Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-23-21 Public Comment - L. Semones - UDC Affordable HousingFrom:webadmin@bozeman.net To:Susan; Agenda Subject:Code Audit Comment Submission Date:Thursday, September 23, 2021 12:07:03 PM A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted. Form Name:Affordable Housing: Development Code Input and Ideas Date & Time:09/23/2021 12:06 PM Response #:15 Submitter ID:43908 IP address:184.167.63.190 Time to complete:2 min. , 3 sec. Survey Details Page 1 Affordable Housing: Development Code Input and Ideas 1.Contact Info First Name Linda Last Name Semones Email Address lindasemones@hotmail.com 2.View Unified Development Code Topic NCOD Code Section (If Known)Not answered Describe Your Idea or Comment Here Dear Planning and Zoning Commission Members and Clarion Team, Below is an email that I sent to Tom Rogers with questions about the process of dissolving the NCOD. Tom very kindly responded almost immediately, but said that he was unable to answer the questions at this time, and would forward my email on to the Clarion group. I would very much like the process of dissolving the NCOD, keeping the current historic districts, and developing design standards for the downtown neighborhoods to be discussed in detail during your meeting. I think it would clear up confusion and possibly concerns. Here is the email: I could use some help understanding the new proposed changes to the UDC concerning the dissolution of the NCOD. Here is what I have heard in the public forums and read in the recommendations. The Clarion report recommends dissolving the NCOD. It recommends keeping the historic districts separate, in areas regulated by the National Historic Preservation Code, which is fairly strict. Then, what I am hearing, is that the R neighborhoods would for all intent and purposes be upzoned. For example R2 zones would go from allowing 2 living units per parcel to allowing 5 living units per parcel. Each zoning district would increase accordingly. The report indeed does recommend establishing a transition zone between the B3 and the R zoned areas, using a gradual decrease in height and gentle density. However with the changes to what is allowed in the R zones, the gradual decrease in height would probably be from 7 stories to 40 feet or more, since they recommend an increase in height in the residential zones. Here is what I don't understand. Once the NCOD is dissolved, the neighborhoods would then have the option of creating their own overlay called a PUD Base Zone. All the homeowners would have to get together and make application to the city, and the city would have to approve their application. So, for example, the group of neighbors could request that if a lot were to be redeveloped to include 5 living units of 40 feet high, the units would be required to have a certain setback or have certain architectural requirements. So from what I understand, the whole creation of an existing neighborhood PUD would fall on the shoulders of the neighborhood group. And it would then have to meet certain requirements and be approved by the city commission. Tom, is this a correct read of the documents and meetings or am I way off?? I could use some help with this. Thanks so much, Linda Semones I would like to follow these questions up with some other questions and comments. I am making these comments and asking these questions as a private citizen, although I am a member of the Historic Preservation Board. First of all, I believe that the necessity of protecting the downtown neighborhoods from gentrification should be central to any changes to the NCOD. At this time, with the information available, the idea of an affordable housing overlay seems to work for the entire community. I understand that within this overlay, existing housing would be preserved by requiring any new development to keep the footprint of the existing housing. I am anxiously awaiting any other regulations for an affordable housing overlay which might include keeping the use of the current structure if it is affordable apartments. I also, at this time, am supportive of an ordinance to establish a transition zone between the B3 downtown and the R neighborhoods. I think this zone is crucial to both preserving affordable housing along the edges of the downtown, and to preserving the neighborhoods with their urban forest. Of course, my support and many other citizens' support depends on the actual wording of the ordinances and the order of the process itself. I firmly believe that these ordinances, the affordability overlay and the transition zone, should be in place before the NCOD is dissolved, if it is to be dissolved. If there is any gap between the enactment of the preservation of housing and the dissolution of the NCOD there will be a mad rush to gentrify the area before the new ordinances are active. I also believe that the answers to the questions in my above email will also affect how the public feels about the Clarion recommendations. I know that many citizens worked very hard for many years to develop the NCOD as it exists today. If there is a better way to preserve affordable housing, save the urban forest, and preserve the architectural presence of the downtown neighborhoods, citizens might be in favor. But the plan should be very clear, with procedures that are transparent to the public. Thank you for all the work that you do. Sincerely, Linda Semones 404 S. Church Ave. Have an image or document that supports your idea? Upload here Thank you, City Of Bozeman This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email.