HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-25-23 Public Comment - N. & T. Hildner - Sundance Springs Appeal Public Comments
Appeal of Administrative Project Decision
Ref: Sundance Springs PH113 Comm Lot 2
Application Type #23-214
September 25, 2023
To Bozeman City Commissioners:
Mayor Cyndy Andrus, Deputy Mayor Terry Cunningham, Commissioners I-Ho Pomeroy,
Jennifer Madgic and Christopher Coburn
We were recently informed by a neighbor about the concerns and appeal of an
administrative project decision with reference to the Sundance Springs PH1B Comm Lot 2
application #23-214. We've lived at 3505 Good Medicine way since 1993 and have enjoyed a
very safe and pleasant neighborhood and would like to keep it that way. Based on the attached
documentation we agree that the City of Bozeman must concur with the appeal that to be
legally binding the Bozeman City Commissioners can only approve application#23-214 if it is
based on the final approval of the Sundance Springs master plan and PUD signed by the
Bozeman City Commission in 1996.
Sincerely, - - -
,
Nancy and Tom Hildner� /l � �`
Attention Homeowners
Development on Sundance Springs Neighborhood Services Lots Must Comply with the PUD
The City has Approved a Site Plan that Does Not. There are Problems Here
On June 28th, Bozeman's Community Development Division approved Application#22047 for Lot 2 of Sundance Springs
Neighborhood Services,(Lot 2 containing 1.3 acres is in red on the aerial map below).This letter comes from a group of homeowners
in Sundance Springs and Ellis View Estates who are appealing this approval decision as it violates the law, it threatens neighborhood
safety,it ignores almost 200 letters in opposition,and it ignores our Covenants, Development Guidelines,and the Sundance Springs
Planned Unit Development(PUD).We retained attorneys to represent us at the September 26th Public Hearing before the Mayor and
Commissioners at 6:00 pm at City Hall, 121 N Rouse. There are ways for citizens to voice their concerns before and at the hearing.
Ph,,ise se.-
Why is the Approval of Application 22047 being Appealed?
Land development in the Sundance Springs Subdivision is governed by requirements contained in the Final Approved Master Plan of
the Sundance Springs Planned Unit Development(PUD). During the review process of Application#22047 several important
documents were"lost" by the Community Development Division, including the Final Approved Master Plan and PUD,the Approved
Development Guidelines,and the final Conditions of Approval Document.All these key historical records,which are the mandatory
and only criteria for reviewing proposals for development on Lot 2,are now unavailable.
By approving the application,the Bozeman Community Development Division broke the law in three ways:
1) By approving Application#22047 without the Final Approved Master Plan and Approved Development Guidelines,
(The Bozeman Community Development Division confirmed that it"lost"these legal documents),
2) By allowing Community Development Staff to reconstruct the terms of the "lost" Final Approved Master Plan,
(Only the City Commission legally creates these terms,which the Commission ordered and approved in our PUD in 1996),
3) By approving an application that does not comply with the PUD requirements known from the surviving files.
There are numerous legal and technical problems,too many to list
here,both with this approved project and with the flawed process
_`__ ,. `� -+�- ;% ,•-'¢: leading to the approval.Our attorneys will spell these out in detail
for the Mayor and City Commission at the Public Hearing on
September 26th. By law,the Commission must deny, maintain or
table a decision at the public hearing.
The information in the next few pages focuses on two more
essential concerns that have led us to ap
peal the approval of
Application#22047.
1) Significantly reduced safety on neighborhood streets.
V 2) Almost complete disregard for our PUD's mandated
r r Architectural Guidelines that maintain Sundance Springs
o , Residential Character
Cry 1.n•:.
o.,re�.... ,.....,
it Please read on.
Concern# 1: The Safety of Our Neighborhood:
This Site Plan shows 3,000 Square Feet of Outdoor Patio Space Which is not Allowed under the PUD
The Bozeman Community Development Division has approved the proposed two large buildings with additional outdoor patios,fire
pits, and picnic tables on the lawn's business space. Our PUD prohibits any outdoor patios or outdoor business activity for the two
neighborhood services lots. (Please see page 4 for the developer's approved site plan.)
Page 1 of 5
Concern # 1 (continued)
The Proposed Activities are Destination Businesses not Neighborhood Services Businesses
In our Master Plan, Lot 2 is approved as a local Neighborhood Services Lot,with a single 5,000 square foot convenience-type store
and ample on-site parking. The Master Plan and Covenants say that the businesses should derive a majority of customers from
adjacent neighborhoods. A Village Store is shown on our surviving Master Plan Map,the one that appears again in the marketing
materials for the subdivision we were all shown.This is the one pertinent document that has not been "lost"from the City's files
during the Site Plan review process.
The approved Site Plan#22047 shows two buildings with a possible restaurant,a possible beer brewing space,3,000 square feet of
outdoor drinking and dining patios and lawns for additional seating,along with other small businesses housed inside of the buildings.
These two buildings,with their"destination" businesses,will draw increased traffic to our neighborhood from east and west
Goldenstein and from South 3rd and will also increase traffic on Peace Pipe Drive and Graf Street.A substantial increase in traffic
flowing through our subdivision from 7 AM to 9 PM,seven days and nights a week,will flood our quiet,safe streets with cars and
trucks from all over the city in transit to these proposed destination businesses.
By the Numbers: Not Enough On-site Parking for Lot 2 Resulting in Dangerous Parking Overflow on Our Streets
As approved,Site Plan#22047 has only 44 on-site parking spaces for the 2 two-story buildings totaling more than 12,000 square feet
of retail,office,and indoor and outdoor dining/drinking space.The developer's architectural drawing(attached)suggests space for
between 310 and 365 occupants at full indoor and outdoor capacity.Again,only 44 on-site parking spaces were approved. It's
important to note that these numbers are only for Lot 2,the smaller lot. Lot 1 with 5 acres may severely magnify the parking
problem when it is developed.
Where will the business customers park their vehicles? Clearly,due to the extreme excess parking demand,vehicles will overflow
onto our narrow streets that are not designed for street side parking.Such parking is strictly prohibited in our PUD-as approved by
the City Commission and as affirmed by the Community Development Division -to ensure Emergency Response Vehicles access to
our neighborhoods.One only needs to drive to North Wallace near the Wild Crumb or near the MAP Brewery to see what crowded,
unsafe passages our streets will become. (Wallace congestion is pictured below.)
Site Plan#22047 will Create an Unsafe Parking Bottleneck at Critical Emergency Ingress Points to our Neighborhood
In their approval letter of Site Plan#22047 the City Staff required that"No
Parking" signs must be installed along South 3rd Avenue, Little Horse Drive, Ellis
View Loop,and Peace Pipe Drive to prevent on-street parking. There are no
details about what the signs will say and exactly how far they will be located
along the named streets. (People will walk a long way for a cold microbrew,a
latte, or a good meal).
Nothing at all is said about signage on the three other streets that are close to
the proposed commercial properties nor about a plan for law enforcement to
keep our neighborhood streets passable and safe.
Once the 44 spaces of on-site parking on Lot 2 are occupied,is it realistic to
think that signage alone will keep customers from parking along our narrow,
grass-lined streets,that were not designed to safely accommodate lines of
parked vehicles?
Please Read On.
Concern#2: PUD Guidelines Requiring Lot 2 to Maintain A Residential Character Are Ignored by the City
When the developers bought Lot 2 they explicitly agreed to abide by the terms of the PUD,the Final Approved Master Plan and
Development Guidelines. By law,they also are subject to a set of Covenants for the Sundance Springs Neighborhood Services
Property which includes Lots 1 and 2 that front along Little Horse Drive.These covenants mostly mirror the covenants and design
critera that govern the rest of Sundance Springs within which we all operated as we built our homes and neighborhood over the last
Page 2 of 5
Concern#2: (continued)
25 years. The covenants for Lots 1 and 2 have special weight because the City of Bozeman is also a party to them as noted in the
Commission's Findings of Fact and Order from 1996. From Article IX"Building Guidelines"of the Neighborhood Services Property
Covenants
"...the intent is to establish minimum standards to ensure that the type of building constructed is comparable
to and blends with the eclectic styles of housing found in the surrounding development,and that the type of
building avoids the appearance of'Commercial Development'. The purpose of the design theme is to provide
functional and cost effective structures that have a residential character."
Immediately below is a Sample Illustration-taken from Neighborhood Services Covenants—illustrating what the single
commercial structure on Lot 2 should look like.
vQw�qr- SEGON�4¢'•'
gOOJ rOCZM QOOr roR, -
•Jcr °qM�4Y RO._ce �..
Below are the two buildings the Community Development Division approved for Lot 2.(These are the developer's renderings.)
f
ICI IN IF11- 111
This is not what any of us expected, based on a 25 year history of PUD regulation enforcement by the City and Sundance Springs.
The two buildings are out of character with the style of our neighborhood. They look like commercial buildings that should front
Main Steet or North 7th. NOT like the cozy residential-looking single commercial building pictured in our founding documents for Lot
2. The proposed buildings are designed for businesses that will attract customers into our neighborhood rather than to serve our
needs locally. They are non-compliant with the PUD,the Final Approved Master Plan and Covenants.
Page 3 of 5
Concern#2: (continued) a
Below is the Proposed Site Plan for Lot 2—as Approved by the City Staff.
Two Buildings with 12,000 sq feet,3,000 sq feet of patio space,2,000 sq feet of lawn,not enough parking,and unapproved access to
numerous trails shown in SS Open Space,controlled by the residential portion of the PUD. (Only SS homeowners can grant access to
our open space which requires a 2/3`d approval vote.The red lines enclose the entirety of what the developer owns and controls.)
/ OPEN
SUNDANC
AYE o.3n ncREs x�sK No SPRINGS
iKE PATH SUBDIVISI
as Eioc scraweK s „ETDncK ZONING)
NBO'.rMp' C-J00 E0'(MI -
N UmCaeO.w•frtr
s�
� KOPOSEO30'MN WATEN/SEN£P EASEMENT i 3..'+.efrd•I ute -_ _-
I// _ _ C
•
j3 •/ / wwem a0300n i POND t0.9cf -_ _/
;,,,6WET
'
EET9ACp.T.R REST
IDOLE CRECx D
.� O CK o�00lE' A[iT.PEa E
PLO / T�tlE
279.46D
i
Below is the developer's rendering of how many patrons might be on just part of a first floor building,the patios and lawns.
.fJ.
r f
JJ
Ay
. wN
� r - �._ �.. / .../,V...�• .,.,..E-..Y.E.....
HARDSCAPE SCHEDULE
- -. _ �" / D� iLr61 9�. YVLL•. 36c.+^. iClse
f HOgSE nR.._ , Vf! r•.ae Y'YL3 SL:u1 LCLY�
• �- -- .a,..rw�...w..rnwr.w•. � w..�.Y
Page 4 of 5
Number of Customers Based on Developer's Drawings
West Building - first floor only:
12 4-person indoor tables = 48 people
6 4-person tables outdoors = 24 people
4 6-person picnic tables = 24 people
Grand Fire Pit seating = 10 people
Corner Fire Pit Benches = 6 people
Other Bench seating on building = 5 people
Employees (estimated) = 10 people
Subtotal (as drawn) = 121 people
First Floor north tables/seating = 20 people
2nd Floor businesses/seating (est) = 24-48 people
4-6 6-person lawn area tables = 24-36 people
Subtotal (estimated) = 68 - 104 people
West Building Grand Total = 189 - 225 People
North Building - west 1/2 only:
4 4-person outdoor tables = 16 people
6 2-person outdoor tables = 12 people
11 Outdoor Bench seating = 11 people
6 4-person indoor tables (est) = 24 people
6 2-person indoor tables (est) = 16 people
Employees (estimated) = 8 people
Subtotal West 1/2 North Building = 98 People
Estimated East 1/2 of North Building = 12 - 20 People
Est. North Building Upstairs Businesses = 12 - 24 People
Subtotal East 1/2 and Upstairs N. Building = 24 - 44+ People
North Building Grand Total = 122 - 142 People
Projected Grand Total 311- 367 People
i
Total Parking Space on Site = 44
r