HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-14-24 Public Comment - T. Hoitsma - Bozeman Yards Application 24-107From:Todd Hoitsma
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Bozeman Yards Application 24-107.
Date:Friday, December 13, 2024 9:30:41 PM
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.
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I HOPE THIS LETTER FALLS WITHIN THE
SUBITTAL PERIOD (submitted DEC 13 9:30 PM).
I am a writing as resident of the NE neighborhood and live at 706 East Peach, close
to corner of Peach and Ida, which is a few blocks from the proposed development
application.
I am in strong opposition to the Block 104/Bozeman Yards development application. I submit that the owners should not be allowed to go through with his
plan because it fails to meet the code related to “Compatibility with sensitivity to
the immediate site environment...” (BMC 38.230.100 A7e). I believe that, on this basis, the developers should return to the drawing board and downsize the development, reducing it in mass and height. Some background follows below.
The NE neighborhood—specifically the area near the climbing rock where the
development is proposed—is unique in Bozeman. I am not alone on this sentiment.
Just take a walk north on Ida Ave. from Peach St. and it becomes quite apparent there is NOTHING else like it Bozeman. There is no curb and gutter, no sidewalks,
and few trees. It can be noisy due to the railroad; it is kind of beat-up looking with
patches of gravel and not the smoothest pavement. Walking north, TinWorks Art is
on the left. Apparently the philanthropic owners recognized something here, and kept the old tin buildings and the abandoned field and have worked with and
celebrated the vibe here.
As one continues walking north past TinWorks and approaches the climbing rock and the old railroad depot there are more old tin buildings and gravel. Because there
are no tall buildings or trees, there are great views of the Bridgers and Story Hills. It
is a transition from the denser downtown development and a relief for the
considerable pedestrian traffic in this area: they take in this view and the element of funky-ness associated with under-development and—yes—a vibe we like associated
with “blight.”
If Block 104 gets approved, we can say goodbye to this character and gritty-ness. The area will begin a sad, predictable transition to looking like every new
development around town complete with curb and gutter, tidy trees, manicured
plantings, smooth black top, and—most importantly—massing that will overwhelm
the surroundings. For those of us many neighbors that participated in the RUDAT (a
neighborhood, architect-sponsored, non-binding planning exercise in 2007), Block
104 as currently proposed is not what we wanted during that visioning process.
Specifically, the proposed Block 104 building fails to meet criteria BMC
38.230.100 A7e because it does not fit the character of the neighborhood. It it too
tall and—despite the architects best efforts to hide it—TOO MUCH MASS. It
would overwhelm sight lines and does not meld into adjacent two-story buildings. If built as designed, I believe it will forever change a unique part of town that has a vibe we cannot replace.
To be clear am not against development, and realize it is invetible. There are several newer three-story buildings closer to my home, including the new Wildlands building that successfully integrated into the neighborhood. The newly proposed
Wallace Works project also appears to creatively fit into the neighborhood fabric
and was not opposed during the planning process.
Thank you for your consideration.
Todd Hoitsma706 East Peach St