HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-17-20 Public Comment - L. Semones - Additional signature on our Community Plan letterFrom:Linda Semones
To:Agenda; Linda Semones
Subject:Additional signature on our Community Plan letter
Date:Monday, August 17, 2020 3:30:28 PM
Attachments:community plan update Letter on Growth Plan Linda 8-7-2020.docx
Hello and thank you for all your hard work. I am resubmitting our letter on the Bozeman
Community Plan draft, as an additional person, Jennifer Dunn, has requested that her name
be added to the signatures.
With Respect,
Linda Semones
Dear City Commissioners,
I would like to express gratitude to our Neighborhood Coordinator, Dani Hess, and to Mayor Chris
Mehl for their encouragement to write this letter to recommend changes in language in the Bozeman
Community Plan. The Plan is the overriding document that sets the expectations for growth in our city.
It also must coordinate with all the other policy documents available for public review, including the
Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan and the NCOD policy recommendations, both recently updated.
Before I begin with specific suggestions, I would like to emphasize that this letter is working towards
the same goals as the members of the Planning Board. A major goal is the preservation of our
surrounding natural areas, wetlands, wildlife habitat, farmland, and recreation areas through 1)
reducing sprawl by encouraging density and infill, 2) efficient and financially sustainable provision of
transportation, water, sewer infrastructure, 3) increasing housing stock through a diversity of strategies
to increase housing affordability 4) walkability 5) vibrant, inclusive, and diverse neighborhoods.
I am concerned that the Community Plan does not balance the need for infill (efficient use of land
and city infrastructure, creation of more housing stock, creating walkable, multimodal transportation
networks), with the need for new development to be sensitive to existing neighborhood form, scale,
and residents’ quality of life. One way that this imbalance is manifested is in the plan’s wording. The
Bozeman Community Plan is not balanced, specifically when referring to the different types of infill
recommended for the differing areas of the NCOD , gentle infill and high density infill. The Plan
document does say on page 10 that "The needs of new and existing development coexist and they
should remain in balance; neither should overwhelm the other." However, the term “increased density”
is mentioned in a positive manner 24 times in the document, while under the topic of the Theme of a
City of Neighborhoods density is only mentioned in a generic sense, with historic preservation being
mentioned only once, on p, 61 under Zoning Amendment Review. This is concerning for the following
reason. This document sets the stage for our policies toward the historic and traditional downtown
neighborhoods, and these areas need to be mentioned in a way that will complement and support the
NCOD policy and the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan. As written, this balance is not attained.
Our plan should acknowledge the value of infill and density and that there IS a way to do infill and
density that is sensitive to existing development patterns (making it easier for owners to renovate
single family homes to be turned into multiplexes, ADUs, group living arrangements meaning more than
four unrelated people living in a household, incremental development). The term used for this type of
more environmentally and neighborhood sensitive development is gentle density, or gentle infill.
I would request that the terms gentle density and gentle infill be added to the Glossary F, and used throughout the Plan. These terms imply the following:
Navigating the density debate might be easier if more cities embraced "gentle density," “which Brent Toderian defines as "attached, ground-oriented housing that's more dense than a detached house, but with a similar scale and character. Think duplexes, semi-detached homes, rowhouses, or even stacked townhouses."
While even this mild form of densification draws opposition, it's less drastic than big blocky mid-rises. "Many people don't mind sharing a common wall and are eager to cut
their costs and carbon footprint, but still appreciate a direct relationship with the ground.
That's why fellow urbanist Daniel Parolek in San Francisco calls this kind of density the 'missing middle.'"https://www.planetizen.com/node/91658/appreciation-gentle-density
If this term of gentle density development were included in the Plan, it would help allay the fears of Bozeman’s citizens, concerned with the construction of large
massive multi-story buildings next to a residential area, or buildings out of alignment in mass and height with the neighborhood. The most important concept is that gentle
density would be designed to match neighborhood character of design, mass and scale. Also, any development of this kind would encourage neighborhood
involvement in the planning process for infill development within a neighborhood or in a transition zone. In the NCOD it already recommends that there be a required meeting prior to the application review for the neighbors impacted by development in transitional areas.
This is summarized on p11, 6.2 of the NCOD recommendations: “Develop a plan to have public meetings prior to application on review with impacted neighbors. Collect input from neighbors on large scale projects. Add noticing requirements with area radius. Develop minimum standards that applicant has to meet. Develop clear thresholds that trigger review.”
My specific concerns are for the transition areas bordering the B3 downtown business core. This area
is of importance because there are multiple investors and developers who would expand the core by
purchasing property in transitional R2,R3, R4, R5 zoning areas adjacent or close to the B3 core, and then
request a zoning change to B3 for their property. This is how the central city has expanded at the
expense of residential property owners in adjacent areas in other cities, and we can expect this process
to occur here as well. The zone change process is outlined in the section Zoning Amendment Review
starting on page 60 of the Plan.
First, I would like to review a section of the Downtown Business Improvement Plan that refers to
making minimal changes to the zoning around the downtown district and reads:
“Each of these areas should be addressed through careful study and strategic relocation of the
B-3 boundary line. Care should be taken to keep the changes to the boundary as minimal as possible so that they maintain and reinforce the existing downtown and neighborhood areas on either side. Fundamentally, the Downtown district should not be reduced in area. Likewise, this recommendation is also not intended to meaningfully expand the district. Rather, the hope is that
minor boundary adjustments will address potential land use conflicts and reduce the potential for
future challenges.” (Bozeman Downtown Improvement Plan p. 56)
This sets a policy that encourages high rise intense development within the downtown historic
business area, but poses a limit to that area. Again, the transition area around the B3 city core is
the area at stake. Minimal adjustments are to be made according to the map presented in the plan, but chipping away at the zoning and neighborhoods to the north and south of the plan is not recommended.
Again, in the NCOD it states on p51 that city policy should “protect the character of the Main Street Historic District and enhance the residential neighborhoods through context-sensitive
development.”
Both the NCOD and the Bozeman Downtown Improvement Plan offer balanced concepts of
development. This is not reflected in the current draft of the Bozeman Community Development Plan. It should be.
Obviously Bozeman is growing and changing, and the neighborhoods surrounding the core will grow and change as well. Growth and change is good for a community, but this growth should be guided, and the language should be in the Bozeman Community Plan to set the stage for implementing the already established policies mentioned above in the NCOD and the Downtown
Bozeman Improvement Plan.
Then where should this language be included in the new Bozeman Community Growth Plan?
N1.2 could read: Increase required minimum densities using gentle infill in residential areas
and historic districts.
N1.11 Enable a gradual and neighborhood appropriate increase in density over time in developed areas with the civic involvement of the residents of the area by defining a review process including neighborhood input.
N2.4 Evaluate design standards. Encourage gentle infill in transition areas and residential neighborhoods. Encourage development in appropriate business districts of buildings that are capable of serving an initial residential purpose and be readily converted to commercial uses
when adequate market support for commercial services exists.
DCD-1.4 Update the Unified Development Code (UDC) to reflect density increase or minimums
within key districts, and gentle density standards and regulations for transition zones between business districts and neighborhoods and historic districts.
DCD-2.4 Evaluate revisions to maximum building height limits in multi-household, commercial, industrial, and mixed-use zoning districts to account for revised building methods, building code changes, and the effect of incremental height changes on meeting goals of this Plan while maintaining neighborhood character in those zones affected by these changes.
DCD-2.8 Eliminate or reword this item as it is too inspecific: Revise the zoning ordinance,
reducing the number of zoning districts to be more consistent with the designated land use
classifications, to simplify the development process, and support affordability objectives of the plan.
Under Urban Neighborhood on p. 41 add: Historic Districts and traditional neighborhoods surrounding the core as well as the transition zones will be considered areas of gentle infill.
Under Residential Mixed Use p. 48: add: Those areas surrounding the downtown core that are historic neighborhoods and traditional neighborhoods will be considered areas of gentle infill.
In conclusion, these are not difficult or controversial changes. I believe that these wording changes meet the criteria for Plan Amendment on p.61. These changes align the Bozeman Community Growth Plan with the wording in the Bozeman Downtown Improvement Plan and
the NCOD recommendations. The terms gentle infill and gentle density support the Community
Plan’s emphasis on environmental conservation. The additional wording also sets the stage for defining process and code for the transition areas most affected by the rapid development of the town.
Thank you for your consideration.
Linda Semones 404 S Church Ave. lindasemones@hotmail.com 406-599-3916
Jack and Jane Jelinski 433 N. Tracy jjjelinski@msn.com 406-587-8367
Connie Lange 712 S. Tracy connielange712@gmail.com
Brian Gallick 777 E Mail STE 203 brian@gallicklawfirm.com 406-404-1728
Jennifer Dunn Historic Preservation Board Jennifer.a.dunn@gmail.com