attend the mixer as well, since these 4 entities will be working to flesh out the work plan, and will need to know each other and each other's areas of expertise. I personally found it offensive that a member of a city committee would question the validity of volunteer citizen involvement. As a citizen of Bozeman, I support the NCOD review and it's suggestions. I would like to see a stronger Historical Preservation Board, more than just an advisory board. What that would look like is to be decided in the next few months. I do not believe a person buying a home in a historic district expects to be able to do whatever they want to the home. They are buying the home because they like the idea of participating in the history of the area, and generally would appreciate positive guidance in renovation and detailing. That does not mean they want a million little details regulated, and it is up to the city to make sure that positive guidance does not become control of every feature. But the COD review suggestions are a good basis for a solid start in preserving homes, businesses and schools that make Bozeman a desirable place to live. The reason people want to live in the downtown area is not large 5 story apartment buildings. It is the atmosphere created by homes with green space and history. Shall we have a historical downtown Bozeman surrounded by blocky apartment buildings? That would toss our desirable atmosphere of community out the window. I have several more comments. I attended a visioning meeting for this process in the upstairs event center downtown. At this point I can't remember whether the meeting was for the Downtown Plan or the NCOD review. Either way, my comment is pertinent. In that discussion, several members of the group mentioned that the idea for the downtown was to have people live, work and play in the downtown area. If that is the goal, it should be obvious that only rich people will live, work and play downtown. The housing going up will be unaffordable for teachers and service workers. My own children work in the public school system, and would like to live close to their jobs where they could walk or ride a bike to work. My daughter works at Whittier, and my son-in-law works at the high school. At this point, they are living in my basement, hoping for a housing miracle. The housing going up will be affordable for couples pulling in a 6 figure income or better, but not for everyone who works downtown. If the city is serious about affordable housing, downtown would be a good place to start. Also, there seems to be a consensus that in the future, everyone will live in 10 story buildings because they are more sustainable. What is sustainable about a 10 story box building? Do the box buildings planned for downtown Bozeman have any green spaces? Rooftop gardens? Solar panels? Or are we just calling them sustainable because they house lots of people efficiently ? It seems to me that we would be adding to the global warming problems by allowing these heat creating boxes to be built alongside asphalt streets without green setbacks. There is more to solving the environmental problems we face than dealing with a population increase by boxing up as many humans as possible. What we plan as a community, what we dream as a community, is what we will get. We should plan and dream the very best possible for our growing community, not the defaults that other less desirable places have settled for. Sincerely, Linda Semones 404 S. Church lindasemones@hotmail.com