Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-24-22 Public Comment - L. Poole - Sundance Springs Commercial Development, site plan number 22047From:Larry Poole To:Agenda Subject:Sundance Springs Commercial Development, site plan number 22047 Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 6:29:15 AM 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: Planning Department City of Bozeman From: Larry Poole 3772 Ellis View Loop, Bozeman, MT 59715 To whom it may concern: As an individual who has spent 3 out of the past 4 years residing in Bozeman from October through April as well as visiting Bozeman on numerous occasions for over a decade, one of the attractions are the City’s great neighborhoods, trail system, bike lanes and general feeling of being able to enjoy activities like walking and biking with a sense of safety. I have particularly enjoyed the trail system in the south west residential areas logging many miles on the trails that wind through the neighborhoods. Thus I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Sundance Springs Commercial Development, site plan number 22047. To my awareness this is the first commercial development that violates the friendly picturesque neighborhood that has been protected over the years. Looking at the renderings of the proposed buildings they belong in a “strip mall” not in the midst of a community of single family residences. While commercial development on the proposed site will take place at some point, the development's requested departures from laws describing the City's block frontage standards are so egregious that they cannot be supported. For example: BMC 38.510.020.F.1.d states "Departures may be considered provided the location and front orientation of the buildings are compatible with the character of the area and enhance the character of the street.” As mentioned above, placing large commercial buildings along a designated open space and trail system is neither compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood nor does it enhance the character of the street. Further, Block Frontage Standards are in part designed to make sure the streetscape remains as visually pleasing as possible. This proposal not only has parking along South 3rd and the corner of Little Horse Drive, it places parking along the trail system to the east without any mitigation; thus the proposed development negatively impacts two streets and the trail system. When creating the PUD, the City Commissioners explicitly forbade Neighborhood Services District patrons from parking on the streets. The requested reduction in the parking requirements, from 68 spaces to 44, is so drastic that if approved will not only encourage but will require patrons to park on the streets during busy times. The Planned Urban Development governing the site, which incorporates zoning under the 1992-era B-1 Neighbors Service District, made a requirement that any development on the parcel under review be small and residential in nature. Again, it is obvious by just looking at the renderings of the proposed buildings they are neither small nor residential in nature. Further when held against the 1992 era B-1 Standards, the setbacks are not met, the building size is too large, one of the proposed uses (a brewery) is disallowed, and there is inadequate parking for the size of the proposed buildings. Also of concern is the provision for a large patio space which will support outdoor business uses on the site. Again this goes against the 1992 era B-1 zoning which prohibits outdoor business use on the site as a principal use. Allowing any conditional use or other permission that might be granted by the city that would allow for outdoor business use or alcohol consumption are just not compatible with the tranquil nature of the open spaces and residential areas that are so close to the lot in question. (It should also be noted that this development would be very visible and only a 10 minute walk from Sacajawea Middle School. Thus it might be a possible attraction to middle schoolers depending on the nature of the businesses.) The final point I wish to make is that there are no sidewalks along South 3rd (which was a requirement by the City Commission at the time Sundance Springs Subdivision was approved). Allowing the development to proceed without sidewalks not only puts pedestrians at risk but defeats the intention of making Bozeman a walkable City and is in direct violation of an order by the City Commission. Please deny application 22047 until such time as the site plan complies with the 1992-era zoning requirements (without conditional uses) and the block frontage standards (without departure), parking for proposed buildings can be contained on site (as required by the City Commission), and sidewalks are included on South Third Ave. Your consideration of my comments would be appreciated.