HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-28-23 Public Comment - K. Filipovich - Community Development Advisory Board - UDC commentsFrom:Karen Filipovich
To:Agenda
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Community Development Advisory Board - UDC comments
Date:Wednesday, September 27, 2023 12:45:37 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.
Dear Members of the Community Development Advisory Board:
Thank you for your service. I really appreciate your thoughtful perspectives and varied
questions, as well as patient listening as your fellow citizens try to understand and express our
questions, concerns and comments.
I listened to the discussion at the 9/18/2023 meeting and have questions that seem to address
many of the issues that came up. It would necessitate slowing down the UDC process, but as
one commenter pointed out, zoning and building size/intensity changes are essentially a one-
way street - if you decide that it is a mistake in the future, there is not a lot you can do about
it.
Please vote to slow down the process and ask for specific information that can be shared with
the residents and voters in this community before proceeding further.
1. What is the analysis of the 2018 intensification in zoning standards and the
subsequent ADU change that allowed more ADUS in more residential zoning
districts? What are the most likely outcomes for building in residential and business
areas if the proposed zoning intensity and building types are changed? How does it
vary in different areas of town?
I live in the old north core. Since 2018, 34 units have been built that I can see from my yard in
my zoning classification. 2018 is important because they were all permitted under that
intensification of the zoning standards for R-3, the current zoning in the area I live in. Here are
the results for the city:
34 units of affordable housing were demolished and replaced with 32 very expensive
housing units. Several to many of those units are now occupied part-time or used as
vacation rentals.
1 unit was a tear-down, with no increase in the number of units or people. It has been
both a part-time and full-time resident occupied
1 unit is an ADU with a long-term rental
As a result, fewer, richer people live in my neighborhood than six years ago with a net result of
one fewer total unit, despite almost constant construction for the past five years. This result is
the antithesis of adding more people in the downtown core and promoting affordable
housing. The building in my immediate area does not meet the strategic goal of adding
more full-time residents in the downtown core, nor does it support any affordability
criteria. Further intensification in both the residential and business zoning areas would
likely accelerate that trend in this area.
In the B-3 district near me, there have been significant numbers of units added since 2018, but
it is really unclear how many units are full-time occupants and it doesn't appear that
affordable units were added, though some more affordable units were torn down to make
way for these new units or their construction pads.
Is this consistent with the pattern of development across town, in some parts of town or an
anomaly? New builds are a matter of record and that record should be analyzed, summarized
and made widely public. Since the proposed residential changes allow for a 10K square foot
house in the "low intensity" residential areas, getting this kind of detail is really important. If
you can get detailed information from other communities, that would be helpful too.
2. How will HOA covenants interact with the proposed changes in residential and
business districts?
Since huge parts of town are in HOAs, this really matters. Could you get a clear answer and
share it with the community? If the HOA covenants trump, this will only apply to older parts of
town and parts you annex. If those annexed or infill sections are brought in with an HOA, that
will then mean the city has no meaningful way to adjust zoning or building standards in the
future.
The water conservation program has really struggled with lawn watering covenants, so getting
clarity on how zoning will apply where is important.
3. What are the economic and tax impacts of the intensity changes proposed?
- This can be difficult to do, since there are many factors at play. That said, we've had
some natural experiments in town, with different zoning districts directly adjacent to
one another, so the underlying value of the land, based on zoning, is likely to be the
biggest variable. Please ask for a public analysis of these factors before proceeding. As
we heard in testimony, we don't have a very clear idea of the what economic impacts
are and who will bear the negative costs.
4. The UDC is a big document and doing an overhaul of this size is difficult. Here are
some thoughts about a small portion in the UDC, with the recommendation that we
slow down and get it right. A new building is usually rated for at least 30 years and in my
neighborhood, many buildings are more than 100 years old. Determining how and
where to build has multi-generational impacts. Taking a few more months on this
decision is prudent.
Very large single housing units could be built under the proposed code. Other towns
have struggled with this and this loophole needs to be tightened.
Natural resources protection is at the core of the City of Bozeman climate plan and
essential for health and safety and part of sustainability in the Community Plan. We
need to keep our flood buffers, water quality, runoff absorption, and ability to reduce
heat sinks in order to have a thriving community in the future. There is a lot of good in
the existing code, but more of it needs to be updated and clarified and made very clear
that natural resources review needs to happen at the beginning of the planning process.
Affordability is a term thrown around a lot, but in order to be helpful, focusing on long-
term affordability for a variety of brackets of median income is essential. It needs to be
much clearer which definitions are being used, how those criteria will be evaluated in
the planning process and how ongoing affordability will be ensured.
The purpose of the UDC is to support Bozeman residents and ensure that different
interests are balanced and trade-offs are both understood and minimized. There are
many good examples in the draft code, but there are also many areas that need a longer
discussion to ensure the best possible result is going to occur.
Please delay the approval of the code and ask for further analysis and public input into the
process before the draft is sent to the City Commissioners.
Best regards,
Karen Filipovich