Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-01-25 Public Comment - A. Levy - Argument against moving the B-3 boundary - Google DocsFrom:Allison Levy To:Terry Cunningham; Jennifer Madgic; Joey Morrison; Emma Bode Cc:Bozeman Public Comment Subject:[EXTERNAL]Argument against moving the B-3 boundary - Google Docs.pdf Date:Friday, November 28, 2025 9:35:49 AM Attachments:Argument against moving the B-3 boundary - Google Docs.pdf 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. Thank you again for taking the time last week out of your busy schedules to meet with us and walk with us, listen to us and debate with us. It made us feel heard. Now we wait. Heartfeltthanks. Happy holidays. Best regards, Ali Levy 308 S. Black Ave Argument against moving the B-3 boundary to E. Curtiss between S. Tracy and S. Black Development in the B-3 zoning district, where it meets historic residential neighborhoods, has been an issue for the Bozeman community for the last decade! Since the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) Design Guidelines for the B-3 were relaxed, through the creation of subchapter 4b, in order to stimulate redevelopment in the core, residents have been advocating for transition regulations that would mitigate the negative impacts of this high-intensity zoning district on the existing homes and residents nearby. Zone Edge Transition (ZET) measures were added to the UDC in 2018, but the first iteration did not require that transition regulations apply across a city street. This resulted in unsympathetic development at the corner of N. Tracy and Villard (and other locations) where new construction compromised the integrity of the setting of the George Harrison house, a National Register Historic home built by an early Bozeman African American architect, and located within the N. Tracy Historic District. Our Growth Policy, a.k.a. the Community Plan adopted in 2020 suggests that we learn from our mistakes. Page 25, “R-1.1 Be reflective: use past experience to inform future decisions.” This situation should not be allowed to happen ever again. In the proposed draft UDC, Zone Edge Transition regulations are greatly improved, including set backs, landscape requirements, and architectural step backs. They also apply across a right-of-way that is less than 60 ft. Many of the older streets surrounding the B-3 are less than 60 ft right-of-ways. If the Henry had been required to meet these provisions, the damaging impact to the historic property and district would have been greatly reduced if not eliminated. The Growth Policy also suggests on page 34, “DCD-2.9 Evaluate increasing the number of stories allowed in centers of employment and activity while also directing height transitions down to adjacent neighborhoods.” Since this 2020 Community plan’s adoption there has been widespread support for leveraging increased height ONLY on condition that deed restricted affordable units be required. The state legislature continues to remove our communities' tools for affordable housing creation, so nothing should be given away for free. These transition measures proposed in the draft UDC fulfill a directive from the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan (DBIP) as well. On page 116, in the section on Sensitive Transitions the plan recommends that within the B-3 “...adjacent to the surrounding residential zones, buildings should begin to taper down and gradually adjust downward.” The plan actually goes on to recommend “gentle” residential infill, for the neighborhoods near the B-3, calling out ADU’s specifically! On page 111 of the DBIP areas are identified for an adjustment to the B-3 boundary. Below is an image of E Curtiss that corresponds to the area labelled “B” in this map. The proposed draft UDC zoning map is suggesting the boundary of the B-3 zone be moved south to E. Curtiss rezoning a church and 3 small homes pictured on the left above. Current Zoning: Proposed zoning: Our Growth Policy recommends on page 29, “N-1.11 Enable a gradual and predictable increase in density in developed areas over time.” Nothing about rezoning from R-2 to B-3 is gradual. Furthermore, the community learned on November 17th, at the Community Development Board meeting, that developers could get out of fulfilling the ZET requirements in the draft code if they were to cede property to the city to increase the right-of-way to 60 ft! This loophole was confirmed at the November 18th City Commission UDC work session. East Curtiss at this location varies from 57’ 9” to 58’ 1” wide, making transition regulations apply. Or so we thought. This rezoning would create an incentive for redevelopment of an entire city block to include massive buildings, potentially 90 ft tall, the type of buildings the transition regulations were drafted for. By ceding as little as 2 feet to the city, a developer would not be required to set back, landscape, or step back an enormous project thereby repeating the trend of development that has caused so much damage already. This loophole must be closed if we are to hope for the recommendation on page 30 of the DBIP, “Protect the character of the Main Street Historic District and enhance the residential neighborhoods through context-sensitive development.” As we’ve learned from multiple projects at the edge of the B-3, enormous buildings across from low density, single family historic neighborhoods are NOT context-sensitive. This identified ZET loophole is also an argument against moving the B-3 boundary. Were the boundary to remain midblock, transition regulations would be nearly impossible to get out of. We actually want the transitions as outlined in both the Growth Policy and the DBIP! In fact, another directive in the DBIP, supports a recommendation from resident property owner and architect Jessica Jellison, that if the boundary in this area were to change, it should actually move north in order to rezone the city-owned parking lot to R-A! Page 111 states that “Care should be taken to keep the changes to the boundary as minimal as possible so that they maintain and reinforce the existing downtown and neighborhood areas on either side.” This map below illustrates that rezoning the parking lot (one parcel) is actually a more minimal adjustment to the B-3 boundary than rezoning the church and 3 small homes. Rezoning the parking lot to R-A would more closely implement a recommendation from the 2019 NCOD Final Policy Direction report (colloquially referred to as the Bendon Adams report) which states on page 48, “The established neighborhoods and historic districts located to the south of downtown dictate a very clear boundary between traditional neighborhood development and the B-3 zone; our recommendation, regardless of any of the options presented, is for the City to consider aligning the southern B-3 district boundary with the existing historic districts to the south of Babcock Street.” The DBIP also presents parking data that has become increasingly important to consider in land use decisions since the population explosion resulting from Covid, and recent changes in state law. On page 46 the report includes data from the Western Transportation Institute indicating that this section of downtown was frequently experiencing higher than 85% on-street parking utilization both during the day and in the evenings. 18 individual blocks were called out. “These areas can largely be found around the edges of the study, in the boundary of the Downtown core and the residential neighborhoods where parking regulations around time limits are loosened.” Neighboring residential areas are currently serving as overflow parking for high intensity use of the downtown core. In May of 2025 the Governor signed HB 492 removing Bozeman’s ability to require parking for much of the redevelopment that would happen in B-3. Until Bozeman adds another parking garage downtown, it would be unwise to increase congestion and dysfunction on these narrow historic streets by expanding the B-3 further into residential areas. There may be little appetite among the current commission to rezone the city parking lot at this time. If that is the case, the B-3 line should remain where it is in current code, with the parking lot rezoning on the table as an option in the future. With the B-3 line existing midblock we have some assurance that redevelopment in the core will in fact transition down to the historic neighborhoods to the south. Several public comments have related the incredible history of the structures in the area, and our Growth Policy suggests (page 30, N-4.1) that we as a community want to “Continue to recognize and honor the unique history, neighborhoods, neighborhood character, and buildings that contribute to Bozeman’s sense of place through programs and policy led by both City and community efforts." Aside from the history, the feel of E. Curtiss between S. Tracy and S. Black is very residential in character. The expansion of the B-3 in this location would destroy this character. The final Growth Policy directive that should guide us in this decision is found on page 26, “R-2.9 Long-Term and Lasting Impact: Create long-term gains to the community with solutions that are replicable and sustainable, creating benefit for present and future generations.” We have a duty to future generations to preserve the unique history embodied in our historic neighborhoods. Once destroyed or compromised, we cannot get it back. And as is often found, when we lose the structures, we lose the stories. Locating the B-3 line mid-block will require redevelopment of the B-3 to implement the ZET requirements in the proposed draft UDC. These requirements will result in a gradual stepping down in intensity from the B-3 towards the neighborhoods, which will honor and respect these historic resources so they may be enjoyed by future generations.