HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-29-24 Public Comment - M. Kaveney - Comments for #24191 and #24192, 7th and Aspen Revised NoticeFrom:BozemanTreeCoalition
To:Bozeman Public Comment; bminnick@bozeman.net
Cc:Douglas Fischer; Terry Cunningham; Jennifer Madgic; Joey Morrison; Emma Bode
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Comments for #24191 and #24192, 7th and Aspen Revised Notice
Date:Monday, October 28, 2024 10:29:12 AM
Attachments:2024.1028.BTC Comments for Revised 7th and Aspen.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.
City Clerk- Please include these comments in the folder for 7th and Aspen Revised Notice.
Bailey-
Please find comments for the Revised 7th and Aspen project attached below.
Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and Commissioners-Please follow along with this project that unfortunately pits temporary affordable housing
against the City's environmental codes and growth policy goals.
Thank you,Bozeman Tree Coalition Founders,
Marcia KaveneyAngie Kociolek
Daniel CartyApril Craighead
Lara SchulzChris McQueary
Public comments in response to 24191 and 24192, 7th and Aspen: Revised Notice
Submitted by the Bozeman Tree Coalition
10/28/2024
The Revised Notice contains the following new information/changed information:
1. Project 24191 – 7th & Aspen Master Site Plan: Revised 7th & Aspen Master Site Plan
Narrative; Revised Existing Survey including updated tree/vegetation information (Sheet C2.1);
Economic Development Staff Report – 7th & Aspen
2. Project 24192 – 7th & Aspen Phases 1 and 2 Site Plan: Revised 7th & Aspen Phase 1 & 2 Site
Plan Narrative; Revised Existing Survey including updated tree/vegetation information (Sheet
C2.1); Revised Demo Plan Phase 1&2 (Sheet C2.2); 7th & Aspen Phase 1 & 2 Exterior Lighting
Cutsheets; Economic Development Staff Report – 7th & Aspen
Bozeman Tree Coalition (BTC) comments on the revised notice:
After reviewing the revised materials, the Bozeman Tree Coalition’s view is that the 7th and
Aspen revised narratives and the revised Demo Plan for Phase 1 and 2 (Sheet C2.2) do not meet
the expectations of the Site Plan Review Criteria in Bozeman’s Municipal Code (BMC) Section
38.230.100. The revised Existing Survey (Sheet C2.1) is an improvement but still lacks
important information. Our specific concerns with the revised materials are the following:
Criterion 1. Conformance to and consistency with the city's adopted growth policy:
The revised materials of 7th and Aspen Mixed-Use Master Site Plan # 2419 do not comply with
the following important goals of the Bozeman growth policy.
A. Goal EPO-2: Work to ensure that development is responsive to natural features.
One can surmise that “natural features” include vegetation such as mature trees. The revised
Demo Plan for Phase 1 and 2 (Sheet C2.2) marks the demolition of 22 (of 24) trees plus
numerous mature shrubs from Bozeman’s urban forest—including two Colorado spruce trees
over 36 inches in diameter. Removing over 90% of the existing vegetation does not comply with
the spirit of being responsive to natural features.
The revised “7th and Aspen Existing Survey” document is an improvement over the original, by
illustrating a more complete representation of the existing trees/large shrubs on the site.
However, it does not differentiate the diameters of existing trees and lists trees only at 2.5 inches
diameter, which downplays the significance of the existing vegetation. As with the previous
existing survey, this makes it difficult for the planning staff to ascertain what is actually on the
ground.
For example, there are seven trees with diameters estimated at 28-36 inches. These trees are
appreciating green assets. The ecosystem services and ecological benefits of mature trees take
upwards of 60 years to replace and thus are not replaceable with a 1:1 ratio of saplings.
Specifically, the building and plaza design of Phase 1 does not incorporate the two
approximately 100-year-old existing spruce trees to the west of the proposed Phase 1 building.
Due to an existing sewer line, boulevard trees cannot be planted to replace these large spruce
trees. Eliminating these trees and replacing them with a plaza not only ignores the spirit and
letter of growth policy goal EPO-2, but these actions will also eliminate the benefits of
vegetative screening and will perpetuate the existing tree inequity problem in that location
(https://www.treeequityscore.org)
B. Goal EPO-3.9 Integrate climate change considerations into development standards.
Simply put, removing mature trees and depositing them into the landfill releases the carbon they
have been storing for decades or longer. It is commonly known that large trees sequester more
carbon than small trees. The planting of fewer young trees will not make up for this loss of
carbon storage. Removing trees and disposing of them in a landfill is in direct conflict with the
city’s goals to reduce the release of carbon into the atmosphere.
C. Goal EPO-1: Prioritize strategic acquisition of parks to provide a variety of recreational
opportunities throughout the City.
The revised narrative does not address this inadequacy in the application. Although Westlake
Park includes the BMX park, Children’s Memorial Garden, and a handful of community garden
lots, it does not include non-dedicated park space for simply relaxing or playing. The revised
narrative lists the next closest park as Centennial Park, which includes North Grand Baseball
fields. Centennial Park does have non-designated space available to the public but is
approximately a half mile away from the 7th and Aspen proposal and will soon feel the increased
pressure of the N 3rd development housing hundreds of new residents. Finally, it is misleading to
list the Bozeman Senior Center and the Gallatin County Fairgrounds as nearby parkland.
Although these facilities do offer activities and are great to have nearby, they are not parks. So,
although there is a plethora of activities within a mile of the project, there is little in the way of
non-dedicated open space. Therefore, cash-in-lieu of parks and open space should be denied in
the Master Site Plan.
Criterion 7. Conformance with the project design provisions of article 5, including:
a. compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the site and the
adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development relative the architectural design,
building mass, neighborhood identity, landscaping, historical character, orientation of
buildings on the site and visual integration.
The revised narrative does not improve the compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate
environment of the site and adjacent neighborhoods. The existing large trees and mature shrubs
are integral to this property. For example, the spruce trees visible from N. 7th and the large ash
trees anchor the site and are part of the neighborhood identity, existing landscaping, and add to
the historical character, having been there for decades. These specimen trees along the west and
north aspects of the parcel should be protected from damage during construction and
incorporated into the design to comply with this criterion (see conditions below).
c. Design and arrangement of elements of the plan (e.g., buildings circulation, open space
and landscaping, etc.) in harmony with the existing natural topography, natural water
bodies and water courses, existing vegetation, and to contribute to the overall aesthetic
quality of the site configuration.
This criterion calls for the design to be in harmony with the existing vegetation rather than
removing it and planting new. Again, the revised narrative does not show additional protection to
more than one tree. A recent phone conversation between the applicant and a founding member
of the Bozeman Tree Coalition (10/16/24) revealed interest by the applicant to try to keep more
trees and mature shrubs along the east property line from getting damaged during demolition.
This is good news, and the revised narrative and Demo Plan need to show commitment to this
interest by including drawings showing how these trees and hedges will be protected during the
demolition and construction phases.
d. Landscaping, including the enhancement of buildings, the appearance of vehicular use,
open space and pedestrian areas, and the preservation or replacement of natural
vegetation.
For a third time, the review criteria call for preservation of natural vegetation. It cannot be more
evident that this is an important requirement of the Site Plan Review Criteria 38.230.100.
However, the revised narrative does not address any improvement in this area. To the contrary,
the revised Demo Plan makes it clear that nearly 100% of the existing landscaping will be
removed. Furthermore, a sewer line beneath the sidewalk along N. 7th will make it impossible to
plant replacement trees in the boulevard.
Burden of Proof as required by Sec. 38.230.100 of BMC
C. Plan approval may be denied upon a determination the application does not meet the
criteria of this section. Persons objecting to the recommendations of review bodies carry
the burden of proof. A denial of approval must be in writing.
The revised narrative for 7th and Aspen Master Site Plan and Phase 1 and 2 Site Plans does not
meet compliance with the review criteria listed above. The Bozeman Tree Coalition has carried
and met the burden of proof for the site plan criteria of concern listed above.
Concerns regarding the additional departures requested from other codes:
In addition to the concerns cited above, we ask the City Planners to deny the following additional
departures from codes.
Departure 2) “the light and air setback adjacent to the northern property line between
Phases 1 and 3 per BMC 38.520.030.C”
The recent conversation on 10/16/24 between the applicant and a founding member of the
Bozeman Tree Coalition also revealed an interest by the applicant to keep several of the existing
trees along the northern property line of Phase 1 where it meets Phase 3. The revised narrative,
Demo Plan, and Existing Conditions documents do not reflect this intention.
Departure 4) “and a reduction in usable open space by 20% per BMC 38.320.070
Departures for housing creation.”
The revised narrative does not address the applicant’s claim of a need for a departure of open
space. All future residents of this development deserve open space, which is why this code exists.
Open space requirements are even more important in areas such as this that are in areas lacking
in natural open spaces, near busy arterials, and in areas expected to have dense infill. Open
spaces are also especially important to offset the trend of heat islands and tree inequity, which are
increasingly found in Bozeman’s low-income housing projects.
Conditions Requested to address the Site Plan Review Criteria and additional departure
requests:
If the above concerns are addressed with appropriate and reasonable conditions, this project has
many positive attributes and will likely be experienced as a positive addition to the community.
In response to the revised narrative, revised Existing Survey, and subsequent conversations with
the applicant, we suggest the following conditions to bring the application into better compliance
with the Site Plan Review Criteria.
1. Add a protection plan for 75% of the mature vegetation that exists to the east of the proposed
parking lot, in the open space area to the east and south of the Phase 2 building, and along the
boundary between Phase 1 and Phase 3.
2. Require the protection of the largest spruce trees to the west (streetside) of the Phase 1
apartment building. How to do this: The revised narrative shows a layout that illustrates that the
apartments are identical on each floor. We strongly suggest the removal of a section of 8 identical
apartments (2 per floor) in the Phase 1 building thereby decreasing the floor area of the building,
which will allow the one or both of the largest trees on the property to remain on the west side of
the phase 1 building—continuing to provide the future residents and neighborhood with their
ecosystem services, historic connection, and visual shield from N. 7th. The apartments removed
from Phase 1 can be included into the Phase 3 building to the north, resulting in the same number
of affordable units. This creative solution results in both affordable housing units and the
protection of existing mature trees.
3. Require a condition that a public pocket park be added to Phase 3 along N. 7th or Aspen.
4. Set a condition that the Phase 3 design will accommodate the protection of at least one of the
two large healthy deciduous trees on the north and northeast corners of the existing (tavern)
building, that they will keep 75% of the vegetation on the east lot line intact, including the large
spruce tree, and they will keep 75% of the large spruce trees on the south side of Phase 3. This
last request will ensure some degree of year-round screening and will help the applicant commit
to following the environmental Site Plan Review Criteria for Phase 3.
Conclusion
The Bozeman Tree Coalition believes that housing and trees can coexist, and that City staff and
the City Commission should be proactively working to make that happen. By following the
existing environmental municipal codes and growth policy outlined above, Bozeman can have
new affordable housing that celebrates rather than diminishes our urban forest.
Thank you,
Bozeman Tree Coalition cofounders:
Marcia Kaveney
Angie Kociolek
Daniel Carty
April Craighead
Lara Schulz
Chris McQueary