Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-07-24 Public Comment - J. Knokey - Bozeman City Commission_Application Update_Harpers CornerFrom:Jon K To:Bozeman Public Comment Subject:[EXTERNAL]Harpers Corner Annexation and ZMA, Application #23127 Date:Tuesday, May 7, 2024 8:39:55 AM Attachments:Bozeman City Commission_Application Update_Harpers Corner.docx 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 reach out with any questions: jon.knokey@gmail.com Have a great day! --Jon Knokey Bozeman City Commission 121 N Rouse Ave Bozeman, MT 59715 Harpers Corner Annexa�on and ZMA, Applica�on #23127 My name is Jon Knokey, and I am the applicant for Harpers Corner Annexa�on and ZMA, Applica�on #23127. I would humbly like to make a request and share an update. First the request: would it be possible to reschedule our hearing for the next available Commissioner mee�ng to allow us to incorporate a meaningful change to our applica�on? Second, we would like to inform you that a substan�al amount of effort and outreach went into crea�ng a fair and meaningful compromise that will make Bozeman proud. Here is the outreach and communica�on schedule: • February 8th: Met with the Wats Lane neighbors at the home of Mary & Ray Seed • February 16th: The neighbors emailed their desire for a twenty-acre split, from R-2 to R-4 • February 16th: Apprecia�ng that R-2 over twenty acres was not an economically feasible op�on due to unknown civil costs, we decided to jointly pursue an Annexa�on agreement with the City of Bozeman. • February 26th: We met with the city to discuss the Annexa�on agreement and sent the jointly agreed narra�ve outlining our desire to impose R-2 height restric�ons along Hidden Valley as well as enhanced setbacks (this was included in the pre-read). • March 8th: The city reversed course, sta�ng they would no longer allow the Annexa�on Agreement. • March 9th: I informed the neighbors we would not pursue a private agreement due to obvious li�gious issues. A zoning designa�on was the agreed upon correct course. • March 18th: I sent the narra�ve and presenta�on to the neighbors – reques�ng feedback and to discuss a path forward. • March 20th: Mr. Vidmar and I met with Commissioner Morrison at City Brew to discuss further op�ons. A zoning designa�on was the agreed upon correct course. • May 1st: A subset of the neighbors sent a leter from a lawyer. The journey is such that on February 16th the neighbors s�pulated, in an email, that support for the applica�on would require that half the property be zoned R-2 and the other half R-4. There was an agreement that R-4 was viable on the 20.06 acres to the east, where the property meets the neighboring REMU. Furthermore, the neighbors shared that R-2 was the needed designa�on on the western approach, nearest to Hidden Valley Road. Otherwise, the protest would remain. It was not un�l May 1st that we received feedback that R-3 is an acceptable outcome, including nearest to Hidden Valley Road. This was welcomed. This provided the opportunity to find common ground. We would like to propose the following changes to our applica�on: • Legal Description: S27, T01 S, R05 E, C.O.S. 408A, PARCEL 2, ACRES 20.06 will be requested at R-3. • Legal Description: S27, T01 S, R05 E, C.O.S. 408A, PARCEL 2, ACRES 20.06 will be requested at R-4. We stand ready to design the project to allow for even further benefits for the neighborhood – including a gradua�ng density. This will take place during the public Subdivision Review process. Conversely, we have compromised our applica�on from REMU to R-5 to R-4; to the final proposal: the R-3 to R-4 split. This will allow the density to taper from REMU at the eastern border to R-4 then R-3 as we move westward towards Hidden Valley Road. With each step, the City Planning Department has recommended the criterion for Zoning. The community benefits remain unmistakable. Our revised applica�on will be in clear accordance with the direc�on from the Commission, as well as input from neighbors. This course of ac�on is the compromise the Commissioners sought. I respec�ully request to reschedule our hearing for the next available Commissioner mee�ng. Warmest Regards, Jon Knokey