HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-23-19 Protest - L. Sundeen - AC Hotel by MarriottFrom:Leif Sundeen
To:Danielle Garber; Agenda
Subject:Application 19078 - AC Hotel Site Plan - PROTEST
Date:Monday, September 23, 2019 3:41:29 PM
Attachments:AC_Hotel_Application_19078 .pdf
Provided below is my letter in protest of the AC Hotel Site Plan. I have also attached a PDF version.
Sincerely,
Leif.
Leif Sundeen
5 E. Lamme St.
Bozeman, MT 59715
City of Bozeman Department of Community Development
c/o Planner Garber
PO Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59771-1230
Application #19078 - AC Hotel Site Plan and CCOA + Dem
To Whom It May Concern:
I am protesting the Application #19078 known as the “AC Hotel Site Plan and CCOA + Dem”. As a
resident within 1 block of this development I am protesting the current application as it stands for
the following: parking calculations, street infrastructure, traffic to pedestrian safety, and building
scale.
Parking Infrastructure
There are three issues I have with the proposed plan: 1. The parking calculations “under park” the
parking requirements, 2. No curb in loading/unloading parking and 3. No onsite parking.
Parking Calculations:
The applicant has understated the needed employee parking for determining parking calculations.
The applicant states that there will only be 16 fulltime employees for 143 rooms. This developer
submitted a “like” application for the AC Hotel Missoula to the City of Missoula for tax increment
financing (TIF). The developer states there will be 40 fulltime employees for 105 rooms in Missoula1.
Based on the calculation used for tax incentives, that would translate to 54 full time employees and
not the 16 stated in this application.
Curb Loading and Unloading:
The proposed site plan does not allow for unimpeded 2-way traffic flow on Tracy. The proposal is to
widen Tracy by 2’ to 33’. A 33’ wide area is insufficient to allow for unimpeded 2-way traffic flow.
Based on my calculations a minimum of 36’ would be needed to allow for an 8’ West side parallel
parking area, 20’ of 2-way traffic and another 8’ of loading and unloading. Living and using Tracy
daily, even 36’ would be insufficient in the winter, due to, snow build up on the street leading to
one-way traffic.
I ask the applicant move the entrance to Mendenhall for loading and unloading, create site provided
curb in and/or onsite parking similar to the Etha and Element hotels.
No Onsite Parking:
My review of the current applications has no onsite parking. How is a 143 room hotel and associated
meeting space accommodating for the diversity of guests and users? Does this site plan account for
ADA vehicle requirements? Will this hotel be charging for parking; creating additional demand for
free on street parking?
Based on my experiences, all other major city cores I have visited in the last 12 months (at least 5
city cores), have had a requirement for a minimum of onsite parking. Based on the Gallatin Field’s
parking garage public information, parking only cost about $27,000 a spot to put in. Spot cost can be
reduced further if automated parking systems are used to increase density. All applicants after the
Etha have had to provide a minimum of onsite parking to accommodate a diversity of users.
Street Infrastructure
The increased vehicle traffic, pedestrian traffic and bicycle traffic in the downtown core has
stretched the capabilities of current infrastructure. The additional demand of this site needs to,
adequately address its impact on overall traffic and protect the safety of all modes of travel. I have
the following issues with the application:
Traffic Study
I do not see an applicant provided a vehicle traffic, pedestrian traffic and bicycle traffic study to
assess the full impact on current infrastructure. I ask the application to provide an all-inclusive traffic
study of vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle traffic.
Traffic Control
Per the proposed parking analysis, the applicant is depending on offsite parking. This will have the
following impacts:
1. There will be more pedestrian traffic. Based on submittals the developer has filed to the city,
they want to use the Bridger parking garage and transit hub. This will lead to a large increase
in pedestrian cross traffic across Mendenhall. This may necessitate the need for a traffic light
at Tracy and Mendenhall to reduce traffic conflict and improve pedestrian safety.
2. The developer is proposing Tracy as the loading and unloading zone. Based on the assumption
of utilizing the Bridger parking garage, a car will need to utilize Tracy, Lamme and Black street
to utilize the parking garage (Mendenhall is one way and Tracy is to narrow to U turn on). This
will have an enormous increase in traffic on Tracy, Lamme, and Black. The circuitous nature
of the vehicular traffic impacts 3 residential designed streets. I ask the applicant to move their
entrance to Mendenhall to discourage circuitous traffic through the residential designed
streets.
Building Scale
The overall elevations as presented, creates a 170’ tall canyon wall that fronts Mendenhall and
Tracy. It’s scale will create a canyon feeling with reduced natural lighting. In my opinion the height
needs to be reduced and/or setbacks and step backs need to be increased to reduce the mass of the
building. The Element Hotel has setbacks and a lower overall elevation. The Etha Hotel has step
backs around the building to reduce mass of the site.
Summary
The changes I am looking for, to alleviate my protest are:
1. Increased parking requirement for the undercalculated fulltime employees.
2. Change the entrance and loading/unloading to Mendenhall. Utilize site provided curb ins
and/or onsite parking to allow for unimpeded traffic flow - similar to the Etha Hotel and
Element.
3. A multi modal traffic study showing the vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle impact on the
surrounding blocks.
4. Developer provided traffic light at Tracy and Mendenhall. This is to minimize pedestrian
flow/safety conflict to the garage and improve traffic flow for circling vehicle traffic to the
garage.
5. Reduce the mass and scale of the hotel through setbacks, step backs and/or reduced overall
height. Verify compliance for height (including accessory items on the building, e.g. cell phone
towers) and setbacks.
Sources:
1. https://missoulian.com/news/local/year-old-firestone-building-toppled-to-make-way-for-
/article_79353be3-79bc-5896-8182-db3920ca0ffd.html
Leif Sundeen
5 E. Lamme St.
Bozeman, MT 59715
City of Bozeman Department of Community Development
c/o Planner Garber
PO Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59771‐1230
Application #19078 ‐ AC Hotel Site Plan and CCOA + Dem
To Whom It May Concern:
I am protesting the Application #19078 known as the “AC Hotel Site Plan and CCOA + Dem”. As a
resident within 1 block of this development I am protesting the current application as it stands for
the following: parking calculations, street infrastructure, traffic to pedestrian safety, and building
scale.
Parking Infrastructure
There are three issues I have with the proposed plan: 1. The parking calculations “under park” the
parking requirements, 2. No curb in loading/unloading parking and 3. No onsite parking.
Parking Calculations:
The applicant has understated the needed employee parking for determining parking calculations.
The applicant states that there will only be 16 fulltime employees for 143 rooms. This developer
submitted a “like” application for the AC Hotel Missoula to the City of Missoula for tax increment
financing (TIF). The developer states there will be 40 fulltime employees for 105 rooms in Missoula1.
Based on the calculation used for tax incentives, that would translate to 54 full time employees and
not the 16 stated in this application.
Curb Loading and Unloading:
The proposed site plan does not allow for unimpeded 2‐way traffic flow on Tracy. The proposal is to
widen Tracy by 2’ to 33’. A 33’ wide area is insufficient to allow for unimpeded 2‐way traffic flow.
Based on my calculations a minimum of 36’ would be needed to allow for an 8’ West side parallel
parking area, 20’ of 2‐way traffic and another 8’ of loading and unloading. Living and using Tracy
daily, even 36’ would be insufficient in the winter, due to, snow build up on the street leading to
one‐way traffic.
I ask the applicant move the entrance to Mendenhall for loading and unloading, create site provided
curb in and/or onsite parking similar to the Etha and Element hotels.
Page 2
Application #19078 ‐ AC Hotel Site Plan and CCOA + Dem
Leif Sundeen
No Onsite Parking:
My review of the current applications has no onsite parking. How is a 143 room hotel and
associated meeting space accommodating for the diversity of guests and users? Does this site plan
account for ADA vehicle requirements? Will this hotel be charging for parking; creating additional
demand for free on street parking?
Based on my experiences, all other major city cores I have visited in the last 12 months (at least 5
city cores), have had a requirement for a minimum of onsite parking. Based on the Gallatin Field’s
parking garage public information, parking only cost about $27,000 a spot to put in. Spot cost can
be reduced further if automated parking systems are used to increase density. All applicants after
the Etha have had to provide a minimum of onsite parking to accommodate a diversity of users.
Street Infrastructure
The increased vehicle traffic, pedestrian traffic and bicycle traffic in the downtown core has
stretched the capabilities of current infrastructure. The additional demand of this site needs to,
adequately address its impact on overall traffic and protect the safety of all modes of travel. I have
the following issues with the application:
Traffic Study
I do not see an applicant provided a vehicle traffic, pedestrian traffic and bicycle traffic study to
assess the full impact on current infrastructure. I ask the application to provide an all‐inclusive
traffic study of vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle traffic.
Traffic Control
Per the proposed parking analysis, the applicant is depending on offsite parking. This will have the
following impacts:
1. There will be more pedestrian traffic. Based on submittals the developer has filed to the
city, they want to use the Bridger parking garage and transit hub. This will lead to a large
increase in pedestrian cross traffic across Mendenhall. This may necessitate the need for a
traffic light at Tracy and Mendenhall to reduce traffic conflict and improve pedestrian
safety.
2. The developer is proposing Tracy as the loading and unloading zone. Based on the
assumption of utilizing the Bridger parking garage, a car will need to utilize Tracy, Lamme
and Black street to utilize the parking garage (Mendenhall is one way and Tracy is to narrow
to U turn on). This will have an enormous increase in traffic on Tracy, Lamme, and Black.
The circuitous nature of the vehicular traffic impacts 3 residential designed streets. I ask the
applicant to move their entrance to Mendenhall to discourage circuitous traffic through the
residential designed streets.
Page 3
Application #19078 ‐ AC Hotel Site Plan and CCOA + Dem
Leif Sundeen
Building Scale
The overall elevations as presented, creates a 170’ tall canyon wall that fronts Mendenhall and
Tracy. It’s scale will create a canyon feeling with reduced natural lighting. In my opinion the height
needs to be reduced and/or setbacks and step backs need to be increased to reduce the mass of the
building. The Element Hotel has setbacks and a lower overall elevation. The Etha Hotel has step
backs around the building to reduce mass of the site.
Summary
The changes I am looking for, to alleviate my protest are:
1. Increased parking requirement for the undercalculated fulltime employees.
2. Change the entrance and loading/unloading to Mendenhall. Utilize site provided curb ins
and/or onsite parking to allow for unimpeded traffic flow ‐ similar to the Etha Hotel and
Element.
3. A multi modal traffic study showing the vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle impact on the
surrounding blocks.
4. Developer provided traffic light at Tracy and Mendenhall. This is to minimize pedestrian
flow/safety conflict to the garage and improve traffic flow for circling vehicle traffic to the
garage.
5. Reduce the mass and scale of the hotel through setbacks, step backs and/or reduced overall
height. Verify compliance for height (including accessory items on the building, e.g. cell
phone towers) and setbacks.
Sources:
1. https://missoulian.com/news/local/year‐old‐firestone‐building‐toppled‐to‐make‐way‐for‐
/article_79353be3‐79bc‐5896‐8182‐db3920ca0ffd.html