HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-06-23 Public Comment - D. Carty - Public comment_ Proposed UDC updateFrom:Daniel Carty
To:Agenda
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Public comment: Proposed UDC update
Date:Monday, November 6, 2023 9:27:44 AM
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.
(Please place the following public comment in the City's UDC folder. Thank you.)
Date: Nov 6, 2023; Time: 9:30 AM
To: Bozeman City Commission and Community Development Board
Subject: Suggestions to improve the public engagement process re the City's proposed UDC
update
I am writing to offer the following comments and suggestions about how the City can
improve the public engagement process from this point forward.
First, please provide clear comparisons and contrasts between what the MT state
legislature has required and what the City has written into the proposed UDC update.Providing such comparisons and contrasts will help keep the public and City on common
ground (examples follow).
1. One example is the MT state legislature's requirement for duplexes in all residential
districts vs. the City's proposed UDC update response of 8-plexes. Because of the
City's 8-plex response to the MT state legislature's duplex requirement, it is fair for
the public to wonder if other measures proposed by the City are more extensive than
those required by the MT state legislature.
2. A second example is: How does the reduction in public participation in developmentreview written into the proposed UDC update compare and contrast with what was
mandated by the MT state legislature? 3. A third example deals with the public's criticism of the City's proposed parking
requirements, which may well have been mandated by the MT state legislature—andthus these parking requirements may or may not be subject to change by the City.
4. A fourth example: The City has to adopt 5 strategies from the list of 14 provided bythe MT state legislature. Arguably, the duplex requirement takes care of one of these
strategies, and perhaps the ADU requirement takes care of a second of thesestrategies—thus leaving only three more strategies for the City to adopt. Clarifying
this issue will provide for more focused discussions between the public and the City.
Second, please call specific attention to known controversial issues not mandated by the
MT state legislature, and—for such issues—please explain the rationale for decisions theCity has made to date. The best example here is the Greek house location revision, and
other controversial issues are probably evident from public comments made to date.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment and make suggestions.
Daniel Carty213 N. Third Ave
Bozeman, MT 59715
dgc12@hotmail.com
406-548-2810