Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-02-25 Public Comment - A. Lincke, Forward Montana - Fw_ Data analysis from FMT surveyFrom:Chuck Winn To:Anja Lincke Cc:Emily Kiely; Erin George; Bozeman Public Comment; Tom Rogers Subject:Fw: [EXTERNAL][SENDER UNVERIFIED]Data analysis from FMT survey Date:Friday, May 2, 2025 2:28:19 PM Attachments:forwardmt-housing-survey-2025_write-answer-with-coding.txt forwardmt-housing-survey-2025_report-ver1.docx forwardmt-housing-survey-2025_tables.xlsx FINAL FMT UDC Priorities Survey Report.pdf Hi Anja, We very much appreciate the work that went into this. I am forwarding it to public comments and we will get it to the Boards for their review. Community Development has the attachments as well so I hope we have all the bases covered. Thanks again and please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Chuck Chuck Winn | Interim City Manager City of Bozeman 121 North Rouse Avenue - P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 P: 406.582.2307 C: 406.581.0020 From: Anja Lincke Sent: Thursday, May 1, 2025 11:03 AM To: Emily Kiely; Chuck Winn Subject: [EXTERNAL][SENDER UNVERIFIED]Data analysis from FMT survey 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. Hi Emily and Chuck, We have finalized our survey report complete with data analysis done from a qualified independent MSU student. I have attached the complete files I got from the analysis, along with our updated report. Let me know if you all have questions! Thanks for all the work you are doing! Anja -- Anja Lincke She/They | Housing Campaign Manager o: (406) 542-8683 c: (406) 638-1183 e: anja@forwardmontana.org w: forwardmontana.org created with MySignature.io Forward Montana UDC Priorities Survey Report Compiled by Anja Lincke , Forward Montana Housing Campaign Manager. Last updated: 4/8/2025 anja@forwardmontana.org Background: The City of Bozeman conducted a survey to gauge the community’s priorities in conversations about the development code. The city’s survey had 203 respondents that disclosed their age. 12 respondents (or 6%) were ages 18-24. According to census data, 32% of Bozeman is 18-24 years old. Recognizing that gap, Forward Montana created a survey that mirrored the questions the city asked. We commend the City’s outreach eort and we know young people can be challenging to reach-- but we also know, based on a 2024 poll, that aordable housing is a top issue for young people. With renters and young people as major stakeholders in the future of our city, Forward Montana is committed to continuing to bridge our priorities into real policies in the UDC. The purpose of this report is to transparently share the data we collected, along with the methods, limitations, and construction notes of our process. Results: I. Validity information We had 195 respondents. 20 responses from the very beginning of the survey were removed from the priorities pool, due to an error in the survey. Additionally, some participants in the survey selected more than five responses for the first question. That data was considered invalid in analyses of priorities amongst renters or homeowners, though their answers in the written section were still valid for coding and analysis. Regarding housing situations, one response identifying as unhoused was excluded from priorities analysis1, along with one response preferring not to answer2. One response identifying as owning a manufactured (mobile) home was included as a homeowner. 2 This person’s priorities were Bike Infrastructure, Pedestrian Infrastructure, Sensitive Lands, Aordable Housing Creation, Aordable Housing Preservation. They did not include a written response. 1 This person’s priorities were Historic Preservation, Sensitive Lands, Business Development, Aordable Housing Creation, Aordable Housing Preservation. Their write-answer is the following: “aordability is a huge one, the cost of living in a reasonable home in montana is excessive and over done.” II. Analysis: A. Priorities Data: Analyzing just the valid renter data, the top priorities were: (1) Aordable housing creation, with 81.4% of renters listing it as a priority; (2) Aordable housing preservation, with 74.4% of renters listing it as a priority; (3) Preservation of Sensitive Lands, with 60.5% of renters listing it as a priority; and (4) Strengthening Pedestrian Infrastructure, with 43.4% of renters listing it as a priority. (5) Bike Infrastructure and (6) Water Adequacy tied with 36.4% of renters listing it as a priority. See appendix 2 for the detailed breakdown. Renters seemed to be largely ambivalent to business development, parking configuration, expansion of city boundaries, and build height in particular. Most renters selected as having a full time job, but still paying more than 30% income on rent and needing to make compromises on basic necessities in order to pay it. This is corroborated in the write-answer section analysis. B. Write-answer trends: In addition to priorities analysis, the write-answer sections were also analyzed and coded. Coding description: ● Housing aordability/insecurity/rent prices (61): Self-explanatory. This variable looks at any complaints about housing prices. This was by far the most common category that write-answers fell into, and almost all renter write-answers mentioned it in some way. ● Gentrification (30): This was classed as any write-answers which mentioned wealthy residents coming into the city, either as a cause of general cultural decline or housing price increase. Steep correlation with long-term viability of residence. ● Bike infrastructure and pedestrian-friendliness (26): These two priorities appear very closely linked. The general attitude among respondents seems to be that they are forced to take cars because of long distances to services and inadequate ● Long-term viability of residence (18): Any answers which mentioned having to move out of Bozeman (concerns that someone else might) due to cost of living. This sentiment overlapped heavily with mentions of housing unaordability and gentrification. ● More mixed-use zones, decreased car use, concern over suburban sprawl (19): These three sentiments often overlapped with each other, and with pedestrian/bike use. Most identified lack of basic services (such as grocery stores) and short-range jobs within suburban neighborhoods. ● Environmental consideration (17): Many responses indicated concerns over preserving Bozeman’s natural landscape and features. These responses overlapped heavily with water use & access. ● Water (9): Self-explanatory. Any response showing concern for water use. ● Not ok with increasing build height, or large apartment complexes (7): These two sentiments were often colocated. Complaints about lack of parking were usually related to high-rise buildings in the Downtown area. Answers in this category also frequently mentioned the building style of recent apartment developments as lacking personality, local character or good quality of construction. Frequency table: Housing aordability/insecurity/rent prices 61 Gentrification 30 Bike infrastructure and pedestrian-friendliness 26 Long-term viability of residence 18 More mixed-use zones, decreased reliance on cars, concern over suburban sprawl 19 Environmental consideration 17 Raw data: Survey Master Data Methods: Our methods include a variety of non-probability sampling methods. Phase 1 included asking participants from our “commissioners and cookies” chat to participate; sharing the survey with our friends, asking them to pass it along; asking participants in our Housing Happy Hour to take the survey, and standing outside of the Country Bookshelf to ask people to take our survey for one 2 hour session. This yielded ~70 responses. No rae prize was associated with these responses. Phase 2 consisted of a paid instagram ad published on the Forward Montana instagram account. $72 was spent on the ad. The graphic and the language used is included in Appendix 1. This yielded ~110 responses. With the paid ad portion of data collection, we attached a rae entry option to incentivize more respondents. The rae prizes consist of three gift certificates: (1) $50 to Log Jam, (2) $30 to Steep Mountain Tea House, (3) $30 Country Bookshelf. Participants' identity and rae entry was captured in a separate survey, and the content of their responses is not identifiable nor a factor in their winning chances. Respondents were not intentionally primed to answer the survey in any specific way. To read more about details of our methods, see this document: Data Methodology Survey Construction Notes: We had two versions of the survey, with the same questions with a few slight changes recommended to us by a survey expert at the university. These changes didn’t change the structure or content of questions that are included in our data analysis (ex. we took away the question that asked for a name and added a picture when asking what quadrant of Bozeman folks lived in). Additionally, some responses Water 9 Not ok with increasing build height, or large apartment complexes 7 to the first priorities question on the second version of the survey are invalid due to software issues (19 responses of the 195 total). On Feb 7th, we received a .docx version of the City of Bozeman’s UDC area of interest survey. We used the same language of that survey to construct our survey. After getting 23 responses from the first version, we received feedback from a MSU professor who does survey research to: ● Add confidentiality statement in the intro ● Remove the “name” entry at the top ● Add a map to the quadrant question ● Make question 1 be a selection question rather than a type it in question (you can select a question that is just choose one – the circles are choose one) ● Q2 – add some bounds to this to make sure they only select three ● Consider making a tinyurl that has a descriptive and easy to type in address. Oh, one more thing…you can make google forms have selection questions, so they can just click on the selection rather than writing it in. ● The question about sources of information needs to be the square boxes so you can check more than one ● For the last question, consider having them click a link that takes them to a new survey where they enter their name. Rather than change the construction of our initial survey, We decided to create a new version implementing the feedback. That second survey received 168 responses (as of 3-13-25). During the weekend after the second survey was published, we received feedback from respondents that the first question about priorities only had a few options. After a few attempts to manually fix the question options, we quickly realized that a software that was intended to help participants rank the top 5 priorities was malfunctioning and eliminating options for respondents. We uninstalled that software. After that, the problem did not reoccur. Therefore, a portion of the early responses for the first question of the second version should not be treated as valid data and has been indicated as such on our spreadsheet. Limitations: With the two dierent versions of the survey and various sampling methods used, survey conditions were not constant for each respondent. With the addition of the rae option, the language of the last question changed within the duration of the survey. Thus, it should not be used for any analysis purposes. As aforementioned, a portion of the early responses for the first question of the second version should not be treated as valid data and has been indicated as such on our spreadsheet. With non-probability sampling methods, this data can not be claimed as a representative sample. However, we do think that the data collected is a helpful indication of the priorities for Bozemanites who are young and or rent. Resources: ● Raw survey data from the city: https://engage.bozeman.net/16906/widgets/55265/documents/64294 ● UDC Phase 1 presentation from the city: 020425 UDC Engagement Phase 1 Review CC.pptx ● Bozeman Commission meeting 2-4-2025 https://bozeman.granicus.com/player/clip/2424 Appendix 1: Poster used in paid ad. Appendix 2: SURVEY SECTIONS 1 & 2: Pre-analysis of this data was carried out by Forward Montana. VALIDITY INFORMATION: 20 responses from the very beginning of the survey were removed from the priorities pool, due to an error in the survey. Additionally, some participants in the survey selected more than five responses for the first question. These data were considered invalid in analyses of priorities amongst renters or homeowners, though their answers in the written section were still valid for coding and analysis. Regarding housing situations, one response identifying as unhoused was excluded from priorities analysis1, along with one response preferring not to answer2. One response identifying as owning a manufactured (mobile) home was included as a homeowner. FINDINGS: In accordance with the survey’s goals, priority findings were tallied based on homeownership status. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 CasesRenter & Homeowner Priorities RENTERS (129 cases)HOMEOWNERS (32 cases) The priorities section finds that affordable housing creation & preservation are overwhelmingly important to renters, students, and young people, with over 85% of renter responses mentioning either as one of their top 5 priorities for the UDC rewrite. Following closely behind were concern for Bozeman’s natural landscape and water adequacy, along with walkability and bike infrastructure. Renters seemed to be largely ambivalent to business development, parking configuration, expansion of city boundaries, and build height in particular. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CasesAreas of Least Importantance RENTERS (129 cases)HOMEOWNERS (32 cases) 0 20 40 60 80 100 Full time job >30% income on rent Make compromises Full time student Part time job Multiple part time jobs Part time student Cases Living situations HOMEOWNERS RENTERS Most renters selected as having a full time job, but still paying more than 30% income on rent and needing to make compromises on basic necessities in order to pay it. This is corroborated in the write-answer section analysis. Student priorities were also tallied, and seemed to line up with general trends; however, students placed a greater emphasis on historical preservation than renters at large. In addition to priorities analysis, the write-answer sections were also analyzed and coded. Information on this coding, as well as tables generated from the raw data, should be accessible from Forward Montana’s website. Write-answer trends, frequency table: Housing affordability/insecurity/rent prices 61 Gentrification 30 Bike infrastructure and pedestrian-friendliness 26 Long-term viability of residence 18 More mixed-use zones, decreased reliance on cars, concern over suburban sprawl 19 Environmental consideration 17 Water 9 Not ok with increasing build height, or large apartment complexes 7 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 CasesStudent Priorities (Full & Part Time) Housing affordability/insecurity/rent prices (61): Self-explanatory. This variable looks at any complaints about housing prices. This was by far the most common category that write- answers fell into, and almost all renter write-answers mentioned it in some way. Gentrification (30): This was classed as any write-answers which mentioned wealthy residents coming into the city, either as a cause of general cultural decline or housing price increase. Steep correlation with long-term viability of residence. Bike infrastructure and pedestrian-friendliness (26): These two priorities appear very closely linked. The general attitude among respondents seems to be that they are forced to take cars because of long distances to services and inadequate Long-term viability of residence (18): Any answers which mentioned having to move out of Bozeman (concerns that someone else might) due to cost of living. This sentiment overlapped heavily with mentions of housing unaffordability and gentrification. More mixed-use zones, decreased car use, concern over suburban sprawl (19): These three sentiments often overlapped with each other, and with pedestrian/bike use. Most identified lack of basic services (such as grocery stores) and short-range jobs within suburban neighborhoods. Environmental consideration (17): Many responses indicated concerns over preserving Bozeman’s natural landscape and features. These responses overlapped heavily with water use & access. Water (9): Self-explanatory. Any response showing concern for water use. Not ok with increasing build height, or large apartment complexes (7): These two sentiments were often colocated. Complaints about lack of parking were usually related to high-rise buildings in the Downtown area. Answers in this category also frequently mentioned the building style of recent apartment developments as lacking personality, local character or good quality of construction. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this data, the people surveyed in this study (mostly young renters and students) were overwhelmingly in support of increased access to affordable housing. Many respondents mentioned struggling to pay their bills even with full-time employment, or expressed a desire to leave the city altogether to somewhere more affordable. Several responses cited strong support of specific action plans, such as implementing rent control. Overall, this was by far the most important issue to all constituents under 35 in the survey. The primary physical concern in terms of city design was decreased suburban sprawl and more urban development in areas residents could easily access. Several respondents mentioned preferring the city to develop areas already contained within city limits, instead of expanding its borders further. The general tone towards the Downtown area seemed pessimistic, and many respondent renters strongly felt that recent high-profile developments there did not adequately serve their needs. Attention was paid to the need for local businesses and jobs within short distances from suburbs and high-density apartment developments, as high car payments/insurance are also a limiting factor for low-income residents. 1. This person’s priorities were Historic Preservation, Sensitive Lands, Business Development, Affordable Housing Creation, Affordable Housing Preservation. Their write-answer is the following: “affordability is a huge one, the cost of living in a reasonable home in montana is excessive and over done.” 2. This person’s priorities were Bike Infrastructure, Pedestrian Infrastructure, Sensitive Lands, Affordable Housing Creation, Affordable Housing Preservation. They did not include a written response. PRIORITIES - TOP 5 RENTERS (129 cases)HOMEOWNERS (32 Aff. Housing Creation 105 13 Aff. Housing Preservation 96 17 Sensitive Lands 78 15 Pedestrian Infrastructure 56 11 Water Adequacy 47 17 Bike Infrastructure 47 14 Neighborhood character 37 13 Agricultural Impacts 34 5 Historic Preservation 25 7 Parking Number 23 8 Population Growth 21 12 Density 21 13 Business Development 15 6 Growth in City Boundary 11 8 Build Height 11 5 LESS IMPORTANT - TOP 3 RENTERS (129 cases)HOMEOWNERS (32 Build Height 86 21 Business Development 56 7 Parking Configuration 50 13 Growth in City Boundary 40 12 Neighborhood character 40 8 Bike Infrastructure 28 3 Population Growth 23 5 Density 22 3 Minimizing Agricultural Impacts 22 2 Historic Preservation 13 6 Pedestrian Infrastructure 7 7 Affordable Housing Preservation 5 0 Sensitive Lands 5 0 Affordable Housing Creation 4 1 Water Adequacy 1 2 QUADRANT RENTERS HOMEOWNERS NE 32 4 NW 43 14 SE 50 11 SW 20 3 Outside city limits 9 2 No answer 6 0 LIVING SITUATIONS RENTERS HOMEOWNERS Full time job 91 23 >30% income on rent 81 3 Make compromises 70 3 Full time student 49 2 Part time job 41 5 Multiple part time jobs 27 4 Part time student 7 0 AGE STATS RENTERS HOMEOWNERS 18-24 69 3 25-34 73 12 35-44 14 13 45-54 1 2 65+0 3 Prefer not to say 0 1 TIME IN BOZEMAN RENTERS HOMEOWNERS <1 year 8 1 1-2 years 21 1 3-4 years 53 0 5-7 years 27 6 8-10 years 21 4 10+ years 29 22 STUDENT PRIORITIES Count Aff. Housing Creation 38 Aff. Housing Preservation 37 Sensitive Lands 32 Water Adequacy 20 Historic Preservation 14 Bike Infrastructure 13 Neighborhood character 13 Density 13 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Cases Parking Configuration 12 Pedestrian Infrastructure 10 Build Height 7 Population Growth 5 Agricultural Impacts 5 Business Development 3 Growth in City Boundary 3 0 5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 CasesRenter & Homeowner Prio RENTERS (129 cases)HOMEOWNE 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CasesAreas of Least Important 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 NE NW SE SW Outside city limits No answerCasesResidence by Quadrant RENTERS HOMEOWNERS RENTERS (129 cases)HOMEOWNE 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 65+Prefer not to sayCasesAge Stats RENTERS HOMEOWNERS 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 <1 year 1-2 Cases Student Priorities (Full & Part Time) 0 Full time job >30% income on rent Make compromises Full time student Part time job Multiple part time jobs Part time student orities ERS (32 cases) tance ERS (32 cases) 2 years 3-4 years 5-7 years 8-10 years 10+ years Time in Bozeman RENTERS HOMEOWNERS 20 40 60 80 100 Cases Living situations HOMEOWNERS RENTERS PRIORITIES - TOP 5 RENTERS (129 cases)HOMEOWNERS (32 cases) Aff. Housing Creation 105 13 Aff. Housing Preservation 96 17 Sensitive Lands 78 15 Pedestrian Infrastructure 56 11 Water Adequacy 47 17 Bike Infrastructure 47 14 Neighborhood character 37 13 Agricultural Impacts 34 5 Historic Preservation 25 7 Parking Number 23 8 Population Growth 21 12 Density 21 13 Business Development 15 6 Growth in City Boundary 11 8 Build Height 11 5 LESS IMPORTANT - TOP 3 RENTERS (129 cases)HOMEOWNERS (32 cases) Build Height 86 21 Business Development 56 7 Parking Configuration 50 13 Growth in City Boundary 40 12 Neighborhood character 40 8 Bike Infrastructure 28 3 Population Growth 23 5 Density 22 3 Minimizing Agricultural Impacts 22 2 Historic Preservation 13 6 Pedestrian Infrastructure 7 7 Affordable Housing Preservation 5 0 Sensitive Lands 5 0 Affordable Housing Creation 4 1 Water Adequacy 1 2 QUADRANT RENTERS HOMEOWNERS NE 32 4 NW 43 14 SE 50 11 SW 20 3 Outside city limits 9 2 No answer 6 0 LIVING SITUATIONS RENTERS HOMEOWNERS Full time job 91 23 >30% income on rent 81 3 Make compromises 70 3 Full time student 49 2 Part time job 41 5 Multiple part time jobs 27 4 Part time student 7 0 AGE STATS RENTERS HOMEOWNERS 18-24 69 3 25-34 73 12 35-44 14 13 45-54 1 2 65+0 3 Prefer not to say 0 1 TIME IN BOZEMAN RENTERS HOMEOWNERS <1 year 8 1 1-2 years 21 1 3-4 years 53 0 5-7 years 27 6 8-10 years 21 4 10+ years 29 22 STUDENT PRIORITIES Count Aff. Housing Creation 38 Aff. Housing Preservation 37 Sensitive Lands 32 Water Adequacy 20 Historic Preservation 14 Bike Infrastructure 13 Neighborhood character 13 Density 13 Parking Configuration 12 Pedestrian Infrastructure 10 Build Height 7 Population Growth 5 Agricultural Impacts 5 Business Development 3 Growth in City Boundary 3 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 CasesRenter & Homeowner Priorities RENTERS (129 cases)HOMEOWNERS (32 cases) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 NE NW SE SW Outside city limits No answerCasesResidence by Quadrant RENTERS HOMEOWNERS 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CasesAreas of Least Importantance RENTERS (129 cases)HOMEOWNERS (32 cases) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 65+Prefer not to sayCasesAge Stats RENTERS HOMEOWNERS 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 <1 year 1-2 years 3-4 years 5-7 years 8-10 years 10+ yearsCasesTime in Bozeman RENTERS HOMEOWNERS 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 CasesStudent Priorities (Full & Part Time) 0 20 40 60 80 100 Full time job >30% income on rent Make compromises Full time student Part time job Multiple part time jobs Part time student Cases Living situations HOMEOWNERS RENTERS file:///C/Users/mmaas/Downloads/forwardmt-housing-survey-2025_write-answer-with-coding.txt[5/5/2025 10:37:21 AM] ---SECTION 2--- 1. (RENT) As a formally unhoused person and someone who still feels housing insecure, I feel the availability and affordability of current housing inventory and creation of new housing is of utmost importance. 2. (GENT) I work with high end real estate & the gap between these home owners and the people hired to build, design, and upkeep these residences is far too wide. It seems like there is more Bozeman can do to support these working residents. 3. (RENT) MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLEASE 4. (RENT) I believe it’s more important on the type of housing being developed. It’s crucial for new development to emulate what is needed. New housing is not necessarily important when it’s not affordable 5. (PED) i want safe walkable neighborhoods and better bike infrastructure 6. (NOT) Growth outside of the city limits seems smarter. People come here for the great views and building height increases would harm that 7. (RENT, ENV, PED) A lot of the above seem related - eg. “Neighborhood character†and “historic preservation†can be directly tied to building more bike and pedestrian infrastructure, since so much of downtown Bozeman is a walkable community. Most important to me (as a young person) is affordability and maintaining sensitive lands. 8. (RENT, VIAB, GENT) We need affordable housing, at any cost, to avoid population contraction - our local businesses are already bleeding workers, and return-to-office initiatives in government and business are going to draw away a lot of the high earners that flocked here after 2020. Once they leave, who will be left, especially after a decade of pushing our native Bozeman residents? 9. (RENT, PED, MIX) My biggest priority in all of this is living in a city where more than just the upper classes can succeed. Affordable housing is essential to a place where people can thrive instead of just survive. I also believe that creating a city around car use is a waste of resources and creates a dependency on something many cannot afford. All of our lives get better if we are able to walk and bike and take public transportation more. All of our lives get better if we are not worried about paying astronomical prices for rent each month. 10. (VIAB) It would be really nice to be able to own a home in Bozeman at some point, raise a family in Bozeman, etc. (I am currently a senior at MSU) 11. (RENT, VIAB, WAT, PED) The college people are the ones who suffer from the expensive living situation and due to that they have to work more than 2 jobs just to live here. Outside of this population, it's just being able to live in an area and save up for life's general downsides. Water is important and we are blessed to be in a place that we are able to drink from the tap. Being able to walk is nice. 12. (???) Too many people. Bozeman community is an exclusive environment for those who are colored or those who cannot afford to do outdoor recs 13. (RENT, GENT) I have no issue with high rises being built, and I fact I think they can be really helpful with the city’s growth within the county. But these builders and contractors need to do more to create more affordable housing within these units, have adequate parking for each unit (more than just one parking spot per unit), and not just allow them to become vacation rentals and second homes. 14. (NOT) Stop approving massive apartment complexes with not even what could be considered minimal parking. 15. (NOT) Existing neighborhoods and areas downtown are too developed, with parking and road file:///C/Users/mmaas/Downloads/forwardmt-housing-survey-2025_write-answer-with-coding.txt[5/5/2025 10:37:21 AM] infrastructure unable to infinitely grow. 16. (WAT) Water! If we can't water our lawns every day STOP approving dense housing. 17. (ENV, WAT) I think protecting sensitive land and have access to clean safe drink water are very important thing that should be prioritize during the city's growth and development 18. (GENT, RENT, PARK) The city of Bozeman gave out too many building permits and did not allow for the infrastructure to support all this population growth, not to mention that most of these new builds for apartments are completely outrageous, some of these apartments are charging prices that make LA look affordable and I would know because I’m in the trades and have built them. Something needs to happen to control the housing prices and rental prices here 19. (RENT, GENT) Affordable housing needs to be prioritized. Stop allowing big developers to buy residential housing lots and build large luxury condos or vacation rentals in their place. 20. (RENT) Need affordable housing 21. (RENT, ENV, NOT) We obviously have a housing crisis and as nice as it would be to not build Bozeman up more we need to create more housing for these people. Protecting our sensitive lands and agriculture are important as is the building height ordinance. 22. (RENT) affordability is a huge one, the cost of living in a reasonable home in montana is excessive and over done 23. (RENT) Affordable housing 24. (RENT) I think that the creation of more affordable housing an alternative car centric infrastructure. A Bozeman that relies on cars and $2,000 studios will choke itself out 25. (MIX) We need to have more density, with less sprawl. Public services need to be supported and subsidized more. 26. (RENT, PED) My priorities are having options for affordable housing and options for transportation beyond cars. So many people in this town ride their bikes or walk year-round as their main transportation and I would love to see streets that are safer for bikers and walkers. 27. (GENT, ENV, PED) We have some amazing historic buildings in Bozeman, and it's been so sad to see some of them get repurposed and lose their character. I also think, above all else, preserving sensitive lands and making the city accessible, both financially and pedestrian-wise, it so important to make sure we have a place to live that isn't burdensome. 28. (PED, RENT, VIAB) I can’t drive so I bike and walk mostly. Being a pedestrian sucks in Bozeman and the roads are not built safely (and there’s not enough holding drivers accountable) I want Bozeman to be more walkable and accessible to way more public transit. Additionally renting prices are insane and borderline impossible to sign up for. I have had multiple friends who were born and raised here forced out of Bozeman because they can’t afford to live here. 29. (WAT, ENV) water conservation and water quality is important to the sustainability of Bozeman. Growth is going to have detrimental effects on the Missouri headwaters, and measures should be taken in reduce it. Additionally, habitat loss through development, including grass lawns makes a space ecologically unproductive and wastes a lot of water to maintain. 30. (RENT, ENV) Affordable housing needs to be readily available to people coming into Bozeman, while maintaining preservation of the beautiful land upon which Bozeman is built. These two are primary concerns because a) the landscape is a large part of why people are coming to Bozeman and b) Bozeman living is not affordable, especially for young people and students who don’t have the financial cushion and job file:///C/Users/mmaas/Downloads/forwardmt-housing-survey-2025_write-answer-with-coding.txt[5/5/2025 10:37:21 AM] stability older residents are more likely to have. 31. (RENT) Rent has increased faster than wages. A single person cannot afford an apartment on their own. Even the run down apartments are grossly over priced. 32. (RENT, GENT) Bozeman is losing its historic and innate charm in exchange for fast built, cheap, ugly housing that is still not even affordable. We are losing what this city was built on, and gaining nothing of value. 33. (MIX) We desperately need to increase density in Bozeman and curb the suburban sprawl. Having open areas around the city is of paramount importance and is why I live here. 34. (PED, MIX, ENV) Pedestrian/bike And public transit accessibility in dense, mixed-use areas with access to nearby stores and green spaces with a range of pricing that offers enough affordable options is of highest interest to me. Awareness of the space in regards to the natural features and impacts on the environment is also worthy of consideration. 35. (PED, MIX) I am very concerned about the lack of intention around multi-use residential areas in Bozeman. The sprawling nature and lack of medium-density builds in neighborhoods has created an unwalkable landscape. I would like to see more main-street residential+business like zoning be created in the neighborhoods by Gallatin high school. 36. (???) The city should stop meddling. 37. (GENT) Bozeman is leading to gentrification 38. (PED) I live within two blocks of Main Street. And have been almost hit by vehicles over 15 times and have been told by a driver that it was not my right to cross the road while he was driving on it. I barely feel safe walking around Bozeman with the lack of road infrastructure to make drivers uncomfortable to drive above the speed limit or cut a left turn in front of pedestrians crossing. 39. (MIX, GENT, RENT, VIAB) I think density and building affordable house (apartments/ houses with less than 3 rooms) is extremely important for the future of this city. I think people should realize cities are living communities with culture that grows and always looking back to try and maintain a Bozeman that doesn’t exist anymore alienates a part of your population that you can’t afford to lose. My partner and I work in civil works and local non-profit industries and the pressure of finding affordable rentable housing is immense. We have seen many friends leave because they cannot afford to live and grow a family here on their local salaries. 40. (RENT, ENV) I want affordable housing that doesn't damage the beautiful lands we are in. I want housing that doesn't displace others or wildlife. I want more parks incorporated into neighborhoods to help protect and provide shelter for wildlife. 41. (RENT) Housing is so brutal here 42. (GENT, RENT) Most of the development I have seen in the last 5 years seems to prioritize countryside vacation homes for the super wealthy or the development of apartment complexes that are owned by out of state millionaires who boast basic commodities are luxury items to inflate the cost of each unit. I would like to see some form of control for this constant catering to the wealthy. 43. (RENT, VIAB, GENT) As a young adult coming from less-than-ideal circumstances, I have still managed to put myself through college, but now, even as full-time working adult, in what I would call an EXTREMELY nessecary field (childcare) I can barely afford basic nessecities, let alone saving to have my own house (I currently live with two roomates, also full time workers in essential fields), my own family, or even having the resources to give back to my community (something I long to do). I believe Bozeman's older and privileged population has made it near impossible to live here, and I wonder, who will be left to watch their children, stock thier food, or sell them clothes when the working class can no longer afford to live here. file:///C/Users/mmaas/Downloads/forwardmt-housing-survey-2025_write-answer-with-coding.txt[5/5/2025 10:37:21 AM] 44. (RENT, VIAB) I found a decent place to rent and work, but I can't afford to change apartments or jobs. I'm stuck and may have to move out of Bozeman if anything happens to change my income or living situation. 45. (RENT, VIAB) BOZEMAN NEEDS MORE AFORDABLE HOUSING! I DONT WANT TO BE PRICED OUT OF THIS CITY! 46. (GENT, NOT, RENT, WAT) Bozeman needs to retain its charm and small town feel, the reason so many people have moved here. There need to be fewer huge apartment complexes (it’s already becoming overgrown with them) and instead there should be neighborhoods where natives and locals have the opportunity to own a house and the land it is built on. Affordable housing, specifically retaining and preserving places that are affordable, is a must. The moratorium on building height should stay, or add only a few stories, as long as parking garages are included in every build. Water adequacy is of great importance and should be managed and monitored closely. There is no point in having a lovely town/city if there is an issue with or lack of water. 47. (RENT, GENT) I deeply care about affordable housing, and making sure Bozeman still keeps its character while building new infrastructure to support low to middle class people (we’ve seen enough development for the high class folks, I think). 48. (RENT, GENT) I would like affordable housing that preserves the character and quality of a neighborhood, regardless of building height and proximity to the city’s core. 49. (PED, WAT) Biggest things would be drastic improvements needed to bike and pedestrian infrastructure and public transportation; careful consideration of sustainable water sources as construction continues 50. (GENT) It seems that the developer incentives favors them over the people living here. Growth is meant to help our community not wealthy people looking for the latest real estate rush. I don’t see why a place as desirable as Bozeman should give developers help in achieving their profits while destroying the community that once was Bozeman. 51. (RENT, VIAB, MIX) Many people are being priced out of Bozeman. Well paying jobs aren't even keeping up with the cost of living here. I think we should lower zoning barriers, build upwards, make sure we're not contributing to urban sprawl. I just want to be able to afford a house one day, with a yard, for my kids. 52. (GENT, RENT) Rich outsiders have made it nearly impossible to afford living in Bozeman and many of the green spaces and character throughout the city have been replaced with luxury high rises and giant complexes. 53. (GENT, RENT, VIAB) It really feels like developers are slapping up crappy buildings quickly and easily getting away with it. I know several folks who live in new buildings that are already having issues. They are also so expensive and don’t solve our housing issues. It seems like developers are often given a ton of incentive and discounts when the number of “affordable†(certainly not to me on my limited income) units they create are so few. Want us to bike, walk and take the bus more? Pay the city to clear sidewalks in winter, create more bike and bus routes, and have buses run more often. I honestly think there also needs to be a reassessment of the income of individuals in Bozeman to base this affordable rental rate. I feel like no one I know pays 30% or less of their monthly income. The number of people who don’t have to work or that live in multiple states shouldn’t be counted in this either. In all honesty, I don’t know exactly how the “affordable†housing rate was created but it seems very skewed based on many people that I know. It feels pretty hopeless to ever be able to buy an affordable home in Bozeman and that makes me question whether or not I want to stay here and invest in the community I am involved in and love. 54. (RENT, VIAB) Because my wife and I have been kicked out and relocated from our rentals 5 times since 2018. Buying a house even with out dual income is impossible. The dream is dead. 55. Quality and design of construction as well as code enforcement and equity amount builders/owners file:///C/Users/mmaas/Downloads/forwardmt-housing-survey-2025_write-answer-with-coding.txt[5/5/2025 10:37:21 AM] 56. (GENT, RENT, PED) This city's growth is out of control, and it's being left to people with absurd amounts of money. We need more rent control in Bozeman and laws that prevent greedy people (aka most landlords here nowadays) from spiking rents to make an extra, easy dollar. Bozeman is made by young, working and middle class people. Those with too much money who come here to use Bozeman as a playground don't realize the damage they're doing by forcing out locals and people who actually know how to use and respect the land. Also, I ride my bike almost every day and I feel like I am guaranteed at least one close encounter with a car. We need more bike lanes that are sheltered from the street – slapping an extra line on the road (and putting pegs between the road and the bike lane) doesn't do a thing for bike safety. 57. (RENT, PED, MIX) I spent a lot of time in the last few years learning about Bozeman housing development and infrastructure, which led me to advocate strongly for Social Housing. I’ve watched Welcoming Our Neighbors and other agencies advocate for building more housing in the idea it would just “trickle down” but I do not see that as a viable strategy. We need affordable housing to pair with smart, sustainable, and efficient infrastructure if we’re actually going to house people AND maintain a sense of community in doing so. Access to green space, adequate public transit and walkability, and mixed use/income developments (ie. Social Housing or an Affordable Housing Overlay) seem much more strategic for long term solutions. 58. (VIAB, RENT) I currently have to move out of Bozeman after being here for 8 years because I can’t pay $2,000 to life on my own and Dave enough to eventually buy anything 59. (PED, RENT) I think bozeman has terrible biking and pedestrian infrastructure despite there being many people who bike and walk around town (it being a college town at heart) i feel there are jobs and businesses that have been developed in bozeman and that these developments have been taking precedent over the need for affordable housing. When many of the people struggling to make ends meet in bozeman are the one who have lived here for 10 plus years - housing and alternative transportation options should be a priority. 60. (RENT, GENT, ENV, PED) Affordable housing with environmentally and financially sustainable city practices are of highest importance to me, followed by pedestrian infrastructure and community/neighborhood character. 61. (RENT) Housing people is more important than "neighborhood character." 62. (PED, MIX) I’d like to see more bike infrastructure, more density and infill, with multi family options 63. (PED, RENT) Being a pedestrian or cyclist and, in turn, a driver, is scary in Bozeman due to the lack of infrastructure. Preserving affordable housing should be prioritized before creating new affordable housing. Paying attention and dealing with density issues will help address parking 64. (ENV, RENT, MIX, GENT) Above all, I want any development plan to prioritize harmony with preserving Bozeman’s natural environment and wild animals. They are the living species who don’t get a say and I think it’s part of what I love most about living here so it’s important to me. However, development must carry forward and we need more affordable housing options and more career building jobs for young people in Bozeman. I want there are to be options for where I live and what I do for work to be able to afford living here.I do care about neighborhood character but I’m also worried this gets used as logic to stop new development. I’m more concerned that new development and housing neighborhoods don’t have basic amenities close by like groceries, or little shops and businesses. I see new developments incorporating green space and parks. But it seems like a lot of new builds are mainly residential and it doesn’t feel inviting for folks who don’t live in those areas. I would like for new developments outside downtown to offer more and feel more integrated in the broader Bozeman community. I’d also love to see more multigenerational housing options and fewer megamansion or soulless apartment developments! Just more variety and more communal options. 65. (RENT) Less high end apartments and more small single family homes. file:///C/Users/mmaas/Downloads/forwardmt-housing-survey-2025_write-answer-with-coding.txt[5/5/2025 10:37:21 AM] 66. (RENT) This place is not affordable. 67. (PED, GENT, RENT) Motorists speeding in the city and often driving extremely noisy vehicles with substandard mufflers have been degrading Bozeman's quality of life and endangering bicyclists and pedestrians. So it's important to improve infrastructure for both pedestrian and bicyclists. It's also important to preserve the quality of neighborhoods zoned mainly or wholly for single-family homes to preserve quiet neighborhoods that are good for children and working adults. At the same time, neighborhoods with relatively affordable housing such as areas with older apartment buildings and trailer parks need to be preserved so that lower-income residents can live somewhere that's somewhat affordable. 68. (MIX, PED) Need density and public transportation to have a walkable community and preserve open spaces. 69. Honestly, checking anything in the “least important” section feels dishonest to me, and I feel like I can’t really choose. It all feels so important! 70. (RENT, VIAB, GENT) Please, we are BEGGING for affordable housing. My husband and I are very hardworking and cannot afford to buy a home and are not interested in moving to rural Montana. Likewise, we need better snow plowing and safe road conditions, and not to be told “we don’t have the resources” from the city, when they continue to approve multi million dollar homes and neighborhoods. 71. (YEAH IT IS) This is a note about the first survey item — the check boxes don’t allow your choices to be ranked. Is this a mistake in the survey design? 72. (RENT, VIAB) Our community is seeing immense population growth- increasing housing prices and making it unaffordable to live in the area. If we want our working class to continue contributing to the local economy, the city should consider prioritizing how to keep those people in our community. 73. (ENV) Preserve vital agricultural land!! 74. (GENT, PED) Bozeman is losing its family friendly neighborhoods. Too many of the new developments include mixed residential and commercial use. Too many of the new houses are tightly spaced, cookie cutter built. Neighborhoods that include only single family units are not being planned and built. Family friendly neighborhoods, walking trails, quiet streets, and local businesses were what made Bozeman unique. We’re losing this character. Bozeman is turning into a suburban city with too many apartments, condos and chain restaurants and stores. We don’t want to be the next Salt Lake. 75. (RENT, VIAB) I am an MSU student and living in Bozeman has become too expensive. It is cheaper for me to study abroad than to rent in Bozeman. Next semester I am doing online classes from a cheaper living state because rent here is not possible for me to afford even though I have roommates and work 20 hours a week 76. (NOT, GENT) Parking needs to be a top priority. These high rise buildings that are being built with 30 parking spots are creating massive parking issues around town. Our streets can not handle thousands of cars parked on them every day, especially in the winter. It creates such traffic issues. Also, we really just need to stop and consider, who are we building these high rise apartments for? It seems that we are building them for the rich out of stater to have a second home to visit twice a year. And in the meantime we are drastically changing the landscape and feel of our town. And for what?!? 77. (GENT) Bozeman is doing an extremely poor job developing infrastructure to support its growth and is actively pursuing projects that ruin the very things that make it great 78. (RENT, GENT, PED, MIX, ENV) Bozeman is a wonderful community. I currently live in the Northside downtown neighborhood. I am a renter. There are news builds (condos/apartments)popping up and I am concerned about their presence. While I welcome and am excited for more housing options in Bozeman, the new buildings coming up are typically not affordable for average residents. I'm nervous what impact million file:///C/Users/mmaas/Downloads/forwardmt-housing-survey-2025_write-answer-with-coding.txt[5/5/2025 10:37:21 AM] dollar condos will have on my current rent price, as it can artificially raise the cost. I'd love to see a focus on rent control, zoning restrictions for buildings where a percentage of units must be deemed affordable for the average single local income in Bozeman. I value the walkability and community efforts in the north side neighborhood, but assume that to be the culture of the people living in this area, not the city. I've noted many new areas in Bozeman being developed that are not focused on mixed living, business and residential. It's a shame we're focusing on creating a town that values car transportation as highly as it does. Nature and agriculture are big reasons people relocate to the area, they want to live among and alongside it. If they are not components considered at the top of development, then we're just creating another city of suburban sprawl and eliminating a huge appeal of Bozeman. I understand there is a delicate balance between development and preservation, but it must be considered for the posterity of the uniqueness and charm of this area. Ideally I'd love to own in this neighborhood eventually, but know that is a far reaching goal, especially in the north side. I'm very focused on being able to maintain the housing I'm currently in, preserving the history/charm of the community, having a positive impact of nature around us. 79. (RENT, GENT) There is a graceful and respectful way to add affordable housing and general housing density to a town that is already rife with character and history. People who have been here for a long time seem to not appreciate too much change, but won’t say no to making new friends. The ‘dine-and-dash’ model of Andy Holloran and other developers of building luxury apartment complexes that are financially out of reach for most people is case in point, and it is the worst use of precious land. On top of that, what is ‘market rate’ when it comes to rent? NIMBYism and a free market are helping to destroy Bozeman, as there is nothing to keep landlords in check as they enter a bidding war against each other for what they can charge. Rents going unchecked have literally kicked people out of their apartments in place of six-figure earners who work remote jobs. ‘Business development’ and any ‘housing’ related checkbox are related. 80. (RENT, MIX) As a city we should focus on quality of life for our residents, not on property values and parking. 81. (RENT, MIX) Bozeman needs affordable housing and better urban development. The disastrous suburban sprawl has no commercial amenities thus contributing to increased car traffic and environmental destruction. Most HOA's in Bozeman are horrible and only drive housing cost up by preserving vacant units for short term rental. The city needs affordable housing, better access to amenities, increased urab planning with a focus on minimizing vehicular use, and needs to create more commercial pockets. 82. (MIX) I think Bozeman needs to focus on growing its urban center to reduce the pace of single family housing sprawl throughout the valley. Alternative (other than private car) means of transportation that are maintained through the year are needed to allow for downtown to grow without turning half our city into a parking lot. A pitfall cities all over the country have been captured in. 83. Change is happening in Bozeman and we need to face that fact. We need a focus on people and community, planning for the future so we get there with some semblance of order, efficiency, and most importantly, community still intact. 84. (ENV, RENT, WAT) For the first question, I feel that aspects such as agriculture, water adequacy, and impact on sensitive lands are so important for Bozeman given the nature and wildlife it is surrounded by. I also feel that affordable housing creation and preservation needs more emphasis due to students such as myself or those of lower SES. It is ridiculous that many places advertise as student friendly when in reality they aren't and they cater to students that have more money. This just leaves fewer options for those that can't afford much. 85. (RENT, WAT, ENV, PED) Main priorities are land, water, wildlife, and ecosystem conservation. Then affordability and accessibility of housing and transportation. Prefer to focus on expanding bus system instead of parking. 86. (PED, RENT) Bozeman needs to be more bikeable walkable. We need housing for regular people. file:///C/Users/mmaas/Downloads/forwardmt-housing-survey-2025_write-answer-with-coding.txt[5/5/2025 10:37:21 AM] 87. (PED, MIX)I think walkability and density are extremely important in preserving our natural landscape 88. (NOT, RENT, VIAB, GENT, ENV) I am concerned with building height as it makes sense to move vertical due to the valley however, people come here for the mountain view’s and we don’t want buildings obstructing the culture. Affordability is crucial as a huge portion of renters are college students and the median salary in Bozeman makes buying a home unrealistic with average home prices. Character is important as lots of new complexes going up are not well designed. Lastly preserving the agricultural land is important. Farmers feed us and there is only so much farm land left in the valley and the country. 89. (RENT, VIAB) I want to be able to afford to live here. Being a full time student, I work as much as I am able to and don't spend money if I don't have to, but I still barely have enough to pay for rent and groceries. 90. (RENT, GENT) Build housing for the people who are here and not speculative affluent new comers ---SECTION 1--- 1. (RENT, MIX, PED) Neighborhood character, affordable housing, mixed use spaces, and opportunity for non car centric transportation are important to me! 2. (RENT, PED) Building affordable housing with character and accessibility to downtown via walk or bike is essential to providing a healthy community that can engage in the community. 3. (MIX) Urban sprawl creates miserable cities; if Bozeman is going to grow it should grow up 4. (ENV) It’s important to retain the character of Bozeman that draws people to the city. Without its feel and the cohesion of its building types, that is respondent to the local ecosystems, “Bozeman” won’t exist. The “soul” of a place is most important to me, especially growing up in this community. 5. (ENV) Bozeman is going to grow whether we want to or not, I want us to choose a model of growth that prioritizes people working here and our environment. 6. (WAT, ENV, GENT) I think it is important for the City to think about how to grow and support good jobs, but should not chase growth or try to attract business at all costs, especially if we don't have enough water or it means demolishing existing trees, homes, or otherwise displacing people 7. (MIX) I think our buildings need to be taller 8. (VIAB) The cost of living here for students, and even those in Montana, is so high that it’s nearly impossible for students to stay past graduation. It’s also difficult to make enough money as a part time employee to be able to pay rent every month. 9. (RENT) I would rather be able to afford to live than to see the mountains 10. It is worth clarifying that the city should be encouraging the things I listed in the first question, and acting indifferently towards the areas listed in the second instead of limiting or requiring them.