The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10-05-23 Public Comment - L. Grenier - Comments on the Draft UDC CDBFrom:Lotus Grenier To:Agenda Subject:[EXTERNAL]Comments on the Draft UDC Date:Thursday, October 5, 2023 3:46:22 PM Attachments:23.10.05_Comments on the City of Bozeman Draft UDC _Thruline.pdf 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. Hello, Please find our comments on the draft UDC attached. Thank you for all your work! Best, LOTUS GRENIER Architect, Owner 212 S Wallace Ave, Ste 301 Bozeman MT 59715 c: 406.600.9677 thrulinepartners.com THRULINE PARTNERS DESIGN TO BUILD Comments on the City of Bozeman Draft UDC October 5,2023 Dear members of the Community Development Board, Thank you for all the hard work you have put into developing the Draft UDC.As a design build firm we are very aware of many pressures our growing community faces and commend you for stepping up to the plate to address them. Thruline Partners has worked extensively in the older Bozeman neighborhoods designing and building remodels,additions,and ADUs.By and large our clients want to renovate their existing homes for better functionality,energy performance,durability,and to extend the life of their older,often historical,and sometimes very dilapidated houses.They are almost always interested in adding density,if they can afford to.We fully support density,infill projects,and maximizing limited land and infrastructure resources,and are by and large in support of the proposed changes to the UDC as it will make many of our project goals more achievable. To try to better understand how the new standards in the abstract play out in reality,we looked at how the proposed code would play out for several of our current projects.Many questions came up about interpretation and implementation,and we are concerned that the new standards could impact current property owners’ability to complete projects that often factor into their long term financial plans.We were puzzled as professionals who work with these codes regularly,so we understand the general public’s apprehension.We hope our questions and comments serve to point out where the new standards could be made more clear to help move this well intentioned work forward. As our work is primarily small-scale residential,our review focused on the new R-A Zoning and the development implications of the 12 du/a Minimum Density requirement.If the 12 du/acre minimum density is a mandatory minimum,it seems untenable or prohibitive in certain situations as a requirement rather than an allowance. We interpret the new code to require a property owner with a lot in R-A zoning between 10,000-10,980 SF to provide a minimum of three dwelling units if building or rebuilding.But maybe we get to round down for partial numbers like we do for parking?This needs clarification. ●10,000 SF =.23 acres >12 du/a x 0.23a =2.76du >round up to 3 du required. ●10,980 SF =.25 acres >12 du/a x 0.25a =3du >tipping point for 3 units. What happens in the case of an owner of a Single Family Home (SFH)on a lot bigger than 10,000 SF who wants to add an addition,say an office,bedroom,or a bath to their existing THRULINE PARTNERS ||212 S.WALLACE AVE.STE.301 BOZEMAN MT 59715 ||(406)414-7744 thrulinepartners.com 1 THRULINE PARTNERS DESIGN TO BUILD home?Does this trigger the requirement to increase density to 3 du for their lot?Is a property automatically bumped into multiple units when the existing footprint of a SFH is changed? Though we’ve never understood how cost is not considered a hardship for variances,we all know cost is a major constraint for most projects.What happens if an owner can not afford to build a project with multiple units,but they can afford much needed improvements to a dilapidated house that would change the building footprint,or a single additional unit or ADU? The cost of construction is one thing,but the process of designing and permitting a multi-unit project is complicated and almost certainly necessitates the expensive services of an architect and professional design team (surveyor,engineers,etc).The complexity interpreting the code, and of multi-unit development more generally,raises the question of whether licensed professionals will need to be required for all permitted projects in the City. Another example we thought through is a 13,000 SF lot with a run-down single family house,not an uncommon case in the R-A zone.Under what circumstances would this property be allowed to re-build a SFH under the 1:1 replacement exception (Draft Section:38.260.030.A.2.a)What is the exact definition of a 1:1 replacement?Is the house footprint from 1920 the required footprint for the new home?Is it the number of bedrooms or baths?Total square footage?Or is any single-family residence a replacement for a single-family residence? In this same example,we understand that even though the density would increase with two dwelling units,say a SFH and an ADU,a two unit building,or two single family homes,this would not be allowed as it wouldn't satisfy the code minimum of three dwelling units.This seems counterproductive for the goal of increased density. We also have questions regarding timeline and phasing.Could a multi-unit project be permitted with plans to build out additional units in the future?Or is such a project required to be built all at one time?Allowing phasing could be a way to make projects more affordable. Another question around future development is raised by the specifics of a current project on a very large,double lot.We are renovating an older home within the existing footprint,and replacing a non-functional garage with a newly constructed garage.Let’s assume this would be considered a 1:1 replacement even though the garage footprint and configuration is different from the original garage.The new garage is engineered for an ADU to be built on top of the garage at a later date.Will that ADU be allowed once the new code is adopted?Or will adding an additional unit to the property in the future trigger the density requirements,which in this case is 6 units? This same project also brings up questions about how easements and flood plains are accounted for in the unit/area calculation.In this case over half of the lot is not buildable due to utility,communications,and stormwater easements as well as being in a flood plain.The formula for calculating Net Density does not account for unbuildable areas of lots with utility easements or flood ways/zones.These restrictions should be taken into account when THRULINE PARTNERS ||212 S.WALLACE AVE.STE.301 BOZEMAN MT 59715 ||(406)414-7744 thrulinepartners.com 2 THRULINE PARTNERS DESIGN TO BUILD determining the required minimum density.The Relief provision only allows relief up to 20%for such constraints when a property may have more than 20%of its area that qualifies as unbuildable. The requirement to maintain or increase the number of dwellings on a lot also may have unintended consequences,an example of which is a rundown,non-code compliant 4 unit apartment building on 12,000 SF lot where the owner is interested in building their forever home.They may be up for building two units,but if 4 du are required a likely outcome will be no investment in the property and further deterioration of the existing,sub-par housing. This is also an example where the most advantageous thing for the owner would be to subdivide the lot into smaller parcels that wouldn’t be required to meet the 10,000 SF density standard.Is there a process through which a homeowner could subdivide a lot without the underlying lots that make a subdivision exemption and lot reconfiguration straightforward? The UDC sets standards for all scales of development,and we hope that our questions and examples show how the new code could hamstring small-scale homeowner improvements and redevelopment.Clarification of the points we brought up,as well as case study examples of how the code could be implemented could help get public buy-in,streamline design and permitting, and make the UDC more usable for all. Sincerely, Lotus Grenier,Thruline Partners THRULINE PARTNERS ||212 S.WALLACE AVE.STE.301 BOZEMAN MT 59715 ||(406)414-7744 thrulinepartners.com 3