HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-15-23 Public Comment - L. Rose - FW_ Public Comments in reference to Application 22375From:Lynn Hyde
To:Agenda; Laura Rose
Subject:FW: Public Comments in reference to Application 22375
Date:Monday, May 15, 2023 12:22:10 PM
Attachments:L Rose-Comments for # 22375.docx
Laura,
Thank you for your comments in regards to Application 22375. They will be made available to all
reviewers, decision makers and the applicants team.
I appreciate your thoughtful due diligence and comments.
Lynn Hyde | Development Review Planner, Community DevelopmentCity of Bozeman | 20 East Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771406.579.1471 | lhyde@bozeman.net | www.bozeman.net
From: Laura Rose <roseboze11@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 12:14 PM
To: Lynn Hyde <lhyde@BOZEMAN.NET>
Subject: Public Comments in reference to Application 22375
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.
Lynn, Please see my attached document.
Thanks. -Laura
This is a comment in reference to Applica�on 22375, North 3rd Apartments
My name is Laura Rose & I am a resident at 315 W Peach St.
Below are my concerns & sugges�ons regarding the proposed North 3rd Apartments project:
• I support Affordable Housing but do not support a project that densely packs (7) 4-story
buildings into this neighborhood while using incen�ves to reduce open space that I
believe is needed for this project, the residents & the neighborhood.
• The size & scale of this project will have a significant impact on the character of the
neighborhood. The lineup of (3) 4-story buildings along 3rd Street - will be a “heavy
hammer” to the exis�ng scale of the street & the neighborhood.
• It’s concerning that there have been no full site eleva�ons or renderings provided by the
developer that show the en�re project in one con�guous image- to clearly demonstrate
to the public how the actual scale & height of this project relates (or doesn’t relate) to
the overall neighborhood.
• I believe that it’s more beneficial for affordable housing to be distributed throughout a
community and not concentrated in just one por�on. The size and scale of this project
seems to be on the heavy end of that concentra�on scale for this area. Is this what the
community wants? Can the project offer more of mixed use & affordability op�on?
• As a resident of W Peach Street Condominiums living directly south of the project, I am
especially concerned with the (2) approx. 53’ high buildings located close to our
residences. Yes, they’ve met the minimum 5’ set back per code from their property line,
but the difference in scale & mass between these 2 projects is significant, with the tall
buildings crea�ng an imposing feeling while reducing the benefits of indirect dayligh�ng
or many of the residents.
• Surprisingly, the ini�al concept design proposed by the developer had a more
harmonious rela�onship with the adjoining residents: the buildings were set back about
15’ from the property line & offered a nice buffer of open space & landscaping for use by
the apartment residents. The developer even noted in their applica�on that “The
buildings are intentionally set back further than required at the southern boundary”.
They acknowledged & highlighted the importance of a buffer & transi�on between our
residence & the larger scale of their project.
What happened? I believe this is an example of how incen�ves for density & incen�ves
for reduced open space influence “lesser” design choices such as this & do not
encourage beter solu�ons when density is introduced into exis�ng communi�es
Requests/ Recommenda�ons for improving the “buffer” & transi�on at south end of project
property:
• Increase the setback of buildings #4 & #7 from 5’ to 15’
• Reduce the heights of buildings #4 & #7 by 1 story
• Plant more mature trees from the get-go along the south property line- so it doesn’t
require a decade to create a viable screening buffer for the buildings & parking lot.
• Protect the life of the new trees from snow plow damage -since they will be located in a
plan�ng area to iden�fied for snow storage
• Provide light shields for the 25’ poles with parking lot ligh�ng.
Neighborhood circula�on- re: 4th Ave entry
• Pedestrians walking north up 4th Ave from W Peach Street- who want to head NE
through the complex are currently forced to cross 4th Ave. to con�nue on a sidewalk to
get through the development. Why not add a sidewalk that turns right towards building
#7 so pedestrians (especially children) don’t have to cross 4th Ave. It would also help
provide a safer & more direct path for residents walking from Peach who want to access
the open space on the west side of Building #7.
-Laura Rose