HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-01-25 Public Comment - K. Filipovich - Comment on Transitions Zones - MitigationFrom:Karen Filipovich
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Comment on Transitions Zones - Mitigation
Date:Monday, December 1, 2025 8:54:19 AM
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.
Dear Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and Commissioners:
I’m writing in regard to the transitions section in the September 2025 draft UDC. As is stated
in this section, the purpose of transitions is to, “To help mitigate the impacts of Btaller
buildings on lower intensity zoning districts.”
This set of transition standards is an improvement over the current transition requirements
put more differences in density, mass, and height between different zoning districts. This
approach is appreciated.
A few tweaks to the proposed standards would help this section more effectively meet the
section objective quoted above.
Recommendations:
1. Landscaping requirements for all transitions. Currently, there are tree and shrub
requirements for some, but not all transitions between lots, alleys, and fronts of
building on transition zones. Eliminate options that do not include trees as part of a
transition zone. Trees mitigate transition by offering visual, aural and temperature
moderation. No one deserves to live in a heat sink.
2. Set the stepback at two stories for all transitions to RA and RB Zones. Two stories
appears to be 30' for commercial or mixed zones. The wall plate height for RA of 22'and
for RB of 33' are the relevant measures for those living in the residential buildings. In
order to mitigate the effects of a much taller building, the stepback height needs to be
similar to the wall plates, not the overall height of the buildings. Humans spend their
time on the ground and inside on the main flor, not on the peak of their roof.
3. Move alley setback to 10' to match the lot line transition and allow for landscaping to
all residential zones. The current proposal offers 5' of setback on both sides of the
alley, plus something like a 14' easement for the alley. In order to accomodate mature
trees, please increase the setback on the more intense zoning side (B-3, REMU, etc.) to
10' in order to accomodate mature trees.
4. Eliminate the street width loophole by requiring transition across all streets,
especially to RA and RB zones. According to staff in the 11/16 meeting with the
Community Development Advisory Board, it appeared that builders could get around
the 60' requirement by ceding inches or feet as needed. We don't need snaggle tooth
fronts at transition. Additionally, residents of newer developments with slightly wider
street easements also deserve mitigation. If there is a drastic zone change across a
major street like Main Street in the future, there is either the option of the variance
process or the better option of reworking the zoning map itself.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Karen Filipovich