HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-24-24 Public Comment - S. & F. Boyd - Comments on The Guthrie, Project 23354From:Scott and Frances Boyd
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Comments on The Guthrie, Project 23354
Date:Friday, June 21, 2024 3:18:48 PM
Attachments:Deny the Guthrie Affordable Housing Plan.pdf
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 see attached comment letter.
Dear Bozeman Commissioners,
Both The Guthrie’s A6ordable Housing Plan (GAHP) as well as the Economic Development
Sta6 Report (EDSR) dated May 22, 2024, regarding the “Approval of A6ordable Housing Plan
for Community Development Project 23354 The Guthrie at 5th and Villard Site Plan” err in
their analysis and application of Bozeman’s Unified Development Code (UDC) and its
A6ordable Housing Ordinance (AHO) in at least four ways.
The first error in both is in defining most of the units as one-bedroom units. From the EDSR:
The BMC does not contain a definition of the term, “bedroom.” Pursuant to BMC
38.700.010, where the BMC does not define a term, it must be defined as found in
the latest edition of "The Illustrated Book of Development Definitions" by Harvey
S. Moskowitz and Carl G. Lindbloom. The "The Illustrated Book of Development
Definitions" (2015) provides a definition of a “bedroom”:
A private room planned and intended for sleeping, separated from other
rooms by a door, and accessible to a bathroom without crossing another
bedroom.
StaU finds that all the units in The Guthrie meet the definition of a one-bedroom
unit for the purposes of assigning rental rates pursuant to 38.380.020.D.2.,
because sleeping areas may be separated from other rooms by a door, and these
sleeping areas are accessible to a bathroom without crossing another bedroom.
Doors provide privacy to the sleeping area from other parts of the apartments.
This determination by the EDSR results from incomplete research and does not involve a
thorough examination of the facts at hand. Clearly EDSR sta6 is choosing to treat what the
Project Narrative calls “operable partitions” and creatively interpret the term “door” such
that these units will be classified as one-bedroom units. Arguably any reasonable person
would critically evaluate the proposed layout of these units and determine that most of
them are studio units. Consequently, we disagree with the EDSR sta6’s findings on this
point. Moreover, any reasonable person would need to ignore AHO code-referenced
defined terms in describing these units and put aside reasonable due diligence of other
considerations in order to define these units as one-bedrooms.
Because the classification of the unit size determines the maximum rent that can be
charged to tenants of the a6ordable units, care should be taken to be accurate in defining
these units. Further, since rent is being determined according to the unit size pursuant to
38.380.020.D.2., not only should the review authority determine which rooms qualify as
bedrooms, the review authority should determine which units qualify as studio units
because that classification is an additional classification that is specified in the AHO for
determining rent amounts.
Bozeman’s UDC defines the term “apartment” as:
A habitable room or suite of two or more habitable rooms (emphasis added) meeting the
requirements of the city's adopted International Building Code, located in an apartment
building or used for residential purposes in non-residential buildings located within non-
residential districts, as specified in this chapter. An efficiency unit is as an apartment under
this definition. Townhouses and rowhouses are excluded from this definition.
The UDC also defines the term “e6iciency unit” as:
A dwelling unit containing only one habitable room (emphasis added) as defined
and regulated by the most recently adopted International Building Code.
The International Building Code defines the term “e6iciency dwelling units” as:
EUiciency dwelling units shall conform to the requirements of the code excepts as
modified herein:
1. The unit shall have a living room of not less than 190 square feet (17.7 m2) of
floor area.
2. The unit shall be provided with a separate closet.
3. For other than Accessible, Type A and Type B dwelling units, the unit shall be
provided with a kitchen sink, cooking appliance and refrigerator, each having
a clear working space of not less than 30 inches (762 mm) in front. Light and
ventilation conforming to this code shall be provided.
4. The unit shall be provided with a separate bathroom containing a water
closet, lavatory and bathtub or shower.
"The Illustrated Book of Development Definitions" (2015, i.e., the dictionary) defines
“habitable room” as:
Any room in a dwelling unit other than a kitchen (emphasis added), bathroom,
closet, pantry, hallway, cellar, storage place, garage, or unfinished basement, cellar,
or attic.
Because the AHO specifically uses the term “studio” and it is not defined in the UDC, the
dictionary defines it as:
“See Dwelling Unit, EUiciency”.
For completeness’ sake, and though the term “e6iciency unit” is defined by the UDC, the
term “Dwelling Unit, E6iciency” is defined by the dictionary as:
A dwelling unit consisting of not more than one habitable room (emphasis added),
together with kitchen or kitchenette and sanitary facilities.
Comment: EUiciency units, also known as studio apartments, typically contain
between four hundred and five hundred square feet. See Dwelling, Micro-Unit.
Searching for “Dwelling, Micro-Unit” we find in the dictionary:
A type of dwelling unit between two hundred fifty to four hundred square feet
containing a kitchen, bathroom, and sleeping accommodations.
Comment: The micro-unit is designed to provide aUordable housing to single
persons and couples. The size of micro-units diUers by jurisdiction and purpose.
Most cities usually have minimum area requirements for apartment housing (four
hundred fifty square feet, for example) that would have to be changed if micro-units
are to be permitted. Newer forms of “rooming houses” composed solely of micro-
units are now being built to cater to young singles who want to live away from home
in smaller, aUordable units. The micros units in such modern rooming houses may
be as small as one hundred to two hundred square feet, including a small kitchen
and compact bath. See Micro Hotel.
Because all of Unit A1, Unit A2, Unit B1, Unit B2, and Unit B3 layouts are comprised of only
one habitable room in each they are, by definition, e6iciency dwelling units, colloquially
known as studio units. More precisely, all Unit A1 and A2 layouts are micro-unit dwellings
due to their small size and Unit B1, B2, and B3 layouts are e6iciency dwelling units.
However, for our classification purposes all five of these unit layouts can be treated the
same because Bozeman’s AHO does not make the distinction between the two, although it
should in order to provide lower rents for those living in smaller units. The "operable
partitions” are not doors because these partitions are only separating the sleeping quarters
from the kitchenette and not separating them from other rooms. Further insight can be
gained by looking at the definition of “rooming unit” in the dictionary:
Any habitable room or group of rooms forming a single habitable unit, used or
intended to be used for living and sleeping but not for cooking or eating (emphasis
added).
Again, the kitchenette is explicitly excluded from consideration as a room. The “operable
partitions” cannot be treated as doors because they’re not separating habitable rooms.
Further, Unit C1 and D1 layouts do not utilize “operable partitions” but rather true doors in
the unimaginative sense of the word. Clearly, the developer is attempting to charge a
higher rent than he is otherwise allowed by misclassifying almost all units as one-bedroom
units.
The Unit C1 layouts are true one-bedroom units. There is a door separating the sleeping
quarters from another habitable room, which is the living area. The Unit D1 layouts are
correctly defined as two-bedroom units.
Therefore, the a6ordable unit allocation by Unit layout for The Guthrie is:
Layout A6ordable Units Market Rate units
A1 12 studios 11 studios
A2 10 studios 11 studios
B1 6 studios 9 studios
B2 6 studios 9 studios
B3 11 studios 5 studios
C1 6 one-bedroom 6 one-bedroom
D1 5 two-bedroom 4 two-bedroom
Using the 2023 HUD AMI numbers for Gallatin County as the EDSR report does (2024
numbers have since been published), one-person households at the 80th percentile earn
$58,950 and the corresponding rent using the EDSR’s methodology would result in a
monthly rent of $1,473.75 for the 45 proposed studio units, not the $1,683.75 that
HomeBase proposes—and that EDSR is erroneously permitting. Cumulatively this second
error would result in tenants paying an extra $113,400 in the first year of occupancy using
2023 HUD AMI numbers.
Third, in continuing the analysis of the errors in the GAHP and in the EDSR sta6 report, BMC
38.380.40.A.2.c. states:
Access to shared amenities and services by residents of the aUordable homes must
be the same as to those in market rate homes in the development.
The EDSR concludes:
AUordable homes are distributed throughout the building and nothing in the Site
Plan Application or AUordable Housing Plan indicates that any shared facilities will
not be available to all residents. The Applicant confirmed in writing that, “Access to
project amenities and services are available for ALL residents.”
Returning to the dictionary, the definition of the term “amenity” (as opposed to the term
“facility” as used erroneously by the EDSR) is:
A natural or created feature that enhances the aesthetic quality or visual appeal or
makes more attractive or satisfying a particular property, place, or area.
Legal Annotation: “A river is more than an amenity, it is a treasure. It offers a
necessity of life that must be rationed among those who have power over it.” New
Jersey v. New York (U.S., 1931).
Both viewsheds and private patios meet the definition of “amenity” because the view is a
natural feature while the patio is a created feature.
A viewshed is defined in the dictionary as:
An elevated or unobstructed location, position, or area that permits an unhindered
panoramic vista of particular interest or pleasure or unique view to or from a
particular point. See Vista. See Figure 106.
.
Examining the exhibit 006-A0.14 – A6ordable Unit Locations, we find that there are no
a6ordable units on the ground floor where all patios are located. Forty-eight of the
a6ordable units are located on the lower floors 2 and 3 with limited, obstructed views. Of
the remaining eight a6ordable units on the upper floors 4 and 5, all but one are interior-
facing units. Only the two-bedroom unit on the fourth floor would be considered to have a
view. No a6ordable units face the nearest mountain views to the east or north and none
have unobstructed views to the South. By restricting the vast majority of the a6ordable
units to the second and third floors with limited-to-no views and by allocating no a6ordable
units a patio, the developer fails to grant equal access of shared amenities to the residents
of the a6ordable units.
Fourth, and last, it is professionally inappropriate for the EDSR to add “underlining”
emphasis when citing the UDC. Such underlining emphasis serves no purpose other than
to attempt to discourage—if not intimidate—concerned Bozeman residents from objecting
to the proposed plan. The EDSR states, “Pursuant to 38.380.030, “Applications for
development of a6ordable homes that comply with the requirements of this division
qualify for and must be awarded the incentives applicable to the type and tenancy of
a6ordable housing being provided and requested by the developer” whereas in the actual
code, “must be awarded the incentives” is not underlined for emphasis. Furthermore, at
the June 20, 2024, Inter-Neighborhood Council meeting an employee of HomeBase relayed
that HomeBase worked with Bozeman sta6 to determine the classification of the units.
This behind-the-scenes coordination is inappropriate as it relates to the EDSR
determinations and serves to undermine public trust. Because the EDSR does not
elucidate why the units are not classified as studio/e6iciency units one can only conclude
that it was not considered as a possibility. Therefore, the review of the a6ordable housing
plan can only be characterized as lacking and incomplete. These actions call into question
the impartiality and objectivity of the EDSR and imply a bias towards the developer and
against those potential tenants benefiting from the AHO. These actions also serve to call
into question the city’s onsite meetings with the developer that reviewed the constraints on
the existing building which prevent the preservation and redevelopment of the current
building. Hopefully, under their review authority, the commission will investigate these
circumstances, report their findings to the public, and mitigate against repeat occurrences
of this, at best, perceived bias and insu6icient reporting.
In conclusion, the GAHP incorrectly identifies most of its units as one-bedroom units and
thus applies the incorrect AMI and maximum rent amounts in HomeBase’s plan. The GAHP
also fails to meet the development standards of the AHO by not granting the same access
to shared amenities and services to the a6ordable units as to the market rate units.
Therefore, the GAHP should be denied. Because The Guthrie project as a whole seeks to
utilize the Deep Incentives of Bozeman’s A6ordable Housing Ordinance with an invalid
a6ordable housing plan, it too should be denied.
Respectfully,
Scott Boyd
Bozeman
Enclosure: Portions of Exhibit 08 Project and DEM Narrative from SPR submittal
Studio misclassified as 1BR. A1 and A2 layouts
Studio misclassified as 1BR. B1, B2, and B3 layouts.
Layout C1 – 1BR
Layout D1 – 2BR
Drawing 006 – A0.14 – A6ordable Unit Locations