The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-11-22 Public Comment - S. Eagle - Public comment re site plan application 21235From:Lynn Hyde To:Agenda Subject:FW: Public Comment re site plan application 21235 Date:Monday, July 11, 2022 2:46:08 PM Attachments:2022 07 11 Eagle Public Comment to Lynn Hyde, Planner.pdf With attachment. Lynn Hyde | Development Review Planner, Community DevelopmentCity of Bozeman | 20 East Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771406.579.1471 | lhyde@bozeman.net | www.bozeman.net The City has enhanced our project intake process and will now be receiving all project submittals – New and Revisions, through ProjectDox. As a result of this transition in process, response times to inquiries may be delayed. We understand the impacts any delay may create for your site development and we will make every effort to provide you with the highest level of customer service in a timely manner. We encourage you to review our Development Center webpage and become familiar with the new intake process. Your patience during this transition is greatly appreciated. From: Steven Eagle <seagle@gmu.edu> Sent: Monday, July 11, 2022 6:09 AM To: Lynn Hyde <lhyde@BOZEMAN.NET> Cc: Steven Eagle <seagle@gmu.edu> Subject: Public Comment re site plan application 21235 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. Dear Ms. Hyde, I hereby submit the attached public comment regarding “Six Range Condominiums,”application 21235. I also have mailed a copy to the attention of Diane Tolhurst. I very much appreciate your consideration of my views. Sincerely, Steven Eagle = = = = = = = = = = = = = Steven J. Eagle, Professor Emeritus of LawAntonin Scalia Law School at George Mason UniversityM (703) 328-7976 | seagle@gmu.eduSSRN Author page: http://ssrn.com/author=20343 3301 Fairfax Drive | Arlington, Va. 22201 | (703) 993-8000 Steven J. Eagle, Professor Emeritus of Law 205 Stillwater Creek Drive | Bozeman, MT 59718 M (703) 328-7976 | Ph (406) 219-2564 | seagle@gmu.edu July 11, 2022 Via email: Ms. Lynn Hyde, Development Review Planner, lhyde@bozeman.net Via U.S. Mail: City of Bozeman Department of Community Development, ATTN: Diane Tolhurst Post Office Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 Re: Public comment regarding site plan application 21235, “Six Range Condominiums” Dear Ms. Hyde: I hereby submit this public comment with respect to Project Application 21235, “Six Range Con- dominiums,” which would encompass “7 buildings, including 183 residential units and one 7,000 square-foot commercial building” to be located on 8.6 acres at the southwest corner of Babcock Street and Ferguson Avenue. For many years I was a law professor and part-year resident of Bozeman, during which time I lectured in programs for federal judges. My wife and I developed a deep affinity for the area and moved here full-time after my retirement. My area of specialization was Property and Land Use Planning Law. I have written extensively in the areas of property rights and planning. Some of my scholarly articles were reprinted in editions of the Zoning and Planning Law Handbook, Planning & Environmental Law, and similar publications. I also have spoken at meetings of the American Planning Association. I am conversant with, and support, the City’s goals of providing housing for members of all so- cio-economic groups in our city and restraining gentrification that would force many long-term residents to move away. Likewise, I understand the ecological and fiscal importance of prevent- ing sprawl, and that all of this requires the creation of additional housing within the city. In this comment I do not discuss the applicant’s assertion that his development group owns or has legal access to areas necessary for the project that are in fact owned and controlled by CT Condominiums. I understand that CT’s attorney, Alanah Griffith, is strongly pressing this point. Nor do I discuss whether the project meets other, objective and technical requirements for ap- proval. Again, I understand that CT Condominiums and others are raising these issues. Allow me to begin with a question: Why do planners in the Department of Community Develop- ment pass upon this application, instead of its being entrusted to the City’s engineering staff. They certainly can determine whether the application meets technical structural requirements, such as building heights and structural integrity? For some, it would suffice that approval re- quires only conformance with individual technical design standards. The answer, it seems to me, is that Bozeman is a collection of neighborhood communities, and not an aggregation of physical measurements. Indeed, this is the premise behind the designation of your agency as “Community Development.” The review of technical standards only does not comport with the City’s overall objectives. Bozeman’s growth policy is instantiated in the project design standards of the “Unified Development Code” [Bozeman Code of Ordinances, Chap. 38] [subsequent statutory references are to Code sections only]. These objectives include “con- sider[ing] the character of the district and its particular suitability for particular uses” [§38.100.040 (B)]. In particular, the “Project Design” provision [§38.500.010 et seq.] implements Bozeman’s growth policy through “[e]nsur[ing] that new commercial and multi-household development is of high quality and beneficially contributes to Bozeman’s character” [§38.500.010 (C)]. Most im- portant for review of the present application, the Code “Ensures that new developments within existing neighborhoods are compatible with, and enhance the character of Bozeman’s neighbor- hoods.” [§38.500.010 (D) (emphasis added)]. Further supporting the primacy of these fundamental requirements, the Code also provides: “In their interpretation and application, the provisions of this chapter are minimum requirements adopted for the promotion of the health, safety and general welfare of the community. In some instances the public interest will be best served when such minimums are exceeded.” [§38.100.050 (A) (emphasis added)]. The existing neighborhood in which the proposed project is to be inserted consists primarily of single-family homes constructed during the past twenty years that are almost exclusively of one- or two-stories of harmonious design, and of north-south or east-west orientation along streets generally forming rectangular grids. To the north of the proposed project is the harmonious Val- ley View West Subdivision, which includes over four miles of walking and biking trails, several playgrounds and sport fields, and the beautiful five-acre Meyers Lake. To the south and west is CT Condominiums, with its private park and trails. The proposed project would consist of four- story apartment buildings that would tower over the existing one- and two-story single-family residences directly across the narrow Palisade Drive. There are no other four-story residential buildings within miles of the neighborhood. Permanent rooftop amenities for residents’ recrea- tion would effectively make the structures on Palisade Drive five stories tall. Some of the build- ings would have a diagonal orientation, which is at variance with the need to “orient buildings with an emphasis on compatible development” and to “recognize the need for a system of streets and block frontages” [§35.510.010 (A) (2) (3)]. While Bozeman does not have a form-based code typical of New Urbanism, such codes resemble Bozeman’s compatibility requirement for development within existing neighborhoods in that both augur for gradual changes in the height and bulk of permissible new buildings. The looming wall of structures that are proposed simply fails this test. The goal of increased urban density in West Bozeman is appropriate. However, while it’s been said that “too much of a good thing is wonderful,” in real life, and in Bozeman, it is not. It might be that the applicants could refashion their project to achieve most of its goals without looming over the established residential neighborhood in which it would be located and thus changing its character. They should be encouraged to try to do so. Yours truly, Steven J. Eagle Professor Emeritus of Law