HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-29-22 Public Comment - R. Landers - Planning File 22-047 - Sundance Springs Sub Ph 1B SBFrom:Rick Landers
To:Agenda
Subject:Planning File 22-047 - Sundance Springs Sub Ph 1B SB
Date:Saturday, October 29, 2022 11:26:47 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.
Dear Commissioners,
I am a resident of Sundance Springs subdivision and I write in opposition to the site plan forthe Sundance Springs Sub. Ph. 1B SB (File 22-047). The proposed development, if approved,will have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding residential neighborhood.
While it is debatable whether the property should have been zoned commercial in the firstplace, the current proposal does not even adhere to the standards and theme of the originalPUD. The brewery that is being proposed, and the size of the development, will end up being acitywide destination, generating significant new traffic into an area of homes and schools,rather than a small neighborhood commercial center.
When a PUD is approved and developed, property owners in that community are entitled torely on the originally approved development standards,and have a vested interest in theirenforcement. The approved PUD is therefore more like a set of CCRs, rather than a zoningordinance that can be changed over time based on changes in public policy. I agree with theother residents of Sundance Springs and the surrounding neighborhood who urge theCommission to strictly enforce the Sundance Springs PUD requirements, and the City Code,and not allow any departures or variances.
The departures to allow larger buildings, smaller setbacks,and fewer parking spaces thanrequired are particularly objectionable. We already know for certain what the consequenceswill be: an overbuilt site and spillover, off-site parking that harms the surroundingneighborhood through increased noise, trash, traffic and congestion.
I would also note that, based on public records, the applicant and property owner, 406 CoalBlowers, LLC, appears to be majority owned by out of state investors. The project rep wasrecently quoted in the Chronicle stating that the owners tried to come up with a site plan thatwould “benefit” the neighborhood, and that the plan “was driven by what we thought would begreat in that neighborhood, what it’s missing, and how we could do commercial in thatneighborhood.” However, as far as I know, nobody from 406 Coal Blowers, LLC asked anyresidents in the neighborhood what we think would be great, or whether we feel that we are“missing” anything. Had they asked, I believe they would have learned that most of theresidents think that Sundance Springs is great as it is and that, if the site is going to havecommercial development, it should strictly adhere to the originally approved PUD and theCity code.
Please vote in favor of your constituents, the local residents of Bozeman, and reject this siteplan. Thank you.
Rick Landers