Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-30-24 Public Comment - S. Bieluch - Re_ [EXTERNAL]Re_ 811 W Mendenhall Public NoticeFrom:Scott Bieluch To:Bailey Minnich; Bozeman Public Comment Cc:Jacob Doesschate Subject:Re: [EXTERNAL]Re: 811 W Mendenhall Public Notice Date:Tuesday, April 30, 2024 5:34:16 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. Thanks for sending me all of the information about this project. I haven't had a chance toreview it all yet, but wow, this is much, much worse than I thought. Those exterior elevations are ridiculous, the zoning change from R4 to R5 should have never even been allowed. Thebuilding will tower over my one story rancher house and I will no longer have solar power as a viable option. It looks like the City is pretty evil and completely screwing the adjacentproperty owners. This will drastically change the quality of life for the worse in the neighborhood and severely decreases my property value. This extra height will block the sunfrom ever hitting my house again. No extra height should be allowed. If this is approved as is, I am pretty much forced to sell my home of 24 years and move. Thank you PlanningDepartment for looking out for the interests of the long time local homeowners, not!!! Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. It seems clear, this will make my neighborhood suck to live in and I have to move. Developers can do whatever they wantunder this City government and the homeowners pay the price, literally. Yes, by administrative review, I was wondering if the site plan approval goes before the city commision. It sounds like it is not going to. These decisions should be made by a planningand zoning commission, not employees of the Planning Department. I have read clear inappropriate things in the documents where the developers are trying to get out of theLEGALLY REQUIRED FULL DEPARTURE REQUEST. I'd like to officially request that the Site Plan review be brought before the City Commission for a vote - there are too manythings the developer is weaseling out of. I very strongly oppose the rear setback deviation - the Planning Department would not give me one for my house, why is this different? Thisdeveloper has 95 units, they can follow the rules like everyone else and live with 94. It was originally 93 in the first meeting I went to.This should be a FULL DEPARTURE REQUEST - do not treat this developer any different than you treated my project!!! The developer also needs the full 20 foot rear setback - JUST LIKE YOU MAKEEVERYONE ELSE DO - there are no exceptions for wealthy developers to get more parking by taking public right of ways. Just because it is luxury units does not mean you can treat thisproject any differently than my project was treated - every single rule must be followed to the letter of the law or I will sue the City of Bozeman Planning Department. And mostimportantly no deviations or exceptions from the height rules can be allowed, this developer already illegally failed to notify me, an adjacent property owner, and had the zoning changedwithout my knowledge. The developer must not be allowed to further violate the city's rules. The parking study is a joke. Clearly whoever wrote that is biased and in the pocket of the developer who paid for the study or incompetent. I demand the City study the traffic impactsto W. Lamme St further before allowing the development to proceed further or once again, each time the City violates my property rights, I will be forced to take legal action and sue. I would petition the City Commission to create a permit zone, but that would be acomplete waste of my breath and time. My personal past experience has proven that this City Commission gives zero weight to public input in their decisions. It is clear that this citycommission has given the developers the green light to do whatever they want, all at the expense of the adjacent property owners. This developer does not even bother to follow thecity laws and notify adjacent homeowners and the commissioners still let the developer do anything they want. all with the goal of increasing the developers profits and all at the expenseof the neighbors. All of the commissioners have pre-determined their opinions and votes long before city commission meetings and public comment. Talking to this city Commission is liketalking to a brick wall. They even write what they are going to say before the meeting starts and then completely tune out during public comment. My only option is to move, newBozeman is for wealthy out of state homeowners, not long time locals. Thanks City Commissioners and Planning department, great job pushing the working locals out of town! Scott Bieluch805 W. Lamme Bozeman, MT On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 3:00 PM Bailey Minnich <bminnich@bozeman.net> wrote: Good afternoon Scott, I was forwarded your public comment email as I am the planner reviewing the application. I wanted to provide additional information based on a couple of questions you submitted. Asa side note, we are working with this applicant to obtain a revised notification list which will restart the public comment period. I don’t have the exact comment period dates yet as it willdepend on how long it takes the applicant to get us the revised list, but they will have to post a new sign on-site and re-mail the public notice letters. 1. I would like to know if this project is under Administrative Review? Site Planapplications are reviewed by the Planning staff and ultimately decided on by the Planning Director. There is not a public hearing before the City Commission after thecompletion of the public comment period. I’m not sure if that is what you meant by Administrative Review. Please let me know if I’m not understanding your questionand I can provide more information. 2. How can I find out what variances or deviations or exemptions from the City rulesthat the project is seeking? Are they seeking a pass on the City's building height rules? The applicant is requesting 3 departures for the project: 1) to the street vision triangle at the corner of N 8th Avenue and W Mendenhall Street, 2) the light and air setback adjacent to the city right-of-way along the existing alley, and 3) the minimumrear setback adjacent to the existing alley. I’ve attached the submitted departure narrative to this email. Departures are reviewed administratively in conjunction withthe Site Plan application. They are different from variances as they do not go before a separate board for review. Departures are voluntary opportunities to allow someflexibility for applicants to propose alternative designs provided they meet the purpose of the standard and comply with criteria applicable to the specific departure section. Regarding the proposed building height, the property is split zoned R-5 and B-2M. Underthese zones, the building height depends on the roof pitch and the purpose of the building. In the R-5, the maximum height can vary between 50-60ft, and in the B-2M for a buildingonly with residential uses, the max height is 4 stories or 50ft. There are some additional height allowances for stairs, elevator penthouses, services elements, etc. that allow up to 12feet of additional height for these features, which they are proposing to utilize. This project is also proposing to utilize the shallow incentives under BMC 38.380.030.C with asubmitted Affordable Housing Plan to gain one additional story of height in the R-5 and two additional stories in the B-2M. I’ve attached the elevation plans which outline the proposedheight measurements in red. 3. How can I officially request that the developer provide a parking study for W LammeSt? The submitted Traffic Impact Study was reviewed by the City’s Engineering Department and they did request more information regarding the trip distribution fromthe alley onto Lamme, as well as the traffic controls on Lamme. The applicant submitted up updated TIS memo from the engineering consultant and this satisfied theEngineering Dept’s request. I’ve attached the TIS and updated Memo to this email. If you have more questions on the TIS, the reviewing engineer on the project would bethe best point of contact. 4. I'd like to request that with this development, there is a condition that my street bemade Permit Parking Only. I’m aware this was not a question, however I wanted to point out that only the City Commission can create a permit parking district. Youwould need to petition the City Commission to create the district and would most likely need the surrounding neighbors to agree. You can find more information aboutResidential Parking Permits on the City’s website and if you want to start the process, navigate to the Contact Us page where you can submit the request through the AskBZN button. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Also, all of the application materials are available on the City’s Public Documents website, which you can reach here: 23245. Bailey Bailey Minnich, AICP, CFM | Development Review Planner | CommunityDevelopment City of Bozeman | 20 E Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771 C: 406.595.3141 | O: 406.582.2260 | E: bminnich@bozeman.net | W: www.bozeman.net From: Jacob Doesschate <jdoesschate@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2024 8:49 AMTo: Bailey Minnich <bminnich@BOZEMAN.NET>Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL]Re: 811 W Mendenhall Public Notice Hi Bailey, We have received a new public comment from Scott Bieluch, please see below. Thanks, Jake Doesschate | Development Review Coordinator, Community Development City of Bozeman | 20 East Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771P: 406.582.2945 | C: 406.579.9610 | jdoesschate@bozeman.net | www.bozeman.net From: Scott Bieluch <s.bieluch@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2024 10:36 PMTo: Jacob Doesschate <jdoesschate@BOZEMAN.NET>; Planning Technician <PlanningTech@BOZEMAN.NET>; Bozeman Public Comment<comments@BOZEMAN.NET>; City Desk <citydesk@dailychronicle.com>Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: 811 W Mendenhall Public Notice 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, Thank you for the reply. This is the second time this developer has failed to abide by the lawand notify me. The first time this developer got away with violating my rights and held a meeting and successfully changed the zoning without notifying me and violating myproperty rights. The City held a second meeting to include me, but it was a sham, the commissioners had already made up their minds and did not listen to one word that I or anyother neighbor said. Commissioner Coburn said 'I hate doing things twice' , his attitude was let's get this over with and there was no changing his mind or getting him to listen to a singleword I said. I lost all my faith in democracy at the local level. The zoning change for this project was unlawful and I still intend to sue the city. Attempting to exclude me a secondtime only proves my case and demonstrates that this is a crooked developer trying to unfairly and illegally interfere with the democratic process. Thank you for forcing them tofollow the City rules. Attempting to notify me by general delivery addressed to my condo's name was a deliberate attempt by a shady developer to violate my rights and exclude me from the process. I verymuch do not appreciate this attempted crime and I would like to request an investigation - clearly the developer has my name and address from the zoning fraud they previouslycommitted and were called out for. My house would not even be a condo if not for the Planning Department forcing the change on me, and then the fact that my house istechnically a condo is used to discriminate against my ownership and exclude me from notification of multiple Planning Department Projects adds insult to injury. It is completelyunfair that the planning department forced me into calling my 1960 raised ranch a condo, and then used that condo label to exclude me and deny my property rights. I have several questions for whoever is in charge of this project - I would like to know if this project is under Administrative Review? It most certainly needsto be, the developer has a very shady reputation and is currently trying to sneak many bad things past the public. If the project is not under administrative review, how may I requestthat it goes to Administrative Review? How can I find out what variances or deviations or exemptions from the City rules that the project is seeking? I fear the developer is trying to sneak even more height through, whenthe whole neighborhood was against the zoning change and no one wanted the fifth floor allowed in the first place. Are they seeking a pass on the City's building height rules? How can I officially request that the developer provide a parking study for W Lamme St? My property will be highly negatively affected and severely de-valued by increased traffic on W. Lamme. It is already like the Grand Prix for the Domino's Piazza Drivers and has anextremely high volume of traffic. Many of the houses don't have driveways. My own driveway is blocked at least once a month due to the current parking shortage. Adding 95units with 68 parking spaces will negatively impact the quality of life in this neighborhood, solely to increase the profits of an out of state developer. Parking is already in severely short supply in this neighborhood. I'd like to request that withthis development, there is a condition that my street be made Permit Parking Only. My parking options are limited to a one block radius. One block to the West is the High SchoolPermit Zone. One Block East is North 7th Ave, not feasible to park on and carry my groceries back to my house. My truck would be vandalized or hit or stolen if overnightparking is even allowed on N 7th. One block South is W, Mendenhall, no Parking there Tu and Th overnight and the 446 daily vehicle trips will dominate W Mendenhall Parking andleave me no space there. To the North is a dead end N 8th Ave. There are a few spaces there, but only one house on the street has a driveway and it is a triplex. The Vet employeescurrently use all the available street parking. If the street on my block is full, I have zero parking options. People park in front of my house to shop at Basiclai - a retail store the city allowed to havezero off street parking, People park in front of my house to pick up a piazza at Domino's. People park in front of my house and eat tacos from Taco Johns drive thru. People park infront of my house and shop at the used clothing store on N. 7th. There is already a parking shortage!!! Can you please pass this email along to whoever is in charge of making parkingpermit zones and let them know that this area desperately, desperately, desperately needs to be included in a permit zone currently and even more so (if that is even possible) when thisbuilding's construction commences. Please, there are daily conflicts on my block already over parking, or lack of parking that is. This project should be re-thought completely. The City is being taken advantage of. Offering 5% of the units as affordable is a complete disgrace and does not deserve any incentives from the City, whether they are "shallow" or not. This project as proposed is abad deal for the City of Bozeman. If the developer wants incentives, variances, deviations etc from the people and City of Bozeman, then the Commissioners need to represent thepeople's interest and demand 25% affordable housing. You'll never build out of a housing crisis by offering 5% affordable units and selling 95% high end luxury apartments to out ofstate 2nd homeowners. Five percent affordable units is not good enough. The City and people of Bozeman can do much, much better than what this developer is proposing. Thank you, Scott Bieluch 805 W. Lamme St Bozeman On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 12:51 PM Jacob Doesschate <jdoesschate@bozeman.net> wrote: Good afternoon Scott, I would like to thank you for bringing the error in the public notice to our attention, the public notice was not sent out to all adjacent property owners by the applicant on the 811 W Mendenhall project. At the Department of Community Development, we greatlyappreciate that you alerted us of errors made by the applicant during the public notice period. As such, this project will be required to have a new notice period, with newmailers sent out to all adjacent property owners. I will make sure to personally check the list of adjacent property owners, to ensure that you will receive a mailer containing thenotice, during the new notice period. Thanks, Jake Doesschate | Development Review Coordinator, Community Development City of Bozeman | 20 East Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771P: 406.582.2945 | C: 406.579.9610 | jdoesschate@bozeman.net | www.bozeman.net City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’sConstitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and thecontents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as informationrelated to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law. City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law.