HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-28-22 Public Comment - J. Poole - Sundance Springs Commercial Development, site plan number 22047From:20jean20@gmail.com
To:Agenda
Subject:Fwd: Sundance Springs Commercial Development, site plan number 22047
Date:Friday, October 28, 2022 7:51:11 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.
To Whom it may Concern:
As you will note below, yesterday I sent in comments regarding the Sundance SpringsCommercial Development, site plan number 22047. When I checked the public comment list
this evening I was concerned my submission was not listed, thus I am resubmitting mycomments to make sure they are received by the deadline. I would appreciate some type of
confirmation that they have been received . Thanks. Jean Y. Poole
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: 20jean20@gmail.comDate: October 27, 2022 at 8:19:00 PM CDTTo: agenda@bozeman.netSubject: Sundance Springs Commercial Development, site plan number22047
City Planning Department
Bozeman, MT
I am submitting this public comment to express my outrage over site plan
22047 in Sundance Springs.
From October to May each year, I reside in South Bozeman, adjacent to
Sundance Springs. I enjoy the city’s walking trails and the tranquil open
space that were established by the Sundance Springs PUD. I was
dismayed to see that Bozeman is willing to even consider violating their
own planning rules to allow a large commercial development on a lot that
is instead zoned and covenanted for a development that "maintains the
residential character" of the surrounding area.
The proposed development will disrupt the nature of the entire area. I live
next door to the site and I walk the trails regularly while I am enjoying my
home in Bozeman. The sites covenants, the PUD, and the order of the
City Commission that created Sundance Springs all require that the
commercial development, I live next door to, will appear residential in
nature and that the commercial uses should be confined within the
buildings. Can any sane person look at the plan and really conclude the
proposed development is "residential in nature?"
The City Commission also forbade parking on our residential streets in the
Order that created the PUD. In order to comply with this order, the site
plan would have to provide enough parking spaces to meet the expected
parking demand. But the plan provides only 44 spaces for an expected
parking demand of 68 spaces. There is no space for overflow parking
EXCEPT our neighborhood streets. How can the city consider a plan that
will violate the order of the City Commission?
The proposed development includes a sprawling outdoor patio connected
to a space that is labeled as a "brewery" on multiple different pages of the
architectural drawing associated with the site plan. Such a use would
simply destroy the tranquility of open spaces, the trail system, and my
home. The lighting plan is non-compliant with the Order of the City
Commission. Despite the fact that the developer touts this as a plan that
promotes the walkability of the city, the design puts a dumpster in the
center of the interface with the trail system.
How did this plan make it through the planning department? I am in
disbelief!
The simple fact is that the proposed development is TOO BIG to meet the
development requirements of the site. The 1992 B-1 zoning requires that
all buildings be less that 5000 square feet in *gross floor area* (not
footprint). The two buildings are each more than 6000 square feet. In
addition the combined 12,000 square feet of gross commercial floor area
simply requires more parking than fits on the site. Also, the setbacks don't
meet the 1992 B-1 zoning.
My answer to the consideration of this plan is a resounding NO!!! I have
had enough with the city caving in to the interest of developers in violation
of ordinances and the order of the City Commission.
I support responsible commercial development on this site. I expect the
city to disapprove application 22047 until such time as the site plan:
1) complies with the 1992-era zoning requirements (without conditional
uses);
2) complies with the block frontage standards (without departure),
3) Reduces the building size so that the full parking demand will fit on the
site, as ordered by the City Commission
4) sidewalks are included on South Third Ave so I can walk safely to this
development should I choose to patronize the business.
Jean Y. Poole
3772 Ellis View Loop
Bozeman, MT
Sent from my iPhone