HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-19-22 Public Comment - P. Quinn - Public Comment on Site Plan 22047 - Sundance Springs Neighborhood Services Lot # 2 Development - With Staff ResponseFrom:Lynn Hyde
To:Paul Quinn; Agenda
Subject:RE: Public Comment on Site Plan 22047 - Sundance Springs Neighborhood Services Lot # 2 Development
Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 10:56:27 AM
Paul,
Thank you for your public comment. It has been received and included in the review as well as the public record.
All reviewers, the applicant and public will have access to your comment.
If you have any question please let me know.
Lynn Hyde | Development Review Planner, Community Development
City of Bozeman | 20 East Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771
406.579.1471 | lhyde@bozeman.net | www.bozeman.net
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Quinn <paul_quinn_99@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2022 10:46 AM
To: Agenda <agenda@BOZEMAN.NET>
Cc: Lynn Hyde <lhyde@BOZEMAN.NET>
Subject: Public Comment on Site Plan 22047 - Sundance Springs Neighborhood Services Lot # 2 Development
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.
To: Bozeman City Commission
Bozeman Community Development Board
Bozeman Community Development Directors Bozeman City Planning Department
From: Paul Quinn, Bozeman, MT
Date: October 19, 2022
RE: Public Comment on Site Plan 22047
Sundance Springs Neighborhood Services Lot # 2 Development
Please find attached document.
Thanks,
Paul Quinn
467 Peace Pipe Dr.
Bozeman, MT 59715
To: Bozeman City Commission
Bozeman Community Development Board
Bozeman Community Development Directors
Bozeman City Planning Department
From: Paul Quinn, Bozeman, MT
Date:October 19, 2022
RE: Public Comment on Site Plan 22047
Sundance Springs Neighborhood Services Lot # 2 Development
Dear City Commissioners, Members of the Community Development Board, Community
Development Directors, and Planning Department Staff:
Thank you for the opportunity to share my perspective and concern for the development of
Lot # 2, Sundance Springs Neighborhood Services.
I was born and raised in Bozeman, MT. I grew up on a farm 1/4 mile from this proposed
development. I left Bozeman after graduating from MSU. And after about 20 years of working
toward coming back, I returned. My wife and I (and now 3 year old son) own a home down
the street from the proposed commercial development at 467 Peace Pipe Dr. My wife and I
run a private investment management firm.
Growing up in Bozeman and my background in financial markets, I hold a unique perspective.
I am not opposed to development. As they say, "the only constant is change." However, I
grew up with an appreciation of Bozeman's history and value changes that are thoughtful with
positive, long-term outcomes for our community and environment.
I grew up on the former Patterson Ranch at the corner of South 19th Road and Goldenstein
Road. The Patterson Ranch was the homestead of James L. Patterson. James L. Patterson
was a Colonel who fought in the Civil War. He came to Bozeman with his wife and family
after the Civil War. He built and lived in a 1-room log cabin which still exists today on my
parent’s property. Mr. Patterson grew his homestead property into a 2,500 acre ranch
covering Southeast Bozeman from what would become MSU all the way to Leverich Canyon.
My parents purchased what was left of the Patterson property in 1983 from the estate of Pat
Harris -- James Patterson’s great grandson. I grew up helping my parents rehabilitate the
Patterson property in a manner that preserved and respected its history. Their land has been
used for agriculture and will remain so.
In the 40 years since my parents moved to the property, I have witnessed a staggering
amount of development encroaching my parents’ property. The majority of these changes
exemplify profit over principle. The destruction of agricultural land, the changes to the
landscape, and the environmental impact are very real negative outcomes.
As a native Bozeman person and a resident of the Sundance Springs Subdivision, I want to
emphasize that I am not opposed to the development of Lot # 2, Sundance Springs
Page 2 of 4
Neighborhood Services. However, I feel strongly that the City of Bozeman Commission must
follow the rules and covenants ordered by the 1990’s era City Commission when the Planned
Urban Development was adopted.
In addition to the specifics outlined below, my primary concern is noise pollution. A large
outdoor patio where the potential use might be a restaurant with noisy patrons or a MAP
brewery with loud music and numerous vehicles parked on our neighborhood streets. Think
carefully about the parking challenges and safety issues the city encountered with the MAP
location at 510 Manley Road. These are very real concerns in our residential neighborhood
and across the street from Sacajawea Middle School. More specifically, our covenants do
not allow outdoor activities for this site. The proposed area borders a peaceful open
space and beautiful trail system. It is a place enjoyed by neighbors as well as other members
of our community. It is a home to wildlife. This proposed commercial development and its
2,000 square feet of outdoor patio threatens to degrade this unique Bozeman amenity with
noise pollution. Already, this open space area is an echo chamber, albeit a tolerable one.
From my backyard, I can clearly hear conversations on the decks of homes along Ellis View
Loop adjacent to the proposed development. The proposed development is aligned perfectly
to amplify sound down our open space trail corridor towards Rain Roper Drive. That is
unacceptable.
With that introduction, I am writing to express my concern about Site Plan 22047, which is
currently under review. Overall, the design outlined in the site plan does not reflect the
requirements of the site’s covenants, to which the city is a party. The plan is not compatible
with requirements of the Sundance Springs PUD, including the requirement for sidewalks
along the South Third frontage. Finally, the requested departures from the block frontage
standards, which I oppose, do not meet the approval criteria outlined in the Bozeman
Development Code.
Specifically, first, this development bills itself as contributing to the walkability of our city, yet
there is no provision for, or even room allotted for sidewalks to be installed along South Third
Avenue. When development is allowed to proceed without sidewalk installation, the future
walkability of our city is degraded. Allowing this development to proceed without sidewalks on
South 3rd will prevent the future continuity of sidewalks in our neighborhood as more land is
developed.
Second, both the site covenants and the PUD designate this site’s zoning as B-1
Neighborhood Services District, according to the 1992-era zoning. Yet the site plan is
incompatible with both the covenants and the requirements of the Neighborhood Services
District. As a resident of the City of Bozeman, I expect the city to adhere to the orders of the
1990’s era City Commission. In this case, the Commission ordered that the city be a party to
the site covenants. Therefore, I expect the city to follow the requirements of the covenants,
and to enforce the covenants per the authority of BMC 38.100.100.
The current site plan ignores the following requirements of the covenants, which also stipulate
that the 1992-era zoning requirements are in effect. I ask that these violations of the
covenants and 1992-era B–1 zoning be rectified in the plan before it is approved:
Page 3 of 4
• requirements for traditional gable, hip, and shed roofs
• siding requirements (which preclude buildings with glass walls)
• maximum building size limits of 5000 square feet.
• parking requirements outlined in Chapter 18.50 of the 1992-era zoning
• 25-foot front and 20-foot rear set backs
• Foundations that are constructed “high” to avoid problems with high ground water
• Outdoor lighting design restrictions outlined in the covenants
• Requirements to design of buildings that avoid the appearance of commercial
development (per the covenants) and maintain residential character (per B-1 Neighborhood
Services District)
Especially disconcerting is the inclusion of a 2,000 square-foot patio and other structures that
would facilitate outdoor business use. The 1992-era B-1 Neighborhood Services District set
the expectation that all business uses be confined within buildings. I, as a neighbor who lives
within a short distance of this development, expect those zoning requirements to be enforced
to maintain the tranquility and residential character of our neighborhood – which is the stated
intent of the B-1 Neighborhood Services District requirements.
Allowing a 2,000 sq ft patio would simply create a source of continuing future conflict between
business owners, who would want to use the patio for outdoor business purposes, and
residential neighbors, who have the right to the undisturbed peaceful use of our property
written into the covenants. Designing a building to support outdoor activities under zoning
that presumes uses fully enclosed within buildings seems disingenuous.
Third, the current block frontage standards of the Municipal Development Code require that
the buildings front the streets and that the parking be behind or to the side of the buildings.
The site plan is requesting multiple departures from the block frontage standards. I am
opposed to the approval of any of these departures on the grounds that they don’t meet the
required approval criteria.
• The approval criteria require that the building placement be compatible with the
surrounding area. The buildings are incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood
because they do not comply with the design requirements of the covenants. Allowing these
buildings to be placed away from the street will only compound the incompatibility and
magnify the impacts on our neighborhood because the incompatible buildings will be closer to
residences and will encroach even more on our neighborhood’s open space.
• The approval criteria require that any departure improve the character of the street
front. Placing parking lots along 100% of our neighborhood street frontages, including the
corner of South 3rd and Little Horse Drive, represents a degradation of the street front,
especially when considered in comparison to the alternative intended by the covenants and
PUD: a street-front building that complies with the building design guidance and mandated
1992-era B-1 zoning.
In summary, the 1990’s era City Commission ordered that the City of Bozeman is a party to
the covenants associated with the Sundance Springs Commercial lots. In making this order,
the Commissioners expected the city to be bound by applicable terms of the covenants and
Page 4 of 4
empowered the city to enforce the covenants. As a resident of the City of Bozeman, I expect
the city to abide by the covenants agreed to by the city in the PUD and exercise its authority
to enforce the covenants to which the developers agreed when they purchased the property.
The intent of the PUD and covenants are clear. Development on this lot is to occur in
compliance with the 1992-era B-1 Neighborhood Services District and other restrictions
outlined in the covenants.
Further, the requested departures from the block frontage standards do not meet the
requirements of being compatible with the surrounding area nor enhancing the character of
the street (BMC 38.510.020.F.1.d) and therefore should be denied.
Thank you for considering my comments.
Sincerely,
Paul Quinn
467 Peace Pipe Dr.
Bozeman, MT 59715