The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-13-23 Public Comment - A. Sweeney - Concerns about the proposed draft of the new UDCFrom:Anna Bentley To:Agenda Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL]Concerns about the proposed draft of the new UDC Date:Monday, November 6, 2023 6:23:06 PM Attachments:Minge-1.png For UDC public comment folder Anna Bentley, AICPDirector | Community Development | City of BozemanP: 406.582.2940 | C: 406.595.5070 | E: abentley@bozeman.net CUSTOMER SERVICE HOURS (Front Counter @ 20 East Olive, 59715): Open: M, W, F: 9 AM – 4 PM; & T, TH: 9 AM – 1 PM Find online resources and check submitted application status through the Development Center webpage (www.bozeman.net/services/development-center). From: Alison Sweeney <a.bernadettes@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, November 3, 2023 9:22 AM To: Anna Bentley <abentley@BOZEMAN.NET>; Chris Saunders <csaunders@BOZEMAN.NET>; Jeff Mihelich <jmihelich@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: [EXTERNAL]Concerns about the proposed draft of the new UDC 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 city staff members, I've just sent this content to Alice Buckley, as well as Bobbi Geise who runs the OLLI Friday Forum that will be covering the UDC next Friday. I would like you all to know my concerns as well, especially since Chris Saunders will be on the panel for the forum. My intention has always been to work with you, city commissioners, and advisory board members to get a better code for Bozeman. Thank you for your time and effort; here's the content I sent to Alice Buckley: Hi Alice, My name is Alison Sweeney. I live just a few blocks away from you on 14th Street. I recently watched a webinar with you, Chris Shaida, and Mark Egge, trying to inform people about what is in the draft update. There are several assertions you guys made that I'd like to push back on. Density = Affordability This will not be the case. When I pointed out to Jason Delmue (member of Bozeman's Community Development Board, CDB) that none of the multi unit dwellings that are currently replacing old historic homes or duplexes are affordable, he told me he's not surprised because something new in a great location will necessarily be expensive. Think about that for a minute... none of the added density in central Bozeman will be affordable. Maybe it's increasing housing stock, but for whom? I fear gentrification not renters! Chris Shaida accuses us of being NIMBY about renters. I assure you that's not the case. As you know our neighborhood has a high number of renters and we love them. We can have a relationship with them. Because they're here. If we increase housing stock only to accommodate wealthy weekenders and 2nd, 3rd, or 4th homeowners we will no longer have neighborhoods. If the goal is to provide housing for the folks that make our town run (the nurses, firefighters, car mechanics, hairdressers, grocery store clerks, and wait staff) up-zoning won't do it. Please watch the webinar on this page: https://www.livablecalifornia.org/vancouver-smartest-planner-prof-patrick-condon-calls-california- upzoning-a-costly-mistake-2-6-21/ Patrick Condon was a pro-density guy for decades and recently changed his position because the evidence has not supported it anywhere yet. The new units will be small There is no guarantee of this because the new draft code is missing FAR regulations, while increasing height and mass allowances. Our current code contains FAR regulations, but does not tie it to units. So for example someone in R-2 could tear down a small house and build a McMansion under current code. This possibility is only exacerbated under the proposed draft because builders are now allowed 10,000 square feet with no FAR constraints. I've had conversations about adding FAR regulations to the proposed draft with both Jason Delmue and Mark Egge and neither is opposed. Please read these articles for a better understanding of FAR: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/new-ban-on-mcmansions-would-dramatically- change-seattles-house-building-rules/ https://ctabuilds.com/upcoming-far-regulations-in-seattle/ The infill will blend in with the existing built environment This is simply not the case. With Code Studio's axonometric drawings it's easy to get that impression, because when you view something from above you are not observing height and mass relative to surrounding structures, or on a human scale from the ground. I've attached a drawing by a local architect that shows an elevation of what is possible under the new draft code. This drawing was submitted to the city as part of public comment. The surrounding homes in the drawing are based on actual example homes currently in the central neighborhoods. The proposed building with its two huge dormers actually does meet parking, open space, set back, and lot coverage requirements touted in the new draft. One thing that is repeated over and over in the webinar is that all the constraints work together. And they do, but the allowed height and mass in the proposed new code are still too large to blend in. The wall plate height in the proposed code is in fact taller than many people's existing homes. With a 5 ft above grade allowance, in addition to the 45 ft tall implied height limit, you could end up with a structure that is 50ft tall. For some perspective, the Story Mansion on Wilson is not that tall. Jason Delmue said it's unlikely any developer would build that. However in a recent CDB meeting when questioned by Ben Lloyd about developers maxing out allowances in the code, Chris Saunders (City Planning Dept) admitted that historically builders typically did not build to the maximum allowed height and mass, but they are doing so more frequently now. So I would suggest we need to be more conservative in our allowances to make sure we end up with buildings we are actually comfortable with. I like the wall plate requirement, it would be nice to see some structures with roofs again. I think many of us are getting tired of the big black boxes taking over the historic district. But the allowed 25ft wall plate height, is simply too generous to garner the desired effect. Notice in the drawing, the 6 unit apartment building at 616 S Grande Ave. This would be possible under the proposed code, no tapering roof necessary. On May 18th 2015 the language requiring new development in the NCOD (Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District) be in keeping with the character of the structures on the same block was removed. This action has allowed Black Olive, SOBO, the new $1.8 million (each unit) duplex behind SOBO, and the new construction on 8th and Alderson, and so on. Therefore releasing this proposed draft of the UDC on the central and historic neighborhoods of Bozeman will wreak havoc with the character of our built environment. Thank you for taking the time to read my email. I hope that the information I've presented makes you realize that my concerns are evidence based. I'm not just whining. I think many of us want the same thing; for people who live and work here to have affordable housing while preserving the character of our neighborhoods. I just don't think the proposed draft of the UDC does that. Thank you, Alison B. Sweeney Bernadette's Handmade Jewelry Bozeman MT 406-404-5740 alison-bernadettes.com