HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-18-21 Public Comment - A. Kelley Hoitsma - Mountains Walking App. 21319From:Amy Kelley Hoitsma
To:Agenda
Subject:Application 21319
Date:Thursday, November 18, 2021 11:15:49 AM
Attachments:PastedGraphic-1.pdf
PastedGraphic-2.pdf
Mountains Walking Zone Change Application 21319.docx
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.
RE: Mountains Walking Zone Change Application 21319
Hello —
As a next-door neighbor who has been very involved in the neighborhood associationand efforts to preserve the unique character of Northeast Bozeman, I would like to
submit comment on this application.
I want to start by saying I like Mountains Walking, and glad it’s in the neighborhood. I didn’toppose it when they first applied for a building permit; I was part of the neighborhood group
that met with them and helped iron out the traffic problems associated with the site. We endedup getting a stop sign placed at the corner of E. Peach/Avocado and Plum, which I believe has
greatly improved traffic safety at that spot and potentially prevented traffic accidents or evenfatalities.
The fact that the Zoning Commission voted 5-1 to oppose the requested zone change
is significant. The Planning Commission voted 3-3, so they did not give it theirendorsement either. I believe that changing a zone in an existing neighborhood—especially an
iconic neighborhood like Northeast Bozeman—requires widespread support and approvalfrom all corners of the neighborhood. I believe this proposal does not enjoy that support,
primarily because neighbors are concerned less about Mountains Walking expanding andproviding employee housing, but about Mountains Walking leaving the neighborhood and
being replaced by something larger, taller, louder, and busier.
Furthermore, I believe it is a terrible precedent to create an “island of spot zoning” on a parcelthat is currently zoned as R-2: “moderate-density residential.”
With that preface, I oppose the proposal to change the zoning from the current M-1 and R-
2 designations to B-2M for several specific reasons.
1. The B-2M zone is not appropriate for this area
In Sec. 38.300.110. - Commercial and mixed-use zoning districts—intent and purpose, theintent and purpose of the B-2M zone is described as:
C. Community business district-mixed (B-2M). The intent of the B-2M
community business district-mixed is to function as a vibrant mixed-use districtthat accommodates substantial growth and enhances the character of the city.
This district provides for a range of commercial uses that serve both theimmediate area and the broader trade area and encourages the integration of
multi-household residential as a secondary use. Design standards emphasizingpedestrian oriented design are important elements of this district. Use of this
zone is appropriate for arterial corridors, commercial nodes and/or areas servedby transit.
Referring to the City’s GIS Infrastructure Map: E. Peach Street, E. Avocado, and N.
Broadway are designated as “Collector” streets, not “Arterial corridors.” By this measurethe zone change is inappropriate.
The area does not fit the definition of a commercial node, which in Sec. 38.700.040.Cdefinitions is defined as:A commercial node is an area meeting all of the following conditions:
1. Designated as "community commercial" in the land use section of thecity's adopted growth policy;
2. Designated as a B-2 zoning district; and3. Located in one of the four following locations:
a. Northwest of the intersection of Stucky Road and South 19thAvenue to the limits as shown on the future land use map
contained in the adopted growth policy,b. East of Highland Boulevard across from the Bozeman
Deaconess Hospital to the limits as shown on the future land usemap contained in the adopted growth policy,
c. South of West Main Street across from the Gallatin Valley Mallto the limits as shown on the future land use map contained in the
adopted growth policy,d. Northwest of the intersection of Baxter Lane and Davis Lane to
the limits as shown on the future land use map contained in theadopted growth policy.
By this measure the zone change also is inappropriate.
The area is also not currently served by transit. The Streamline bus currently runs down
Rouse and Tamarack. The closest stop is at E. Peach and Rouse. While that is notan insurmountable distance—weather permitting—for someone who likes to walk,
public transit does not currently run down Broadway or E. Peach and thus the area is not“served by transit.” By this measure the zone change also is inappropriate.
2. A zone change to B-2M would allow dramatic form and intensity standardsfor future development that would undermine the residential character ofthe neighborhood to the north
If this zone change is approved, future development at this site could be radically different
than what might be envisioned by the current applicant. Should Mountains Walking decide tomove its operation or otherwise cease to exist, it could be replaced by something not currently
allowed in M-1 (and absolutely not permitted in R-2), including large-scale retail (over40,000sf) and convenience uses (defined in Sec. 38.700.020 as: “Retail commercial uses
which have relatively high traffic-generation rates per 1,000 square feet compared toother commercial uses. A use is designated as a convenience use if the method of operation
includes one or more of the following characteristics: 1. The primary business is the sale offood or drink for consumption, either on or off premises, over a counter, or from an outdoor
service window or automobile service window. Of the food or drink sold, at least 20 percent isin disposable or carry-out containers; or 2. Use features drive-in and/or drive-through
component.”). I believe these uses are incompatible with the character of the NortheastNeighborhood.
3. A zone change to B-2M will exacerbate the current parking problems at the site
In the applicant’s “Zone Map Amendment Project Narrative: Project Background
Information” they state:
The future improvements anticipate construction of a new building on the southlot to expand the brewery space and create employee housing on the second floor
of the new building. Additional parking is anticipated to be provided on thesubject property for overflow brewery parking.
Where would this additional parking be located? Arguably the current parking is inadequate
for the current business, with cars parked well into the residential neighborhood on a dailybasis. How do they propose to expand the brewery space AND provide additional parking?
4. The zone change to B-2M would provide no buffer between residential and densecommercial development.
The 21319 Staff Report for the Mountains Walking Zone Map Amendment states on page17:
The parcels are bordered by streets to the west and north and an alley to the
east, which creates a natural buffer between zoning districts. Page 77 of thegrowth plan states, “at a minimum, zoning boundaries should follow property
boundaries. The greater the physical separation, the less likely there may bea conflict. For example, a local street, typically 60 feet wide, when combined with
the standards for site development, is generally considered anadequate separation— even for substantially different districts.” This street buffer
is provided on two of the four sides of the properties, with an alley on theeast. Thus, it is the property line to the south that would rely on zone
edge transitions to assist in stepping the intensity of uses and bulk anddimension of the buildings from the lesser intense residential zone to the south
to the proposed B-2M to the north.
It is the property/properties to the south that are of most concern to the neighborhood. That isthe residential neighborhood. There would be NO separation between the new B-2M
designation and an entire neighborhood of R-2 to the south: not by street, not by alley. Theonly “zone edge transition” remedy would to require that the new building at the southern
edge of the property (now zoned R-2) would be:
(Sec. 38.320.060 – 2) From a height of 38 feet at a ten- foot setback from theapplicable residential districts, buildings must step back at a 45-degree angle
away from the applicable property line…
This situation is something that neither my neighbors nor I find compatible, desirable, oracceptable.
The “transition” requirements for B-2M are even more stark:
(from Table 38.320.050 — Table of Form and Intensity Standards—Non-
Residential and Other Mixed-Use Districts, Footnote 8):
B-2M height limits: a. For buildings designed for non-residential or mixed-use:Five stories or 60 feet (whichever is less), provided the top floor of five-
story buildings within 30 feet of the front property line feature has a stepbackof at least ten feet from the front face of the building.
Conclusion
While I support and patronize the Mountains Walking Brewery and have found them to begood neighbors, I ask that the City reject this zone change request.
Respectfully submitted,
Amy Kelley Hoitsma
706 E. Peach StreetBozeman, MT 59715
406-581-1513aok@mcn.net
RE: Mountains Walking Zone Change Application 21319 As a next-door neighbor who has been very involved in the neighborhood association and efforts to preserve the unique character of Northeast Bozeman, I would like to submit comment on this application. I want to start by saying I like Mountains Walking, and glad it’s in the neighborhood. I didn’t oppose it when they first applied for a building permit; I was part of the neighborhood group that met with them and helped iron out the traffic problems associated with the site. We ended up getting a stop sign placed at the corner of E. Peach/Avocado and Plum, which I believe has greatly improved traffic safety at that spot and potentially prevented traffic accidents or even fatalities. The fact that the Zoning Commission voted 5-1 to oppose the requested zone change is significant. The Planning Commission voted 3-3, so they did not give it their endorsement either. I believe that changing a zone in an existing neighborhood—especially an iconic neighborhood like Northeast Bozeman—requires widespread support and approval from all corners of the neighborhood. I believe this proposal does not enjoy that support, primarily because neighbors are concerned less about Mountains Walking expanding and providing employee housing, but about Mountains Walking leaving the neighborhood and being replaced by something larger, taller, louder, and busier. Furthermore, I believe it is a terrible precedent to create an “island of spot zoning” on a parcel that is currently zoned as R-2: “moderate-density residential.” With that preface, I oppose the proposal to change the zoning from the current M-1 and R-2 designations to B-2M for several specific reasons.
1. The B-2M zone is not appropriate for this area In Sec. 38.300.110. - Commercial and mixed-use zoning districts—intent and purpose, the intent and purpose of the B-2M zone is described as:
C. Community business district-mixed (B-2M). The intent of the B-2M
community business district-mixed is to function as a vibrant mixed-use district
that accommodates substantial growth and enhances the character of the city. This district provides for a range of commercial uses that serve both the
immediate area and the broader trade area and encourages the integration of multi-household residential as a secondary use. Design standards emphasizing
pedestrian oriented design are important elements of this district. Use of this
zone is appropriate for arterial corridors, commercial nodes and/or areas served by transit.
Referring to the City’s GIS Infrastructure Map: E. Peach Street, E. Avocado, and N. Broadway are designated as “Collector” streets, not “Arterial corridors.” By this
measure the zone change is inappropriate. The area does not fit the definition of a commercial node, which in Sec.
38.700.040.C definitions is defined as:
A commercial node is an area meeting all of the following conditions: 1. Designated as "community commercial" in the land use section of the city's
adopted growth policy; 2. Designated as a B-2 zoning district; and
3. Located in one of the four following locations:
a. Northwest of the intersection of Stucky Road and South 19th Avenue to the limits as shown on the future land use map contained in the
adopted growth policy, b. East of Highland Boulevard across from the Bozeman Deaconess
Hospital to the limits as shown on the future land use map contained
in the adopted growth policy, c. South of West Main Street across from the Gallatin Valley Mall to the
limits as shown on the future land use map contained in the adopted growth policy,
d. Northwest of the intersection of Baxter Lane and Davis Lane to the limits as shown on the future land use map contained in the adopted
growth policy. By this measure the zone change also is inappropriate. The area is also not currently served by transit. The Streamline bus currently runs down Rouse and Tamarack. The closest stop is at E. Peach and Rouse. While that is not an insurmountable distance—weather permitting—for someone who likes to walk, public transit does not currently run down Broadway or E. Peach and thus the area is not “served by transit.” By this measure the zone change also is inappropriate.
2. A zone change to B-2M would allow dramatic form and intensity standards
for future development that would undermine the residential character of the neighborhood to the north If this zone change is approved, future development at this site could be radically different than what might be envisioned by the current applicant. Should Mountains Walking decide to move its operation or otherwise cease to exist, it could be replaced by something not currently allowed in M-1 (and absolutely not permitted in R-2), including large-scale retail (over 40,000sf) and convenience uses (defined in Sec. 38.700.020 as: “Retail commercial uses which have relatively high traffic-
generation rates per 1,000 square feet compared to other commercial uses. A use is
designated as a convenience use if the method of operation includes one or more of the
following characteristics: 1. The primary business is the sale of food or drink for
consumption, either on or off premises, over a counter, or from an outdoor service
window or automobile service window. Of the food or drink sold, at least 20 percent is
in disposable or carry-out containers; or 2. Use features drive-in and/or drive-through
component.”). I believe these uses are incompatible with the character of the Northeast Neighborhood.
3. A zone change to B-2M will exacerbate the current parking problems at the site In the applicant’s “Zone Map Amendment Project Narrative: Project Background Information” they state: The future improvements anticipate construction of a new building on the
south lot to expand the brewery space and create employee housing on the
second floor of the new building. Additional parking is anticipated to be provided on the subject property for overflow brewery parking.
Where would this additional parking be located? Arguably the current parking is inadequate for the current business, with cars parked well into the residential neighborhood on a daily basis. How do they propose to expand the brewery space AND provide additional parking?
4. The zone change to B-2M would provide no buffer between residential and dense commercial development. The 21319 Staff Report for the Mountains Walking Zone Map Amendment states on page 17:
The parcels are bordered by streets to the west and north and an alley to the
east, which creates a natural buffer between zoning districts. Page 77 of the
growth plan states, “at a minimum, zoning boundaries should follow
property boundaries. The greater the physical separation, the less likely
there may be a conflict. For example, a local street, typically 60 feet wide, when combined with the standards for site development, is generally
considered an adequate separation— even for substantially different districts.” This street buffer is provided on two of the four sides of the properties, with an
alley on the east. Thus, it is the property line to the south that would rely on
zone edge transitions to assist in stepping the intensity of uses and bulk and dimension of the buildings from the lesser intense residential zone to
the south to the proposed B-2M to the north.
It is the property/properties to the south that are of most concern to the neighborhood. That is the residential neighborhood. There would be NO separation between the new B-2M designation and an entire neighborhood of R-2 to the south: not by street, not by alley. The only “zone edge transition” remedy would to require that the new building at the southern edge of the property (now zoned R-2) would be: (Sec. 38.320.060 – 2) From a height of 38 feet at a ten- foot setback from the applicable residential districts, buildings must step back at a 45-degree angle
away from the applicable property line…
This situation is something that neither my neighbors nor I find compatible, desirable, or acceptable. The “transition” requirements for B-2M are even more stark: (from Table 38.320.050 — Table of Form and Intensity Standards—Non-Residential and Other Mixed-Use Districts, Footnote 8): B-2M height limits: a. For buildings designed for non-residential or mixed-use:
Five stories or 60 feet (whichever is less), provided the top floor of five-story buildings within 30 feet of the front property line feature has a stepback of at
least ten feet from the front face of the building.
Conclusion While I support and patronize the Mountains Walking Brewery and have found them to be good neighbors, I ask that the City reject this zone change request. Respectfully submitted, Amy Kelley Hoitsma 706 E. Peach Street Bozeman, MT 59715 (406)581-1513