Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-30-21 Public Comment - H. Fretwell - The IvesFrom:Holly Fretwell To:Agenda Cc:Susana Montana Subject:Ives Building design plan comment - application 21165 Date:Thursday, September 30, 2021 10:10:52 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. September 30, 2021 Dear Commissioners, I am writing regarding the proposed North Central Block 4—The Ives Apartments Mixed-useDevelopment Site Plan and Commercial Certificate of Appropriateness Application No.21165. I understand the development need in Bozeman and the potential benefits of density over sprawl. I am not, however, supportive of the proposed design for the Ives building. The design does notprovide sufficient transition to adjacent neighborhoods nor does it fit the character of Bozeman’snorth side. As an active participant in the September 16, 2019, City Commission meeting, I am of the opinionthat the commission felt obligated to change the zoning from R4 to B3 given the 2009 growth planthat included that lot in the community core. Statements during that same meeting insinuated thatregardless of the zone change, there would be considerable deliberation about the transition between development on the property and its suitability with neighboring properties. This was stated clearlyby then Commissioner Kraus at about 2:28:51. “Certainly height is a consideration in B3 and how would that look right next to this [parking lot being rezoned]? But I would also say, of course, that we put in transition zones between B3 andresidential zones. It [any proposed building on the said property submitted for the zone change]would not be a Black-Olive because Black-Olive is wholly within B3 it’s not an edge of B3. Black-Olive is incorporated into the B3 and is surrounded by B3. It’s not on the edge.” Krauss continued, “it could be a fairly large building . . .but it couldn’t be the Black-Olive because itwould be in the transition zone. It’s on the edge. Not like the Black-Olive.” The proposed Ives building is on the edge of what is now B3 zoning and is on the border of thecommunity core, it is directly adjacent to private single-family residential homes on both the northand west sides and is, therefore, in the transition zone according to statements made in theSeptember 2019 meeting. Yet, the proposed design maximizes the allowed height in Bozeman B3 uniform zoning code and allows only the minimum required setback without any consideration fornatural transition along the west side. As required by code the building does step back at a 45-degree angle along the west alley beginning at 38 feet height. Nonetheless, as reported by the Design Review Board Staff Report “the Ivesbuilding would appear to tower over the smaller one- and two-story older homes to the north andwest.” “Appear” is an understatement as this 6 story, 171,654 gross square foot building is proposedto sit 21 feet from the neighboring single-family residences to the west. While the other tall buildings proposed in this massive development sit within the community core, the Ives building is on thefringe and will always tower above the residential homes next door. Figure 11 in the Design Review Staff Report makes it appear as though large lawns and park areasabut the west side of the proposed Ives building. That is incorrect. The green space shown in thediagram is private single-family residences. This means that the balconies on the step back of the proposed design for the Ives building will look directly into the resident yards precluding privacy. There are currently two “canopy trees” along the west side of the alley and three trees along the eastedge of the alley. Given the 16-foot alley being proposed, I am guessing all of those trees will be removed during development leaving no vegetative screen between the private residences and thebuilding. Page 20 of the Design Review Board Staff Report notes that there is no room for trees onthe west side of the building, hence privacy will be lost as a result of the construction of thisstructure. In addition to the private balconies, there is also a shared courtyard that would look directly into the neighboring yards and homes. In the end, any privacy screening created will be atthe cost of homeowners, rather than the developer that is reducing the privacy and stands to make aprofit doing so. According to code 38.520.030 it is intended that development promotes visual compatibility withadjacent properties and adjacent resident privacy is protected. In no way is this building in harmonywith the adjacent architecture and it directly infringes on resident privacy without any attempt toscreen, at least the west side, with natural canopy. Increased traffic down the alley to access the level-3 parking garage exacerbates the issue. The Bozeman Community and Strategic Plans are intended to help guide the design of developmentbut this proposed development goes against many of the goals from those plans. · Goal N-1of the Bozeman community plan is to promote housing diversity, including missing middle housing. Middle Housing is defined by the plan as “a range of house-scale buildings withmultiple units—compatible in scale and form with detached single-family homes—located in awalkable neighborhood.” Examples include Single-family cottages, Duplexes, Townhomes,Bungalow courts, and Carriage houses. The proposed 6-story, 171,654 gross square foot (gsf) mixed-use development will not provide any “missing middle housing.” · · Goal N-4 of the plan encourages a sense of place. Bozeman is a place where we recognize the outdoors, nature, and natural beauty. Yet, the design for the Ives building fills the entireavailable landscape with the structure and provides little natural character. Similar to a handfulof other new developments in Bozeman, it is unlikely to build a sense of place. Take a look at the back of the Element from Lamme or 5 West from Mendenhall. The flat bland exterior couldbe anywhere. In truth, the proliferation of more of these buildings is dissolving our sense ofplace. · The west side of the proposed Ives building does appear to have the required setback of a 45- degree angle at 38 feet height. But as mentioned above and demonstrated in figure 7 of theDesign Review Board Staff Report, it appears that setback exists only on the north end of thealley and in the middle of the building, not along the entire west wall. Furthermore, the set backprovides no recognition of the community core boundary or natural beauty that coincides withBozeman’s sense of place and space. · The proposed Ives building does nothing to honor the unique history of Bozeman and the former hospital district. The historic arches from the former hospital on Lamme Street provide asense of place and a time in history. Unfortunately, the arches are planned for demolition. · The Bozeman Strategic Plan asks for a “safe, healthy, welcoming, and inclusive community.” Living below or walking by a straight up 6 story building is not welcoming nordoes it promote a feeling of safety, perhaps the reverse. · A 6-story building will reduce sunlight available to yards to the west destroying what are now productive gardens that provide a sense of nature, peace, and tranquility for healthy living. · The potential hum from transformers that are planned on the west side of the building is another health concern as they are proposed to sit 21 feet from the neighboring property line andthe yards we now enjoy for peace and serenity. · The requested variance to reduce the distance of the driveway from the alley from 40 to 20 feet is another safety concern for those very same people trying to be a part of a safe andwalkable community. · Requesting cash in lieu of the required provision for parkland further goes against the “safe, healthy, welcoming, and inclusive community.” Neighborhood parks are key to encouraginginclusivity and community. The Design Review Board Staff Report notes that parks and publicspaces help create “walkable” areas. The northeast neighborhood that is subject to sitting below this towering building is a vital andvibrant community. Homeowners in the neighborhood are investing in and enhancing their homes asdemonstrated by significant improvement of at least four of the six homes on the east side of GrandAvenue’s 300 block in the last half-decade – these homes also sit along the alley below the proposed development. The one thing preventing further investment in these homes is the fear of toweringdevelopment that takes away our sense of community, health, and safety. In summary, there are multiple reasons why this planned design does not meet Bozeman's planning guidelines. There are accommodations that can be made for this development to better meet the localcommunity and culture. The proposed plan should be reevaluated to consider the following thatwould allow increased density and provide a welcoming culture that encourages safety, healthyliving, and community while embracing Bozeman’s sense of place. 1. The development should provide a reasonable set back on all sides of the building andcreate a natural open space along the edge to provide a park-like barrier that would providethe sense of place Bozmanites desire while also helping to disseminate noise and allow increased airflow and sunlight. Such natural settings and open space enhance walkability anda sense of safety. The fact that this proposed development qualifies for a subsection Kexemption so that it is not required to provide for vegetation to enhance privacy exemplifiesthe lack of transition between the building itself and the neighboring private residences. 2. The balcony rails along the 45-degree setback should be solid to enhance the privacy ofboth the residential homes below and the new apartment dwellers.3. The transformers should be enclosed to reduce noise pollution.4. The height of the building should be reduced and its setbacks should be increased to more appropriately transition from the community core development to the surroundingsingle-family residential homes.5. The width of the alley must not encroach on the existing property boundaries. This was aproblem in the development along the same alley just north of the proposed Ives building where the pavement extended beyond the alley into private properties and private fenceswere torn down to allow the encroaching development.6. Space should be made for natural canopies on all sides of the development to create anatural transition from mid-rise development to single-family homes. We are all aware that Bozeman is growing and I am not opposed to that growth. Our community canflourish with growth that honors the long-standing character of Bozeman that has thrived on nature,individualism, quaint culture, and assertive outdoor activity. Those characteristics are not part of the Ives building design. Thank you for your consideration. Please don’t hesitate to call or email me if you have any questionsor concerns. Best regards,Holly Fretwell320 North Grand Avenue hollylfretwell@gmail.com406-579-3658