HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-26-24 Public Comment - S. Wood - Public Hearing Resolution 5663 Bozeman Yards TIFFrom:shanadwood@gmail.com
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Public Hearing Resolution 5663 Bozeman Yards TIF
Date:Tuesday, November 26, 2024 9:50:18 AM
Attachments:Public Comment RE Application 24-105_Bozeman Yards_SWood.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.
Dear Commission and staff:
Please see attached comment letter pertaining to the agenda item “Public Hearing Resolution
5663 Bozeman Yards TIF”.
Thank you.
Shana Wood
TO: Bozeman City Commission FROM: Shana Wood RE: Application 24-107 Tax Increment Financing Request, Block 104, Bozeman Yards DATE: 26 November 2024 Honorable Mayor Cunningham and Bozeman City Commissioners: My husband and I own and occupy a single-family residence at 506 E. Cottonwood Street in the Northeast Historic Mixed Use (NEHMU) area of Bozeman. A large portion of our property taxes go to the Tax Increment Financing District, 76.7% percent in 2025 to be exact. I am opposed to providing $3.66 million in TIF public assistance for yet another 5-story luxury condominium project in Bozeman. I recently voted FOR the city’s request to fund more emergency personnel and build a new fire station but that vote failed. Citizens are tired of rising property taxes, but I do believe that “taxes are what you pay for a civilized society” (Oliver Wendell Holmes). I just don’t believe that subsidizing the luxury real estate market is an effective or resilient use of tax dollars. And I am concerned that the luxury condo market is saturated. I don’t believe this is the time or place for a project that claims it would not be possible to earn a large enough rate of return on investment without public assistance. For one thing, that is not the city nor the taxpayer’s problem. The developer should reduce the cost of the building if they cannot meet their target IRR. For another thing, NEHMU no longer seems to be the blighted neighborhood it once might have been. I might be in favor of using TIF money to subsidize a project like the Bozeman Yards if the occupancy numbers were flipped or at least more balanced. Perhaps two market rate luxury units and 40 affordable/attainable units would be of greater utility to the community? Or perhaps a 50:50 ratio is more egalitarian. On page 13 of the Bozeman Yards Project Application the developer justifies the TIF subsidy explaining that “Gallatin Valley grapples with soaring construction costs, driven by rising material expenses and a local labor market that is scarce and increasingly expensive.” This seems ironic: maybe labor is scarce because housing is expensive. Another reason I oppose the giveaway of TIF funds is that the street realignments that the developer is requesting seem contrived, unnecessary and only justify their grand proposal. In 2011 Wildwood Trails, Inc (a trail construction company owned by my husband and I) built the existing trail along the Aspen Street right-of-way. We planted trees and installed a bench designed and built by Ken VanDeWalle (another northeast Bozeman resident). The trail is part of the Main Street to the Mountains trail system and the Bozeman climbing boulder circuit. The Aspen Street ROW with the trail and the boulder in Northern Pacific Park are an integral and cherished part of the neighborhood. The combined area hosts parades, picnics, Tinworks art installations, daily dog walkers and lovely views of the mountains. The proposed project would eliminate this gathering space and replace it with a paved street. The Project Application narrative blathers that “The overarching goal of these enhancements is to breathe new life into the district, forging a clean, secure, and inviting ambiance.” That is realtor-speak. The “ambiance” already exists. Building two 70 foot tall, “vertically integrated” buildings of +/- 42 units (each) detracts from the unique and organic nature of NEHMU.
I’m also opposed to vacating Ida Avenue, another apparent giveaway to the developer that will ultimately require public input. I understand that there is an official city procedure for abandoning a platted street including directing staff to review the petition, completing an engineering staff report, a Resolution of Intent, a noticed public hearing, and finally a Resolution of Abandonment (Bozeman City Resolution 3628). North Ida Avenue has become a more efficient route to Bridger Canyon since North Wallace has become busier. To cut off the natural north-south flow along the west side of Northern Pacific Park and make that weird hitch in the street around the park with acute angle intersections is silly and contrived. The benefits of this TIF-financed infrastructure only apply to the developer and not the district and larger neighborhood. The point is we don’t need Aspen Street, only this proposed project needs Aspen Street. Nothing else is being built on Aspen Street. The Bozeman Yards project needs to figure out how to meet their required rate of return without public funding. There is no public utility in more luxury condominiums in this historic, mixed-use neighborhood. I would prefer to see the TIF money used not as a subsidy to a real estate developer but for a project that truly benefits the district. “But for” this proposed development perhaps a different kind of use that provides more jobs and innovation such as an office for a tech industry like Schedulicity or Resonon Imaging Solutions or a light manufacturer like MFGR or AutoPilot would provide a more resilient form of economic development. Sincerely, Shana Wood 506 E Cottonwood Street Bozeman, MT 59715 406-224-3133