HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-10-21 Public Comment - S. Church - Gallatin County Rest HomeFrom:Sarah Church
To:Agenda
Subject:public comment on application 21330
Date:Sunday, October 10, 2021 5:02:07 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.
Hello,
We have read the applicant’s Zone Map Amendment (ZMA) application to rezone 1221 Durston
Road (Tract B of OCS 2439 – application 21330) from R-3 to R-4. The applicant puts forth arguments
for why the ZMA adheres to Bozeman’s Growth Policy and future land use map. The application
refers to “contemplated” uses proposed for the ZMA (a day care and housing), but no uses have yet
been determined. In our opinion (and in our training and practice) planners and municipalities must
consider all potential uses, density, and intensity of a zoning change. Thinking through a zoning
change should be considered with the land, not the current owner or proposed use (i.e.
contemplated use that could very well change or be parceled off to a different owner in the future).
The R-3 zone is capable of providing fairly high density housing that is compatible with the existing
surrounding neighborhoods which are zoned R-3. The existing R-3 zone adheres to the following
policies (see bulleted list below) that the applicant argues is appropriate for R-4. R-3 is in keeping
with the surrounding R-3 neighborhoods, with higher density zones proximate to major arterials
(Oak, 7th, Durston).
N-3.3 Encourage distribution of affordable housing units throughout the City…
R-3 allows for “Apartment building, limited” (5-8 dwellings per building) and “Cottage
housing”, “Manufactured homes on permanent foundations”, single, two, three, four-
household dwellings, as well as two and five attached townhouses and rowhouses. All
of these have the possibility of being, or including, “affordable” or “missing middle”
(see goal N-1.1) housing units.
DCD-1.5 Identify underutilized sites, vacant, and undeveloped sites for possible
development or redevelopment.
Just because the site is not currently developed under R-3 doesn’t mean that R-4 will
make it now inherently more developable.
EE-1.4 Support employee retention and attraction efforts by encouraging continued
development of affordable housing in close proximity to large employers.
This is a great policy and R-3 can do this too.
RC-3.1 Work with Gallatin County to create compact, contiguous development and infill…
Yes, that’s an awesome policy! Again, developing under the current R-3 zone does this
too.
Uses allowed under R-3
R-3 allows for “day care centers”, which is a “contemplated” use by the applicant. If
these contemplated uses (day care and housing) are allowed, why up-zone to R-4 if
these uses are already allowed by right?
R-3 also allows for “community residential facilities serving nine of more residents”
under special use, as well as “group day care home”, “group living” – these uses are
potentially related to the existing uses of the Gallatin Valley rest home.
Policy 76-2-304(1)(d)
The current R-3 zones is also in keeping with policy 76-2-304(1)(d), which states that
the Commission must “…consider the nature of the dominant uses allowed in a district
compared with the adjacent properties”. The dominant uses in this area are currently
single and double household units, as well as a few multiple unit
townhomes/rowhouses.
Furthermore, this policy states that the Commission must “…consider differences in
allowed intensity between the districts such as differences in height, setbacks, or lot
coverage. The greater the difference the more likely a conflict is possible” (Growth
Policy p. 77). There is a minor difference in height allowance until the City moves
forward with changes to height allowances in residential zones. However, the current
R-3 zone essentially allows for 3 stories (R-3 is 36' for a roof pitch less than 3:12 and 46'
for a roof pitch greater than 3:12), while R-4 allows for 4-5 stories (40' for a roof pitch
less than 3:12 and 50' for a roof pitch greater than 3:12). This additional density in this
particular neighborhood (where two stories is the norm) provides a potential conflict
with neighborhood character. It is our contention that good densities can be achieved
in the R-3 zone, without additional height allowed by right in R-4.
We can see that this neighborhood is changing, including increased density in housing. We
acknowledge that this is necessary in our growing region and agree that infill is better than
greenfield development. We contend that higher density housing along arterial corridors makes
more sense than allowing a potential use that is out of scale with the adjacent neighborhood. Thank
you for your consideration of our comments.
All the best,
Sarah P. Church, PhD planning
Robert. D. Church, AIA
1215 Crabapple Drive
Bozeman, MT 59715