The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-26-24 Public Comment - A. Hoitsma - Application 24-105 (Block 104_Bozeman Yards) Public CommentFrom:Amy Kelley Hoitsma To:Bozeman Public Comment Cc:Terry Cunningham; Joey Morrison; Jennifer Madgic; Douglas Fischer; Emma Bode Subject:[EXTERNAL][Possible Malware Fraud]Application 24-105 (Block 104/Bozeman Yards) Public Comment Date:Monday, November 25, 2024 12:44:34 PM Attachments:Application_24-107_public_comment_Hoitsma.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. WARNING: Your email security system has determined the message below may be apotential threat. It may trick victims into clicking a link and downloading malware. Do not open suspiciouslinks. If you do not know the sender or cannot verify the integrity of the message, please do notrespond or click on links in the message. Depending on the security settings, clickable URLs may have been modified to provide additional security. Please accept for the record my comments regarding compliance of this application with Bozeman’s Unified Development Code and other legal matters. Thank you. Amy Kelley Hoitsma 706 E. Peach Street, Bozeman Public Comment RE: Application 24-105 (Block 104/Bozeman Yards/805 N Ida Ave.) Amy Kelley Hoitsma 24 November 2024 Please accept for the record my comments regarding compliance of this application with Bozeman’s Unified Development Code and other legal matters. Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) This application is within the NCOD, which states: “All new construction…[in] the neighborhood conservation overlay district … will be subject to design review unless specifically exempted. The recommendations of the design review board or administrative design review staff must be given careful consideration in the final action of the review authority.” I have poured through the posted documents and drawings for this application and don’t see where the NCOD has been considered. I believe the mass and height of the project is grossly out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. The applicant’s project narrative states that it is “carefully taking into consideration the identity of this unique piece of the Bozeman fabric” and that the “bold form provides some funk and identity to the neighborhood” and that the “architectural essence of the buildings pays homage to the Northeast neighborhood's rich history” and that the “material choices and design elements resonate with the industrial and heritage undertones of the northeast district.” These statements do not resonate with me or any of the neighbors with whom I have worked and/or know well. The “funky” character of the northeast neighborhood is due in part to repurposed old buildings that now have thriving businesses with public “eddy-out” spaces. It still has remnants of Bozeman’s history, like the old train depot and other buildings that served as cold storage for the railroad. The tallest structure in the neighborhood has been the iconic Misco Mill, which is a point of neighborhood pride. The neighborhood is also a mix of the old and the new, and the newer structures—such as the Mill Street Loft condo, the Block 106 condo, SAV/Treeline Coffee, and Wildlands—have been relatively modest in mass and scale. If built, this development will change all of that. At five stories and 70 feet in height, it will be one of two downtown-scale buildings a mile from downtown. It will overpower the neighborhood. The true essence of the building can also be gleaned from the project narrative: The current design concept utilizes dynamic forms angled strategically to capture view corridors to the surrounding mountain ranges as well as capitalize natural light to both the units and the sweeping patio spaces designed as extensions of the units themselves to push residents to take advantage of the outdoors. It is not designed for the neighborhood; it is designed for its future residents, who will pay a price for those view corridors and sweeping patio spaces. From the Baker Tilly report: “The estimated sales price per square foot for phase 1 is $608 for the affordable units and $1,026 for the market rate units.” According to Delger Real Estate’s “Bozeman Condominiums Market Review,” the median square foot price for a Bozeman condominium as of January 2024 was $4431. Affordable Housing I already submitted comments regarding the applicant’s intention to use the shallow incentives of the Affordable Housing Ordinance to add 10’ in height above that which is allowed by the B2M zone in exchange for 5% of the units being for sale at 120% AMI. In my comments I noted that two units out of 42 is actually less than 5%. I have since seen different numbers for the total number of units, so this claim may no longer be true (although the posted Development Action sign lists 42 residential units and two affordable units). The two units being offered at these rates are still both 1-bedroom units, which does not meet the AHO requirement that “the mix of bedrooms per unit in affordable homes must be as similar as possible to the mix of bedrooms per unit of the market-rate homes in the development.” I think it is interesting that, according to the Baker Tilly analysis: “The Developer’s original application had proposed 10% of the units as affordable at 120% AMI.” Vacating a section of Ida Avenue While it could very well turn out to be a positive amenity for the neighborhood, I do not understand how the decision was made to vacate Ida Avenue and extend the climbing rock greenspace (Northern Pacific Park) to meet the applicant’s property edge. Recently another neighborhood applicant, Cloverleaf (owned by Outlaw Partners, formerly the site of Bronken’s Distributing and currently creatively repurposed as an indoor pickleball court), had to petition the City Commission to vacate the platted north-south alley in their property. They are following Resolution 3628, which sets an extensive procedure for abandonment of streets or alleys. According to the October 1, 2024 memorandum from City staff to the City Commission: “Accepting of the petition and directing staff to review the petition is the initial step of that procedure. Future steps include: completion of an engineering staff report, a Resolution of Intent, a noticed public hearing, and finally a Resolution of Abandonment.” In this application, I see no documentation or rationale for why the street has been vacated, and it certainly did not seem to follow the procedure set out in Resolution 3628, which would require a public hearing and approval by the City Commission. In the “Bozeman Yards Development Staff Report” (15 November 2024), David Fine and Brit Fontenot state not only that this expanded park is a public benefit (which it may well be) but also that “reconstruction of Front St. adjacent to the Depot and Northern Pacific Park 1 https://bozemanrealtygroup.com/wp-content/uploads/assets/bozeman-market-report-condominiums.pdf may facilitate the future redevelopment and preservation of the Depot site.” I assume the applicant would normally be required to make improvements to the section of Ida Avenue that fronts their property and not Front Street. But attaching the park to their property now essentially makes Front Street the block frontage. I am certainly in favor of repurposing the depot one day, as it is a historic gem to the neighborhood and the City—but not at the cost of incentivizing two 5-story luxury condominium buildings that will forever loom over and cast a shadow upon the historic depot. I also question the legality of the decision to vacate Ida Avenue for this application. If, after proper review, it were decided that Ida should NOT be vacated, it would fundamentally alter the required project infrastructure improvements (i.e. likely no improvements to Front Street would be required as it is not block frontage). This would necessitate a major revision of the TIF assistance request. Thank you for considering my concerns and how they might impact administrative approval of this application. I believe my concerns warrant closer review and public explanation for decisions made in this project. With my best, Amy Kelley Hoitsma 706 E. Peach Street, Bozeman