HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommunity Housing Questionnaire Summary May 2019
Community Opinions
Questionnaire Summary
May 2019
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 2
Purpose of Questionnaire
From May 20 - May 30th the City of Bozeman conducted gathered public
feedback on various housing topics through an online questionnaire. A total of
525 responses were received. The purpose was to gather general public
sentiment on the topic of community housing and allow interested members of
the public who could not attend the work shop an opportunity to provide input.
Questions asked included the following topics:
• How concerned are you about the topic of community housing in
general?
• What do you think is the right mix of rentals vs. ownership in Bozeman
today, and in the future?
• Should the rate of future development of community housing match
job growth? Be slower? Faster?
• What income levels should the action plan prioritize?
• Other general comments about what should be done to improve the
availability of community housing
How the Input Will Be Used
Over the next four months, the City of Bozeman and community partners, will be
working together to create a Community Housing Action Plan. The goal of the
Action Plan is to identify priorities, based on data outlined in the 2019 Bozeman
Community Housing Needs Assessment, that strengthen community through the
creation and preservation of a range of dwellings for those that work and call
Bozeman home.
Driving the development of the Community Housing Action Plan is a diverse
cross-section of community partners coming together as the Housing Working
Group. The Housing Working Group will use the input collected, as well as future
questionnaires and feedback from community workshops, to inform the action
planning process. The purpose is to help ensure the work of the Housing Working
Group comports with public sentiment and primary concerns are addressed
through the process. Specifically, this first round of community input will help
guide the goals and objectives of the action plan.
For more information
Go to the City of Bozeman website:
https://www.bozeman.net/city-projects/community-housing-action-plan
Contact
Loren Olsen | Affordable Housing Program Manager
406.582.2953
lolsen@bozeman.net
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 3
Table of Contents
Question 1: What priority should Community Housing (housing that is affordable
for residents and local employees) be in Bozeman? ................................................. 4
Question 2: Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the
following principles from Bozeman's Community Plan to help guide the
Community Housing Action Plan under development? ............................................ 4
Question 3: What do you think the target should be for new Community Housing
(housing that is affordable for residents and local employees) that is produced
through the Action Plan? ............................................................................................. 34
Question 4: Should development of additional Community Housing: (select one
of the below) ................................................................................................................. 43
Question 5: What importance should the Housing Action Plan place on each of
the following? ................................................................................................................ 49
Question 6: Where should Community Housing be located? .................................. 54
Question 7: Do you have thoughts or ideas on actions that can be taken to
improve the availability of Community Housing in Bozeman that you would like to
share? ............................................................................................................................. 57
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 4
1. What priority should Community Housing (housing that is affordable for
residents and local employees) be in Bozeman?
2. The housing element of Bozeman’s Community Plan, adopted in 2009,
declared certain principles that broadly define what is meant by
Community Housing (housing that is affordable for residents and local
employees), why it is important, and what kinds of actions should be
taken.
Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the
following principles from Bozeman's Community Plan to help guide the
Community Housing Action Plan under development? Please rate
according to a scale of 1 “disagree” to 5 “strongly agree.”
Not a priority
4%
One of
Bozeman's lower
priorities
5% A moderate
priority
11%
A high priority
36%
The top priority
in Bozeman
44%
71%
78%
81%
84%
85%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Successful delivery of affordable housing should
not be measured only by sale prices and rents, but its performance in terms of minimizing
energy use and maintenance costs
There is no single home price or rent benchmark that defines "affordable housing." Affordability
for residents of various incomes levels should be based on ability to pay, since affordability is a
All residents should have access to decent and
affordable housing
The solutions to providing affordable housing
should involve using diverse approaches and
mechanism
Availability of housing for residents of all income
levels is essential for attracting and retaining the
employers that provide the jobs that are essential
to the community's prosperity
% selecting 4, 5 - strongly agree
Avg: 4.4
Avg: 3.8
Avg: 4.0
Avg: 4.3
Avg: 4.3
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 5
Are there other community principles and characteristics that are
important to you and that should be retained as Bozeman works toward
addressing housing needs for residents and employees?
1. A community that is less reliant on cars, which benefits both lower-income
individuals getting from their homes to their places of employment, as well as
the environment everyone has moved here to enjoy, i.e., development of
sidewalks and other measures to make city more walkable; improvement of
existing and development of new bike lanes; expansion of Streamline routes
and frequency of schedule 2. A community that is taking a proactive approach
toward preventing and mitigating the effects of climate warming (will people
want to pay such high housing costs and earn lower wages to live in a place
where Bridger Bowl gets just 2 inches of snow a season or the sky is smoky the
entire summer? Doubtful.), i.e., green construction; increase in planning of
native and drought-resistant plants; water usage restrictions for landscaping
(e.g., no one should be water their lawns in the middle of the day when the
water simply evaporates; it's wasteful and inefficient)
1. Allow trailer homes to have permanent foundations on very small lots. 2.
reduce unnecessary bldg. code requirements. 3. Incentives for smallest homes
on smallest lots
1. Energy efficient buildings like the Larkspur apartments seems like a good
model.
1. Preserving historic Bozeman character. 2. After returning after a 14 year
absence, I see a city that is changing to cater to wealthy residents -- who may
or may not live here all year. Economic Development aimed at the wealthy has
replaced preserving the heart and soul of Bozeman.
A community with a strong commitment to affordable housing is a community
that will stay diversity and vibrant.
A livable income would go a long way. Most businesses are vastly under paying
given the costs of housing and services in the area.
A living wage for Bozeman city workers so that they can afford to live in
Bozeman. Perhaps a stipend or some other means to affect this part of the
labor market while leaving the housing market alone. There also could be low
interest housing loans extended to these people which would be paid back in
time if they sell the property, etc.
A unique aspect of Bozeman is that it has a focus on quality as well as
uniqueness/diversity of structures, versus sacrificing these for big homes or
"cookie cutter" structures. This focus seems very important to retain.
A vibrant community is comprised of people of all income levels. Downtown has
become a hub of galleries and restaurants, neither of which cater to low-
income people. We used to have grocery stores, a drugstore, car parts store...
all either on Main St. downtown or within a block thereof. This is not Aspen, or at
least, it didn't used to be... Employers can't find employees to work in said
galleries and restaurants because they can't afford housing.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 6
Ability to pay is a huge factor. I'm a single mother of two, who just graduated
after completing my bachelor's followed by my Master's. I have a great deal of
school debt as well as being the primary parent to two children. Housing in
Bozeman is so expensive and we're going to be continuing to live like I'm still a
student for years to come because my new income will not accurately reflect
what I am actually able to afford with all things considered.
Access to decent & affordable hsg should be within their means & should not
be hand out by instantly providing a home of equal value in a neighborhood
that they get @ reduced price, with no investment & instant equity when other
young & medium income has worked hard to afford housing. There are different
Definitions of Affordable & Decent. Also, why only going after Tax Payers &
Building industry and NOT the City have something in (a lot of property owned
by City of Bozeman that could be gifted to Habitat for Humanity or HRDC or
why not partner with building industry to build on this land!
Access to public transportation -expansion of Streamline bus services. Extensive
network of sidewalks, including curb cuts. Increase partnerships with and
advocacy to the State of Montana and Federal government to help support
needs of individuals of low income and with disabilities, including retirees and
families with pre-school-aged children. Subsidized day care for all.
Accessibility in housing should be a priority. Accessibility should not be defined
using specific terminology as each disabled persons needs are different.
Housing should be adaptable.
Accessibility to necessary services (like grocery stores) and leisurely pursuits (like
trails and parks), or simply ensuring that there is ease of access to public
transportation so that these services are accessible. I am a single mother of 3
children, struggling to get to any point where I can afford even an apartment of
our own. Currently we live with my sister, and commute from Paradise Valley 5
days/week for work and school. I believe in giving people a hand-up, so some
kind of community enrichment program tied into affordable housing would be
great. Example: A community of truly cheap (like $1000 for a 3 bedroom, all
utilities included) housing with 3-5 year lease. As part of the lease agreement,
the residents agree to take financial management courses, help grow food in a
community garden for residents and to donate extras to the food bank,
volunteer their time teaching other residents life skills (how to change your own
oil, how to set heathy boundaries, free group fitness classes, how to sew, etc.) At
the end of your lease, you have the option to reapply for residency, or of course
exit the program and move out of the community housing.
Adding increased regulations for development has increased cost of land
development which has increased cost of lots, which has increased costs of
homes. 80% to 90% of affordable housing efforts should be centered around
adding supply with decreased regulation/standards for lot development.
Greatly increasing supply could reduce lot prices and decrease the overall cost
immediately. I hate to break it to the city but there is no way they will ever meet
affordable housing demands without streamlining development regulation and
time to add lot supply to the market.
addressing needs of people who are in a home and don't want to move but
because of low income, special needs or disability need help with maintaining
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 7
their home.
Adequate parking and improved public transportation need to accompany
increased housing units. All neighborhoods of all income levels need parks,
trees, gardens plots, sidewalks, access to basic services (groceries, gas, schools,
day care centers).
Affordability for whom is a question that still needs to be better defined and
addressed. Most housing in Bozeman is only "affordable" for those with income
and in investments that allow for top-end development. The availability of truly
affordable housing for those who make modest or lower incomes flat out has
not been factored in in past affordable housing discussions. If we had not been
able to purchase a home 19 years ago, we wouldn't be able to even find an
apartment we could afford in Bozeman. As we near retirement age and
consider living in a smaller place than our small "starter home" (1392 sq. ft.) that
we might be able to own outright, our equity is not sufficient to allow us to do
this in Bozeman or nearby towns. For those of modest means, like those in their
20s and 30s, the only options are to share apartments with several other
unrelated people. Those if us who are in modest circumstances who are aging
would find those kinds of housing arrangements quite difficult. When will the city
encourage modest homes that are in the 950-1,000 square foot range or allow
for tiny house developments that might be truly affordable to those who make
modest and lower incomes? The city should continue to require park space in
all new developments and we would like to see more of that space made
available for community gardens/"food forests" so that residents in multi family
style developments could raise some of their own food. Walkable and bikeable
trail systems and bus routes that connect our town are critical as we also need
to be doing what we can to mitigate CO2 emissions as a community.
affordable groceries, gas, electricity, taxes
Affordable housing development should happen in a way that mixes it in with
existing market rate housing. We need to be intentional about not segregating
development of affordable housing apart from market rate housing. We also
need to factor in transportation into our definition of affordable. Homes in
Belgrade may be cheaper, but the people who commute into Bozeman to
work make up for that savings in how much they spend on transportation. Same
goes for development on the west side of Bozeman. Sprawl is costly for residents
AND the municipality that must provide public works to outlying areas.
Affordable housing for a diverse range of incomes makes for a strong and
vibrant community
Affordable housing impacts your t business owners as they need such housing
for their employees or you will become just like a ski area town (big Sky) which
has a difficult time finding employees. This limits the growth of new stores and
restaurants. There goes your most valuable asset...downtown.
Affordable Housing is a COMMUNITY problem and should be addressed as a
community, not singling our specific individuals or industries to bear the burden
of solving or paying for solutions.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 8
Affordable housing is needed in Bozeman where lower income people can
afford to live and it needs to have nearby public transportation as not everyone
can afford cars here either.
Affordable housing is relative. The expectations of an affordable home does not
include all of the bells and whistles of some homes. Also, It makes sense to me to
have some of the larger businesses with lower paying jobs help with the
costs/incentives for employees/employment.
Affordable housing should be geographically dispersed.
Affordable Housing should be no more than 36% of gross income or $45,000
Average in Bozeman, gross 36% for Housing, Insurance, Utilities, Or no more than
$1350.00 for a home Or $125,000 Or around $100.00 per foot for a 1250 Square
foot home. Rent for apartment no more than $800.00 for a 3 bed room plus
electric.
Affordable housing should include condominiums. Although they are attached
homes, condominiums are still privately owned homes owned by a single
household, much like townhouses. There are many condominiums in the
Gallatin Valley. As a previous homeowner of a condominium in Bozeman, it is
offensive to me that the City if Bozeman excludes condominiums in the
affordable housing calculations and in the discussion. Including condominiums
in the affordable housing mix, will increase the number of affordable units in
Bozeman and changes the affordable housing calculus and urgency. We
aren't sure it's the city government's role or if they have the necessary skills to be
involved in trying to influence, modify, stimulate or to incentivize the housing
marketplace. This approach can be fraught with unintended consequences.
There have been several municipal governments across the country that have
tried to tackle affordable housing with less than positive results. There also
needs to be a larger understanding of the term affordability, since recent
"affordable" homes built in Bozeman have a ridiculously high dollars per square
foot valuations. We ask the team to address our concerns during this process.
Affordable housing should not just be in undesirable neighborhoods without the
amenities that everyone needs, i.e. do not force people with lower incomes into
areas where they have to go far to get their needs met (medical/dental care,
groceries, education, etc.).
Affordable housing shouldn't be related to the edges of town.
affordable housing to me does not mean more trailer parks nor does it mean
more apartments, condos, townhouses. It means the ability to OWN your own
home.
Allow for more affordable units closer to downtown areas and improve bike
lanes to improve accessibility. The downtown area should not be reserved for
the elite. The working class wants easier access to work, by foot and/or bike,
which can save us money. It seems like very few affordable homes are near
amenities, which means increased transportation, which means higher cost due
to vehicles (gas, upkeep, insurance, etc.). Also, look to more creative solutions.
Tiny homes, cottage communities. As far as characteristics, try to shy away from
cookie cutter developments where all units look identical. But if push comes to
shove, affordability trumps creativity.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 9
An element of affordability is physical proximity to transit options including
walking/biking/busing to get to work and services.
An employee working full time at state minimum wage should be able to find a
rental one bedroom or studio paying no more than 1/3 of monthly total income.
Any subsidized projects should require that the homes be lived in as primary
residences, not for second homes or rental investments. Zoning regulations
should be lifted for people wanting to live together/provide living space for
others outside their family.
As a single mother who works for the Bozeman Public Schools, I can not afford
day care on top of my mortgage with just my pay check. I have a masters and
not even that can afford a child plus a home, not to mention every other bill
that comes with living. I can't imagine what it is like for others. I would love to
move to a bigger home with a fenced yard for my child, but I cannot in this
market because while I'd make money off my sale, I'd lose it all in the next
home. I want to stay in Bozeman, I want to help the Bozeman economy, but it is
difficult to do so when I have to choose between a house payment and my
child's daily care.
As you work, be sure to record the voices of residents and local employers.
Having on the ground data can provide better arguments for city government.
Attainable Housing
Attracting talent and jobs doesn't appear to be an issue in Bozeman; the labor
market is currently so tight that employers have a hard time filling positions with
existing residents and recruit from outside the area. Bozeman doesn't need any
more promotion; it's doing fine on that front. An evaluation of 2018 home buyers
found that half of them moved from outside markets. Bozeman does need
more aggressive efforts to create affordable housing for existing residents. Other
communities have had success with regulators that require developers to
create X amount if affordable units for Y amount of market units built. I think it's
also important to consider things like walkability, parks, and multi-use zoning that
allows for neighborhood grocery stores, coffee shops, breweries and gear
shops.
Avoiding a ring of 6 story buildings around downtown in the name of affordable
housing, but whose primary residents will be market-rate buyers or renters and
whose economic benefits go to developers.
Avoiding gentrification, considering cost of living in housing cost calculations--
utility costs, energy efficiency of housing, etc.
Balancing increasing population growth and the housing that requires with
environmental issues such as clean air & sufficient water.
Be able to see the mountains where my apartment
Bozeman does not have an affordable housing problem, it has an expectations
problem! As a local, who has over 100 years of heritage in Montana. People
need to start looking at the options that they can afford and start there. Then
they can work to obtain a goal beyond that.
Bozeman has been on a high for many years with businesses of all types
prospering greatly. It's time the business owners stop padding their pockets and
paying their employees more!
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 10
Bozeman has log been attractive to dreamers, young adults, and members of
the working class. It is these people that make the town vibrant and creative- it
is these people that serve you at restaurants and build your house and maintain
your yard, these people should be able to live on Bozeman comfortably and
without excessive financial burden
Bozeman has not done a good job of holding developers responsible for their
impact on the local economy. In addition, there is too much injection of outside
money and culture that serves to increase the cost of living higher than what
the market can bear.
Bozeman is a community where we care about our neighbors and friends. By
not addressing affordable housing and the challenges that some residents face
in Bozeman, I feel that the City makes a strong statement that they are not as
invested in this issue as they need to be. However, while much needs to be
done about housing in Bozeman, I believe it is important to implement open
green space plans so that Bozeman can grow (it will no matter what we do).
Bozeman is becoming a city of the (clueless) wealthy. Please stop all the green
lights for developers (from California). Include greenery and open space when
at all possible.
Bozeman needs to maintain a high standard of development and sometimes
that makes affordability a challenge. We should not lower standards to make
things cheaper.
Bozeman needs to prioritize the middle class housing not luxury housing
Bozeman needs to retain some single family neighborhoods. Yes we need
multifamily dwellings with condos and apartments but stop putting them next to
and across the street from single family homes. Behind Target is a prime
example of too much congestion and density!
Bozeman should build up, not out. We live in a city poised to be a metropolis
some day, so the time is now to lay the foundation for what kind of place we
want it to be. Will we create a logical plan for our expansion, or let the sprawl
slowly consume Four Corners, then Belgrade, then Three Forks?
Bozeman should not be accessible only for the wealthy. The values capture this
to a certain extent, but I think there's room for additional focus on the working
class.
Bozeman touts off about being "pet friendly" when most people with more than
one animal are hard-pressed to find a home. More than two? Forget about it...
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 11
Bozeman was/is attractive to us and so many we know that have moved here,
because of the fact that it is a SMALL town, it is SAFE, the beauty, and all the
outdoor things that are so easily accessible. The growth rate that it has
experienced over the last few years, is not something that should be a goal of
maintaining. It has grown too much and too fast. I believe that the city should
be focused on keeping the growth rate at a much more desirable (controlled-
and therefore well planned) rate. Keeping the "farm feel" (with open lands),
safety, beauty, traffic control, etc., should be the focus. We left an area where
things like "affordable" (aka low income) housing, and rapid growth, basically
ruined it. Crime increased, traffic became unbearable, and the "affordable"
housing was a complete eyesore after just a few years. What small cities are
you trying to follow their lead because they have had such success providing
"affordable" housing? Or are you just trying to do the same thing that have so
many have done - to their detriment - and are expecting a different result?
Remember, that is insanity. There is nothing wrong with employees having to
look in outlying communities to rent/own. That will strengthen those
communities, and provide jobs there then as well. I strongly disagree that this
should be such a high priority that you are making it. Let the free market work
itself out!!!!
Bring in something, ANYTHING, that is not another brewery. Stop subsidizing
wealthy developers with commercial projects that provide few housing options.
Use that money to purchase land specifically to put out to bid for workforce
housing developments with caveats on future sale prices of those homes. Treat
your residents and employees like human beings and they will respond in kind.
Build "cheap" houses again. What’s wrong with linoleum and crummy trim. Does
everyone need fancy appliances and granite countertops? I’m not saying we
need a lot of manufactured homes etc., but the quality doesn’t need to be as
high for every house. Build some basic, bare bones houses that check the boxes
for needs but not necessarily wants
Care needs to be taken to ensure a mix of housing in neighborhoods
throughout the city. We've had a de facto income ghettoization, with lower
income residents in trailer courts, removed fairly summarily by gentrification and
higher income condos replacing those on a pretty regular basis. There has been
an utter failure to replace those affordable units. The city has repeatedly
demonstrated alack of will to address the problem and has apparently been
unwilling to examine a variety of funding sources to create new or rehabbed
units for lower income persons. Over and over we've heard that affordable
housing in Bozeman has been created for folks with incomes of $70,000. This is
not a reflection of salaries or hourly wages for working folks in the community,
including our teachers, police, firefighters, and most city employees. Not once
have we heard the city commission or officials discuss an exploration of the
potential of city-owned and developed rental housing.
Cater to those who live here year round rather than those who decide to buy a
house so they can be here during ski season.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 12
Charging the builders high impact fees, and asking developers to pay all the
costs, only gets transferred to the consumer. The city needs to work towards
more affordable impact fees, etc. because Bozeman is a highly desirable
place to live, you have more people coming here, and with greater wealth.
Those things drive up the prices, and there's really nothing to base "affordable
housing" upon.
Community design is an important element
Considering alternative options like tiny home communities or co-housing
communities
Cooperatives - sharing common space such as kitchen/laundry, TV or
recreation space.
Cost of living and affordable housing go hand in hand. Salaries need to go up
as well.
Create affordable Senior living as well as working class housing.
Creating a sense of community should also be at the core of any new housing
development. More qualitative planning styles that are geared towards
aesthetics are crucial to creating this sense of place for residents' welfare.
Creativity and open mindedness to strategies that may be unique and new for
addressing community housing needs. Approaching the task with a can do
attitude. All types of dwelling units - single family dwellings, Condos, and rentals
need to be a part of the Community Housing Program.
Critical components of the "housing" part of affordable housing should be: 1.
the opportunity for those on low incomes to have their own free standing home;
2. the opportunity to build equity, or purchase a small home; 3. the opportunity
to live in a desirable location in Bozeman city limits; 4. a housing cost that that
makes it possible for full time, (single or couples) service workers earning low
wages ($15/hour or less) to own a home. This, I think, can only be accomplished
by using donated land or lots and building tiny homes on permanent
foundations.
Current and future housing sites should be designed to be bike-able and walk-
able
Currently the job of providing affordable housing lies with the
builders/developers. That is ridiculous. The Chamber/downtown and media
companies are the ones driving tourism and airline flights, bringing in the
crowds. The task of housing should fall on these business's as well. Not just the
builders. The builders are supplying homes not driving the media frenzy.
Dependable Public Transportation, especially due to location of available
buildable areas for new housing.
Diversity and inclusion as well as access for differently able should be added to
goals and objectives.
Do not factor in the income of homeowners at all when gaging the rent to
income ratio for home renters.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 13
Don't put all affordable housing projects in NW Bozeman! You're making SE and
NE Bozeman little social and economic enclaves for the well off, privileged. It's
having an effect on society at large and our schools, which are neighborhood
based. Please integrate affordable housing throughout the city or you're going
to have a city geography of haves and have nots, the privileged sections, and
the not so much privileged. It already exists, but the more affordable housing
that's built in NW Bozeman, the worse it will become.
embracing a diverse community whereby waitresses live next door to the
billionaires. no gentrification, no blocking views of the Bridgers. Provide some
type of safety net for renters. Current MT Law states that w/out any reason or
cause a day notice can be given a tenant by property owners
Employers have a role and responsibility in providing affordable employee
housing as part of their compensation packages.
Energy efficiency and green construction are important for the community
values as well as standards in building materials and architecture.
Ensure that neighborhoods retain a "mixed-income" nature. Affordable housing
options should include a mix of rental options and home ownership.
Family friendly neighborhoods with respectful neighbors are important. I don't
like the mixed neighborhoods with expensive homes next to apartments and
condos that have multiple cars for roommates and loud parties late at night.
Flow of traffic needs to be factored as traffic can get out of control if not
planned for new homes and apartments. Parks need to be kept up to date so
after a long day at work the locals can enjoy a peaceful area to walk around
and relax.
Focusing on parks is ridiculous. We are SURROUNDED by nature and incredible
recreation opportunities and don't need a pocket park in every part of the
town. Cash in lieu makes more sense and allows neighborhoods to keep HOA
fees low.
Freedom.
Garages are important and so are small fenced in yards for all of the dogs in
Bozeman.
Get government out of it. The market does fine without city meddling. None of it
has worked before, but the city keeps pushing it.
Get rid of HOAs if possible and eliminate most of the coding laws within
neighborhoods. These fees are exorbitant and unnecessary and create a lack
of diversity and personality in neighborhoods
Get rid of the high priced condo complexes downtown, which are helping jack
up housing costs and taking away the possibility of affordable housing close to
many jobs.
Getting density in the right places, like closer to downtown, needs to be
emphasized. Even if it doesn't make affordable housing directly, it will increase
supply in a smart way instead of a sprawling pattern.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 14
Governing by survey is a poor process that is easily manipulated by what and
how questions are asked. A more democratic and representative approach
would be to put it up to the residents for a vote. Affordability is a financial
problem and the simplest and most logical approach to resolving it is through
financial methods. Create a bond to fund financial housing assistance. If the
voters approve, you have your mandate and solution. It is certainly preferable
to manage funds than trying extort landowners, developers, and builders into
building "affordable" homes or coughing up cash. Is it a fair and equitable that
the building and developing community are the only businesses in the valley
taxed with resolving the city's affordability problem? Since the inequality lies
between home owners and non home owners, perhaps the funds should come
from home owners through property taxes or even better, taxing the
appreciation of their property. In that way the funds increase or decrease with
the increase or decrease of home/ property prices, paralleling rise and fall of
affordability. The existing Bozeman Affordable Housing ordinance is an
incredibly convoluted, and poorly written document. If one was cynical, they
would conclude that this was by done by design to force developers to give
the city cash in lieu. Hopefully that is not the case. Maybe the city needs to hire
a consultant to teach them the K.I.S.S (keep it simple stupid) concept. For the
city to manage this existing ordinance it will likely require a full time staff rivaling
the current building department and even at that, it is likely unmanageable.
The entire Bozeman Code has become unnecessarily complicated, subjective
and unwieldy. This and the recent preponderance of PUD's is overwhelming the
city staff and is most likely one of the principle causes of the constant staff
turnover, not to mention the increased time and costs that the developers incur
thereby reducing affordability.
Governing by survey is easily manipulated by how and what questions are
asked. Affordability is a financial problem and the simplest and most logical
approach to resolving it is through financial methods. Govern by democratic
means and put it up for vote.
Green space
Green space, multiple concentrations of neighborhood character (vs urban
sprawl or a single congested downtown).
Having a community that is inclusive of all residents and doesn't feel exclusive. In
other words making sure that each neighborhood incorporates affordable
housing that is not noticeable as affordable. Also not creating specifically
"affordable" neighborhoods that are stigmatized.
Having more pet friendly options that don't break the bank.
Help communicate wage and income levels needed for the various housing
prices. this helps employers know "how much do i need to pay people who
work for me"
Higher density housing that doesn't cut into existing farmland or greenspace
needs priority over sprawling into surrounding land. Infrastructure updates,
including public transit, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure must be integrated
into housing plans. A vacancy tax is indispensable- if you own multiple homes
sitting empty, you can afford to pay for others to have one.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 15
Homeowner incentives
Homeownership for year round residency should be treated differently than
homeownership for out of state, temporary visitors which adds nothing to
community stability. Businesses should contribute to affordable housing funding
pool. Large businesses should provide rentals for employees earning less than
25/hour.
Housing across all incomes including middle incomes should be included in
inclusionary zoning. Also- city investments in housing affordability should include
permanence.
Housing at a variety of socio-economic levels should be available in all
neighborhoods whenever possible.
Housing Cooperatives.
Housing does not need to be single family stick built houses.............apartments,
condo's, townhouses, manufactured housing are the only solutions because of
'cost'.
Housing is and should be a function of the private sector. Any attempt by
government to create "affordable" housing is simply another tax and will not
work because the goal is undefinable.
Housing of all types - rentals, Condos, Town homes, Single Family Dwellings and
Multi Family Dwellings should be included when addressing housing needs.
Housing people without filling in the valley. We need to increase housing density
rather than housing sprawl so mass transit is more successful, the environment is
less burdened, and tax revenue increases due to less infrastructure costs.
Housing should be beautiful as well as functional and have an aesthetic
relationship to the neighborhood and neighboring housing.
Housing should be served with connectivity to a high-quality bicycle,
pedestrian, and transit transportation networks. (Transportation costs are
typically the second largest household expense after housing. "Drive to quality"
just replaces housing costs with transportation costs while creating congestion
and planet-heating pollution.)
Housing should be well maintained by landlords, and renters should be treated
with dignity. Rent should be set according to income, not market value that
skyrockets as population increases cause housing scarcity.
Housing should only take 25-30 % of a person's take home pay. Employers need
to pay way more.
How about backing off on restrictions! I would happily live in a tiny house BUT
Bozeman would not allow that in city limits.
I am a 30 year old Bozeman resident who has lived here for 9 years. I am finally
embarking on buying a home but can't afford anything other then townhomes
or condos. I do not want to leave my current apartment to basically live in
another apartment. Please create affordable (under $300,000) single family
homes so I can start creating a family and finally own my own home in
Bozeman.
I am strongly in favor of high density, adorable housing near the city center to
meet housing demands and preserve our wilderness
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 16
I believe new housing should represent your community appropriately. In other
words if there is a population not finding housing that accommodates their
needs, they should be a higher priority.
I believe that Bozeman had too much growth in the last two to three decades
and just said "build what you want, where you want." Roads weren't built to
accommodate the traffic and loads, schools weren't built to accommodate,
either. They needed a slower approach, which I hope is what they are
embarking on now.
I believe that maybe some areas should have background checks done before
someone's ability to move into a community area. I visited a friend at a
community low income housing, I noticed there were families with a lot of
young kids - but 2 doors down was a drug addicted felon near these children.
Both parents are working and doing what they can to survive in this incredibly
expensive town, why do they have to drop down to having their children
around dangerous people?
I believe that part of the more recent crunch in housing has been bad
management of the permitting process for homes that favors the development
of housing for high income households.
I believe there should be residence that are more affordable but I don't think
they need to be in Bozeman. The valley is huge and there are many
opportunities just outside Bozeman that would be much more affordable.
Everywhere in the country if you can't afford to live in the city you just have to
commute. Very typical.
I don't like to see an emphasis on high-density housing. I am on the low end of
middle-class (by income standards) and would like a decent-sized single-family
home (not a townhouse or condo) with a yard and privacy. I personally am
annoyed with all the new developments that are jam-packed with single family
homes that are so close together you still feel like you're in a condo. I also don't
like the new developments that are a total mixed bag. One block is single-
family homes, the next block a big apartment complex and then the next block
a row of townhomes. Nothing goes together and then you end up with a super
high density neighborhood with traffic and safety issues and noise pollution.
Where is the quality of life with super high-density housing? In planning for more
housing and establishing more neighborhoods, I want to see an emphasis on
preserving open space (real open space, not just developing some trails that go
through housing developments). I also believe all new building should be
green. Sustainable building materials and energy conservation should be high
priorities, not cheap, put it up in month, building.
I feel like this issue cannot be fully addressed without support from city planning
and the consideration of city ordinances and adjusting zoning.
I like my job doing computer repair and have developed relationships with a lot
of residents and businesses through the services we provide. If I am unable to
find housing for my family including my disabled spouse, I may have to find
another job and housing in a more affordable area, leaving everyone I know
behind.
I like the density increasing downtown but at market rate, more walkability.
Public transportation, free buses, light rail,… Other towns have gone through
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 17
what we are, learn from them.
I personally can't afford housing in Bozeman and currently commute 100 miles,
one-way to work there. Regardless, I am pro small government. I truly believe
the market will naturally balance itself out. I don't believe that government
interference provides a healthy economy. Leave it be.
I think Bozeman needs to slow down for a minute and take stock. It seems to me
that when money talks as much as it does here it leaves people of moderate to
low income behind. Even tenured faculty have difficulty finding affordable
housing around this area.
I want to live in a city that reflects the community who lives here, not the
community that business people want to attract. This is a home not just a
business opportunity. A well rounded community is healthy for everyone:
people to do all the jobs; happier people in the shops and on the sidewalks; less
distracted driving on the roads from people who are stressed, working too many
hours, commuting too far. Home ownership grows civic involvement on most
income levels but being financially overextended does not.
I want to see micro homes become a priority. Many people, regardless of
income, want to have less impact upon our environment. You can do that with
small homes. They should be allowed anywhere.
I was born here 57.5 years ago and live in the house I was born into so I'm very
fortunate. I'm horrified that normal working class people can't afford to buy
homes in my hometown. What the fuck has happened to Bozeman? Are we just
a trust-funders' market any more? Makes me sick that normal people can't
afford to buy real estate here. Fucking bogus.
I work full time in the retail grocery business. I make pretty good money and
would like to own my own home. With the high cost of rent I would much rather
put my money towards a house payment but it is impossible with the cost of
housing. Is it possible to build small homes (not tiny homes) ???? Or maybe over
55 and older homes?????
I would like to see long term residents getting priority into affordable housing.
I would stop the mix use neighborhoods they do not seem to retain value.
Designate an area in the subdivision that is for condo/ townhomes then park
then homes. Apartment living needs to be accessible to the city services. Also
Bozeman has a GREAT need for infrastructure, maybe it would be
advantageous to work on that FIRST before planning anymore
developments/housing.
I'd say infrastructure is more important than housing as it is one way that will help
with "affordable" housing. Housing cost rise not only because Bozeman is such a
desirable place to live but the rising property taxes to cover schools and other
infrastructures. Perhaps we should start there. Thinking of other efficient and cost
effective ideas instead of raising property taxes.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 18
Identify and incorporate the most vulnerable of our Bozeman populations who
are qualified, but have been currently or traditionally discriminated against in
housing as a priority. Examples include women with or without children who are
Intimate Violence survivors; homeless who are working with HRDC/other
programs involved with Housing First; single parents with low incomes, people
with disabilities; others people as identified by gender and other demographic
analysis research of our community.
If home owners in County pocket areas are annexed, that process needs to be
affordable as well.
If someone is to obtain 'affordable housing' based on low income then they
need to be working full time if they have no disability that prevents them from
working. I know too many able body people that elect NOT to work or elect to
forgo working 'lesser job' than they think they should have to do, then they turn
around take advantage of social services by claiming 'no income'. There is
more jobs in this town than can be filled, so there is really NO excuse to not be
working somewhere locally. I think affordable housing provided by the
state/community should be done on a quarterly basis (every 3 months re-
evaluated), if you elect to not work, test positive for drugs, then all state aid
should be removed, and loss of housing at the end of your 'quarter'. If positive
for drugs or alcohol abuse then mandatory 30 days in a recovery facility, and
job training required while recovering.
If you are so concerned about housing affordability, maybe take a look at the
squeeze you put on homeowners like me via taxation. Tough to afford a
mortgage and then be forced to dig deeper into our pockets for whatever pet
project the commission comes up with.
If you can't afford to live here...don't move here.
If you were BORN in Montana (you have a 516 or 517 SS#) rent control applies.
Imposing artificial price caps is on housing is like squeezing a big balloon. You
might lower the cost for some but you'll raise it for others. Better to just pay
people more and spread the pain proportionally.
Improve ability for Montana residents to stay in Bozeman and afford to live here.
Major issues when people move from out of state who make more money and
can afford to buy up housing. Cost of living to income ratio in Bozeman very
skewed making it difficult especially for families. This in the long term could
significantly impact our economy if young families can't afford to stay.
In order to keep Bozeman affordable you have to stop making it look more
attractive. In other words, stop bringing in so many people and the cost of living
will become more affordable. At this rate the bubble will burst and the entire
town will go into a recession.
Inclusiveness, access, spreading affordable housing amongst neighborhoods
spanning the whole home-value spectrum (don't put it all in the same place
and do not shy from building units in expensive neighborhoods).
Income commensurate with cost of living
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 19
income is a function of housing cost and affordability, raise minimum wage. The
fact of the matter is that Bozeman is growing and so are second home owners.
People with a low minimum wage will never be able to compete in this market
regardless of several affordable housing options such as apartment complexes,
etc. That's a band-aid, not a solution.
Increase in public transportation, less restrictive design standards to lower
construction costs, affordable housing still having access to parks
Increased density, mixed use and walkability/public transit. Rent control does
not work - see NYC and San Francisco - it benefits the lucky few and results in
underinvestment in housing stock in the long run.
Increasing green spaces; increasing bike lines and in and out of town trail
systems; increasing bus transport in town-more routes in town and out to Three
Forks the airport and Belgrade; decreasing, yes decreasing lighting- help bring
back night skies; allow homes in New Hyalite View to have rental/granny
apartments built into existing homes; make Bozeman solar panel friendly - stop
Northwestern Energy's anti-solar pricing change; fiscally encourage all
businesses and residences to use solar and to rent solar space or sell solar power
to other energy consumers. Currently as a landlord, the price ratio between
home sale prices and rental prices is off, it would be difficult for an average
citizen to purchase a home in Bozeman and turn it into a reasonably priced
rental. And yet obviously rental prices are too high for people starting out based
on available incomes. It is still possible to purchase homes and create rentals in
Belgrade/Three Forks - but we create an ecological nightmare having all those
people driving. Having a comprehensive ecologically sound transport plan is of
utmost importance also - lest we turn into Salt Lake.
Increasing the available supply of housing is vastly more important than listening
to the lucky few residents who bought property decades ago and resist all new
housing construction in their neighborhoods because it will "change the
character of the neighborhood."
Infrastructure? Streets to plow, secondary are not plowed. Potholes, general
street maintenance. Quit worrying about dog parks, we all love our pets in
Bozeman. Take care of its residents! New Parks- space set aside when there's
new subdivision-also has to be maintained. City employee pay? Does it equate
to cost of living- it doesn't. It was once suggested to put affordable housing near
WalMart- that's stereotyping. There's a lot of out of state people coming in with
their income, ideas & expectations that do not match Bozeman ideals.
It is difficult to watch affordable housing torn down for expensive housing,
though that IS the owners right.
It is foolish not to consider some sort of deed-restricted program that monitors for
who can buy, resale terms and price gain limits, etc. Tons of communities have
these - study them, make notes, tweak findings into a new program suitable for
the area. It is unrealistic to think that some sort of volunteer task for or city staff
(Who already have too much to do) can manage a program. And leaving it up
to developers to handle will not work.
It is important to me to have residents with a variety of income and economic
levels in Bozeman for a diverse community.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 20
It is not impossible to work hard enough to afford the price of Bozeman housing.
If someone is willing to put in the work, budget, and make sacrifices in order to
buy a home, it's completely possible. To keep housing costs down, requirements
on developers should be lessened. Their costs go up, they pass it on to the
buyer. The city should have little overreach into the cost of housing, let the
market handle itself.
It is painfully evident that the oversized and overemphasized historic district is a
major contributor to unaffordable housing. As such, it should be severely
downsized, and its effect on housing and lot costs minimized. The emphasis on
downtown should also be reduced. The downtown is big enough. Instead, the
emphasis should be on neighborhoods surrounding schools, with business
districts between neighborhoods, on major arterials and intersections of arterials.
It's important to me to have some quiet and autonomy in my living space, in
addition to it being affordable. My current living space is technically affordable,
but noisy and unfriendly.
keep Californians out
Keep working to make property taxes affordable. This directly impacts the cost
of housing and wages. Also work to ensure a diverse mix of businesses is
available to employ people of all abilities and training.
Keeping Bozeman, Bozeman. Keeping it a small town feel. Making sure to not
be crowded. No one wants to see I their neighbors windows.
keeping open space and trails
Keeping the integrity of the "neighborhood" experience. Neighborhoods can be
built with lots of affordable housing options that keep the feel of the area
despite a change in housing type. NIMBYism is NOT a solution.
Keeping the locals.
Keeping the views, make neighborhoods walkable.
Let the free market do what it was designed to do. Not everyone can afford a
beautiful single family home with a white picket fence, and that's how it should
be. As a real estate agent, I find a lot of people have unrealistic expectations
about what a "home in Montana" is... There has to be balance between sprawl
and affordability. Sometimes, a condo is the best answer, and sometimes,
renting is the best answer. The city of Bozeman should feel very little responsibility
for how other people choose to spend their money.
Let the free market rule. Forcing us to answer questions that were tailored to
support the liberal city's preconceived notions is so wrong. The city needs to get
out of the markets way by: reducing impact fees and wait times for new builds,
streamline design guidelines rather than wait on a highly subjective commission
for review, employ a sales tax already!! Property taxes are a huge part of why
housing has become so expensive. Raising taxes to support whichever minority
group ranks highest on your survey, will less to higher taxes for everyone else. The
middle class is getting squeezed the hardest.
Limited sprawl, maintained open spaces.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 21
living wage is key. Without living wage - and competitive wages, housing costs
are far outweighing incomes. Community principals have to change...it is not
an option for everyone who wants to own their home to find a single family
residence that they can afford. municipal infrastructure and other costs of
governance must be paid for by something other than property taxes. Local
option sales tax. Home owners will bear the brunt until we figure this out.
Location of the housing is just as important as the structure. walkability and
access to services via the bus system is equally important.
Long-term residents should have the ability to purchase a home. Home
ownership provides a level of security that is not attainable with rentals and
allows residents to develop deeper roots in the community. This is important not
only socially, but also economically. We want to be the kind of community
where people in their late 20's and early 30's can feel secure enough to start
families if that's what they want. That just isn't possible when the home you live in
could be sold out from under you at any moment. We also need to prioritize
housing in proximity to workplaces. The growing number of commuters from
Belgrade and the surrounding area into Bozeman to work is unsustainable and
environmentally reckless. We cannot continue to expect a poorer community
like Belgrade to support thousands of commuters on its limited infrastructure.
Belgrade taxpayers recently voted against buying computers for their schools.
They cannot afford to build efficient roads for Bozeman's entire workforce.
Beyond that, the expectation that every low to middle income worker has a
reliable vehicle to commute from outer Gallatin County into Bozeman daily is
unrealistic and out of touch. Unless we develop fast, reliable public
transportation along with affordable housing, it is highly unethical to house
working people in neighborhoods with no available jobs.
Low income housing, other than flimsy apartment complexes, needs to be
addressed. Affordable housing and low income housing are separate issues.
Those of us living below the poverty line are ignored. We deserve a voice at
your table.
Lower income residents and their housing should in a perfect world be
proximate to 'essential' services--- grocery, community gardens, social services,
general services. No Food Deserts
Maintain Bozeman's views of the mountains and nature
Maintaining clean water, air, and land for future generations, wildlife and
diverse ecosystems.
Maintaining history and saving some green spaces, promoting green living and
smaller homes
Maintaining street infrastructure and upgrading major and minor commuting
routes. Main and 19th have become increasingly difficult to travel on due to
increased traffic between 8-5 Monday through Friday. A route that usually takes
5-10 minutes from the mall to downtown is now taking nearly 20 minutes or more
not including parking concerns.
Maintaining the ability for local residents to walk and bike to their jobs, and not
have to move way out of town because the only affordable options are far
away from the center of town.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 22
Make Bozeman affordable for all. Not everyone is bankrolled by a trust fund or
their parents. How would a teacher, making 50,000, buy a house? That's a
"middle class" job. What about the young adult who can't get a job in their field
but makes ends meet working 2-3 part time jobs between $10-12/hour.
$600+utilities sends them below the poverty line.
Make sure close to public transportation and grocery stores.
Making sure that affordable living spaces can accommodate young, working
professionals with dogs.
Many pet owners suffer due to an outrageous pet deposit on top of expensive
housing costs. I feel that if an out of state buyer wants land here they should
always no matter what pay at least 25% more if they don’t reside in the home
more then 8 months out of 12. I also feel that the locals should receive a lower
tax rate then none locals, I mean we already pay taxes toward our roads and
law enforcement etc., why make someone who lives here year around pay just
as much as someone who doesn’t even work in the state of Montana?
Many residents have low pay. Wages have not increased, for many, at the
same rate as cost of living has increased. This is not just a housing problem!
Minimize the number of single-family homes that can be rented as short-term
rentals. By reducing the number of these types of rentals, the city maintains a
higher inventory of homes that can be bought by local families, therefore
lowering average sale prices.
Minimizing need to drive on a daily basis (i.e. grocery store within walking
distance!) - High density, mixed use development (to help with point above)
Mixed neighborhoods. Not the wealthy in one with service workers in another.
No obstruction of view of the Bridgers. Realize we are all 1 community. Provide
a safety net for renters. Current MT Law allows renters/tenants to be evicted
w/out cause or a reason. Than instability and insecurity is stressful on the
economy and individuals.
Modifying UDC to allow for greater variety of housing types within each zone
district. ADUs, duplexes, tri- and 4-plexes allowed in all districts
More affordable standalone houses and not condos
More single family houses designed for 1-2 people that aren't plexes or
apartment buildings are efficient and attractive to moderate income renters
and buyers.
More three and four bedroom apartments on public transportation routes or in
walkability from schools and business areas would be ideal.
Most proposed "solutions" involve spending taxpayer dollars, or increasing prices
of new homes, to subsidize low income home buyers. Any Action Plan should
consider impact on taxpayers and non subsidized home buyers.
Much of the affordable rental market in Bozeman consists of homes that are
owned by out-of-town landlords. This causes many difficulties for families who
rent, most notably because of how often these properties change hands. My
family was forced to move last year because our landlord sold the home we
had been renting. We have friends who have been forced to move twice in
twelve months because the ownership of their rentals changed. The economic
hardship this causes is substantial - the time off work, the costs of moving, and
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 23
the difficulty of having to provide a security deposit on a new place while your
former landlord still holds your former deposit. Bozeman needs more rentals that
aren't single family homes owned by individuals.
Multi-family dwellings, especially apartments, make the best use of scarce,
expensive land, and need to be a main focus of city encouragement. The
single family detached home is an unrealistic dream for most people in
Bozeman in the early 21st Century. That is not likely to change in the foreseeable
future, and is not a realistic aim for new affordable housing.
My concern with affordable housing is when the first buyers sell, the property no
longer fits the affordability range as it's listed at market value. I don't think
Bozeman needs to build affordable housing in Bozeman-perhaps putting in a
railway to Belgrade/Three Forks area for quick transportation. Those areas seem
to have more room to grow. Plus the value of the land is less then Bozeman. The
money coming in to Bozeman is far greater then the communities ability to keep
up with it.
My husband works for the City of Bozeman Water department and we cannot
afford to buy anything within the city or now in Belgrade. He has worked for the
City for coming up on 6 years and his wages are maxed out, meaning he will
not be getting any more significant raises other than the longevity raise of
$0.05/hr each year. The City should start with paying their own employees
wages that are comparable to other Water & Sewer Operators in other cities,
which would be at least an $8/hr increase. Take care of your own. You are a
HUGE part of the problem.
My main other concern is growth management, including ensuring water for a
growing population, or even setting some kind of limits on growth that don't
entail rising housing values and leaving the community only available to the
rich.
Need to balance density with neighborhood character
Neighborhood character, walkability, connection to parks and open space.
neighborhoods within Bozeman should be diverse and not solely at certain
income levels or housing priced at certain levels.
No
No
No answer
no gentrification live as a community second home owners pay a luxury tax
when not using their property for more 5 months provide some rights for renters
currently landlords can evict with NO reason at all,,,,,,,offer mediation mixed
neighborhoods of incomes
No more ugly cookie cutter houses made from weird material
none that come to mind
Not making developments that are not affordable housing based the villain
Not only affordable housing, but also accessible and affordable housing for
people who have physical challenges.
Not only building affordable housing, but making those houses into a
neighborhood. Often times, the people who need affordable housing are the
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 24
people who keep the city running. Treat them with pride.
One problem that the city has is tearing down or rezoning the affordable
housing we have had in the past to encourage infill of hotels and high rent
condos. The myth that infill with multiple storied structures within the city has
been disproven in Bend Oregon. The county with its rapid unchecked
development should be responsible for more low income housing and proper
planning procedures. Bozeman should retain its historical charm by keeping the
character that brought so many here in the first place. Midtown not downtown
should be utilized for hotels and high rise condos. Views and privacy should be
retained in any new growth as well as light pollution.
Open spaces
opportunities for obtaining affordable housing should be available in downtown
Bozeman in order to maintain diversity and opportunity for folks that work
downtown.
Our community needs more bike lanes and shared use paths. Affordable and
eco friendly transportation options for EVERYONE is critical.
Our housing situation is complex and impacted by outside forces such as, MSU
needing spots for roughly 10,000 students not living on campus, the impact of
Yellowstone/tourist service low paying jobs, Big Sky and it's employees, also at
the low end of the pay scale, and the challenge of affordable transportation. I
think all stake holders need to contribute to a solution, and not ignore the
situation as they negatively impact the housing crunch.
Parking availability!!! You can't keep building new developments without
requirement of providing parking space! I'm sure you're pretty aware that
parking downtown is a huge headache! Businesses will suffer if you do not solve
parking issues!
Parking for housing in high traffic areas impact on the environment - housing is
accessible by bike/walking and a reasonable distance to basic needs
(healthcare, grocery stores).
PARKING!!! Do not allow any more apartments that do not add roof or
basement parking garages!!
Parks and Trails. Public Transportation
Pay attention to design. Don't let our town get ugly!
People who qualify for a rent break be made to take and pass a drug test.
Personal responsibility/accountability for budgeting/spending decisions.
Please don't overlook the young middle class. We are working hard to grow our
careers and always miss out on any help. I took the first time homebuyers class
only to learn that I qualify for no assisted programs. However my rent keeps
increasing and it is harder and harder to get ahead.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 25
Please incorporate a gender, race, age, ability, sexual orientation and income
demographics section for Analysis on this Survey and any other forthcoming
RESEARCH being done by the City of Bozeman to support the principles of Cities
for CEDAW (Cities for the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against
Women and Girls). By doing this, it will specifically help our City be as strategic
as possible with limited resources, prevent subtle and conscious bias as well as
uncover possible areas of discrimination and help us take action steps when
such discrimination is discovered. Thank you!
Preserving the aesthetic of the original neighborhood should be a priority.
Bozeman has allowed affordable housing to be plowed over and not replaced
ALL over the City, especially near the downtown. I understand the economics of
such situation in the short term, but long term resiliency requires housing not just
the wealthy, but also the service industry employees. Parking didn't used to be
such a massive problem downtown, at least in part, due to the number of
workers who could easily walk to their jobs. Transportation planning appears to
be solely in the rear view mirror for anywhere that isn't west Bozeman.
Price gouging, artificially inflating housing prices (oftentimes by Realtors to to
make, not earn, ridiculous commissions), and unethical property management
companies are all borderline criminal, considering the average, local household
income.
Prioritize full-time residents over vacation home owners/renters.
Proximity to work locations for employees and, related, alternative means for
transportation both present (bicycles, bus) and future (rail, electric car)
Public transportation
Public transportation is part of the equation.
public transportation. Safe neighborhoods.
Putting in place regulations and setting aside green areas, whether it be
agricultural, or public use on the edges of Bozeman and the surrounding
Gallatin Valley. Consider the sustainability for the future with more intermixed
zoning for walkable neighborhoods. Reducing sprawl and having a cohesive
vision and unified leadership between all towns in the Gallatin Valley to prevent
this from becoming the next front range. Consider redrawing the Gallatin and
Madison county lines so that those property taxes from the YC can be funneled
back into the community that is most utilized by these "residents".
Quality housing, not just quickly built expensive subdivisions that have no
character, are of poor quality and are built inches of one another. Expanded
bike lanes and bus routes should help the growing edges of town reach
downtown more accessible. There should be higher fees for people who own
houses but don't actually live in them most of the year.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 26
Quality of life, broadly defined as the satisfaction that residents experience with
their homes and their place within the community, as well as how those homes
contribute to the overall satisfaction of the community. Some key principles
here are walkability and bikeability, inclusion of parks and open spaces,
neighborhood scale, proximity to services such as food stores (aligns with
walkability). In other words, the answer is not large multifamily housing
surrounded by parking lots on the edge of the city. Also, alignment with the
city's climate action plan should be paramount. The lack of affordable housing
(forcing residents to re-locate or settle in satellite communities such as Belgrade
and Livingston) has probably done more to increase Bozeman's carbon
emissions than any other single factor. The city should start to measure how
affordable housing offsets carbon emissions. The city should set additional
incentives for developers to make housing energy efficient.
Quality of life, cooperation, self-reliance, community involvement, mutual
respect, and serving one another.
Quit denying affordable multi family projects in great locations due to NIMBY.
Especially if the City Planning Department is all in favor of it. Affordable housing
has to go somewhere.
Quit tearing down affordable housing to replace with very unaffordable
housing.
Rather than tool the Bozeman market, by demanding that developers create
"affordable" housing. Would it not be better to create an impeccable public-
transit system that accommodates a high flow of commuters living outside of
the "desirable" zones? For instance, as seen in the Bay Area, where a large
groups of people commute between Oakland and San Francisco, or for
instance, on the East coast where people commute from New Jersey to
Manhattan. We are wasting way too much time addressing the wrong
questions! The market will balance itself out. The real question we need to be
focused on is how to manage the flow of our community. How to effectively
move people around our township. The Bozeman city should stop trying to
manipulate and assess affordability and allow the market to address it in its own
way! More downtown density means more congestion on the streets. The city
loves the extra tax dollars but lacks the prudent resolve to assess vehicular
mobility on a long term schematic.
Reasonable easy access to green spaces by foot or public transportation
(parks, trails) is an important principle in this community and should be
considered when developing affordable housing.
Reducing our reliance on automobile transit. New housing developments should
be dense and close proximity to commercial zones so residents can walk or bike
for essential grocery shopping, community participation, and eating.
Rent controls will have to be implemented so someone making $12/hr can
afford to live in Bozeman and hopefully walk to work.
Rent is so expensive that it's impossible to find a job that pays enough to live on.
When residents have to choose between food, heat or rent, you know there is a
very serious issue.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 27
Rent should be driven down especially with so many college students renting
out its leaving us only able to afford rent
Rentals should also be included in the plan. Consideration for transportation
needs and traffic flow are important too.
Residents want affordable housing without the risk of losing public lands!
Retain the character/density of neighborhoods that border downtown. One
can no longer see the sunrise/sunset from Main Street. Developers should be
responsible for providing their OWN off street parking. The majority of spaces in
the parking garage should be available for public use, NOT for private
businesses. Semi truck traffic should not be routed downtown. A tourism tax
should be applied to alleviate property taxes and affordable housing needs.
Retaining historic character of established neighborhoods. Retaining schools in
the downtown region. Defining disruptive mega projects adjacent to
established neighborhoods.
Safety and high education, maintained streets.
Safety i.e. no gangs, drugs in the area. This means limiting growth until our
infrastructure and law enforcement abilities catch up to current growth. We are
growing too fast and will lose the character of the city soon if growth is not
limited via a moratorium or other mechanism.
Safety in housing and planning for women, children, and all other vulnerable
populations. in location, lighting, and quality of housing. Please incorporate
race, gender, age, ability, and sexual orientation and income demographics
section for analysis on this survey and any forthcoming research being done by
the city of Bozeman to support principals of CEDAW (Cities for the Elimination of
all forms of Discrimination Against Women and Girls.). By doing this, it will help
our City to be as strategic as possible with limited resources, prevent subtle and
conscious bias as well as uncover possible areas of discrimination and help us
take action when discrimination is discovered. Thank you
Salaries for professional jobs are low in Bozeman compared to the rest of the
country.
Section 8 HUD housing must remain as a way for people to afford to live in
Bozeman!
Should be multiple options. Not just cookie cutter houses and apartment
buildings.
Simple supply and demand. If the process of subdivision wasn't so expensive
and timely, and the buildable lots were flooded, it would cause a decrease in
the cost of housing. Simply look at the area nw of three Forks in broadwater
county. Surplus of lots that are affordable. Bureaucratic red tape has caused
the increased cost of housing. Limit government and it will limit cost.
Skyrocketing housing is a function of an unsustainable local economy in our
case one based on retirement income and outside capital. We need to
modulate that and develop plans for a robust, equitable economic future here.
sprawl controlling, energy minimizing, and resource minimizing
Stop dumping multifamily housing units in the northwest part of town - spread
them around, integrate them into southeast as well.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 28
Stop raising our property taxes to provide services for all the newcomers moving
here. You are pricing us out of Bozeman in that way too. So even if you can
afford to own a home you will have $400-$500 more a month in property taxes.
Maybe newbies should have to pay impact fees to live here?
Stop stigmatizing mobile and modular. There is not a lot of difference between
a nice RV and a "tiny" house.
Stop the midrise building downtown with no regard for parking
Stop the selling of homes to people who live out of state with the sole purpose
of renting. Any residential property owner should spend at least 30 percent of
the year in their property. While the argument of cost of living will never end,
the home cost should cap where people have a hope to be a home owner.
Rentals should be affordable for one family, single and double income, to be
able to spend time with their kids, pay bills, have food on the table and health
insurance. Do not force people to choose lights, food or home. It is sad to make
people/parents have 2 to 3 jobs each and still not make ends meet. Oh and
Stop with the childish drawing homes with multiple colors and metal siding, they
are ugly!
Stop trying to subsidize people who aren't willing to commute 30 minutes (even
with public transport available). OF COURSE everyone wants to live in such a
beautiful town but current and long time residents cannot afford to support the
influx of new comers who are outstripping our water supply and road capacity.
Subsidizing low income housing and making developers participate simply
passes the cost burden onto the shoulders of existing homeowners and renters
who saved and made sacrifices to buy/live within their means instead of
expecting to live in a highly desirable town and have their lifestyle subsidized.
These subsidies and the ever growing school taxes increase our homeownership
taxes which are going up every year, to the point that older residents can no
longer afford their homes. Stop babying people and let them commute 30
minutes from affordable and nice neighboring towns like Manhattan and
Livingston and Belgrade, or live in a much more affordable Montana city like
Butte, Dillon, Whitehall, billings, great falls, etc etc etc.
Strategically planned growth; whether it be building upon/renovating currently
neglected/impoverished areas or very thoughtful placement of new
developments using all space as efficiently and effectively as possible
Street maintenance and infrastructure services
Strong access to multiple forms of transportation. Bike lanes, the. Last affordable
and efficient form of transportation is bicycle.
Strongly consider transportation (affording a car, access to public
transportation, and bike/multipurpose recreational trails that aid cyclists year
round).
Sustainability, public access to nature and natural resources, community
building and walk/bike-ability are all important.
Sustainability, quality of the design and character of the housing.
Sustainable, efficient, low impact design. Aesthetics.
The ability to walk/bike and access to green space - parks, yards, is important.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 29
The affordability standard as based on % AMI is unsustainable given that the
AMI is artificially raised with high income workers living in or moving into the
area. This method also has not addressed housing for those living on fixed
incomes for whom an increase may not be in the offing, or may be a standard
3% cost of living per year. Also, Bozeman needs downtown housing for low
income folks.
The affordable housing issue is very much linked to the wage that our state
pays. The last I looked we were 46 in the United States for poor wages.
The Bozeman City Commission talks out of both sides of their mouth !!!!!!!!!! In
one sentence they say we need city mandated "Affordable Housing" then in
the next sentence they want to pass a revenue bond increasing property taxes
to further enhance our city parks ??????? WHAT THE HELL???????
The city needs to focus on providing the ability to build. The building
department must grow and fees must be reduced. The only way to reduce
housing costs is to increase the supply. Right now, we are heading the way of
Boulder, Bend and Jackson Hole.
The city needs to stop micromanaging everything. The city code related to
housing is needlessly complex and burdensome. And the idiocy of having the
city commissioners further get involved once a project has already gone
through advisory board review, city staff and planning review, they shouldn’t be
involved at all. The city needs a streamlined permitting process that takes 2
weeks (tops) not a process that can take months, or even years, to annex and
build a building.
The city should NOT continue to grant permits to expand exiting homes in NE
and SE Bozeman above the height variance or to increase the footprint more
than 5% of the original house. This practice has pushed out modest income
homeowners, raised their taxes and the costs of housing that was once
affordable, but is now high end. It makes no sense to deplete existing inventory
of small and affordable homes and replace it with luxury homes. The core of
Bozeman should be a mix of economic strata in order to keep its character and
to prevent disconnection among its citizens. Law enforcement research shows
that disconnection encourages crime. These core neighborhoods should not
become elite enclaves.
The current so called affordable housing prices in Bozeman are completely out
of line with the wages paid to average workers
The invaluable contributions that workers at all income levels make to the
strength of Bozeman's economy should be stressed.
the location of affordable housing needs to be near public transportation and
amenities for those that cannot afford a vehicle.
The middle class gets squeezed. I'm so tired of helping the lower income
minority at the expense of the middle income majority. Those condos on South
Cottonwood that the city subsidized for "poor" people ended up being cash
cows for those folks who were able to turn a handsome profit just a couple of
years later. As a single women who was able to purchase my home the old-
fashion way - work hard and save- I am now at risk of having to downsize
because my taxes are being raised EVERY year to support pet projects like this
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 30
one. Enough is enough. If I were elderly and on a fixed income, I would be
forced out of my home for sure.
The pay is so very low here. First we need better pay to afford any kind of
housing. I lived in income based apartments, made 1,400 a month and rent was
still $885 plus utilities.
The principles of fairness and equity that people who are working here deserve
access to affordable housing close enough to their place of employment or the
support of public transportation to access work --even evening shifts. Bzn won't
be able to do it "all" for "all" but we can come closer. Community
characteristics: if we can raise more than $400K for a trail in the matter of weeks,
there is enough philanthropy, caring and wealth in this community to support
affordable housing for those that truly need it.
The quality of the homes should be upheld. The larkspur commons are having all
sorts of plumbing issues. I have a friend who worked in the plumbing there and
he said they were told to cut corners because it's income based living. I have
had three friends who live there have pipes burst and flooding even though
they had their heat on.
There is concern that new development will be styled out of character to
Bozeman's older neighborhoods. I don't want to vilify Andy Holloran but I think
he would get more support if some of his developments weren't so damned
ugly.
There should be a cap or regulation on apartment / condo rentals, or any
rentals through management companies. They can charge whatever they
want and continuously raise rent and you are either given the choice to pay or
move. Competing with college students who rent by the room, finding
affordable housing for a family in a decent home is tough.
There should be an extra tax for vacation homes; if you own a home in
Montana and spend seventy percent of the year living in another state, you
should pay property tax at an increased rate to the local populace. Another
issue that should be addressed is the flippant price raising on new homes. I work
in construction and constantly see homes and condos have their price raised as
high as $40,000 just because it has street access, or a view of the mountains;
that they lose the next year due to development.
This is a supply and demand problem. People are not going to stop moving
here, so we need more housing for EVERYONE not just these special groups that
the city is trying to force on us. Make it easier (cheaper and faster) for builders
to built and it will have a ripple effect throughout the community regardless of
the demographic they wish to serve.
This problem was created a long time ago, what we do now will not take effect
for another decade. It is time to look at community approaches that have
worked in other locations, and give them time to work here. By "worked" I mean
that it helped residents; not a focus on helping industry. Developers and
builders are always out to make a profit, that is their purpose.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 31
Too many Californians ruining the economy and housing market. Then they clog
all the trail heads and only hike, support the Sierra club, and try to shut down all
forests to other users such as mountain bikers and recreational activities. Let's
just send them all back to the south coast where they can talk about how
awesome California is all day long with each other.
transportation from affordable areas to employment areas within the
community.
Transportation to and from home and work should also be part of the
conversation /solution to making affordable housing available to all. For
example, public transportation development, trails systems, safe travel for
residents especially our children on bicycles on local sidewalks where traffic is
congested and dangerous in the streets. I urge changes to ordinances to
ensure the above child safety on sidewalks.
Trees, clean water, light pollution, noise pollution, natural skyline, buried
power/telephone lines, minimal concrete use, few impervious surfaces
Try to contain urban sprawl. Use space more wisely instead of using all the
space.
Use Condos as housing this is the first step of housing for most people so the city
should be considering condos in their research. Based on the Condos there is
plenty of affordable housing already.
Use market forces to provide affordable housing (often, relaxing zoning
requirements to allow more infill and subdivision, which leads to density)
using diverse approaches should include transportation.
VRBOs are an issue in terms of keeping rental options affordably priced for long-
term renters.
walkability
walkability
Walkability, bikeability, quality of life, and acceptance of pets into housing for
all levels of income. I'm a responsible college professor who had a very difficult
time finding housing with a dog. Also, I'm grossed out by folks who bought
homes at affordable prices 10 years ago and jack up rent to "market rate" to
make money just because they can. This ethic of making the most money
possible, while negatively affecting the community, is largely accepted here
and it shouldn't be.
Walkabilty (alternative transportation), green spaces, safe routes to school
Walkable community. Integrated commercial/ employment nodes.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 32
We are destroying the valley of our agriculture currency. Our agriculture land
needs to be implemented on both a large scale and small scale scope to
provide healthy food for everyone here. I would Like to see small gardens (that
employ at least 1 person full time) created in this affordable housing scenario.
Including gardens in this affordable housing plan would provide healthy diets to
people that live there. As an example, for every four affordable units, a garden
+ hydroponic systems should be created to feed those four houses. This will
deeply cut costs for food, providing a job for individuals in our community and
would be one of the greatest actions to combat global warming. The city
needs to step up be proactive for once and push back against out of state
developers. Instead of pushing shitty built homes further west let's create homes
(not apartments) for affordable prices in the NE part of town. The think tank
developers shouldn't be creating ugly and insanely expensive units for
Californians. The soul of Bozeman has changed. If we keep segregating
affordable housing to the west and to less ideal locations our community will be,
naturally, segregated.
We are experiencing a loss of service people in the Bozeman area due to the
high cost of living and low wages. It has become a troubling issue for local
businesses. Affordable housing would help to offset this issue.
We need to avoid letting Bozeman become like any other fast developing city.
Community has always been important and inclusion of new residents in
decision making. Many new people do not know how to become involved in
their new community. The Neighborhood Associations have been a great start
for conversation. Without a diverse demographic we will become a rich dull
community of 2nd homes. People should be required to live in their homes or
penalized somehow when they only live in their 3000 sf house for 3 months of the
year. The neighborhood is also impacted by the rental business (AirBnB's, etc.)
where there is a different neighbor every night. Public Transportation and bike
paths are vital to make our streets more desirable and safer. We do not want to
have happen to workers like in Jackson where an hour commute from
affordable housing to work is usual.
We need to keep the uniqueness of Bozeman's heritage in mind and not keep
building multi-story, high-rise concrete ugly apartment buildings. That said, the
ones currently being built are definitely not low cost, affordable housing. Is
there a way or place where low-income, affordable, high density population
housing could be built that would not be an eyesore or get to be known as the
poor/slum part of Bozeman?
Well built homes over these quickly built houses that sell for ridiculous prices.
Never mind that they are tiny. Every trailer park that gets eliminated for some
new development that will "upgrade" an area comes at what cost? Not
everyone wants to live in a trailer park but for some that's what works.
While I do not like that affordable housing isn't available for all residents, I do not
believe it is a right to have housing where you live. We live in a free market
society, not a socialist or communist country.
Who write these questions? Brian @SWMBIA?
Working with HRDC to provide shelter and housing
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 33
Yeah how bout "affordable" means one can live (not just pay rent, but eat too
and have some gas money, and some health options). $1200 a month for a
single mother with two kids is not affordable. All this does is create slum Lords
who do not maintain cleanliness or other aspects of the housing. One cannot
afford to live or work in this town. "Affordable" is a joke and so is housing in this
town.
Yes, Bozeman needs more housing options for Seniors (elderly). Most
established senior living facilities in Bozeman are far too high priced and
unaffordable, for a lot of Seniors.
Yes, it is time to address the need for housing that allows people of all ages and
abilities to "age in place". This is a basic component of a livable community.
Age in place homes are NOT simply ADA compliant and they should be
designed and constructed by CAPS (Certified Aging in Place Specialists) who
are educated in universal design and trained in structural techniques that
provide easy access and functional options ( specifically designed kitchens ,
bathrooms, bedrooms) for those with special needs, that are affordable and
LOW maintenance. It is time we demand this option from developers and that
SWMBIA and certified home builders/ construction and architects receive
incentives and support to move away from the large single family dwellings and
provide small one level, QUALITY home options. Universal design can be
implemented in everything from single family dwellings to apartment and
condo complexes. "Handicapped apartments" whereby access by elevator
and a couple of grab bars in the bathrooms is NOT age friendly housing. The city
needs to stop accepting the bare minimum that is currently proposed by
builders. We also need to create a pool of handymen, carpenters, renovators
who will be accessible to those who choose to age in place and are on limited
or fixed budgets and cannot afford the high cost of home maintenance. It is
time we get the Chamber of Commerce and businesses to contribute to the
needs of the community and give back to those who support local businesses.
It is fine to focus on more than just business....let's focus on the needs and
abilities of all ages.
Yes, why I love Bozeman is the trails and access to open space. I hope as we
push for infill don't loss parks and trails in the process. I believe in infill as long as it
is done right.
Yes. Home ownership in Bozeman is not for everyone. The ability to buy or rent
in the surrounding cities are an option to all.
You cannot have affordable housing in a market directed at attracting owners
from outside of the market, while those in the market are not paid well enough
to purchase homes. An individual who can own multiple homes and hold
millions in debt, is at an advantage over most of the population.
You need to include equality treatment of all types of citizens-gender, race,
age, sexual orientation, culture, etc
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 34
Retain the present
ownership and
rental ratio
25%
Focus on a
different mix
33%
Other
42%
Same mix
Own: 44%
Rent: 56%
Different mix (avg)
Own: 60%
Rent: 40%
3. Ownership housing and rental housing help serve different purposes in
communities. For example:
Homeownership supports year-round residency and community
stability.
Rentals support businesses in need of workers and help new
residents get a foothold in a community.
Currently, about 44% of Bozeman residents own their homes and 56% rent.
What do you think the target should be for new Community Housing (housing
that is affordable for residents and local employees) that is produced through
the Action Plan?
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 35
1 1 3 1 1
9
1
26
10
5
1
75
19
1 1
24 21
4 1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
own
0%
rent
100%
own
25%
rent
75%
own
30%
rent
70%
own
33%
rent
67%
own
35%
rent
65%
own
40%
rent
60%
own
46%
rent
54%
own
50%
rent
50%
own
55%
rent
45%
own
56%
rent
44%
own
58%
rent
42%
own
60%
rent
40%
own
65%
rent
35%
own
66%
rent
33%
own
68%
rent
32%
own
70%
rent
30%
own
75%
rent
25%
own
80%
rent
20%
own
90%
rent
10% Number of Preferences Own/Rent Preference
You answered "A different mix" to the previous question. Please specify
your preference:
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 36
Own/Rent “Other” write-ins:
% ownership is less relevant than overall access to affordable options
a mixture since renters provide stability and a vested interest in the community
much more so than the property owners who are snowbirds.
Action Plan should NOT target or consider own/rent ratio. The City should be
careful about trying to micromanage the housing market.
Affordability for millennial families
affordable apartment rentals
An owner should be free to do as they please with their property, own or rent
without interference from city policy !!!
are you counting the MSU students in the 56%??
Bozeman needs more homes that either first time home owners or retirees can
purchase and upkeep.
cheaper housing Bozeman is completely unaffordable to the average worker
making 20 dollars an hour. Why do think 30 year olds have roommates
Community housing should make no attempt to change the ratio of
owners/renters. The ratio is created by the dynamic nature of local economy
and any attempt to influence it will likely raise housing costs as providers must
expend their resources to comply.
Community Housing should strive toward as many people as possible owning
their homes. Anyone who wants a path to home ownership should have access
to it.
Decrease rental percentage in the mix by making homeownership more
affordable
Determined by market forces
Disagree with your premise re home ownership, rentals should be temporary
Do not try to force a "mix". The market will settle that as supply and demand
ebbs and flows.
Don't forget about the elderly
Don't know
Don't know enough to answer
Don't know. A mix is good but I'm not an expert here.
don't know...
don't think it matters, as long as its affordable. home prices and rents seems to
stay naturally correlated.
Encourage smaller homes to drive down pricing
focus on something outside this binary, like rental +equity, nonprofit-owned real
estate investment trusts, co-operative housing etc
Focus on the ownership. Businesses are closing because there is no workforce.
Bozeman is flailing, bringing in larger companies and bending Montana's values
for appearance when we should be fighting to retain values and the Montana
made insignia.
Get out of the way and let the free market work
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 37
Given the student population the current mix seems about right -- but I don't
know enough to be sure.
higher the pay
home ownership is vital to healthy community
Housing plan should focus on residents being able to afford to buy a home
versus renting.
How many of those 56% of Bozeman residents renting are college students that
will leave? Can this actually be measured accurately?
I believe a community housing for seasonal workers is great. But for people who
wish to remain in Bozeman should have some kind of permanent plan in mine,
like renting to own. Having people who wish to remain her permanently with a
place to live would open up the rentals for the people only working in the area
not planning to call Bozeman home.
I do not think the percentage matters, we are in desperate need of affordable
rentals and homes to buy
I don't feel knowledgeable in this area.
I don't know enough to answer this question, I'm sure there are far reaching
economic consequences either way, good or bad I don't know
I don't know what a healthy mix should look like
I don't know. Ask a housing scholar what the best mix that provides access and
opportunity for every socioeconomic rung.
I don't know. We have students, seasonal workers, etc. Needs research.
I don't see how this matters
I don't think a specific ratio needs to be maintained. I think housing just needs
to be more affordable for both buyers and renters.
I don't think there is a set number but other metrics. Is there enough housing
supply to support workers and the aging population.
I don't think this should be a focus. People rent for more reasons than
affordability. We are a university town as well which skews it.
I have no idea what the ideal mix of owned and rented housing would be.
Need more info to answer this.
I like the idea but think this needs more definition and data. I know a lot of part-
time owners and long-term renters so this % mix might be too simple a measure
I plan to permanently rent because I value flexibility. Renting and home
ownership shouldn't equal commitment
I think if it were more affordable, the ability to own would raise the percentage
of ownership.
I think it should be closer to 50/50. Many people rent because they can't afford
to buy. But if more affordable housing was built for the purpose of purchasing
then I think you will see an increased demand for those homes.
I think the Plan should focus on a mix that includes a higher percentage of
home ownership to bring more people into the marketplace. My son, for
example, doesn't think he'll ever be able to afford to own a house. I'd like to
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 38
see that debunked.
I think they should be focused on separately- the rental market has different
barriers than owning a home. Most low income people are not considering
buying homes.
I think this is a personal preference
I think we need to know what percentage of renters would like to be home
owners in order to help answer that question. I get the sense that a lot of renters
with professional jobs can't afford to buy a house in Bozeman city limits.
I wouldn't focus on ratio
I'm curious to see the average income of those who own a home vs those who
rent in Bozeman. I bet you middle to lower income are our renters and those
with high income are home owners. My point is that there should be a different
goal.
I'm it sure
I'm not sure there's a "correct" answer to this
If housing prices dropped, there would be more ownership
If people are allowed to purchase reduced price/subsidized homes, they should
not be allowed to sell it at market value later. That's essentially making me, the
taxpayer, buy part of their home that they get to collect on while i worked to
buy my own home without taking other tax payers money
If rental units are maintained and decent quality, not an important distinction
Insufficient data provided and not enough context to answer.
It is absurd to think that home ownership is obtainable at all income levels.
It should be land trusted or similar, to provide the best of both.
It should be possible for more people to own their homes. Homeownership is a
key financial stabilizer for most folks f they can truly afford the home they own.
Landlords are leaches and everyone should be able to own or co-own their
home
Leave it alone.
Let the market drive the results
Let market decide
Let the free market determine the ratio.
Let the free market rule. Again, helping the poor will hurt the middle class.
Let the market decide.
Let the market guide.
Let the market prevail
More emphasis should be placed on ownership.
More home ownership than 44%
More homeowners and fewer renters.
More homeowners should own than rent.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 39
More rentals make sense for essential community employees. Many of them are
in a demographic that wouldn't buy even if they have the ability to.
More rentals make sense for essential community employees. Many of them are
in a demographic that wouldn't buy even if they have the ability to.
My belief is Bozeman needs not only affordable homes for people who want to
stay, but also affordable apartment buildings (not rented homes) located
centrally for working class folk who may only be here for school or a working
season.
NA
Need more information to decide this.-- Principle is our City and neighborhoods
should contain all types of people and family units
No action plans. They don't work.
No defined mix, keep the plan flexible.
No idea what an ideal ratio would be; I'd need more context.
No opinion
No target. The more moving pieces you try to control, the more the market will
mock the effort via unforeseen or ignored consequences.
not enough information to answer; nationally trends are showing a increasing
preference toward rental
Not everyone is in a position to buy oh, and I think we need more affordable
rentals particularly for young families.
not relevant metric
not sure
not sure
not sure
Not sure
not sure
Not sure about an ideal mix for this, or how it compares to other cities.
not sure we should be deciding whether people rent or own as a preference
Not sure. I would say roughly the same mix.
Ownership is a vehicle to wealth and should be offered as often as possible.
Owning a home creates a stronger sense of community, belonging, vesting,
care and concern that is absent in rental scenarios. It also fosters greater
consumption in long-term maintenance, upkeep, improvement of properties.
Foils absentee laissez faire deferred maintenance and neglect (blight) assuming
that housing expenses are at or below 20% of gross wages.
Percent ratio doesn't matter, we should focus on getting people into the right fit
and smoothly transitioning. Cost of owning is FAR too high
Perhaps other numbers are needed. Is there a significant number of Bozeman
residents who rent and wish they could own?
Ratio should be more owning than renting
Rent versus own is not a relevant measure of affordability
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 40
rentals are a large part of Bozeman. Renters are long term residents w/ stability
and a vested interest in the Bozeman community.
Rentals encourage vacation rentals. Most new comers work from home.
Renting should be high priority as long as landlords keep up with maintenance
and other features and rent increases should be controlled. Home ownership
has lots of disadvantages and should not be pushed
Since the current Affordable plan is essentially renting as appreciation goes to
the city, the community plan should be 100 % rentals.
Small homes (not tiny homes)
Some people should not own their homes as they might be unable to maintain
it. Rentals make sense for this segment of the demand for housing. No fixed
ratio makes sense.
Standard according to HUD and other studies
state and national levels are 60% owned and higher
Stop trying to control the economy
strive for greater than 60% ownership
Target 0% cost burdened rents and 0% cost burdened owners.
Targets are artificial. The market will tell you what is needed. Start with
apartment stimulation and see if the demand for purchase increases or
decreases
The action plan cannot hope to regularly affect housing prices when more than
50% of our homes are rented, that is dependent on the rent asking price
landowners.
The action plan shouldn't have a priority. Different ownership models are
appropriate for different people at different points in their lives. The focus
should be on supplying a variety of housing across the spectrum.
The American Dream.... what happened to it????? Every working American
should have the option and ability to purchase a home...whether it is a tiny
home, an ADU or a small to family size dwelling.
The city should not try to move this needle. The city should not try to "fix" this ratio
(that would communism) nor can it (cannot effectively manage resources
anyway).
The current mix is forcing would be Bozeman employees to move to Livingston
or Belgrade. We clearly NEED MORE rentals owned homes by quite a bit.
The free market will manage this without government interference; simply
reduce the red tape for new construction (impact fees, length of time for
occupancy permit, limit design regulations that are cost-prohibitive, i.e. garage
door being 5 feet recessed from front door, etc.)
The housing plan should offer a good mix of options allowing individuals to
choose for themselves.
The housing plan should strive for more ownership
The ix is not inherently bad, but, as housing costs to own escalate far faster than
community incomes, it is imperative that we increase the rental stock.
the majority should own!
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 41
The national average of owner to renter ratio in 2016 was 64% to 36%. I don't
think this is a realistic goal for Bozeman as ~36% of the population are students
and typically are not looking to buy or stay long-term. However I do think a
healthier (for the community) ratio of own/rent would be at least the inverse of
what we now have (56% own to 44% rent). I know it would take some time to
get there but I feel that residents take more pride and a sense of responsibility in
their town if they own, therefore creating a more vibrant place for us all.
The need should meet the individuals' needs. If people want to rent they should
be able to do so affordably and if they want to buy they should be able to do
that as well. It shouldn't be a metric by which success is measured. Success
should be measured by percentage of individuals living within their means as
they choose to live.
The percentage seems fair but would want to compare statistics from similar
markets.
The ratio should be equivalent to cities that don't have an affordable housing
problem.
The ratio that has worked well in communities like ours.
The ratio will stabilize itself based on affordability. If it is more affordable to own
vs renting.
The target should be to work on establishing a own/rent ratio that is more in line
with the national ratio which is the close to the reverse of what Bozeman
currently has.
There doesn't need to have a set ratio
There should be no target and no affordable housing plan.
This is difficult to answer, it is not black & white. I am a single mom who has
worked hard and smart to own a home. It takes education and the will to
become a homeowner. It is not for everyone and is a privilege.
This isn't a fair question. It doesn't even mention the effect of MSU.
This should not be a target in the housing plan. To turn the question around, why
should this be a target and what is the appropriate mix?
This town is overrun with college kids, transients and trust funders, your statistics
are skewed.
Too many owners with a renter attitude.
Unsure
Unsure
unsure
We are a college town rent will always be higher
we need a majority of residents owning in order to have a local voice in
property tax, fabric of neighborhoods and commitment to the community
We need more affordable homes for FULL TIME residents. So many homes are
only lived in partially throughout the year. We need more ownership and less
renting.
We need to have more home ownership. As we know that home ownership
generally brings pride of ownership and we have a serious pay gap in Montana
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 42
Wages that need to be adjusted
We should have the humility to recognize that the mix of rentals to ownership is
unlikely to change given the large market forces.
We should strive for higher rates of home ownership
We should try to bring the some ownership up. As we know rentals
we'll always have a big rental pool due to having MSU as a part of our
community
What ratio is considered a good balance??? Shouldn't individuals strive to
become homeowners if chose to and be allowed to have affordable options if
they choose to do so???
What really is the % that want home ownership, there are younger generation
that do not, apt down town Bzn - University how many of those are Student,
enrollment way up? Temporary workers rent?
What was the ratio 20 years ago? That could be a gauge.
Whatever it needs to be. Wages can't keep growing to keep pace with the
cost of housing. We're in Bozeman, but paying California rents and home
prices.
whatever nationwide percentages of own/rent ratio are
Whatever provides housing for all wishing to live in Bozeman
Who can afford to rent or own working at $15.00 per hour
Who decides on the appropriate metric for rentals versus ownership, but higher
ownership levels would lessen the property tax burden if the existing homeowner
population.
you should focus on whether or not gallatin county residents can afford their
homes (owned or rented) -- and listen to people are struggling
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 43
4. The economy is experiencing strong growth, but it is hard to keep up:
About 7,400 more jobs are projected to be added in the City by
2025.
About 43% of employees (about 19,000 people) commute into
Bozeman from Belgrade, Four Corners and other areas.
About 490 businesses reported a combined 9% of their jobs were
unfilled in 2018 (1,450 total unfilled jobs).
Should development of additional Community Housing: (select one of the
below)
Ο Match the rate of growth in jobs by building 500 to 600 community
housing units per year through 2025. This means that the
percentage of unfilled jobs and percentage of in-commuters will
remain the same.
Ο Occur at a slower pace than job growth. This means that more
employees will commute in for work and/or more jobs will remain
unfilled.
Ο Occur faster than job growth. This will allow some in-commuters to
move closer to work and help fill some vacant jobs.
Ο Other - Write In
Match the rate of
job growth (500 to
600 community
housing units per
year)
19%
Occur at a slower
pace than job
growth
10%
Occur faster than
job growth
56%
Other
15%
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 44
Jobs:Housing “Other” write-ins:
Again, this should be measured by individual desire.
As much as the market bears. City should not determine the growth speed
Bozeman should catch up to job needs so that no one must commute. Supply
of housing must exceed demand.
Community housing needs to consider more than just job growth. It also needs
to consider growth in housing needs associated with student increases at MSU
and people moving here to retire. Limiting community housing unit increase
projections to job growth will not adequately meet community housing needs
in the future.
Depends what your incentive is. Again supply and demand.
Did the 490 businesses mention how much their starting wage is? I think that's
the problem too.
Do nothing.
Does this take into account the growth of MSU with rising numbers of students
who will choose to live off campus because it is less expensive.
encourage more student high rise housing near campus to open up the rentals
in town
faster but with sustainable methods
Find a balance that will address the systemic issues--bedroom communities,
emissions associated with commuting, increased density in the urban core due
to our rapidly growing population, looking forward to population impacts of
climate change migration, priorities of protecting farmland and open space,
and the conversation that GDP should not be our measure of "success" as a
community
How about also adding on public transport options? Huffine Lane is a
nightmare during work and off work hours. If you don't offer green solutions,
Bozeman will collapse in its own bubble.
I consider Belgrade and other nearby communities to be part of the Bozeman
area.
I don't know.
I have snake oil to sell you, like these idiots that keep providing you with these
studies.
I think it should occur around the same rate, but not in the rampant sprawl we
currently have
I think that it every community, you live where you can afford. I also feel that
Walmart employees need a place to live.
I'm not sure
If there wasn't so much incentive for people to own homes and rent them out
(putting money in their pocket), landlords would sell and homes would open up
providing more buying options. Find out a way to get people into existing
homes! But instead of renting or not being able to afford rent (so they move out
of town), they can own affordably. Rentals should only be for people
transitioning into ownership or college students!
Impose a moratorium on growth
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 45
In an ideal world, match the rate of growth but there are always lags on both
sides since growth generally isn't linear
In just the last year, I've lost 2 great co workers because the commute from
Livingston became too stressful for them, on top of them both being parents. I
don't know what the solution is, but the current unfilled jobs will persist as long as
workers feel they're being squeezed out of Bozeman.
In-commuters is fine and should not be looked at as a bad thing. It doesn't
change the unfilled jobs.
include housing inside and outside Bozeman as we plan for growth
Increase housing density in the Bozeman footprint so we have less commuters
and can match the job market growth.
Instead of housing perhaps a commuter train would be better. It would be
better for the environment and decrease road congestion and accidents.
It is not the City's job to manipulate where people live
It really depends on the type of work and longevity so if renting is better or for
longterm employees housing options to buy.
Job growth will only get better and positions filled when wages are addressed
Keeping in mind that most Bozeman residents who rent are working 2+ jobs
simply to afford to rent here. It's not a 1:1 ratio of jobs to rentals. Increase wages
and you'll see a much more realistic statistic of "job growth"
Let the market determine pricing.
Let the market dictate.
Market handles
Match the housing need for all people wishing to live in the area regardless of
their employment
match the rate of growth with much higher density to reduce sprawl
Mixed approaches: faster building for a period of time; support creative efforts
such as cohousing, shared ownership, pod housing, etc.; consider perpetuity in
lower income targeted home sales so that the homes stay in the hands they
were intended for; protect the affordable housing we have - most particularly
the mobile home parks
Mobil home parks
Move jobs to Belgrade and 4-Corners (already happening) and match the
demand there for local commuting
N/A. Number of jobs should not be tied to housing, they are too unrelated for
the tie to be useful.
Need to figure out how to not drive down the current housing market and still
create enough affordable housing for employees working in Bozeman
New employers should look at the workforce supply and decide if it is
commensurate in wage to the quality of labor available and will it offset/help
with providing a sustainable income to live here. Help those who want to grow
and increase their income with the proper education rather than bringing in
new employment from other areas.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 46
Occur 10% slower than job growth with the idea that 11% move out per year. I
would work with Belgrade to take up 25% to 35% of the build to help them and
us
occur at a rate determined by market demand
Other towns in the area should step up.
Our community needs to address truly affordable housing while also asking
tough questions around how much growth is sustainable. Water is going to
become a huge issue if growth continues to be allowed at project rates.
Principle of supply and demand will dictate growth. Contractors will build as
long as there is need. Or people will choose to commute from further away.
Slow growth down and consider existing residents.
Speed approval process for new housing projects. Reduce building
ordinances that increase housing costs (i.e. lot size minimums, offset
requirements et al)
Standard according to HUD and other studies
Stop the growth and get affordable housing!!
Supply and demand
Tax the heck out of short term rentals and get those folks into the hotel market.
I wonder how much of the rental market is tied up for tourists and students (who
should be accommodated in University housing and not spilled into the
community. Get MSU involved after looking at the impact that they have on
the Bozeman housing market.
The city cannot and should not try to move this needle. That is an egregious
overreach of power to manipulate the free market in that way.
The city is getting too political with this effort. The city's job should be to identify
necessary infrastructure to support growth, not how can/should we grow;
people will come anyway.
The city needs to get out of the free market's way; again, need to reduce the
red tape with new construction
The county is responsible for its own growth. The city and county need to work
together to create a new growth plan which affects all who live and work here
The growth rate is too fast, and should not be attempted to try and continue.
Not all jobs that are out there, should be filled. Just because someone starts a
business here, does not mean that the city should provide housing for those
employees. Let the free market work!!!
The local government should not be in the business of creating "Community
Housing"
The people choosing to commute in from the areas described, are not
necessarily doing so because of lack of affordability
There is not an infrastructure for this volume of growth and this needs to be
addressed as well (parking, traffic), otherwise match the growth rate.
There should be research that clarifies how stable these employers are to
ensure we don't build too many homes. Home building should be constructed
at a slightly slower rate than employment rates to adjust for slow downs or shut
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 47
downs in employment.
This is a market driven idea. The city should stay out of the real estate business!
This is a poorly written survey. It assumes support of community housing by all
survey takers. There should have been a click box for "no additional community
housing development". That is the box I would select.
this is not something you can control
Ultimately it's the price of the housing that keeps people leaving their jobs. I've
had a secure job for nearly 4 years now, but may have to look to transferring to
another city in Montana. Bozeman is just too expensive to afford buying a car,
while trying to get a home and still be able to feed yourself. The price of these
rentals are what's killing everyone. More rentals that are AFFORDABLE a studio/1
bedroom over 1k is just ridiculous.
Unknown. I would prefer to see the growth of Bozeman/Gallatin County be
slowed down.
unsure
Wages are driving the issue. If pay remains low, and housing costs continue to
soar, the market place and individual behavior will sort it out--- folks will leave.
The Bozeman three year turn will become shorter-duration.
We have lived in many communities in the USA, where ut is normal for
employees to commute 20-30 miles a day. The question suggests commuting
to work is to be eliminated, which defies the norm across our nation. There is no
utopia where everyone lives off of Peach Street and walk to Herbs Grocery.
We have the be realistic with the goals. While catching up with the growth is
bold, we need to start small.
We need to be more pro-active in at least keeping up with the job growth in
the housing department, BUT NOT at the expense of neighborhood design. By
that I mean we should not be focused on sub-divisions that are not self
sustaining and require/ single vehicle travel to town or to grocery shop, get to
bank etc. We need to think differently about how to build neighborhoods in
which residents can walk to a restaurant, a bank, a grocery store, a movie
theater etc. The proposed six story construction that will have businesses on
street level and condos/ apartments above is one possible option. Mixed
housing is a must and IMPROVED public transportation options has to be part of
the plan. It is a domino effect and we have a unique opportunity to be pro-
active in preventing congestion and creating a truly livable community for all.
The other part of this is our lack of creativity and acceptance of how to support
our growth without taxing property owners for everything from schools,
infrastructure and parks . It is time to consider toll roads, resort taxes, and sales
tax .
We should develop additional Community Housing quickly, as long as it is done
sustainably and with environmental impact at the forefront. We should move
toward lowering the percentage of people who commute.
We'll never be able to house all our employees in the city. Some due to
availability but more due to affordability.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 48
What are the unfilled position and #s of job growth entail - A lot moving & work
from home - again, how many students - #1 only obtainable per comments
above - do not over build so slower pace!
Where are these 7,400 jobs going to be? The rate that the community is
growing is not sustainable. The community infrastructure can't take another 500
- 600 community housing units without making improvements to
water/sewer/etc.. What is the City doing to prepare for that? Perhaps that issue
needs to be addressed before this building continues.
Yes, keep up with the growth but put the new homes outside of Bozeman.
Perhaps this is a county issue that needs the cities help instead of a city issue
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 49
5. The median priced single family home sold in Bozeman last year was over
$425,000 and $334,000 for townhomes.
Average rent for available units was $1,570/month.
The need for housing for homeless, special needs and fixed income
households, and persons with disabilities has been rising.
What importance should the Housing Action Plan place on each of the
following? Please rate according to a scale of 1 “not important” to 5
“extremely important."
Ο Safety-net programs for special needs households needing services
and transitional and homeless housing assistance.
Ο Rentals priced at $400 to $950 per month for households earning
less than $20/hour.
Ο Rentals priced at $950 to $1,300 for households earning $40,000 to
$50,000 per year.
Ο Homes for purchase under $170,000 for households earning under
$45,000 per year.
Ο Homes for purchase from $170,000 to $280,000 for households
earning between $45,000 and $75,000 per year.
Ο Ownership townhomes and small single family homes priced from
$280,000 to $350,000 for households earning up to $95,000 per year.
Ο Smaller, low-maintenance homes priced below $400,000 that will
help seniors down-size as they become empty nesters and age,
freeing up their existing home for growing families.
Ο Enter another option [Other write in]
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 50
Unit priorities: “Other” write-ins:
A special taxe for people who buy a home in bozeman, but do not live
bozeman for less than half a year.
A year-round emergency housing shelter that can accomodate every guest,
every night (historically, up to 70 individuals a night)
Affordable independent, assisted, and nursing communities for seniors
Avoid driving up housing costs by mandating affordability with one hand while
driving up building and development costs with the other
Building a program that helps people feel INVESTED in Bozeman as a
community.
Building of smaller homes, townhomes, or condos for purchase that are 1-2
bedrooms for smaller households.
Capping increases that landlords can increase rent
City, county regulations update for small and tiny homes
Condos and apartment for lower wage earners, more shares infrastructure to
lower overal costs, maintenance, upkeep, and repairs.
Considering items people must pay long term in the individuals income, such as
child support.
Cottage homes (smaller homes on smaller lots) that would be available for all
households
County needs to pitch in. This is just not Bozeman and getting both should help
with scale
28%
25%
20%
20%
15%
13%
14%
47%
50%
63%
64%
68%
67%
78%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Ownership townhomes and small single
family homes from $280,000 to $350,000
Smaller, low-maintenance homes priced
below $400,000 to help seniors down-size
Homes for purchase under $170,000
(under $45,000 per year)
Homes for purchase from $170,000 to
$280,000
Rentals from $950 to $1,300/mo
Safety-net programs for households
needing services, transitional and homeless
assistance
Rentals from $400 to $950/mo
Percent of Respondents
% 4, 5 - very/extremely important % 1, 2 - not/less important
Avg: 4.1
Avg: 3.4
Avg: 3.7
Avg: 3.7
Avg: 3.8
Avg: 3.8
Avg: 3.3
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 51
Deluxe studio size or single bed sized apartments for people who are past
traditional college age, are just starting in their careers or maybe are lifelong
retail/service industry workers and aren't making $20 but are old enough to no
longer want to share
Dense, centrally located affordable/community housing, including both rentals
and homes that can be owned (in contrast to the apparently exclusive focus on
luxury units in the downtown area)
Down Payment Assistance: Young residents who have been earning middle
incomes and paying 30% or more of their income in rent for their entire adult
lives have no ability to save a $30,000 down payment. This pushes any housing
for purchase out of reach. Th [comment incomplete]
Ensuring that ownership goals are realistic relative to cost of construction. Not
providing a subsidy to people making more than $50,000/year
For the cities push for affordable house they loose sight of maintenance of
rentals and pricing them lower would not cover the yearly maintenance.
Have more houses/townhomes/condos under 280,000 available for full-time
residents instead of part-time residents.
Highest priority should be studio apartments that can be purchased with a
mortgage or other rent to own situation for young single professionals to retain
their own equity and live without roommates.
Home share for seniors and young people? Works in parts of Europe
Home that are cheap for everyone but limited in lot, size, and number per
owner.
Homes priced below 300000 for a family of 4
Homes under 300k for household income up to 75k
Housing geared for single parents, mostly mothers, with children.
Housing priced between 300-500 dollars a month for families warming at or
close to minimum wage
I make $40,000 a year. My monthly take-home pay is about $3,000. 30% of that is
$900 a month. A household making $40,000 should NOT be paying $950/mo.
That is over 30% of their paycheck, and is verging on house poor when including
utilities, HOA, etc.
If a Californian owns more than one property, they must provide housing
transitional housing for a homeless/needs family.
Improve conditions for current Section 8 and Low Income housing.
Income based programs, to provide housing and home purchasing ability for
the lower incomes.
Increasing new construction and therefore supply of all categories of housing at
all price points
Larger homes for growing families affordable below $650,000
Let builders build to the demand. Stay out of the housing market. Let buyers
speak. Let people learn how to live within their means, not depend on
government help to aid them because they “deserve”. Earn it.
Let the free market work itself out
Let the free market work.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 52
Let the people in Bozeman decide this VOLUNTARILY with their own money and
resources. If the government decides, it is then implemented through FORCE.
Lower rental rates for students who are here 9 months a year
Mixed use housing with have mixed income should be prominant
My family of 5 with my disabled spouse (she has fibromyalgia and had not been
able to get on disability income) make under $35,000 a year. I don't see any
way for us to stay in Bozeman.
My impression there are plenty of smaller homes for seniors where I see people
struggling is affordable housing for growing/young families
N/A
No Action Plan
None
On the surface, these things sound nice. But long term they are destructive to
the overall health of the economy.
Personal accountability and work ethic.
Phase out all trailer parks and replace with efficient, well-built tiny house
Programs to allow for gaining equity in homeownership--fixed price housing is
great but it doesn't allow homeowners to move once they are in a home with
fixed resale price. Accommodate for more residents to benefit from these types
of programs both in pu [comment incomplete]
Protecting green space & preventing urban heat island effect in an
overcrowded valley.
Restrictions on landlords as far as rent caps/home value and withholding
deposit
Restrictions on purchases of single family homes by persons/entities who intend
to use the property for vacation rental purposes only or as second/third homes.
Let them buy out of the city limits.
Seniors that are downsizing should have homes available at less than $300,000
Should have included an option for those of us who believe that the
government needs to get out of the way. For the record, I would have agreed
to helping the disabled, but including the homeless population in that same
group is wrong - some of those peo [comment incomplete]
Single family homes under $340,000, and townhouses under $300,000 are the
only acceptable prices for a market. Families making $100,000 per year are
competing for homes against persons much wealthier than they. It is completely
unacceptable.
Small starter homes on small lots, row houses, single bedroom homes with a
small yard for a pet, tiny homes as an option for the homeless.
Smaller homes (e.g. 1-3 bedroom) for small families/singles/couples in order to
supplement the supply of very large homes
Start up 'tiny home' communities 200-300sq. homes these would be ideal for
single parents or newly married couples priced at or under $125k and income
levels under $45k would create pride in home ownership while keeping housing
cost down. Mandate they ca [comment incomplete]
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 53
Stop trying to dictate how this city will grow. If we are going the way of Boulder,
CO or San Francisco, there's very little the city can (or should!) do to stop it. You
can't stop people from moving here so additional supply is critical for
EVERYONE.
Tiny Houses
Tiny houses for the local homeless
Trailer parks. A $1000+ rental is not actually affordable for a household earning
$40-$50k, but a $350 lot rent with a $30,000 piece of equity on it certainly is.
Bozeman has made it extremely difficult to start a new trailer park, and has
been shuttering [comment incomplete]
Unique, 2-3bdrm housing communities with small footprints/higher density for
lower shared expenses. That Beal street tiny home is a joke at over $450/sq ft.
Wages and the cost of living here are not in sync. Let's focus on increasing the
wages and salaries offered.
Website issue- question not legible
Why assume smaller low-maintenance homes ar for seniors. "Kids" are deferring
or eschewing marriage and families due to debt, or a new view of our over-
subscribed world. And $400K is a BIG payment or a lot of cash... stop using
average wages and look at me [comment incomplete]
You are still to high on the amounts for houses need to start at $125,000.00 or
$100.00 per foot
Your housing expense should be no more than 20% of your income. Above item
numbers 3 through 7 do not meet this requirement.
affordable student condos for rent or purchase
better, more available public transportation options for those who work in Bzn
and live outside the city.
let the building dept build their own homes at appropriate price points
location of affordable housing needs to be near public transportation and
amenities
non-single family home options (apartments, townhomes) with mixed pricing at
and below market rates
stop the density, stop building so many condos, not good for single families
taxpayers should not have to subsidize others rent. two of us worked hard to
achieve our home.
trailer parks, modular homes, passive and active solar
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 54
6. Where should Community Housing be located? Please rate according to a
scale of 1 “never” to 5 “definitely.”
Ο Downtown Bozeman
Ο Within most new residential subdivisions in Bozeman
Ο On vacant lots within the City where higher densities are allowed
Ο In low density neighborhoods where there is space for accessory
dwellings (garage apartments, cottages, tiny homes, etc.)
Ο On property annexed into Bozeman in the future
Ο At or near fire stations, schools and other public facilities to house
essential employees
Ο Within hotels, above retail space and in other mixed-use
developments in the City
Ο On City-owned land
Ο Within residential subdivisions on the outskirts of Bozeman
(neighboring unincorporated county)
Ο In other communities where housing is cheaper and employees
can commute into the City
Ο Enter another option [write-in]
36%
33%
27%
25%
20%
14%
16%
14%
11%
9%
35%
33%
40%
41%
46%
53%
58%
58%
60%
73%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
In other communities where housing is cheaper and employees can commute in
Downtown Bozeman
Within hotels, above retail space and in
other mixed-use developments in the City
Within residential subdivisions on the
outskirts of Bozeman (neighboring uninc)
On City-owned land
On property annexed into Bozeman in the future
Within most new residential subdivisions in
Bozeman
In low density neighborhoods where there is space for accessory dwellings
Near fire stations, schools, other public
facilities to house essential employees
On vacant lots within the City where higher densities are allowed
Percent of Respondents
% 4, 5 - possibly, definitely % 1, 2 - never, rarely
Avg: 4.0
Avg: 3.4
Avg: 3.6
Avg: 3.7
Avg: 3.7
Avg: 3.8
Avg: 3.3
Avg: 3.0
Avg: 3.0
Avg: 3.2
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 55
Location “Other” write-ins:
All housing is community housing.
Areas on or near existing public transit routes.
Belgrade
Belgrade
Build mix-use buildings centered on families. Buildings would include condos,
daycares, small grocery stores, doctors offices, etc. and include parks.
Build on brown field land Idaho Pole city should buy this land and build a nice
manufactured housing community.
City planning is extremely important. I would need to read more about this
before offering my opinion.
Close radius to both super markets for groceries and gas stations
Closer to work areas
Create community that is diverse in home options and provide the
neighborhoods with the ability to provide basic needs for its local residents.
PLAN these neighborhoods carefully to avoid single auto dependency and
promote neighborhood camaraderie.
Disbursed throughout the City
Disbursed throughout the county
Every Where! You need to just build lots of AFFORDABLE housing
Everywhere
Four Corners or Gallatin Gateway for those who may work in multiple locations
Give people access to land for tiny homes
Homes should be well built
I have no idea what is prudent and helpful.
In a Communist society.
In areas with vacant homes; condemned homes that are replaced, or
reclaimed city property
In currently low-density neighborhoods immediately abutting the downtown
business district, such as Olive St
In every elementary school district!
In high density zone appropriate areas.
Instead of an impact fee for art in the City (as proposed) that percentage
should go towards funding affordable infill projects for the next 10 years.
It should be everywhere within the city limits and outskirts
It's a common misconception that housing is cheaper in other communities,
unless free or cheap transportation is factored in as well. The city should address
regional transportation options as part of the community housing plan
More family housing on MSU campus
N/a
Near Transit and other transportation options
Near bus routes
Near bus routes and stops.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 56
Near hospitals and other health care facilities
Near jobs like on 7th, 19th, or huffing by the mall
Near public transit availability, and existing parkland to reduce costs to
developers and residents
Near transportation and grocery stores
Not on privately owned land. Don’t force current land owners to change their
zoning or future plans. That’s stealing
On land more suited for housing and less suited for agriculture
On land that the city plans to expand towards, unless the plan is to de
incentivize growth to control it
Option to purchase land for families who need/desire more room outside town
Other communities only if we attend to green transport options
Places where there is reliable and frequent public transportation for commuters
Spread the multifamily housing through out the city not just in northwest
Try to avoid urban sprawl and commuting
What is community housing???
Where Streamline bus routes are and city should find the bus
Where the market has housing at affordable rates.
Wherever the character/density of the existing neighborhood is not changed by
the new community housing project.
again. this is dependent on access to public transportation at hours from before
8 am to well past 6 pm for evening shift workers
between Bozeman and Belgrade or going towards 4 corners
defer to the private sector
near public transportation and amenities
wherever Planning dept can figure out how to build homes which meet price
points.
within ALL new subdivisions, subdivisions that are entirely affordable homes,
homes closest to schools
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 57
7. Do you have thoughts or ideas on actions that can be taken to improve
the availability of Community Housing in Bozeman that you would like to
share?
Lot prices are too high for builders to purchase and build homes under 400,000.
The city needs to free up some of their own land for projects in affordable
housing.
"Community Housing" should be located everywhere in the city where housing is
currently. The benefits of mixed-income housing are heavily supported by
research.
"Free market pricing is absolutely the worst way to allocate scarce resources ...
except for all the others." Regardless of whether or not it's inevitable, if you don't
wish to see growth consume the valley, the first thing you must do is stop
enabling it. Don't make things appear to cost less than they do. (Our idiotic
Fed does a good enough job of that through its low interest rate policy.).
Instead, seek to pay your people enough to buy what's available on the open
market. This will of course cause the city budget to truly skyrocket. Once those
cost hikes hit the taxpayers squarely in the wallet, you'll see downward pressure
on our property values until equilibrium is reached in all aspects.
"Rentals priced at $950 to $1,300 for households earning $40,000 to $50,000 per
year." This target rent still seems quite high, given that 40-50k is pre-tax income,
not take-home pay and would only likely work for single individuals making that
much. A household with 3 members would have a hard time sustaining that
rent.
"Safety-net programs for special needs households needing services and
transitional and homeless housing assistance." This should absolutely be two
different questions. Special needs households and the homeless population are
two completely different groups.
"The solutions to providing affordable housing should involve using diverse
approaches and mechanisms." - Can you first define what your "diverse
approaches and mechanisms" are? Maybe until you can do so you will have a
clearer idea on how to resolve this issue.
1. I believe it will be necessary for MSU to be involved in discussions and actions
to address housing needs of students. 2. I believe the issue of short-term rentals
such as air-B&B's needs to be looked at since this may be impacting available
long-term housing needs in the Bozeman and the valley.
1. There seems to be little mention of how to keep the city affordable for current
and long time residents. Too many older residents are being forced away
because of higher property taxes and lack of creative ways to offset this. 2. It
seems to me that there is a fundamental belief -even in the questions posed
here - that growth is always good. Is it really? It does seem inevitable to a large
extent but is it good for the city? Does the city PROMOTE more growth? Not
sure just a question. And related question is how would such a built in bias
impact long term less affluent residents that are struggling with meeting their
expenses?? Any thanks for the chance to offer feedback but this is hard!!!
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 58
1) Add condominiums to the equation; 2; embrace the realism that more
affordable housing will be available in areas outside the city proper, I.e. housing
is more affordable in Belgrade, Manhattan, Amsterdam, Four Corners; and 3)
recalibrate the affordable housing program to avoid the idealism that every
newcomer needs to live in walkable downtown neighborhoods and that
embrace the realism affordable housing will rely on commuting to Bozeman; 4)
housing prices in downtown are absurd. Bozeman is a very desirable place to
live, which by basic economics means it will suffer from high demand and
consequently higher prices. Markets drive prices and therefore affordable
housing suffers. This should not be surprising in the face of basic economic
structures of supply and demand. If we had waited to move to Bozeman in
2019, we would have to consider building in Manhattan as the current market
understandably has escalated prices due to demand.
A lot of people are sick and tired of the city's lip service to this issue without
meaningful action. From what I can tell the city has done basically nothing.
How long has the city diddled with affordable housing while employing a full-
time economic development official to sweet-talk high-tech businesses that
bring in exactly the kind of people who drive up housing costs? The story of my
young family is illustrative of the problem. I am 35 and grew up in Bozeman.
From about 2011 (when I returned after graduate school) until 2015, my wife
and I bumped around a series of rentals -- with each move it was harder and
more expensive to find someplace to live. Our living quarters eventually
included a 400-square-foot outbuilding without running water, which we
accepted because we thought we could save enough to buy a house. We
together made roughly $70,000. We gave up looking for a house in Bozeman
and then Belgrade. Three years ago we bought an unexceptional house in
Livingston for $160,000. Now similar houses in our neighborhood are selling for
$275,000+ as Bozeman's housing problem spirals out of control. We spend 1.5
hours in a car each day driving to our jobs in Bozeman. As a result we burn more
than 1,000 gallons of additional gasoline each year, contributing to climate
change. (The city's climate action plan is an absolute joke without getting a
handle on commuting from outside areas.) We have less time together with our
five-month-old son (who also occasionally risks his life going to and from
Bozeman for childcare) and less time to get involved in our community. There
are a variety of solutions that have been well-developed in other communities,
including in-fill housing, land trusts, developments on city land, etc etc. But the
basic root of the solution is for the city to stop being the servant of developers.
The city should simply tell developers the kind of housing they will build. If they
threaten to build in the county instead, call their bluff. People want to live in
Bozeman and developers want to build in Bozeman. (The ongoing rift between
the city and the county, however, is truly ruinous of this area's quality of life in
the long term. Healing that relationship should be at the top of the city's list.)
We all know a major driver of rising housing costs is vacation rentals and people
treating housing as an investment, which reduces what is available to the
majority who relate to housing as a necessity of life. The city should be looking at
major tax disincentives and other policy levers for discouraging vacation rentals.
On the flip side, public banking could provide a financial lever for land trusts
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 59
and other projects driven by the city. Look into it: there is a movement in
California and elsewhere for cities and counties to establish entities like the Bank
of North Dakota, to hold assets and invest them locally instead of handing them
over to the worst of national or multinational banks. Who currently holds the
city's assets? I know of many enthusiastic, smart, energetic and resourceful
people who want to contribute to solving this problem. The city simply needs to
make this a genuine priority and put some resources and resolve behind it. The
city should immediately raise impact fees on developments (or refuse outright
to connect them to city infrastructure) if they do not contain meaningful
affordable housing, and put the money toward a city affordable housing
program that would include multiple full-time staff plus funding for community
partnerships.
A surplus of housing would drive the prices down.
Abandon the idea of Single Family homes under $350. Quit instituting policies
like inclusionary zoning that drive the $400k homes higher yet. Quit spending
money on feel goods like parks, open space, fancier buses, historic home
preservation, and public art...and studying 'affordable housing.' Focus on using
your budget on essential infrastructure to free up infill decrease the cost of
annexation. Expedite planning so that developers aren't building in the
unknown. Let the market find the balance by providing an environment
conducive to free market solutions.
Abolish the Chamber of Commerce. This promotional organization has done
too much damage to our town.
Accessory dwellings could be encouraged by reducing permit fees and
complexities. HRDC's tiny house project should be supported by the City and
community, as should a year round and larger (or multiple locations) homeless
shelter.
Add more low wealth apartments like studios, 1 Bed, 2 Bed, and 3 Bed for
affordable rates for those that make less than $20/hr, Independent contractors
(like Uber, Lyft, UberEATS, DoorDash, Postmates, and others) and for students
that work part time. Have some new apartments that can have a range of
prices for low, medium, and high wealth. this way the resident can rent and
when they earn more they can stay in the same location but move to a
different area in the complex based on the income and pay an affordable
price.
Affordable housing is good for Bozeman. People want better service in
restaurants, clean rooms at hotels, their oil changes quickly but the citizens that
provide these services can't afford to live here. And people that have been
here forever can't even get ahead to upgrade.
AFFORDABLE tiny house communities. The ones recently built on the outskirts of
town are NOT affordable. Change building permit law to allow people to build
alternative housing options within the city limits. Tons of communities allow earth
ship housing, shipping container, straw bale houses, adobe housing, tiny houses
and other non-traditional housing options, why don't we?? I would also put a
rental cap on landlords. They are gouging students and low income renters
charging crazy amounts for dumps which are energy inefficient, rundown and
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 60
barely up to code.
All neighborhoods should strive to have a mix of mixed-income.
All of this must include a discussion of environmental impact. Just building a lot
of low income housing is not a "solution" to the growth of Bozeman. Much of this
has to do salary, taxes, etc....
Allow for cottage communities and tiny homes! Discourage owning a high
number of properties in town and renting them out at high rates. Put more
townhomes near downtown close to amenities, as opposed to further outside of
town-- what good is an affordable townhome when a family still requires 2 cars
and increased transportation costs?? Allow employees to live closer to work!
Increase safe biking lanes/routes between the residential & work corridors.
Perhaps work on special housing initiatives/assistance designated for local
teachers, police, fire department, EMTs, dispatchers and other public service
workers -- we need these people but they can't afford to live here!
allow upzoning of single family home subdivisions
https://www.curbed.com/2018/11/27/18113208/minneapolis-real-estate-rent-
development-2040-zoning
allowing and managing density must be central in strategy moving forward.
people will continue to move to the Gallatin valley, and Bozeman can respond
with either density or sprawl, I strongly prefer density
Already shares in previous section
As a low-income renter, the biggest challenges I have faced are: Unreasonably
high rent/security deposit Credit check restrictions Pet restrictions Landlords run
buck-wild in the community and renters suffer, there should be improved
balance between them.
As I mentioned above building outside of Bozeman is much more affordable for
everyone involved. This is where the focus should be
As I mentioned previously, intentionally constrain the number of homes that can
be rented as short-term rentals on AirBnB, etc. I've lived in 2 desirable
communities (Tahoe and the Bay Area) where demand for short term rentals
soared and local families were priced out. HIgh-wage homeowners bought
2nd and 3rd homes with the sole intention of making money off renting them on
AirBnB. This dwindled supply and increased prices.
As long as we're collectively willing to accept that we can't legally live
anywhere without paying 100,000+ in interest over 30 years for a mortgage we
are forgoing any reasonable price control. Reject the monopoly of a
mortgaged purchase, reject paying interest, and let people live in places that
don't require those so there's some competition or else housing prices will
continue to outpace income. Tiny houses, mobile homes, tent villages,
communal shelters; let these exist so there's at least a little market pressure.
As mentioned before. Bozeman needs to retain its historical charm. The myth
that high rise infill should displace current low income housing within the city
limits is hurting the character or our community. People are becoming divided
and angered over the county and cities poor planning practices.
Balance the building of new developments and multi family housing around the
city. It is concentrated in the northwest and this paves the way for creating low
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 61
income/high crime neighborhoods in a few years.
Be not afraid of growth - be afraid of the alternative.
Both my husband & I are Bozeman natives and have chosen to raise our
children here because we love it here. But, costs are not affordable to live in the
community we've chosen to stay in. You need to look at what is driving up the
costs for LOCALS to keep them here & not move to surrounding communities.
They are moving because Bozeman doesn't offer them what they need.
Bozeman is compared to the growth of Fort Collins. I lived in Fort Collins,
returning to Bozeman because the increase of crime and congestion made it
an undesirable location for me. Rather than Fort Collins being the model, keep
Bozeman Bozeman. Don't be the stewards that allow change that cannot be
reversed. Don't let the overflow of the Yellowstone Club be the target audience
for decisions made. Reward landlords who provide reasonable rents, even
when they "can get more".
Bozeman is such a desirable place to live and work. Why not make dreams
come true for even those that don't earn 6 figures a year on their start ups?
Bozeman Planning needs to stop being so scared of developers leaving the
City. Partner more with MSU architecture/engineering to find solutions. So many
resources and yet the City shells out cash for studies that could be done right
here in our own community.
Bozeman should assist in creating a completely different model of housing to
accommodate millennials such as myself who now have but two unsuitable
options- choosing the stacked chicken coop or the sprawling inefficient
American energy monsters. Instead it would behoove our township to build
smaller high quality energy efficient homes not larger than 1200 square feet. We
are not planning on having a litter of kids like the Baby Boomers. We also don't
want to waste our hard earned money on the perpetual maintenance and
upkeep of the American behemoth. The Chicken coops or stacked community
housing are slums waiting to happen. Bozeman is beautiful because of its
character and charm, don't trample this by changing it to meet the needs of
the lowest common denominator! Let's strive together to work harder to earn
more to support a higher quality and energy efficiency existence. All the while
taxing the shit out of tourist and using that money to keep this town a desirable
and functional place, the place i grew up in. Thank you!
Build actual AFFORDABLE homes! Take out the luxuries and build homes to
house people who work their tails off and can't find an available house under
$200K to buy, or under $1200 to rent!
Build up, not out. Don't be afraid to have a taller apartment and housing
complexes. You want to have a more community feel and less sprawl.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 62
Building costs and land costs are too high. Only approve a subdivision with the
caveat that lot prices can only increase annually at the same rate as the
Consumer Price Index to stop rapacious speculation on lots that drives prices
up. Building techniques need to include panelized housing delivered onsite
and assembled in 3-5 days. Impact fees for affordable homes need to be
waived for a five year period. Habitat for Humanity would build as many homes
as you want if the city would cooperate, which they won't at this point. Make
Habitat build something nice and waive impact fees. Let builders do land
banking where they purchase land for affordable housing in an off-site location
away from their expensive subdivision. Quit selling prime affordable housing
land to rich developers and then whine about affordable housing (Bridger
mobile park now just a park for the wealthy while 60 needy homeowners are
displaced). That's disgraceful and stupid at the same time.
Cap prices on rentals or make rent income-based, tax 'second homes' or
vacancies as an incentive for landowners to fill rentals by lowering prices.
Raised minimum wage to something where everyone can afford basic needs
like safe housing and food.
Cap the housing cost before there is a crash! Get the greed out of our
community!
Change of Planning dept leadership, remove old guard mindsets of hiding and
preventing good ideas behind "code ordinances"
Change the mountain of rules and regulations in the building department! It is
almost impossible to get a permit because of all of the bs you have to go
through! And, the online applications are pretty much I'm Ossicle to fill out! I
have literally been reduced to tears attempting to do so.
charge less
City incentives to build more affordable- expand IZ to include middle income
workforce housing- other incentives like impact fee relief, code allowances for
compact neighborhoods- smaller streets, stacked utilities- change in the code
mindset to support these concepts
City should wave all impact fees for affordable housing don't build row homes
Square footage 1085sf to 1350 sf 1 and 2 car garages ownership makes people
proud.
Community Housing Cooperatives would help transition people from dumping
40% or more of their incomes into rent, and into something of value. There are
multiple types of housing coop's; no-equity, limited equity, and shared equity.
Hamilton broke ground a coop for seniors aged 55+. https://mcdc.coop/wp-
content/uploads/2016/11/feasibility-study-edited-final-6-27-16.pdf
Commuting also takes money, so having affordable housing within the city limits
where people can use the Streamline bus or walk/bike
Considerations and plans for public transportation should be part of the early
stages of planning. Updating bus routes, budgeting for new routes, express
buses to MSU and other locations as well as discussions about park and ride lots
should be part of the early planning phases. Don't wait until construction is
completed and residents are commuting to figure out how people will move
around town.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 63
Create a substantial pool of funds that can be used to incentivize
development, including loan fund for construction and land acquisition.
create a work/live system where part or all of rent could be traded for work.
Work could be on or near the property or providing public serves for the
community in exchange for rent reduction.
Design for function, aesthetics, emotional well-being, sustainability as well as
nature driven (biophilic) design. EG LEED AND WELL STANDARDS
Developers of multi unit buildings should be required to build some simpler low-
income only units
Developers who demolish trailer parks and other affordable housing should be
required to include units for those they have displaced or aid them financially to
find another place to live.
Do you have thoughts or ideas on actions that can be taken to improve the
availability of Community Housing in Bozeman that you would like to share?
Don't rely solely on private developers. Maximize the use of nonprofits such as
Habitat for Humanity.
Drug Tests.
Educate people on the housing crisis in Bozeman so folks stop buying multiple
homes or buying rentals to set up their own AirBnb rentals. They are taking away
affordable options for working class renters. Rent caps would also be great to
enforce on rental companies as prices are driven ever-higher. We also need a
year-round emergency housing shelter that can accommodate at least 70
individuals per night. The Warming Center has to turn people away sometimes
and is only open 5 months out of the year. Not many people realize, but
Montana has a serious homelessness problem among individuals, the elderly,
and even families with young children.
Eliminate more regulatory barriers like application fees or relaxing restrictive
zoning regulations. Just as Bozeman did with Costco, we should continue to
require developers to contribute to a housing trust fund.
Eliminate the overregulation and strangling burden of govt interference. Allow
small lots with front garages. Recognize that government isn't the answer but is
frequently the problem.
Encourage more ADU housing. Provide incentives for backyard infill.
Encouragement of more smaller homes. Like the idea of the tiny homes by Kirk
park those are a little small for most, but a good direction. Discourage many
huge houses since those are all really expensive
Ensure new development, especially by big name developers , include
community housing options
Expand public transportation for those areas where low income housing is
concentrated, be it from Belgrade, four-corners or within Bozeman. Charge a
nominal fare if necessary to fund it.
Family and Graduate Housing on the MSU campus had adorable housing, and
night be while to give some perspective and ideas on how to make housing
affordable throughout the city. Also, seeing as seniors are typically in a fixed
income, planning housing prices at under $400,000 hardly seems affordable,
and should be lowered to account for their fixed income.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 64
First off, build some community housing instead of holding the projects up with
debate. Require the people that buy houses, townhomes, and condos to live
there instead of renting it out while they live elsewhere. Give priority to full-time
residents wanting to buy the units. Communicate with your target audience, I
don't know of any "affordable" or community housing at all.
First, how many seniors, who are downsizing, and probably on a fixed income,
can afford a house in the upper $300s? If you're downsizing, why are you
suddenly paying more for less? "Priced below $400K"??? Is this a joke?? I think
there are a couple of big factors at play with regard to affordable housing in
Bozeman. Without knowing the statistics (and that would have been good to
include on this survey), I think many non-residents, are buying second (or third or
who knows) homes here in Bozeman therefore pricing out the locals. Why is this
okay? There are plenty of actual residents looking to buy without outside
competition coming in with cash offers just so they turn around and rent it out
for an insane amount for a few years and then put it back on the market for a
huge markup. Additionally, and I know many will disagree or be angered by this
statement, but I also believe the real estate world is also driving up costs. Real
estate agents/companies in the Bozeman area (and around the US) are
profiting big time from the current housing situation and what does the city or
homeowner get in return? Honestly, homes can sell themselves in this market.
Not using an agent reduces the need to jack up the prices. Home sellers want
to make the profit they think they are now entitled to (because their agent told
them so, because now they need an even bigger down payment to afford their
next home, and because they have to pay their agent upwards of 6%
commission). This is sickening! That agent did not live in that house, take care
of it, pay the taxes, etc. but somehow they can swoop in, tell a homeowner to
disproportionately price their house out of sync with any sort of reality, go
around purporting there is a housing shortage, and then make a huge
commission for filling out a few forms and putting it on the MLS. I don't like the
real estate business, obviously. I think it is unethical and needs tighter controls,
just like any other industry. For the record, we have sold two of our prior homes
WITHOUT a realtor. These were homes we actually lived in at different times (we
have never owned two homes simultaneously). Having moved to Bozeman
fairly recently from another part of MT, I am astonished at the housing prices.
This is truly Bozangeles, as people told me before I moved here. I have money
for a down payment and make a good salary, but all I can realistically afford is
some cramped place where my neighbors are so close they can hear me flush
the toilet. If I want something with some space, I will have a mortgage that is
over 50% of my take home pay and even then I would be buying a junk show of
a house that is still way north of 400K…but I digress. Bozeman will have a very
hard time attracting (and retaining) the talent and the work force if it does not
do something about the out-of-control housing prices. I know I am already
thinking about where I could move to next because I can't afford a house I
would actually be happy living in and I refuse to commute from a neighboring
community (that is not sustainable living). Simply building "affordable" housing is
not the only solution as many of the middle class will not qualify...the middle
class will continue to be priced out and will end up taking on more debt than is
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 65
financially sustainable.
Focus more on small houses where families can live. Having just moved to the
area with a baby and in our 30's we shouldn't have to live in an apartment or
have roommates anymore.
Get in touch with what it actually costs to live and THRIVE in Bozeman. Require
developers to include ACTUAL affordable housing in their subdivisions. Don't
force lower income families out of town.
Get out of the way and let the market work. All this feel-good meddling won't
solve anything. Weak links and loopholes will always be found.
Get people on board who are dealing with this ridiculous housing situation un
Bozeman!!!!!!!
Get rid of aesthetic requirements that artificially increase waste and cost.
Get the burocracy out of the way, especially the DNRC
Guiding principal should be "do no harm". We need to stop slowing down
supply.
Hard working low income people deserve to have an opportunity to build
equity and advance toward larger homes by starting with smaller homes. In my
opinion, tiny homes would offer this opportunity to single people and families
that need their own 4 walls, their own space, and an opportunity to move
forward toward owning their own single family home of a reasonable size. Way-
too-expensive "affordable" apartments or condos that cost exponentially more
that an average hard-working lower level employee can afford just perpetuate
frustration and the notion that the Bozeman community doesn't value or respect
it's lower-end workers.
Have a "Renters Union" to advocate and mediate on behalf of renters.
Help home owner to remodel homes to add more ADU's. This will increase
density and allow for people to still have homeownership. Also, helps bolster
community.
Hi
High-density high rise houses. Remove height restrictions and start building
multiuse highrise buildings to control urban sprawl. We don't have the luxury to
keep expanding outward.
Higher density housing with walk-ability or bike-ability, and access to grocery,
emergency services, and social center such as bars, community centers, etc.
Higher density is the only way forward here
Higher tax rate for people who own investment housing that is not occupied
year-round
Higher taxation on people purchasing high dollar homes from out of state for
the first 5 years.
Highest priority should be studio apartments that can be purchased with a
mortgage or other rent to own situation for young single professionals to retain
their own equity and live without roommates. Studio/1-bedroom apartments are
the most sought-after and the most expensive (upwards of $1500-1700/month).
The city could build a large apartment building with only studio apartments on
land it owns and allow young couples and single professionals to purchase units
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 66
with bank lending so that they can hold equity and sell when they have saved
enough and are ready to upgrade to a larger home in the community. Some of
the units could be offered as rentals as well, or retained by the city and local
nonprofits (HRDC, Haven, etc) as affordable housing for vulnerable citizens. It
doesn't have to be in a desirable location - just safe, close enough to
transportation, and affordable. Most of us just want a small safe place to sleep,
shower, and keep minimal belongings while we get ahead in life. Bozeman
should be able to help with this.
hire people from the area and not out of state people. you mention that 9% of
jobs remain unfilled, yet I bet there were plenty of applicants for all of those jobs
that probably never even got an interview
Housing diversity isn't possible without public transportation that is available
across the city, protected bike lanes to give more affordable transportation
options, and commercial nodes so goods and services are not far away from
our densest neighborhoods on the west and south sides. Bozeman needs to
think of a way for individuals looking to develop affordable housing to reduce
their costs (looking at parkland requirements, or other standards not related to
public safety) where fair trade-offs can occur.
Housing should connect people of all different walks of life -- not exclude those
of lesser means from community life with everyone else. We need to live in
community to be a community.
I am 34 years old. I work for a local nonprofit. I make $62,000 per year. With a
modest matching contribution to my IRA and the primary insurance carrier for
my family, my take home pay is literally half my income. It think qualifying
income for affordable housing should not be measured by annual income, but
by take-home pay. My husband is a soil scientist and owns his own business.
Beyond medical bills, car insurance, childcare (for one child), and paying
outright for my tuition as a graduate student, we have nothing left to contribute
to our IRA or add to our savings account. We rent a house on land that is being
considered to be annexed into the city of Bozeman. If this happens, our rent
could go up $500 per month -- which would leave us with even less to work with.
I am concerned about the creation of lower income 'neighborhoods' rather
than integrating lower income housing into the overall community. I think the
city should also consider low-income housing density and then try to not create
or perpetuate high-density areas of low-income house. I also think public
transportation options from the outskirts of town would allow more people to
commute into the city and afford homes on the outskirts.
I believe that if there were new small singlewide manufactured home
neighborhoods that it would allow individuals and young couples to begin their
home ownership and wealth building process. This in turn, gives the opportunity
to build equity that can be passed onto the next home, in addition it builds
community and pride in the neighborhood.
I disagree with the finding (or claim) by developers that requiring affordable
housing to be built in their projects would eat too far into their profit margin. The
huge amount of massive developments going up (i.e. $1million condos on
Mendenhall and Tracy, and Andy Holloran's many projects) would suggest
otherwise. I've heard some talk by frustrated residents that developers and
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 67
city/county planners are too closely aligned and the planners are too eager to
approve projects and help developers find loopholes, though I admit that could
just be gossip.
I have expressed many of my thoughts above. Increase hourly and salaried
work wages. It is time to change the way we tax property owners for all the city
needs. Instead, consider tax options that will include resort/ visitors/ general
sales tax on gas and food, entertainment etc. Look at ways to involve
businesses and encourage partnership and community effort. For example,
senior citizens might volunteer time and expertise at various city offices, schools,
parks, and receive a property tax break in return for a specific number of hours
of volunteer work. We need to think differently and avoid the mistakes made by
large cities that are now back-pedaling to repair damage done by ignoring
public transportation options that modify congestion on the roads. Connect
housing to community. Community bonds build on partnership. Bring profits and
non-profits together. Pool resources and contribute ideas, man-power/ staff,
and money toward making our community affordable,, livable and desirable.
I honestly don't feel that I know enough about markets or housing issues in
general to give useful suggestions. What I do know is that I am looking to buy my
first home and there are few good options. There are more houses available for
people who can afford to spend $500,000 or $600,000 than there are for those
of us who make a more typical salary. I have many friends who have had to
leave Bozeman in the past few years because of this issue. We need more single
family housing options in the $300,000 to $400,000 range that average residents
can afford.
I just don't understand why a community like this that has so much money that
they focus on the wealthy and not for people with low income. There should be
more HUD housing here!
I kind-of already shared my idea. I would love to be involved in a program that
allowed me to have cheaper rent in exchange for like 5 hours of volunteer
time/week.
I think Bozeman needs to slow down growth and building. The quality of life in
this town has suffered and it has never been more apparent than the past few
years. Have a coherent plan to start so people can buy where they desire and
know that it won't change with the next commission. The cost of building
materials and labor is driving all the costs up, so I'm not sure how this will work
without a lot of subsidies. Have those in place and, again, a coherent plan. I am
looking for a new community after nearly half a century here, because
Bozeman is pretty awful right now.
I think it is unrealistic to expect SF homes to be under $330k in Bozeman. I think
focusing on affordable condos are going to be better choice. Also, Belgrade
prices already differ by a lot. It seems more affordable to do lower priced
condos in Belgrade.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 68
I think landlords have too much incentive to own and make money off of rent.
There is no cap on rent whatsoever, so landlords can raise the rent as high as
people will pay. Because of the lack of housing, landlords can charge high rents
even for low-quality and/or old and outdated homes. If rent caps were put in
place based on factors such as age of unit, improvements made,
neighborhood, etc. it may disincentivize being a landlord, and they would sell
their rentals, putting more homes up for purchase. With the increased number of
units for purchase, buying prices may decrease. Buying prices should also be
based on quality of the home, and not necessarily just a location. Run-down
homes that cost $300-400,000 just because they are downtown is ridiculous and
doesn't allow people who cannot afford to own a car, or prefer not to own a
car, to buy a home within walking distance of public transit. Also, if a policy was
put in place that any home within an affordable price range be put on the
market for Montana residents only, and then released to non-residents after 30
days. This guarantees that more Montana residents can compete with wealthy
people coming in from out of state.
I think more focus should be placed on building affordable rentals for people
who are out of high school into their mid-20s. These people are very likely not to
have jobs that pay them adequately to live on their own so they are rooming in
houses or apartments that should ideally go to young or small families. Many of
these people are spending upwards of $500, a price they would probably be
very willing to pay for a 1 bedroom or deluxe sized studio. That way existing 2-4
bedroom homes can be more within reach of young or small families since they
won't be competing with young singles.
I think to only say Bozeman is too narrow, we should be thinking
Bozeman/Belgrade/Four Corners and even Manhattan count as places to
develop housing.
I would encourage the city to trust the private citizens of Bozeman to use their
own money and resources wisely and not try and intervene through force of
law. It never works well. Go visit a housing project in Chicago or New York and
see how those are working out.
I would like to know more about the Housing Trust passed by the 2019 MT
Legislature. Will this help? How much capacity is there? Are there other
mechanisms of federal, state and local funding + philanthropy that can help
facilitate real solutions in a timely manner.... like SOON.
I would like to see a "tax" assessed on sale of homes that are "flipped." It would
be a percentage of the marked-up price when a house is sold and then re-sold
at a higher price within 2 or 3 years. That money could go toward subsidizing
affordable housing.
I would like to see the homes/complexes/neighborhoods be just as inviting as
the non-community housing areas. I'd like to see them blend in as an asset to
our beautiful town. It should be pleasurable to live in one of these homes and
pleasurable to live as neighbors to them as well.
I would love to afford housing in Bozeman. Even renting is ridiculously expensive
(in my opinion). BUT I am not willing to inflict my hardship at the expense of other
people's investments or hard work. I don't want to demean what others have
built by devaluing the property in Bozeman.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 69
I would think that you need to break out the supply and demand for housing in
Bozeman. On the demand side, look at ways to encourage Bozeman city
workers, teachers, etc. to live in the City. Another group could be special needs
individuals that need housing but will never earn enough money to buy a home
and maintain it. Break out other demand segments. Supply side is mainly driven
by market forces that seem to be knocking out housing alternatives for low-
income workers, i.e. trailer courts, and leaving them high and dry. This obviously
does not provide housing alternatives at these lower wage earners. Providing
housing for an unlimited number of these folks could become a magnet
attracting other folks and leave to many undesirable unintended effects. I am
doubtful that efforts to affect the supply side can be successful in the long run
without some good analysis and planning. Good intentions are not enough, but
I commend you for your efforts. Also you might be interested in a paper by MSU
presented in a Bozeman city council meeting a few years back by Wendy
Stock.
I'm not sure what to do but it seems ludacris that so many people live in or near
Bozeman / Big Sky with houses they may use 1 or 2 weeks a year and yet so
many people don't have a REAL home of their own who work and actually live
here.
I've lived here most of my life, this town just got fucked over the last five years.
I'm leaving this now exclusive pompous shit hole for an actual community.
I've lived in Bozeman just over 4 years. I've worked my way into making decent
money, but it honestly makes not a lick of difference. I still cannot afford an
apartment on my own - I'm forced to live with others. After paying child support,
car payment, insurance, food, and cell phone I don't have much money left.
I've tried applying for low income because after child support I would most
definitely qualify, but the state does not recognize child support. My sweetheart
pays over half his check to child support, but in the states eyes we should have
more than enough money to survive when in reality, we are barely scraping by.
If Bozeman is going to continue to grow, we need the do something about the
traffic. Making 6 lanes on 19th and main in some areas. The city cannot keep up
with how bad the traffic is getting
Improve local wages.
Incentivize the non-developed land throughout Bozeman to build housing. Tiny
homes and homes on tiny lots are NOT attractive to families; this may work for
single professionals, but not for families. Contractors regularly make $100k after
paying for all expenses and employees PER HOME. That is an outrageous profit
margin considering the home prices are so inflated here. Lastly, stop advertising
for people to move here. We do not need to spend our tax dollars asking more
extremely rich people to buy our over-priced homes that local employees of
the City cannot buy.
Increase minimum wage or tax the yellowstone club members here in town
Increase supply thus reducing demand.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 70
Increasing green spaces; increasing bike lines and in and out of town trail
systems; increasing bus transport in town-more routes in town and out to Three
Forks the airport and Belgrade; decreasing, yes decreasing lighting- help bring
back night skies; allow homes in New Hyalite View to have rental/granny
apartments built into existing homes; make Bozeman solar panel friendly - stop
Northwestern Energy's anti-solar pricing change; fiscally encourage all
businesses and residences to use solar and to rent solar space or sell solar power
to other energy consumers. Currently as a landlord, the price ratio between
home sale prices and rental prices is off, it would be difficult for an average
citizen to purchase a home in Bozeman and turn it into a reasonably priced
rental. And yet obviously rental prices are too high for people starting out based
on available incomes. It is still possible to purchase homes and create rentals in
Belgrade/Three Forks - but we create an ecological nightmare having all those
people driving. Having a comprehensive ecologically sound transport plan is of
utmost importance also - lest we turn into Salt Lake.
Insist on affordability when approving dense/high-rise housing in the downtown
area. Don't allow any more luxury hotels/condos that don't include substantial
numbers of affordable units.
Instead of putting low income housing on heavily trafficked roads, and other
less desirable plots, tiny houses and other lower income alternatives should be
developed with MORE green space around them. Make community gardens,
keep wetlands intact. Make hike/bike paths/lanes a priority.
It occurs to me that the basic principles of supply and demand are in play. We
need more housing units. The more housing units that are on the market, the
more the demand is met, the closer we will get to beginning to see a reduction
in the price of housing. Once we have a greater supply of housing and the
houses sit on the market for a longer amount of time, the sooner we will see
sellers start lowering their prices. Additionally, while we all want a beautiful
Bozeman, there must be a nexus between affordable housing and the
amenities we desire of our community. If park requirements add 3% to the cost
of housing units, if impact fees add 3% to the cost of housing units, if tree
requirements add 1% to the cost of housing, if a new public safety center,
middle school, and high school add 3% to the cost of housing units then we
need to consider lessening the impact of those costs by lessening our
expectations of what those things ought to look like. Finally, reducing the cost
of 10% of the houses (inclusionary zoning) does not create affordable housing.
In fact, it has quite the opposite effect. The city needs to rethink it's existing
ordinances before adopting additional ordinances.
It seems like an excellent solution would be to develop high-density, 5-10 story
Community Housing buildings along 7th Avenue, with the ground level of each
building available to each business currently located along this corridor. In most
cities, the ground level of an apartment building is occupied by a commercial
entity. These ground level spaces should be made available to the occupying
business at the same lease rate that they are currently paying.
It should be dispersed throughout the city - not just concentrated in one area.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 71
It should be feasible for every homeowner who has even a little extra space to
build (like a tiny home) or adapt (like an out-building or garage) for rental - both
to expand supply and make home-ownership more feasible for people with
lower household incomes (under $75k).
It time that SE Bozeman gets some affordable housing!!!!!!!
It's basic economics, supply and demand, make it easier for developers to
create additional subdivisions for develop as well as incentivize infill within lots
vacant within the current City limits. This needs to be done whether within the
realm of the City or the County
Just keep this issue at the forefront of community discussions.
Just please start fixing this issue so I can buy a home :)
Just so grateful the city is taking this issue seriously and hopeful that real
changes will be implemented quickly.
Keep up the good work -
Land Strategies 1. Land Trust 2. Build affordable Housing on vacant City Owned
Land Strategies for existing Dwelling Units 1. Allow rental basements and other in
house rentals within R-1 (both apartments and rooms) Funding Strategies 1.
Residential Demolition permit that requires a contribution to the Affordable
Housing Fund if dwelling units are demolished and commercial property or less
affordable dwelling units 2. Luxury Tax on dwelling units over 750K or apartments
rented for more than 120% of AMI 3. Small employer funding of employee
housing through purchasing shares of a larger housing complex 4. Employer
financing of ADUs in new subdivisions & existing areas. Employer recoups the
financing through affordable rent collected & turns ADU over to property owner
once financing is recouped. 5. Increase Short Term Rental licensing fees with
proceeds going into the affordable housing fund 6. Increase assessed valuation
of short term rentals or vacation homes with the funds from the increased
valuation going into the affordable housing fund 7. Put 10% of the taxes
collected on a house valued at over 750K into the affordable housing fund 8.
Put a surcharge on vacant ag land within the city limits with the surcharge
going into the affordable housing fund Strategies for New Units 1. Rent to own
units 2. Build group living units for singles or couples with a shared kitchen and
living area but separate bedrooms with bathrooms. Other Strategies 1. Do a
community "Barn Raising" to construct housing quickly with minimal labor costs 2.
Put jail trustees and those required to do community service on a crew to build
affordable housing 3. Promote tiny houses 4. Build houses affordable with trade
school, high school. Gallatin College or other apprenticeship programs. 5.
Develop a plan by which the city can create an RFP for development of
affordable housing on City owned land 6. Create an agency to match students
with those who may have a spare room. Incentives 1. Provide city tax breaks to
those who provide rentals at an affordable rate. Code Changes 1. Remove
design guidelines in the UDC that cause increased building costs 2. Update City
engineering standards to allow things like stacked utilities that can allow
increased density and result in lower priced dwelling units 3. Create reduced
regulation zones where the only regulations are those that deal with life safety
issues 4. Streamline the UDC and affordable housing ordinance to encourage
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 72
building affordable units and starter homes 5. Develop a strategy that allows
common ground around Town Homes to be held in common so that you don't
have to create condos. Affordable Housing Fund Uses 1. Use Affordable
Housing funds to: a. Create infrastructure b. Purchase land 2. Use CAHAB funds
to design plans for easy garage ADUs that are pre approved by the city and
available for free distribution from the Community Development Department.
Large employer/landowner entities in Bozeman (i.e. City of Bozeman, Bozeman
School District, Deaconess, MSU) have large staffs, many of whom are struggling
with housing costs. These entities own large parcels and, in every example
noted above, they're already developing. They're just not building staff housing
and, ironically, they have the long-term viability that a 30-year investment would
work. Get with it, Bozeman. There are comparable examples across the map.
Refer to recent actions by the City of Seattle and large employers in Palo Alto,
CA.
Leave it alone...it will correct itself!
Legalize duplexes and triplexes in R-1 and R-2 and eliminate off-street parking
minimums (a.k.a. Minneapolis 2040).
Let the citizens vote! Cherry picking these pet projects to spend my hard-
earned tax dollars (my property taxes are reaching egregious levels) is
tyrannical. You were elected to represent our interests, not your own. Quit
pushing a false narrative that the government needs to step in for correction.
We are not socialists or communists; this redistribution of wealth is so frustrating.
Let the market handle housing. As a young engineer in another state, I could
only afford a housing that required a one hour drive. People need to live where
they can afford it.
Let the Market solve the "problem". The cities that have interfered the most in
their housing market (New York, San Francisco) end up with the highest housing
prices.
Look at how many homes are now short term rentals via airbnb. This reduces the
housing supply for residents. Explore other alternatives for short term rentals or
put limits on the number of days for short term as other cities have done.
Low income housing should be placed in various neighborhoods to support
diversity throughout Gallatin county
Lower impact fee costs and wait times Streamline design review process rather
than leave it up to a handful of commissioners with a far left agenda. Employ a
sales tax so that we can finally relieve the property tax burden. Over 12 million
tourists visited Montana last year and paying a bed tax simply isn't enough.
These tourists who are great for the economy but place a burden on our
infrastructure should contribute with a higher gas tax, higher local airfare tax,
and again a sales tax.
Lower impact fees, increase efficiencies in the building department for building
permits and inspections.
Loyal Gardens is a perfect example of a subdivision that doesn't "fit." The
apartment buildings that were built after the rest of the neighborhood don't
match the scope and scale of the neighborhood and quite frankly bring the
value of a single family home down in that neighborhood. These community
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 73
housing unit need to go in zone appropriate areas moving forward. Demanding
a developer include multifamily into a new subdivision isn't always the best
option to increase your housing units - Bozeman needs to remember that.
Make developers follow the rules about some low income housing be included.
No more big fancy houses or subdivisions. We are tired of it.
Make development of affordable housing easier on the developers - less red
tape, impact fee credits, waived taxes during development
Make the developers, realtors and builders not be so greedy. They are chasing
the big money and ignoring the needs of the community.
Making building/remodeling within the city less difficult and costly. The
builders'/owners' costs do not easily lend themselves to creating affordable
housing. Excessive costs to build in turn equate to increased rents/sales prices to
recoup the costs charged by the city.
Mobile home parks with small garages. options to purchase the land.
More bus routes
More controls need to be in place than there have been in the past. 19th Street
is a mess. There aren't enough "major" north/south or east/west routes in
Bozeman and the past idea to "build wherever we want" and not in a controlled
manner leads to this kind of problem.
More information to the public! I don't think everyone in the community knows
about this discussion nor the survey...
MSU take more responsibility in how they have stressed the market
Multi-pronged approach. Let (Make) those that benefit the most contribute to
the cause---developers, builders and employers that are expanding.
Need to be strong with the action plan and any regulation put into place. There
should not be loopholes for developers/wealthy to take advantage of the
market.
Newly built multi apartment buildings could be required to have 10% of low-
income apartments inside the building. That way low income people could live
surrounded by 90% higher-income people
no
No
No
No more hobby farms.
No. I need more concrete information before making a suggestion
None
None at this time
None at this time.
Nope
Not a fan of townhomes and not interested in living in them.
Obviously, commuting infrastructure needs to be part of this conversation; traffic
is already getting tougher and tougher...
One thing that is frustrating when trying to rent a home in Bozeman is the lack of
affordable housing that accepts pets! If they do, they make you pay an
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 74
obscene pet deposit on top of additional monthly rent. Make more rental
properties pet friendly!
Only 1 bedroom apartments for singles or couples I know of a 20 something
single female living in a brand new 2 bedroom affordable subsidized housing
and she has a much nicer place than I ever had; I saved money by having
roommates and then a small 1 bedroom apartment until I could save up to buy
my own starter home; there needs to be incentive for people to save money
and work hard... not just handouts
Owning a home is a privilege not a right. I do believe the cost of homes has
gone thru the roof. Continually adding impact fees, the cost of design review,
the specifications of design review, city codes getting stiffer and developing
fees has all added to that cost. People think the builders are greedy but the
ones I know are making the same amount to much less now than they did a few
years back. The only difference is they are working harder and battling the
entire process. You can't continue to add and raise fees while the costs of
building doubles and expect the price of homes to decrease. This is not
possible. I also believe that forcing every neighborhood to accommodate multi-
family housing is a bad idea. You are only degrading the nicer neighborhoods
and de-valuing these properties. You don't need apartments and duplex/triplex
in every neighborhood.
Pay City employees more and hire more help to move along Development and
building permits. The longer and more difficult things are the more expensive
properties become. Developers/builders don't work for free as they cant take
the burden to create affordable housing with no assistance with the city. Build
a simple community if need on the out skirts of town with no curb and gutters
make permitting process easier. work with the people developing Bozeman not
against them. And Train the city Staff and get them more help. So they can be
of assistance to people creating new projects
Pets should be considered a little more. One of the largest restrictions to
potential tenants is the lack of pet friendly rental spaces
Place extra taxes on investment and second home properties.
Please don't group community housing of more than 10 units together all in one
place. This further divides the haves from the have nots and doesn't incentivize
maintaining the property.
Please incorporate a Gender, race, age, ability, sexual orientation and income
Analysis on this and ALL RESEARCH being done by the City of Bozeman to
support the principles of Cities for CEDAW (Cities for the Elimination of all forms
of Discrimination Against Women and Girls). This will specifically help our City be
as strategic as possible with limited resources, prevent all forms of discrimination
and help us take action steps when discrimination is discovered. Thank you!
Please STOP Bozeman's growth and development with high-rises and homes
that only encourage wealthy people to move here, and puts the $$$ in the
hands of Halloran and other out-of-state developers. Why do you keep allowing
Halloran to ruin our city? Thanks for listening.
Possibly change tax laws to encourage local workers to become homeowners
and discourage investors. It is nearly impossible to purchase anything in the
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 75
starter home range (< $400k) without being up against full-cash offers.
Promotion of green and sustainable buildings. Establishing guidelines like
homeowners and condo associations' standards of living, such as limits on street
parking, outside storage of personal items, etc. Efforts to increase available jobs
to living wages.
Protect what's here - mobile home parks! Rezone them so that they keep this
essential stock of affordable housing on the market. Large employers such as
the hospital and MSU are growing like crazy but aren't involved in work force
housing - they should be. What can be done about homes that sit empty for all
but a few weeks a year? Or the proliferation of air b&bs? Or flipping houses?
Look for creative solutions.
Provide tax or other incentives for people to keep housing costs lower. Develop
a non-discriminatory way to ensure this housing doesn't all end up
owned/rented by MSU students/parents. Our teachers, safety service providers,
and lower-wage workers need to live in the place they work.
Put a moratorium on all new air bnb, vrbo etc within the city limits.
Put faith in low income housing. Allowing people a fighting chance to stay and
improve the quality of their lives only enhances communities. We need to
remain diverse economically to remain a viable option for future residents.
Quick transportation to surrounding areas
Reduce the property tax burden on local residents by shifting to out of state
developers and non resident home buyers.
rent controlled apartments tourist or gas tax MSU students need more housing
options so they do not push out residents
Rent controlled areas around downtown Bozeman to allow people to live and
work in the area without having to have a car
Renting should be temporary. Homeownership is the American dream- deter
growth than doesn't support that dream. Fees for all developers-including
business sites, hotels, etc. Save available housing stock including mobile home
parks. Add condos to formula. Registration and accountability for safety of
rentals.
Require all developments and subdivisions to include smaller home units (1-2
bedrooms; 800 square feet or less)
Require new subdivisions to include a mix of housing types/ more below-market
units; maybe get rid of cash-in-lieu option for bigger projects
Reserve land, or purchase land in town to build high density apartments, near
grocery stores, that allow ease of access for workers who can't afford a car to
get to their jobs, while being affordable enough for them to enjoy what makes
Bozeman great and allowing them the time to contribute to our growing
culture.
See comment above.
See thoughts above
Simplify ADU requirements, esp. the on-site parking requirement. Generally
reduce parking requirements to lower the cost of housing by allowing for
greater density. Recognize the costs of transportation is part of the overall
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 76
housing costs, so commuting from a distance is a cost burden
Sliding scale
small pocket developments on city owned land make sense
Smaller, higher density units need to be included in new building plans. These
should be particularly encouraged above retail and office space. Too many
new developments are either commercial or subdivisions of single-family homes
- mixed use can solve the housing problem. The zoning can be sorted out - the
city needs to play a stronger hand in the zoning and not be scared of losing
investors.
So many. But it all boils down to intent. The city talks about affordability but looks
at it only within its own box. We really need to take a more holistic view as many
of the community priorities directly affect the availability of affordable housing
and are having a major impact on the livability and inclusivity of our
community.
Stop building over priced shit that nobody from Montana can afford.
Stop focusing on community housing and start improving the infrastructure. As I
said before perhaps think about a commenter train from livingston to Bozeman
and from Belgrade to Bozeman. Focusing on community housing is somewhat
short sighted and thinking inside the box.
Stop paying money to study "affordable housing," just look at every communist
society on this planet, they have always failed at a command-control of market
forces. Or look at the failure of the Japanese government in attempting to
control its entire economy. Let the market figure it out with as little government
supervision as possible. You want affordable housing than stop charging
$10,000/door in impact fees for new construction, stop requiring developers to
solely foot the bill for infrastructure for new subdivisions, streamline the process to
bring land into the city. For the sake of all that is reasonable, stop thinking the
city is the solution and start understanding the city is the problem!
Stop pretending you can prevent the future from happening because you don't
like it. People are coming just like you and your ancestors did. They are as
worthy as anyone who has been living here from birth. Architecture and styles
change. Embrace these things instead of fighting them. Value a city that grows
because the other option is very sad, indeed. Value the everyday people who
keep this city running and have to work multiple jobs just to make it week to
week. Supply and demand is a true concept. Limit VRBO in rental and second
homes. Stick to your rules and guidelines and stop giving developers giveaways.
Stop the GREED!
Stop trying to make bozeman affordable for people who cant afford to live
here. Let everyone live within their means including living somewhere other
than Bozeman.
Take action NOW! Quit hiring consultants and polling citizens, without fill-up and
taking ACTION. Developers are leading city and county government agencies
around by their noses.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 77
Thank you for doing this. It is import to keep diversity in Bozeman and not price
everyone out of here. Also, to take care of our homeless population.
The city and county need to work together to address this issue. The city does
not need to rubber stamp every development that comes along and call it
affordable infill when it results in a 2 bedroom townhome that costs $750,000.00
and has no off street parking. This is obviously a difficult problem that other
Montana communities would love to have. I suggest providing property tax
relief to someone who provides well maintained rental property below the
average market price.
The City bends over backwards to accommodate development and
developers. Play a smarter hand?! "They" want in-- make them pay their share
and be good citizens/neighbors: - parking, impact fees, and removal from TIF
post-development so that tax revenue post-development flows back into
broader city-wide coffers; disallow mothballing of existing housing when a
developer takes title. I need both hands and feet to cou8nt off the affordable
housing commercial that has been taken off of the market/ out of occupancy
for multiple years, such that folks are unnecessarily displaced for YEARS before
the project starts. This shuttering/ removal of useable properties exacerbates the
problem. Have the developer cooperate with HRDC or the City to be interim
managers of the properties? Create relaxed standards (waive impact fees,
revert to actual cost-basis charges, for semi-permanent housing on pads near
grocery and/or shopping/services. (Imagine 5-8 small efficient homes on the
back lot of each grocery store shopping center, and a small community garden
on 'waste' open space in the same commercial lot... perhaps a 'clubhouse' with
shared communal facilities--- laundry, garden tools, etc etc... Work with lending
institutions to accept mixed-use condo units--- retail downstairs, apartment
upstairs- to be financed). Last I looked, that type of loan was unavailable in the
secondary market--- ie help eliminate institutional barriers to new approaches.
Being able to live and work in close proximity will become increasingly
important to folks- hard-cost and time saving (life -work balance) All new
housing with any municipal, state, or federal aid must be mandated to
incorporate carbon-free energy sources, energy and resource conservation
building techniques, and integrate intermodal alternative transportation. Putting
affordable housing in Willow Creek ain't it.
The City has long resisted owning housing for citizens, "We're not landlords."
Maybe they need to be. If left to private enterprise the whole concept is
compromised.
The city has to take all condos into account while working on any affordable
housing. If you are using just single family and townhomes for your numbers
than they are inaccurate and truthfully worthless. Two things have to happen--
take condos into account on affordable housing numbers and reduce building
and development regulations or the city needs to stop talking about affordable
housing.
The city of Bozeman needs to have skin in the game.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 78
The city of Bozeman should not be mandating affordable housing on anyone!
Only offering incentives like lowering the cost to build (impact fees & design
standards), reducing property taxes and city fees and letting agencies like
HRDC do the building of affordable units.
The City should be providing land and significant funding for the construction of
housing, especially for those with incomes under 40% AMI.
The city will have to get involved in rent control; no developer is going to take
less. And we need to stop giving developers tax breaks to build hi end housing!!
The focus should be on getting medium to low income workers back in town,
outside of college students, with affordable condos and rentals if not an actual
house. Price gouging of current rentals and real estate is hurting businesses and
keeping talented workers from moving and staying here. This is actively driving
them away to places with better income/cost balance. Commuters are now
seriously considering the 1 hour commute from Butte, MT as pricing is more
affordable for low income workers but can barely afford the gas to get to
Bozeman.
The future of Bozeman's economy heavily depends upon Bozeman's ability to
provide affordable housing for people of all income levels. During the past five
years, I've seen a number of people leave the Bozeman area due to the
unrealistic nature of Bozeman's housing market.
The goal should be to greatly increase the density of housing near downtown
and Montana State University, which is where the density of jobs and demand
for housing is highest. Having detached single family houses in those areas is a
waste of space.
The idea that there must be homes that people who are earning low incomes
should be able to purchase, is an idea that I don't agree with. Having a place
to be able to rent is important. At least with apartments and the like, HOA's, or
the apartment owners have the responsibility to keep the buildings/grounds
maintained. Keep Bozeman SAFE, keep Bozeman a SMALL city, and keep it
BEAUTIFUL!
The one consistent message I've heard for the last 2 years from renters is that
they lack any type of safety net. Whether, they've a 30 day lease, six month or
12 month. If the property owner or manager decides for whatever reason they
want the renter gone, it's done. In MT Landlords don't have to give a reason.
And unfortunately, with the market as it is, it happens more often than not simply
because landlords either want to sell the property or just raise the rent. One
renter's landlord raised the rent by alleging that the renter/tenant was using
excess water. The plumbing was tested and no excess usage was found by still
the rent increased by $50 a month. That alone can break someone's housing
budget. I've reviewed the Action Plan but my concerns are still that there is no
representation for Affordable Housing for the populations listed below, on the
Action Group for: Renters Property Owner actually living in Bozeman Diverse
Populations such as Veterans, Seniors, Disabled, Ex-Felons (the "Special Needs"
Group that the consultants refer to. Additionally, there was no effort to verify the
number of VRBO's, Airbnb's on the Bozeman market that are impacting the
rental market. Consultants say that it's a very low percentage and thus doesn't
impact. Without facts and data we can't make a good decision on the issue.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 79
And, since there isn't anyone monitoring actual VRBO's, Vacation Rentals,
Airbnb's we are indeed unable to know. Sure, there are a few registered with
the City but there are 200+ advertised. Listen to the community, gather data.
Consultants aren't clear on what's going on in Bozeman and they're NOT
reaching out to gather all the necessary information to make the best long term
decisions
The only sustainable way to make housing affordable is to make it less desirable,
whether that's through size, density, features, location etc. Bozeman is never
going to be cheap as long as it remains a great place to live, but it would be
more affordable if the City would make developing and building easier. Builders
and developers will provide what there is a demand for unless interfered with
through regulation or profit killing taxes and fees.
The problem is 80% the failure of supply to keep up with demand. The City
needs to help the private sector build more housing. In addition, those of us who
have benefited from rising prices (the vast majority of homeowners) ought to be
willing to pay some additional amount in taxes to help those who are being
disadvantaged by rising prices.
The starting point is supply and demand economics. Supply must always
exceed demand. Bozeman must define a compact urban growth boundary
that contains a 20 year supply of land. A study that identifies all factors
contributing to the affordability problem should be conducted, then measures
to counteract or neutralize all those factors should be implemented.
The survey runs with popular assumptions that supply will drive down price and
density (and growth) is good because it helps supply. This is patently false. We
need supply to match real growth, yes, but we need structural intervention that
makes housing a basic need, not a "hot market."
The way this survey is worded. It makes it sound like folks would not be able to
own these houses??? I think that would be a mistake. Single family homes over
apartments when possible. Apartments do not build community. Tax the
University, MSU has been one of the biggest factors in the exploitation of
Bozeman they need to contribute something at the very least.
There are areas that are more affordable. Let the market work the way it is.
There is adequate housing. However everyone wants to be in the latest and
greatest, newer home near main street. People have to realize that not
everyone gets to live on Rodeo Drive in Beverly Hills. Our rental rates of
$1500/month are substantially less expensive than other university towns such as
Missoula--$2200
There is no housing available for people in the $20,000-$30,000 yearly bracket.
Coming up with rent at $1500+ is impossible, especially if you are low income.
Mobile home park rent is becoming just as bad as renting an apartment.
They should be integrated into any neighborhood and not all stuffed into one
area. That creates a type of class division by neighborhood that serves no one
Thinking abut fair housing, not developers greed.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 80
This is a challenging situation, where it's difficult to please everyone. In looking at
the bigger picture, it seems like it would be beneficial to all if Belgrade could
have something to draw it's own residents, like having Gallatin College relocate
there, as they have outgrown their present location.
This is just crazy. I was born here, I grew up here. I'm the third generation of my
family to be born in Montana. If it were not for the help of my family I would not
still be here. Not everyone is lucky enough to have a family with means. Don't let
Bozeman become park city.
This reminds me of the South Cottonwood condos where the city subsidized
buyer's down payment so that they could purchase units for around $100k.
However, these lucky buyers were able to then turn around a few years later
and reap $100k profit! Subsidized housing is NOT a good use of tax payer dollars
- especially not for purchase. The condos to which I am referring are an
example of a completely botched safety net. The city stinks at effectively
helping the majority so they selectively focus on an extremely narrow minority -
it's not far to the middle income who are above the help-level but far below the
upper echelons of Bozeman. We are becoming a town of Haves and Have-
nots with fewer people in between - the people that are the backbone of our
city (plumbers, electricians, small business owners, etc.)
This should be partly free-market, but homes priced above $700,000 are luxury
and should begin paying a high fee that can go into a fund that pays to help
offset the costs of affordable housing for people with jobs in Bozeman making
below $50,000.
This survey shows that you have no idea what affordable housing looks like. One
of the questions suggested homes up to $280,000 for those making a household
income of $45,000. This is not reasonable/affordable. There is a huge piece of
the housing market missing. Where are the homes priced between $100,000 and
$250,000? THAT is affordable housing, and is available in other communities.
Whoever is in charge of this, "affordable housing" project seems to have no
comprehension of what that term means. This issue doesn't only affect the
elderly and homeless/low-income communities either. Bozeman has priced itself
out of a middle class.
Tiny home villages! Community housing should be integrated into all of our
neighborhoods in bozeman. Why separate them?
Tiny houses
tired of taxes increasing pricing senior citizens out of living in Bozeman where
they have lived so many years.
To push anyone further from Bozeman is disastrous for many who rely on services
within the city. Whether it's public assistance, or a bank, much of the county
relies on Bozeman. Pushing people further away while not pushing services from
the city to outlying areas is ridiculous.
To the above statement, to have regular and consistent reliable transportation
(bus or other mass transportation) on any residential should be at a high priority.
Also they should run to manufacturing frequently.
Bozeman Questionnaire Summary Page 81
Utilize progressive models outside the US for ideas, do not simply throw up
affordable housing as a reactionary measure. We are in this position now
because of failure to plan 10-15 years ago. Don't make the same mistake again
by applying a short-term solution.
Utilize the North 7th Corridor with opportunities for hi-rise low cost apartments.
Force developers who tear down mobile home parks and other affordable
housing to create equal housing within city limits. Locate Senior housing
convenient to grocery stores and downtown.
Wages and salaries aren't keeping up with the costs of living -- particularly
affordable housing. It's one thing to make more housing more affordable so
that people aren't literally living paycheck to paycheck. Housing needs to be
affordable but people also need to be able to be making a wage that can pay
the rent.
We must address affordable housing for disabled and seniors on very limited
income.
What has worked and not worked in other similar areas? Transportation is a big
deal and affordable housing should be near bus stops/stores for those who
have unreliable transportation.
When building, build UP. Bottom floor for retail, mixed use. Any new
development/settlement for more than 50 ppl add parking.
When looking at affordability there are a lot more factors not noted. For
instance once you get someone into a house, the costs of utilities, heat and
taxes play a big part of this.
Who will pay for this? What will incentivize tenants to improve their way of life
and move on and up? There is a difference between a hand up and a
handout.
Work towards a plan that can get people in the door of home ownership.
Once someone is through that door, they can advance into homes that can
sustain a family and their is more pride in the place you live. This in turn makes
for a more beautiful city with fewer nuisance properties.
Work with county and Belgrade
Working with property management companies who right now are raising the
rent on all of their properties gauging renters.
Yes, this should be the employers concern, not the cities. Unless, it can come
through grant funding.