Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-04-25 Public Comment - G. Gilpin - Fowler Housing ProjectFrom:Greg and Renée Gilpin To:Bozeman Public Comment Subject:[EXTERNAL]Fowler Housing Project Date:Monday, August 4, 2025 2:38:15 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: City of Bozeman City Commission and Community Development Board Date: August 4, 2025 From: Meredith Center, 1026 New Holland Gaye Lynne Duggan, 1205 New Holland Greg Gilpin, 3229 Caterpillar Nina Harrison, 1142 New Holland Hudson Hart, 1020 Durham Heather Higgs, 3173 John Deer Karl Keith, 1008 New Holland Chad Kimble, 1080 New Holland Molly McGuire, 3260 Farmall Mary Frances McHugh, 3144 Rose Michael Roser, 1015 New Holland Re: Proposed Fowler Housing Project Dear City Commissioners, Community Development Board Members, and City Leaders, On July 22, 2025, the above group organized a meeting with David Fine of the City’s Economic Development Department, bringing together 100 Bozeman residents to share concerns and provide feedback on the proposed annexation and zoning of 5 acres of the city-owned 10-acre parcel as R-3 high-density housing (Geocode: 06-0798-02-3-01-05-0000). News articles on the meeting are here and here. During our meeting, Mr. Fine acknowledged that the Economic Development Department’s proposal does not conform to current building codes or land use regulations. As such, they present unrealistic expectations of what is feasible. With a width of only 150 feet, the parcel is functionally undevelopable for high-density housing. We respectfully petition the City to reject the current housing proposal for the Fowler Housing Project, as the site is functionally undevelopable for high density and poses significant environmental, health, and quality-of-life impacts on adjacent property owners. To be clear, we support the development of affordable housing in Bozeman. The city has several well-designed, environmentally responsible, and community-oriented affordable housing projects completed and in the works that demonstrate what is possible when thoughtful planning and public-private collaborations come together. Unfortunately, the current proposal for the Fowler Housing Project does not reflect these values. We are deeply concerned by the pace at which this project is moving forward. It appears to be fast-tracked without sufficient opportunity for public input or community involvement. Outreach efforts have been limited, and the available project information is sparse—particularly given that 21 adjacent properties will be directly affected. Residents were informed that excavation is expected to begin in the Summer 2026 in conjunction with the construction of the Fowler Avenue Connector. The City should consider new development not only on its merits but also for its cumulative impact on the surrounding areas. A holistic approach ensures that growth enhances livability rather than straining community infrastructure and quality of life. We have seen no such thought for analysis, and there should be no rush to rezone without understanding impacts. We urge the City to adopt a more deliberate planning timeline that allows for meaningful community engagement and time to pursue public-private partnerships and grant opportunities so that this can be a truly affordable and sustainable housing development. Finally, we strongly recommend that the City plan the Fowler Housing Project in direct coordination with the design and construction of the Fowler Avenue Connector. These two public projects are inherently interdependent; infrastructure must be aligned to adequately support any new housing. This may require substantial revisions to the current 60% road design. Below is a list of 37 concerns regarding the high-density proposal that we seek the City to consider: 1. Site Constraints and Functional Undevelopable with High-Density Housing. a. Parcel’s narrow width (150 feet) makes it functionally undevelopable for high- density housing. i. Once appropriate setbacks are applied, e.g., 35’ along Fowler Ave and adjacent property lines—only 80’ of buildable width remains. ii. After accounting for a 25’ road and 25’ driveways, only 30 feet remain for structures. This renders high-density design infeasible. iii. Current proposal reduces setbacks to 20’ and uses a single-lane alleyway. Still infeasible for high-density development. b. No roadway buffers the development from the adjacent Harvest Creek neighborhood unlike other R-3 to R-1 transitions in Bozeman, making the development rely on the adjacent neighborhood's infrastructure. c. Proposed community would be bisected by Caterpillar Street, eliminating any cohesive neighborhood feel. d. Alleyways’ tight corners and no exit on the north end makes the majority of units inaccessible to emergency vehicles from the interior, including ladder trucks required for 3+ story buildings. e. The proposed development includes less than 15% greenspace—far below benchmarks set by similar Bozeman developments. By comparison: i. Bridger View offers ~50% greenspace and sits adjacent to a 40-acre park. ii. Family Promise’s Transitional Housing includes more green space, despite having a higher unit density. f. Parcel lies outside Bozeman’s core and adjacent to 32 acres of open field, underscoring its incompatibility with high-density development. g. There are 21 adjacent property owners, 18 of whom have backyards that directly border the parcel—making them especially vulnerable to the impacts of the proposed development. 2. Incompatible Infrastructure and Traffic Design a. Proposed entrances on Farmall and Caterpillar Streets (residential roads) are not designed to sustain high-volume traffic from high-density development. These streets were intended to alleviate internal Harvest Creek traffic, not to serve as primary access points for a separate, high-density development. b. Expanding Fowler Ave alleviates cut-through traffic along New Holland St. High-density project substantially increases daily traffic loads along this road for anyone headed towards 19th Street. c. No access or entry is planned from Fowler Avenue, a major arterial road better suited to support increased traffic. d. No consideration has been given to add on-street parking along Fowler Avenue (e.g., Ferguson Ave north of Baxter). e. The proposed narrow alleyway through the development is inadequate for high-density housing. f. Proposed 20’ setback fails to account for Fowler Ave’s long-term infrastructure needs, including potential expansion to three or four lanes. 3. Setbacks and Residential Impact on 21 owners' adjacent properties. a. Proposed 20’ setback is inappropriate for units up to four stories in height and adjacent to single-story homes. b. Nearly 50% of the surface parking and the proposed alleyway run along the backyards of 18 adjacent homeowners. This raises serious concerns about health, safety, and environmental quality (noise, light pollution, vehicle emissions, etc). c. The City’s proposed 6-foot privacy fence does not adequately mitigate these harms or compensate for the minimal setback. 4. Parking Limitations and Spillover Effects a. Projected parking ratio of 1.67 vehicles per unit is inadequate, especially given the unit price point of $450K–$650K. b. Garages may be used for storage due to the small unit size, further reducing available parking within the complex. c. Significant concern about overflow parking spilling into adjacent Harvest Creek streets—similar to issues observed on Michael Grove and Tschache Lane, where streets and the park’s parking lot are crowded with excess tenant vehicles and RVs. 5. Affordability and Market Need a. The proposed unit prices ($450K–$650K) do not qualify as affordable housing under most metrics. b. Zillow listings (as of the meeting date) showed 271 non-single-family units and only 39 single-family homes under $550K in Bozeman and Belgrade. This underscores a demand for affordable single-family options, not multi-family. c. The proposal lacks any mention of grants, sponsorships, or nonprofit collaboration (e.g., HRDC, Trust Montana) to reduce unit costs. d. Other R-3 affordable housing and private developments (e.g., 160 acres at Baxter and Cottonwood) are coming online or already underway. This raises questions about the marginal value of this particular project and concerns about public sector crowdout. e. The project appears to adopt dense design models from major metropolitan areas (e.g., Salt Lake City, Seattle, and Manhattan, NY), which may be incompatible with Bozeman’s size and infrastructure. f. Although the proposed units are described as an “award-winning design,” comparisons to Daybreak are misleading. Daybreak’s success relies on extensive greenspace, a lake, rail access, cafes, boutiques, salons, and ample amenities within the community that are not present in the proposal. 6. Public Process, Notification, and Property Rights a. We express frustration over the apparent fast-tracking of the project without adequate public input. b. We were unaware of the project’s scale and proximity until recently, despite owning property adjacent to the parcel. c. No outreach occurred through mail, email, or door-to-door canvassing. d. The city’s website offers minimal information—lacking contacts, timelines, or methods for engagement. e. Pre-zoning and long-range annexation planning, common best practices, were not followed. i. Residents who purchased adjacent parcels did so with no indication that a dense housing project would be developed within 20 feet of their property lines. Everyone was aware that Fowler Ave would be built at some point. f. The proposal reportedly emerged only 8 months ago, raising transparency concerns. 7. Equity and Property Value Impacts a. The current plan appears to prioritize new development at the expense of existing residents. Harvest Creek offers some of the most affordable single- family, market-rate housing. Consider the surrounding density and aesthetics to preserve the character and quality of life for existing residents. b. Property owners anticipate value losses of ~$100K per home—equating to over $2.1M across the 21 adjacent properties. c. Broader neighborhood devaluation could push the total loss above $5M. d. Raises ethical and legal concerns about using city-owned land in a way that redistributes burden and risk from the city to existing property owners. 8. Loss of Green and Community Space a. The current site is a valued green space used regularly by the community. c. Lack of greenspace undermines quality of life and contradicts Bozeman’s reputation for environmentally conscious design. Below is a summary of recommendations provided during the meeting: 1. Extend the Planning Horizon Allow a 3–5 year planning timeline to develop a well-conceived and properly funded affordable housing neighborhood. This will allow time to secure adequate public-private sponsorships and grants. Bridger View—a model of excellence in affordable housing— was not developed overnight; nor should the Fowler Housing Project be. 2. Develop a Comprehensive Master Plan Create a master plan that mirrors Bridger View, including one- and two-story single- family and duplex units, at least 50% greenspace, and ADA-compliant housing options. 3. Foster Affordable Housing Seek public and private grants and sponsorships to ensure that the development remains truly affordable while maintaining quality in design and infrastructure. 4. Apply Thoughtful Setback Standards Implement setbacks proportional to building height along adjacent property lines and Fowler Ave arterial road: 5. Restrict height. Restrict the development to two-story units to better match the existing neighborhood character and to be directly adjacent to existing homeowners. A site visit demonstrates how small homes are along New Holland Drive and how little space 150’ is. 6. Protect Adjacent Property Owner’s Health and Quality of Life Do not place roads or parking lots directly adjacent to existing backyards, even with a 20- foot setback. Rather, place walking trails, backyards for new homeowners, parks, and greenspace along adjacent properties. 7. Plan for Realistic Parking Needs Require at least two parking spaces per unit. Consider carports, and not garages, so that parking is used to park vehicles. 8. Ensure Proper Traffic Flow and Access Locate entrances to the development along Fowler Ave, a designated minor arterial road. Avoid using residential streets such as Caterpillar and Farmall for vehicle access. These could instead serve as pedestrian and bike paths, similar to the proposed connections at Lilly and Oliver into the Harvest Creek neighborhood (see 60% design plans for reference). 9. Account for Future Fowler Ave Demands Increase setbacks along Fowler Ave to accommodate future expansion, especially given the development of the 32+ acres of open fields directly west of Fowler Ave between Oak and Durston. 10. Minimize Impact on Current Homeowners Consider the significant impact this project will have on the residents of the 21 properties bordering the proposed development, as well as the residents of 200+ properties along New Holland and within the westside of Harvest Creek neighborhood (there are 525 properties in Harvest Creek). 11. Consider alternative zonings and uses The Economic Development Department has only evaluated R-3 through R-5 high- density housing. We ask that lower-density housing and open space to connect the Fowler Trail system from Main St to north Bozeman be considered. Lower-density housing is especially critical, as the City has not sufficiently invested in affordable single-family homes, which continue to represent the area’s greatest unmet housing need. An Alternative Affordable Housing Proposal: We propose a plan for 18 residential lots, each matching the width of the 18 existing properties along New Holland Drive between Oak Street and Farmall Lane. The housing units would include a mix of two-story single-family homes and duplexes. An oversized alley would run parallel to Fowler Ave, extending from Farmall to Oak, with a central access point connecting to Fowler Avenue. All new properties would feature backyards abutting the existing New Holland homes, promoting neighborhood continuity.This proposal would retain the Land Trust model, ensuring long-term affordability while addressing the community’s pressing need for affordable, family-oriented housing. The Harvest Creek HOA Board has indicated its willingness to incorporate these new homes into the Harvest Creek Homeowners Association, thereby extending the benefits of community membership, including snow removal, landscaping services, and maintenance of the shared stormwater pond. Notably, all members of the HOA Board are co-authors of this letter and support this integration