Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-25-19 Public Comment - E. Mason-3 - HRDC Warming Center SiteFrom:Emily Mason To:Sarah Rosenberg Cc:Okie Okie; Chris Mehl; Agenda; paige culver; Cyndy Andrus Subject:Re: 18011, Staff Report for the Transitional & Emergency Housing Zone Text Amendment Date:Friday, October 25, 2019 12:53:18 PM Hello, Can you please tell me when the house was built? Also, could you please inform us how the city currently enforces code violations? For example, I was just talking to a neighboron my lunch break who expressed concern to me about how many of the houses around him that have sold recently (in Figgins)have been purchased by out-of-state parents of MSU students and they have been packing the houses full of students. It's myunderstanding that only 4 unrelated people can be in a house in a R1 neighborhood. Is that correct? We also have been hearingabout people say that if this goes through, then they are free and clear to pack their houses and basements full of renters. I wouldhope you would take into consideration what type of precedent you will be setting by approving a house in an R-1 neighborhoodfor almost 40 people. Finally, this neighbor, whose wife died a few years ago of breast cancer, and is raising his two daughters, ages 10 and 12 byhimself, one of whom walks to SMS every day by herself, is very concerned about the undeniable safety implications you wouldbe creating by approving this application. We are real world hard working folks. I do hope you take that into consideration in thisprocess. Thanks, Emily On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 8:43 AM Sarah Rosenberg <SRosenberg@bozeman.net> wrote: The Commission would have to reclaim the application in order for it to get reviewed by them. There is no set level of public opposition that determines if an application is to be denied. Whether it’s one comment or 50 comments, all comments are taken into account for the final determination. There is a minimum 15 day public notice period which this project is meeting. ---- Sarah Rosenberg, AICP Associate Planner 406.582.2297 From: Okie Okie <montanaokie16@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2019 2:34 PM To: Sarah Rosenberg <SRosenberg@BOZEMAN.NET> Cc: Chris Mehl <CMehl@BOZEMAN.NET>; Agenda <agenda@BOZEMAN.NET>; paige culver <mrsculver0798@gmail.com>; Cyndy Andrus <CAndrus@BOZEMAN.NET>; Emily Mason <emilykmason@gmail.com> Subject: Re: 18011, Staff Report for the Transitional & Emergency Housing Zone Text Amendment Thank you both for the quick response. What is the trigger for additional review by the commission? What would warrant an extension of the comment period? Whatlevel of public opposition will it take for the application to get declined? We are going door to door and their is overwhelming opposition. People are asking these questions and they feel very rushedby this process. On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 2:08 PM Sarah Rosenberg <SRosenberg@bozeman.net> wrote: Hello, This language only applies to Zone Text Amendments which is a complete separate application and process. A Special Use Permit does not apply to this language. ---- Sarah Rosenberg, AICP Associate Planner 406.582.2297 From: Okie Okie <montanaokie16@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2019 2:02 PM To: Chris Mehl <CMehl@BOZEMAN.NET>; Agenda <agenda@BOZEMAN.NET>; paige culver <mrsculver0798@gmail.com>; Cyndy Andrus <CAndrus@BOZEMAN.NET>; Sarah Rosenberg <SRosenberg@BOZEMAN.NET>; Emily Mason <emilykmason@gmail.com> Subject: Re: 18011, Staff Report for the Transitional & Emergency Housing Zone Text Amendment Sarah or Chris, Please provide feedback on the 25% or more rule and how it would apply to the proposed warming shelter. thank you! PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCHCHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THEAMENDMENT AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A PROPOSEDCHANGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OFTWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. For this text amendmentapplication the applicable calculation of protesting owners would include all owners of all properties in all districts of theCity for issues affecting the entire city such as review processes and generally applicable standards. For issues affecting adefined subsection of the city such as an individual zoning district the calculation of protesting owners would include allowners within the affected area. This protest does not apply to provisions relating to subdivision review as there is no state authority for protest of subdivision regulations. As of the writing of this report, no written protest against the changes havebeen received. On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 10:26 AM Okie Okie <montanaokie16@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Chris and Sara, Looks like we have entered the 15 day comment period. Please provide feedback on the following paragraphs pulled fromyour 8011 Staff report and Ordinance number 1997 chapter 38. My questions are in Red. Also is link to a chroniclearticle that specifically mentions the 1/4 public transportation portion within the ordinance. 8011, Staff Report for the Transitional & Emergency Housing Zone Text Amendment H. Character of the district. Neutral. Expanding residential uses into industrial zones does not appear to be congruent withthe character. For example, the M-1 (Light Industrial) district’s intent is to, “provide for the community's needs forwholesale trade, storage and warehousing, trucking and transportation terminals, light manufacturing and similaractivities…” Supporting services for Transitional and Emergency Housing, however, would support the character of thisdistrict. Many non-residential districts allow for some element of accessory residential use. For example, the M-1 (LightIndustrial) district allows for residential uses on the second floor. These are usually created for live/work or staff housingbut are not restricted to these purposes. Depending on the scope of the residential use allowed they might be consistentwith the character of the district. Due to the very intensive nature of uses in the M-2 (Heavy Industrial) district and thesmall size and specific neighborhood support nature of the B-1 (Neighborhood Business) district the new use is notproposed to be included in those districts. Similar residential uses are generally permitted in residential zoning districts. Inthese cases, it is the supporting services that may, or may not, be in character of the district. Additional standards areproposed to minimize conflict and reduce unintended consequences. The Special Use Permit review process enables adetailed review that is adequate to examine the specific configuration of uses and the scope of those uses on a specific site.Due to the wide flexibility of different uses which might be combined under the general heading of Transitional andEmergency Housing it is appropriate for the City to take an objective and hard look at any proposal. The Special UsePermit process allows the establishment of site specific conditions to mitigate reasonably foreseeable impacts on adjacentproperties. The combination of review process, special standards, and proper placement in specific zoning districts allowsthis proposal to meet this criterion. Culver: In this case HRDC's application does not mitigate foreseeable impacts to adjacent properties, children or theschool. We have addressed this multiple times in our email to your office. Please reference my last email where Isummarized our concerns tied to sections straight from the HRDC applicatoin. Most importantly, proximity to school andHRDC residents leaving the shelter and roaming our neighborhood. As a secondary concern, home values will also begreatly impacted. Please provide comment.. PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCHCHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THEAMENDMENT AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN APROPOSED CHANGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLEVOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. For this textamendment application the applicable calculation of protesting owners would include all owners of all properties in alldistricts of the City for issues affecting the entire city such as review processes and generally applicable standards. Forissues affecting a defined subsection of the city such as an individual zoning district the calculation of protesting ownerswould include all owners within the affected area. This protest does not apply to provisions relating to subdivision reviewas there is no state authority for protest of subdivision regulations. As of the writing of this report, no written protestagainst the changes have been received. Culver: Can residents of this neighborhood take action with the above protest notice? Please comment.. ORDINANCE NO. 1997 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,MONTANA TO AMEND THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 38 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODETO ADD TRANSITIONAL AND EMERGENCY HOUSING AS AN AUTHORIZED USE. 6. A management plan from the applicant addressing the following factors: a. Provision for continuous on-sitemanagement from an employee or volunteer during all hours of operation. b. Staff training. c. Intake screening of clients toinsure compatibility with services provided at the facility. d. Client code of conduct. e. Provision of on-site storage forclients’ belongings. f. Security measures to be adopted. Culver: As discussed many times, HRDC residents will not be screened!!! This is low barrier entry. HRDC does not havethe ability to perform background checks. They do not have the criminal history on individuals staying at the shelter. Inaddition, there are no security measures in place. Other than checking weapons at the door, HRDC has no way ofprotecting area residents. Approving a special permit will mean the City is ignoring the risks associated risks with thisshelter. Your office has the ability to decline this proposal. Please provide comment... D. Additional criteria. The review authority may, in its sole discretion, apply additional criteria the review authoritydeems necessary to mitigate impact(s) of the proposed use as a condition of approving a special use permit, including butnot limited to: 1. The site where such use is proposed is within ¼ mile of a sheltered public transit stop. 2. Limitation onthe maximum occupancy and/or number of beds provided by the facility. Culver: The proposed site is not within a 1/4 mile of a sheltered public transit stop! Again, HRDC can't force residents toget in their vans which means anyone walking would be forced to walk through residential neighborhoods and next toschools to the next available public transportation shelter. If you remember from my previous email, in all directions fromthe shelter, anyone walkling would be required to cross at a minimum, 2 school cross walks. This creates a huge liabilityfor the city. Please provide comment... https://secure-web.cisco.com/1hqobYhq_XqkeH-y8StD7dUIKjFfB4swXl6lNkZBwp7ZZM3vz81me08e3S-GBfX-4nTyiG6QgiUp6KC8no4Z-HXDPnsRT89MasNudhvtcAmI4FSYGY8wkR9jmsdcdUg9wDxzrD1-JsjXm3LYklCtgN_Z4PElN4yHxaRaThzHLe-HrLwjeR4ALypoHa50pTe80Q6fQPbusTgjLEcnDDEb5nnoqASWIe-ZVDWHR_xSKFegI22fLcDG-QXDDMjEvc0zbdf25xWAt5_X7S5Ys6XR7j0v0pZFxtRZNiV_PaXgGgqkKZr_rb9cyA3_seWF-lrFmlaWb_MW37Ees4qE04QcvWw/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bozemandailychronicle.com%2Fnews%2Fcity%2Fbozeman-leaders-create-rules-for-emergency-and-transitional-housing%2Farticle_16df3a75-f08c-5ed2-982d-f25cd53aa16d.html -- Graham -- Graham City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law. -- Graham City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law.