HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-03-23 Public Comment - C. Omland - Truman Flats #23148From:Carie Omland
To:Agenda; Susana Montana; Anna Bentley
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Truman Flats #23148
Date:Tuesday, October 31, 2023 1:15:37 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.
Canyon Gate – Truman Flats- 23148, Site Plan Comments
In the best interest of the residents of Bozeman and their well-being, it is essential that we take
a closer look at the proposed Truman Flats development in light of the Bozeman GrowthPolicy. This policy emphasizes the importance of preserving habitat, maintaining the integrity
of current neighborhoods, and providing new housing options that align with the city's goals.
My comments in this letter are primarily in reference to the review criteria as follows.
38.230.100. A.1. Conformance to and consistency with the growth policy
38.230.100. A.7.a. CompatIbility with, and sensitIvity to, the immediate environment ofthesite and the adjacent neighborhoods, and other approved development relative to
architectural design, building mass, neighborhood identity, landscaping, historicalcharacter,orientation of buildings on site and visual integration;
Regrettably, Truman Flats falls short on numerous fronts. Its approach to preserving the
natural landscape and habitat, particularly for the local bird population, has been severelylacking. The removal of all 150 mature trees is nothing short of brutal and stands in stark
contrast to the policy's vision of a harmonious coexistence with nature.
Furthermore, the design of Truman Flats doesn't integrate well with the existingneighborhood. The proposed buildings are characterized by uninspiring architecture that could
belong to any typical suburban area. This is a far cry from what the Bozeman Growth Policyenvisions and fails to reflect the agrarian history of the land or the majesty of the surrounding
mountains.
To make matters worse, the lack of awnings on the buildings will inevitably lead to increasedenergy consumption for heating and cooling, which is both unsustainable and unnecessary.
The disparity between HomeBase's stated design intent and their actions in bulldozing everytree on the property is disheartening and far from the "wooded surroundings" and "picturesque
setting" they promised.
It's crucial to question who benefits from such a development, and it's evident that theresidents of Bozeman are not the ones reaping the rewards. The city staff has an opportunity to
rectify these shortcomings, and we remain hopeful that they will consider the following siteplan review criteria:
Compatibility with the Immediate Environment: Truman Flats' design does not align with the
surrounding neighborhood's architectural style or scale, creating an imposing presence. This isat odds with the city's objective to maintain a residential feel.
Variation in Roofline: The flat-topped buildings do not contribute to the aesthetic diversity of
the area. Introducing more distinctive rooflines will help Truman Flats blend in with theneighboring structures, which feature a range of heights and roof styles.
Step-backs and Building Segmentation: Implementing step-backs of at least 10 feet on each
end of the two buildings would mitigate the buildings' plain appearance and mirror the naturalcontours of the nearby mountains. Breaking the development into smaller buildings would
improve compatibility and enhance the circulation of light and air.
It's important to remember that these changes aren't just about aesthetics; they're aboutcreating a neighborhood that respects its history, preserves its natural beauty, and benefits its
residents. With a few thoughtful design adjustments, Truman Flats could truly reflect thevalues and vision of the Bozeman Growth Policy while giving residents what they genuinely
deserve: a harmonious and sustainable community.
Long-time Bozeman resident & concerned citizen,Carie Omland