HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-01-21 Public Comment - S. Mathre - The IvesFrom:Susie
To:Agenda
Subject:The Ives, application 21165
Date:Friday, October 1, 2021 3:47:17 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.
I would like to add my comments about the development called the Ives, application number 21165.
When I read through the Community Plan, I can’t help thinking that The Ives is not what the residents who were
surveyed about the future of Bozeman envisioned as an answer to the growth issue in Bozeman. I’m troubled by
many aspects of this project - the overall look, density, and lack of consideration for the neighboring residences. I’m
aware the city would like to create infill and create more housing for bozeman, but this project is a drastic solution
and offers no legitimate transition from the downtown core to residential areas. At 70’ it would put the Ives at one of
the the tallest buildings in downtown Bozeman, surpassing all of the downtown buildings except the Baxter and the
Armory. If the city wants “the missing middle” housing, this does not fit that definition whatsoever, this clearly falls
into the category of a midrise building, and if all the other buildings in the project are built as proposed, it will
become an entirely different environment from something Bozeman has historically had in this area.
The idea that screening from this towering building is to be placed on the residents across the street on Villard in the
form of deciduous trees that lose their leaves in the winter is disrespectful. The onus of screening should be placed
on the developer, and two linden trees will not provide any sort of shortfall. The alley residents by and large have no
mature vegetation, and there are no plans for any screening on that side as far as I can tell.
The step back on the northwest corner is a paltry consolation as a transition, and there’s no step back transition
towards Villard and no setback. I’m guessing this large, very dense development covering several blocks is not what
the citizens had in mind, and I hope that it’s not too late to require the developer to scale back these plans and make
them more in accordance to the growth policy that was created by input from several citizen meetings and appears to
be disregarded.
Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should.
Thanks for your time in considering my comments,
Sincerely,
Susie Mathre