HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-30-24 Public Comment - K. Sanchez - The Guthrie Application #24493From:karen bucklin sanchez
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]The Guthrie Application #24493
Date:Friday, December 27, 2024 2:47:02 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.
Dec 27, 2024
To: Mayor Cunningham, Deputy Mayor Morrison and City Commissioners Madgic, Fischer and Bode
From: Karen Sanchez
Re: Application #24493
I am writing to you regarding Homebase Partner's development application #24493 (The Guthrie),
on the corner of North 5th Avenue and Villard Street.
Homebase Lawsuit.
If the lawsuit Homebase Partners filed against the city for the denial of Application #23354, aka
Guthrie 1) is still in effect, it may be detrimental to the City of Bozeman to entertain the current
application (Application #24493, aka Guthrie 2). The lawsuit should be settled or withdrawn before
the City agrees to review an application for Guthrie 2.
Accepting a follow-up application for the same development while a lawsuit is active may includeunacceptable risks. What are the implications (legal, financial, precedent and fairness to citizens) ifHomebase is successful / is not successful in its Guthrie 1 lawsuit AND Guthrie 2 is administrativelyapproved? Why put the city in this position?
Administrative Review.
I urge you to remove this project from administrative review.
Is unfair to the City of Bozeman’s Administrative staff to put them in the hot seat of making this
decision, knowing it could entail a second lawsuit if their decision is not favorable to Homebase.
Does the City Council feel that this application is different to Guthrie 1? Put another way: If Guthrie 1was worthy of a City Council review, what are the reasons that Guthrie 2 is not?
The Neighborhood Association Council met and polled its residents and voted on Guthrie 1. This
shows that the Guthrie (no matter what iteration) is of community-wide interest. It is a critical litmus
test for applying the Deep Incentives portion of the Affordable Housing Ordinance. It is worthy of
being removed from administrative review.
Removing this application from administrative review will help reestablish community trust in termsof public dialog being considered and valued, and around perceptions about developers’ level ofinfluence.
Affordable Housing Ordinance.
Revise and repeal the deep incentives. This portion of the ordinance is not good policy. It was a stabin the dark and is faulty.
In Lieu of Payments.
The use of these funds needs to be transparent. Are these applied to the impacted neighborhoods tomitigate the cost to the residents? If so, how?
Deviations from approved development plans.
Please institute methods to force adherence to approved plans for these incentivized developments.For example, require bonds to hold developers accountable.
Public health and safety.
The North 5th and Villard neighborhood includes a grade school, is a commuter bike route, is a kids’
bike route to the BMX park, and includes many residents (Darlington Manor, and public housing,etc.) on foot, and with mobility issues. Adding 200 cars to this particular neighborhood – in additionto the 300 or so in the new development adjacent to Darlington Manor - is dangerous.
This application (like Guthrie 1) does not meet current City of Bozeman requirements and should bedenied:
· Unified Development Code (UDC) …to protect public health, safety and general welfare;
to recognize and balance the various rights and responsibilities relating to land ownership,
use, and development, …
· Affordable Housing provisions of Sec. 38.380. …to promote the public health, safety, andwelfare by incentivizing increased production of affordable rental and for sale housing tomeet the needs of city residents and the goals of the adopted growth policy and thecommunity housing action plan…
Guthrie 2 application concerns.
The Guthrie (1 and 2) is a 30-day extended-stay-hotel model and is incompatible with a residentialneighborhood. Bozeman citizens should not have to subsidize a developer to construct Air BnB’sdisguised as “affordable” 30-day lease apartments.
As with Guthrie 1, Guthrie 2 does not adhere to the Overlay District Standards (Sec. 38.340) tostimulate the restoration and rehabilitation of structures, and all other elements contributing to thecharacter and fabric of established residential neighborhoods and commercial or industrial areas.New construction will be invited and encouraged provided primary emphasis is given to thepreservation of existing buildings and further provided the design of such new space enhances andcontributes to the aesthetic character and function of the property and the surroundingneighborhood or area…
How will ADA parking in the parking lot (or the 8 street spaces) be allocated and enforced? Howmuch will Homebase charge for each of the 35 parking spaces? What about equity? Will any of theparking spaces be allocated to the affordable rental units, and will these be at a reduced cost forthose renters? If there are 3 cars associated with one affordable unit will that unit be allocated 3parking spots?
The Nov 2, 2024 traffic study is not representative. It took place while traffic patterns are not typical
as North 5th is closed to traffic from Main Street at Mendenhall. Without the road closure, there is a
lot of traffic cutting through from Main Street to Peach to avoid North 7th traffic and stop lights.
Public Comment Period.
The public comment period is inadequate, especially for a controversial and non-standardapplication. Why not extend the public comment period to allow for adequate time for the public totake a look? Because it was scheduled to end December 31, it eliminated two City Council meetings(of four). I was not able to attend either of those City Council meetings and provide verbal publiccomment (in person or virtually). And because it was scheduled during a busy time at my job andduring the Christmas and holiday season, I had difficulty finding time to review the application well. Iam sure I am not alone in this.
Another concern around this abbreviated public comment period is the administrative reviewtimeline. Was there sufficient review and decision-making time for our city staff, considering themidweek Christmas holiday and New Years Eve public comment deadline? Did they have time toreview public comments and not rush their decision due to the holidays?
Thank you for your thoughtfulness. It is worth taking the time to set us on the right path. We needaffordable long term residential housing for our residents. We do not need to do what developerswant. It breaks my heart to see these vibrant neighborhoods with affordable old rentals becomeempty lots used for construction lay down areas and then become partly empty high rises. We cancreate a sustainable path forward. I recognize that you are probably exhausted by the process ofGuthrie 1. Please do not be intimidated by HomeBase. Please consider how this affects the wholecity. Please remove this application from administrative review.
-- Karen Bucklin Sanchez