The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12-14-22 Public Comment - L. Semones - Zone Edge transitions letterFrom:Linda Semones To:Agenda Subject:Zone Edge transitions letter Date:Wednesday, December 14, 2022 5:53:58 PM Attachments:Zone Edge transitions letter.docx 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 City Commission Members and Community Development Board Members, I wanted to send you this letter that I provided to the Code Studio group after our Oct. 17 meeting on transition zones. The meeting was attended by many neighbors from NENA as well as other interested parties. In that meeting, the group presented the Code Studio group with a spreadsheet of examples of zone edge transition code from cities all over the country. The group also presented a long and formal study (over 100 pages of interviews and data based evaluations) of neighborhood character in the north side of town. Sarah Church and Susan Tallman, professors at MSU, had their classes develop this study as a long term project. If you wish to see these 2 documents, Code Studio has both at their fingertips. I am in awe at the amount of work you are guiding us through to revise the UDC. Thank you for your dedication. Linda Semones 404 S Church Ave Bozeman MT 59715 406 599 3916 Dear Code Studio Consultant Group, I am writing to you to emphasize the importance of the October 17 meeting with neighbors from the North East Neighborhood and other interested citizens concerning transition zones. I am a member of the Historic Preservation Board, but I am commenting only as a private citizen and a proponent of community within neighborhoods. You must realize that the spreadsheet document of research done by the Visions Transition Committee represents hours of work by volunteers who care about their neighborhoods. You must also have read the thorough document developed by MSU students and their professors. These two documents represent real concerns of the community that should not be denigrated as “nimbyism” or represented as selfish. Every effort was made to ride that fine line between the clear need for affordable housing and the desire to preserve the downtown neighborhoods and their historical resources. As you know, transition zones are often designed to create gateways from a high density high traffic business district to a comparatively less dense, slower paced residential or mixed use neighborhood. Often cities openly express the desire to maintain their downtown residential/ mixed use areas and offer transition zones as a way to conserve older development in historic areas. In Burlington Vermont, the downtown transition district is intended to provide a balance and continuity in the character and scale of development on both sides of Main Street, Pearl Street, and S Winooski Ave, creating Gateways into the urban core of Burlington and a transition between the downtown and the nearby residential district. In Cincinnati, Ohio, the Cincinnati zoning code is adopted, to among other goals, preserve the character and quality of residential neighborhoods, and to promote the conservation, protection and restoration and enhancement of the historic resources of the city. Cincinnati has a form based code with detailed descriptions of transition requirements that is to be admired. The city has made it clear that staff and commissioners intend to increase density and height in all areas of the city, including the downtown core and the new west side developments. From the research presented, it would seem that most of the cities investigated make a clear distinction between the tallest buildings to be found in the high-density business downtowns and the more human scale, walkable neighborhoods adjoining the downtown, whether along a street or in a certain number of blocks. Bozeman seems to be unique in reserving its strongest transition edge requirements only for changes of zoning contiguous within a block. No transition edge setbacks or angled stories away from the lower district are required if a street or alley intervenes between the 2 different zones. Here is the code, which you will recognize. Sec. 38.320.060. - Zone edge transitions. A. Intent. To provide measures that help to provide a compatible transition between certain higher and lower intensity zoning districts. B. Zone edge transition standards. The following standards are intended to supersede other form and intensity standards in this division. 1. Setback adjustments. a. Minimum side and rear setbacks for development within BP, M-1, and M-2 districts where adjacent to a residential district: 15 feet. No additional setbacks required adjacent to alleys and streets. b. Minimum side and rear setbacks for development within B-3 and UMU districts adjacent to a residential district: five feet. No additional setbacks are required adjacent to alleys and streets 2. Height/setback adjustments. a. For development on sites in the B-3, B-2M, UMU, and R-5 districts that are adjacent to the RS, R-1, or R- 2 district, the following standard applies: From a height of 38 feet at a ten foot setback from the applicable residential districts, buildings must step back at a 45 degree angle away from the applicable property line as shown in figure 38.320.060. No such 45 degree angle setback is required if separated by a street. The city also has made an effort to unify the zoning of those blocks with 2 different zones, generally granting zone change requests to change the block to the higher, more dense zone. As a result, in the future if development continues under the current zone edge transition standards, the city will create a tall, sunless wall along Mendenhall and Babcock with no consideration to the residential and mixed use of the adjoining districts. This placement of mass and height of the business zone against the smaller mass and height of the adjoining district designed for residential and mixed use pits a human mass and scale against a downtown business mass and scale with no separation. Other cities that are interested in creating a walkable, healthy and livable environment of human scale have many more tools in their toolkit to create zone edge transitions. Some of these include: 1. Landscape buffers including requirements for trees and shrubs to provide visual and auditory separation: Austin, TX Ranier, WA. 2. Setbacks that increase in footage according to the height of the taller building: Austin, TX 3. Reviews for sun light and privacy for the lower less dense area; Fort Collins, Co San Obispo, CA 4. Use of architecturally similar design, roof lines, windows, similar proportions of outdoor space: Fort Collins, Co 5. Better defined housing/building types to avoid a density only approach; encourage the missing middle housing types with lower rooflines, and less large apartment building type looks : San Obispo, CA. The Bridger View Development next to Story Mill Community Park in Bozeman exemplifies this type of neighborhood housing construction. The San Obispo white paper in the research document has excellent photos of examples of all of these tools. That paper is included in the spread chart that you have before you. In conclusion, the City of Bozeman has the opportunity to create a walkable, green, human scale transition area leading into the B3 in all parts of town. The B3 should not be allowed to extend, with all its height and mass and lack of green space into the residential areas along its borders. This can certainly be done without limiting the affordable housing supply. Adding some of these tools used in other cities seems to be an easy process. These concepts certainly follow the precepts of form based code. If Bozeman truly wants to be on the cutting edge of urban planning the use of transition zones is front line. Sincerely, Linda Semones 404 S Church Ave Bozeman MT 59715 406-599-3916