The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10-09-20 Public Comment - G. Poole - Re_ Future Land Use MapFrom:Michael Wallner To:Jeff Mihelich Cc:Terry Cunningham; Chuck Winn; Cyndy Andrus; I-Ho Pomeroy; Jennifer Madgic; Martin Matsen; Chris Saunders; Tom Rogers; Melody Mileur; Agenda Subject:Re: Future Land Use Map Date:Friday, October 9, 2020 2:09:58 PM Thank you Jeff! Yes, my apologies I forgot to copy her in my original correspondence! Again, welcome Jen! Best, Michael P. WallnerBozeman City Commissioner Cell-406-595-2273 On Oct 9, 2020, at 1:59 PM, Jeff Mihelich <jmihelich@bozeman.net> wrote: Thank you Terry and Michael for the questions from Geoff. Chris – could you or Tom please try to send a response to Geoff’s questions. Please copy me when you do. Thanks all. P.S. Commissioner Madgic – welcome to wonderful world or Commission emails! Typically, all Commissioners are copied when there are constituent questions about large policy issues such as the Future Lane Use Plan. It keeps us all current and informed – FYI and thanks. Jeff Mihelich | City Manager ICMA-CM City of Bozeman 406-582-2306 jmihelich@bozeman.net From: Terry Cunningham <TCunningham@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent: Friday, October 9, 2020 1:47 PM To: Michael Wallner <mwallner@BOZEMAN.NET>; Jeff Mihelich <jmihelich@BOZEMAN.NET>; Chris Saunders <csaunders@BOZEMAN.NET>; Chuck Winn <CWinn@BOZEMAN.NET> Cc: Cyndy Andrus <CAndrus@BOZEMAN.NET>; I-Ho Pomeroy <IPomeroy@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Future Land Use Map As an FYI, I have a Zoom meeting with Mr. Poole at 2:0pm today. Terry Cunningham - City Commissioner City of Bozeman | 121 North Rouse Avenue | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771 P: 406.595-3295 | E: Tcunningham@bozeman.net | W: www.bozeman.net From: Michael WallnerSent: Friday, October 09, 2020 1:45 PMTo: Jeff Mihelich; Chris Saunders; Chuck WinnCc: Cyndy Andrus; I-Ho Pomeroy; Terry CunninghamSubject: Fwd: Future Land Use Map Jeff,I hope you are well! I met with Geoff a constituent today regarding the community plan. I think he also met with Terry. He had 20+ questions he wasgoing to ask on October 20th and I asked him to trim the list and send it now. Is there anyway staff would have time before next Friday to provide answers for hisquestions below? I know this is a heavy lift, but it’s probably more efficient to take this approach....If not, I understand. Thank you, Michael P. Wallner Bozeman City CommissionerCell-406-595-2273 Begin forwarded message: From: Geoffrey Poole <gpoole@eco-metrics.com>Date: October 9, 2020 at 1:32:37 PM MDTTo: Michael Wallner <mwallner@bozeman.net>Subject: Re: Future Land Use Map Hi Michael: Here are my 10 questions... Q1: If the growth policy says that a parcel of land, inthe midst of a residential area, is designated forindustrial land use, is the city legally required togrant a request, at the time of annexation, forapplicable zoning identified in the growth policy? Forinstance, on the industrial land slated for SouthBozeman, if a developer requests M-2 at the time ofannexation, under what authority and circumstance can thecity have allow the annexation but deny the M-2 zoningbut require, for instance, BP zoning? Q2: Given the the proposed industrial parcel is within a5-10 minute walk of Sacajawea Middle School, why does"industrial" designation better serve the goals of theland use plan than "urban neighborhood" -- especially thegoals of "walkable neighborhoods" and "a sense of place"and "neighborhood identity" for South Bozeman Residents? Q4: If the industrial land use in intended to providewalkable jobs for the residents, what safeguards are inplace to be sure that high-paying light industry jobswill occur on the land rather than, e.g., big-box retail(providing low paying jobs to people who will have tocommute into South Bozeman) or mini-storage (no jobs)? Q5: Given that the municipal code states that REMUdevelopment is intended to "provide options for a varietyof housing, employment, retail and neighborhood serviceopportunities within a new or existing neighborhood," howdoes the reclassification of residential land use toindustrial land use help ensure the success of businessesthat will eventually be established in the adjacentBlackwood Groves REMU zone? Q6: In the Commissioner's meeting this week, the planningdepartment said that the community plan does not requireany change to exiting land use, yet then cited"preventing Eagle Mount from having to move" as a reasonfor the industrial designation in South Bozeman. Underwhat circumstances would the city have to ask Eagle Mountto move if the current residential designation weremaintained (as Urban Neighborhood) and how wouldreclassifying the designated land use as industrialprotect Eagle Mount from this threat? Q7: With reference to the proposed industrial parcel inSouth Bozeman, how does designating industrial landwithin walking distance of schools and abutting REMUdevelopment further the goals of the 2019 communityplan? Similarly, what is the city's position on how anUrban Neighborhood designation within walking distance ofschools and abutting REMU development would support thegoals of the plan? Q8: The distribution of proposed reclassification ofresidential to commercial/industrial land in very unevenacross the Community Plan Planning Area. 70% of thelanduse that would be reclassified from residential tocommercial or industrial occurs in about 10% of the landarea covered by the community plan. 47% of thereclassification occurs in a single 400-acre block inSouth Bozeman. How could the 400-acre block ofreclassified land in South Bozeman be changed to reducedthe disproportionate impact in that area? Q9: The plethora of water features in South Bozeman isoften cited as a reason that the proposed industrialparcel was selected in South Bozeman. Implicit in thisstatement is that industrial classification is a risk forwater quality, and that the parcel was chosen to mitigatethat risk. Can you clarify why water resource protectioncited by the planning department as a reason that theparcel was chosen for industrial land use, given that: 1) the City's on-line GIS system shows the same or evenhigher density of water features on the designatedindustrial parcel as on surrounding parcels, and 2) the creek on the selected parcel drains immediatelyinto are area that is covenanted to be a park behindSacajawea Middle School in the Blackwood Grove REMUdevelopment, and then runs through the park in the middleof the Alder Creek Subdivision? How was water quality indownstream parks and playgrouds, potential impacts onchildren from contract recreation, and the livability ofdownstream neighborhoods considered when industrialparcel was designated? Q10: In the on-line city records of public comment on theBlackwood Groves subdivision and the Growth Policy, thereare more than 70 citizen comments opposed to the REMU,industrial, and Community Commercial land usedesignations in South Bozeman. Although two citizencomments were supportive of Blackwood Groves, no citizencomment supported the Industrial Land Use Designation. The wishes of the residents of South Bozeman are clear. Their wishes could largely be addressed by changingindustrial land use on *just one parcel* of the futureland use map in South Bozeman and reverting the parcel tothe current residential (remapped to "UrbanNeighborhood") designation. While some benefits to thecommunity plan would change, a remarkable number ofbenefits for the goals of the community plan would beemerge: including walkablity between future residences onthe parcel and the middle school, improved customer basefor future neighborhood businesses on the adjacentBlackwood Groves REMU parcel, and improved neighborhoodcohesion and identity in South Bozeman. If the CommunityPlan is intended to be responsive to public input, whatis preventing the unanimous public request to remove theindustrial designation from South Bozeman beingincorporated into the Community Plan and Future Land UseMap? Why are the benefits of the industrial land usedesignation on this parcel so important relative to theobvious benefits residential land use that the existingclassification on the FLUM should override extensive,unanimous public comment in favor of "UrbanNeighborhood?" As the plan has developed, other parcelshave been reclassified based on far less public input. Why aren't the wishes of South Bozeman residents beingincorporated into the plan? Thanks for the chat! -Geoff On 10/8/2020 12:39 PM, Michael Wallner wrote: Geoff,Can you call me at 595-2273? Thank you, Michael P. WallnerBozeman City CommissionerCell-406-595-2273 On Oct 8, 2020, at 12:20 PM, Bozeman, MT <webadmin@bozeman.net> wrote: Message submitted from the <City Of Bozeman> website. Site Visitor Name: Geoff PooleSite Visitor Email: gpoole@eco-metrics.com Dear Commissioner Wallner: I appreciate your thoughtful consideration of the proposed update to the Bozeman Community Plan during Tuesday night's City Commission Meeting. I am writing because, having done additional research into the proposed community plan and associated future land use map, I have found what appear to be several inaccuracies or inconsistencies in the comments provided by the planning department regarding the commercial and industrial land use designations slated for South Bozeman. I don't think that public comment is an appropriate or constructive venue for me to express my concerns regarding specific information provided by the planning department. Rather, I would like to share my findings with you directly, and leave it to you to determine whether my concerns warrant followup with the city planners. Is there any chance you could make time for a 15 minute Zoom call with me sometime next week? I would request a Zoom call rather than a phone call so that I could share with you some information from city's excellent public mapping system. I appreciate you considering my request. Best regards, -Geoff PooleCity 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.