The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08-17-20 Public Comment - C. Lange - Community PlanFrom:Connie Lange To:Agenda Subject:Community Plan Date:Monday, August 17, 2020 8:42:33 PM Dear commissioners and mayor: Thank you in advance for your time in reviewing and considering my comments to the Bozeman Community Plan draft. Most of my concerns are centered around the critical need for affordable housing, infill and transportation. In reading the 67 page document, I found numerous entries where these issues are mentioned. It would be difficult to match my comments to each citation. However, I will do my best to reference them below. Affordable housing: On page 6, the Plan states the vast majority of future development is designed, paid for and constructed by the private sector (and, therefore, the City’s role is largely regulatory here). Given that current development vastly favors high-end residential condos in the traditional area of Bozeman, it is the role of the City to set policy and regulations that will level the playing field for low and middle income residents. One area I do not see addressed is how the City recognizes the need to preserve existing low and middle income housing and how they plan to address it. The current trend for purchasing small homes in the older part of Bozeman and adding extensions or remodels that double or triple the square footage and, thus, the value of that home depletes the stock of middle income housing. These houses, which were purchased for around $400K and now valued at about $1.5M will forever be out of reach for the middle class. Eventually the housing market will hit a down cycle. But the opportunity to purchase a home in this part of town will be forever lost to all but the wealthy if this practice is not checked. Because the City’s main instrument to preserve and supply affordable housing is through policy and regulation, it is necessary to create regulations that favor lower income housing. For example, by limiting the size in which a small house (3,000 sq. ft. or less) can be modified to no more than 5% of its original footprint, setback and height. Long-standing residents in these neighborhoods are shouldering the added burden of rising property taxes due to these expensive and extensive home remodels. Additionally, the remodels are often contrary to the City’s desire to maintain the character of the neighborhood. This approach deserves a chance on a trial basis of ten years in order to see how preserving small houses will encourage low and middle income families to return to the traditional neighborhoods when the markets eases. This action would not incur expenses to the taxpayer such as purchasing land and building housing units do. It basically adds to the tool box. I would be interested in your feedback on this. The actions of the City strongly favor developers over the imperative to create and preserve affordable housing. In fact, affordable housing is being destroyed at a far greater rate than new affordable housing is being supplied. Low income residents have been evicted from more than 250 trailers – this is a low estimate. (Most trailers had more than one occupant.) I am still working on a count of how many small houses have been replaced with high-end remodels. My rough guess is approximately 100 small houses between the north and south sides of Bozeman east of N. 7th Ave. Recently the Lovelace Building was purchased. It had about 35 very low income apartments. They housed some of our poorest. About 40 residents were evicted in April of this year. It is now being remodeled to make four luxury apartments. All of these displaced people are citizens of Bozeman and suffered increased financial burdens (including increased transportation cost due to loss of walkability). This practice of turning over property for high-end development is contradicts the critical need to preserve and provide affordable housing. It is also a fact that most people purchasing the newly built luxury condos and houses where low and middle housing once stood are in-movers, coming from other states. So, in effect, the City is emphasizing the critical need for affordable housing for our existing citizens but providing tax abatements and other financial incentives to build high-end housing for wealthy in-movers. We need some kind of regulation to level the playing field. The distribution of wealth is decided by policymakers and lawmakers. Every policy or regulation you make will either negatively or positively affect the poor and middle classes. Regarding infill and ADUs: Most of us recognize the realities for the need for infill. However, I would like to see infill specifically defined in the Plan, Goal N-1, page 18. What are the limits for each neighborhood? Are there limits on two-story ADUs? What protects neighbors’ needs/rights for daylight and privacy? Will ADUs be required to fit the character of the neighborhood? How is over crowding defined - number of ADU square footage per square mile? Other ways? Behind our house two newly built ADUs foreshadow what could go wrong with unchecked and overbuilding of ADUs. They are very large, tall and of differing architectural style, neither of which match the primary residences or the character of the neighborhood. They are packed tightly together. Privacy has been minimalized. I imagine that if similar ADUs lined both sides of all the alleys behind every house from the north to the south ends of town, if the City would someday think, Oops. No. That isn’t quite what we had in mind. The parameters of ADUs need to be specifically defined to prevent overcrowding and loss of neighborhood character. Infill does not have to be confined areas walkable to downtown to avoid sprawl. Any section of town can support ADUs without adding to sprawl. Consider limiting ADUs in a given neighborhood until other neighborhoods have reached that same reasonable limit. Currently, ADUs are being encouraged within the NCOD, supposedly for walkability to downtown. However, Bozeman’s 50K residents don’t all work downtown. As stated in the Plan, MSU and the hospital are two other large employers. Subdivisions south of Kagy and along Highland Blvd. are well suited for walkability and are also along bus routes to the hospital and MSU. Unlike neighborhoods close to downtown, these neighborhoods do not have any parking issues. Additionally, the lots are larger than where most ADUs are currently being built. Midtown businesses, N. 19th and the Ferguson area also employment zones. ADUs would be very appropriate in these areas as well as along major bus and bike routes. Regarding multimodality accessibility: Recently, Mayor Mehl on Nextdoor suggested using the Fairgrounds for a commuter bus shuttle. I am in favor of this system, commonly known as Park and Ride. Although the Fairgrounds offer plenty of parking, its location would worsen congestion on N. Rouse and Tamarak and Oak Streets and do little to lessen greenhouse gases. Most commuter traffic comes into the city centers from Four Corners and the Interstate. Placing P&Rs close to Interstate exits, Four Corners and/or Belgrade and Livingston would be more effective. The above comments are in response to: Page 11 reference to City’s role; page 12 general reference to affordabiliyt; page 15, R-1.3, R-1.7, R-2.1, R-2.4, R-2.5, 4-2.6; page 16, N-1.1 through N-1.4, N- 1.11, N-2.4; page 19, N-3.1, N-3.3, N-3.4, N-3.7, N-4.1; page 22, DCD-1.2, DCD2.4; pg 28 reference to greenhouse gasses; page 34 EE-1.4; page 41 reference to urban density; page 44 reference to preserving character of Main Street and reference to residential space above first floor as it affected residents of Lovelace Bld.; page 49, reference to diverse housing stock affordable to all incomes. In summary, the BCP draft needs to more clearly address how it will preserve existing low and middle income housing – 5% remodel limits, deed restrictions, land trusts or other strategies. Define the parameters for infill, specifically regarding ADUs and prevention of overcrowding. Define overcrowding. And finally, propose significant actions addressing mass transportation to alleviate traffic congestion, parking and greenhouse gasses. Again, thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Connie Lange 712 S. Tracy -- Connie Lange connielange712@gmail.com