Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-27-26 Public Comment - D. Fischer - Re_ Following up on our B3 discussionFrom:Douglas Fischer To:Mary Bateson Cc:Amsden@becklawyers.com; dgc12@hotmail.com; jwebster587@gmail.com; dploseff@gmail.com; lindasemones@hotmail.com; Zehra Osman; mark.campanelli@gmail.com; Jennifer Madgic; Bozeman Public Comment Subject:Re: [EXTERNAL]Re: Following up on our B3 discussion Date:Friday, January 23, 2026 4:56:13 PM Dear Mary (and all), Thank you for the thoughtful follow-up and for laying out your concerns so clearly. Iappreciate your continued engagement on this issue. You asked for further explanation of the reasoning behind my position. I’ll try to be clear and concise. At a high level, my support for the current B3 height limit rests on three considerations. First, I believe downtown is the most appropriate place for Bozeman to accommodate growth.Concentrating development where infrastructure already exists reduces pressure to sprawl outward, supports local businesses, and helps maintain activity and vitality in the city center.In that context, modest additional height is one of the few tools available to absorb growth without expanding the city’s footprint. Second, I weighed competing claims about the impacts of additional height. I take seriouslythe concerns you raise about sunlight, wind, scale, and sense of place. I also hear from planning professionals and practitioners that a 90 foot limit – when paired with other changesto the UDC – does not inevitably produce the harms that are often associated with much taller or more uniform high-rise development. Faced with these differing expert opinions, myjudgment is that the risks are real but not as certain or harmful as they are sometimes framed. Third, process matters. The 90-foot limit emerged from a long and public drafting process for the UDC, informed by staff analysis and advisory board review. Reversing that decision on theeve of implementation would substitute a last-minute Commission judgment for a more deliberative public process – and I am convinced that is a poor way to make policy. You are right that buildings, once constructed, are lasting. That permanence is precisely why Iam cautious about making abrupt changes under deadline pressure. Both 70-foot and 90-foot buildings shape the city for decades; the question is which set of tradeoffs we are prepared toaccept, and how intentionally we make that choice. I have encouraged staff to track how the code functions in practice and to surface issues that merit adjustment – including height and transitions. If problems emerge, I expect us to addressthem through the same public, advisory-driven process that produced the UDC in the first place. I respect that you and I may ultimately disagree on where the appropriate line should bedrawn. I appreciate the seriousness with which you approach this question, and I remain committed to continued public engagement as we evaluate how the new code performs. Best, Douglas Douglas Fischer | Deputy MayorBozeman City Commission 121 N. Rouse St.Bozeman, MT 59715 On Jan 19, 2026, at 5:25 PM, Mary Bateson <mbateson5@gmail.com> wrote:  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 Deputy Mayor Douglas Fisher, I have read and reread your email of Jan 15. 2026, and I would like to engagefurther. Below I include the passages from your email (DF), and my commentsand questions (MB) about what you have said. (1) Governance DF - “I would suggest that neither I nor the City Commission is well-positioned to resolve disputes like this at the 11th hour from the dais.” MB -The City Commission is uniquely positioned to resolve these disputes. It isthe job of the City Commission to do so. (2) ReasonsDF -“…there are many compelling reasons for a taller limit – as well as evidence and arguments that suggest the risks may be less severe or lesscertain than they are sometimes framed. The 90-foot limit was reviewed by various experts and stakeholders – fromstaff to downtown associations to the Community Development Board – before the prior Commission switched it at the last minute, and thenswitched it back. That review did not produce unanimity, but it did surfacetradeoffsFrom my conversations with staff and others, I don’t think our town’sheritage or our ability to secure meaningful resources for affordability is atdire risk. I also feel recent public discussion has discounted the manybenefits of that extra height that led to the current limit.” MB - I would like to hear the reasons that have influenced your decision. I donot see these reasons explained here, just your statements that reasons exist. (3) ”See how it works”DF - “I want to be clear: after such consideration, I do not support rolling theB3 height limit back to 70 feet at this time. …We owe that process and thecommunity time to see how it works. …I have suggested to my fellowcommissioners that we give staff four months to work with the UDC as-is. As staff (and the public) encounter sticking points or problems, I suggest weput those aside in a basket that we then take up and examine. We alreadyhave a few items in that basket now: Transitions and this B3 discussion.Once we have a better picture, we can prioritize and chart a path.” MB - Seeing how a 90-foot building works is an experiment that cannot beretracted. Once we see that “it does not work,” we must live with the 90-footbuilding and its consequences, whether positive or negative. Better to have a real conversation about it before the buildings go up. It is especially importantto have the discussion on what codes are in place before the MLUPA ruleschange the way in which development projects are reviewed, which will virtuallyeliminate substantive public involvement. Thank you for engaging with me and others (who are included on this reply) onthis issue. I look forward to further explanation, and I hope that you are willingto reconsider your position. Sincerely, Mary Bateson, Bozeman resident On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 3:53 PM Douglas Fischer<Douglas.Fischer@bozemanmt.gov> wrote: Dear Jim, Daniel, David, John, Linda, Mark, Mary, and Zehra, Thank you again for taking time out of your Saturday to meet with Jen and me andshare your concerns about the 90-foot height limit in the B3 zoning district. I heard several serious and urgent concerns from all of you – namely that we risk thelivability, culture and history of our town with a 90-foot limit, rather than 70 feet; and that we are foregoing millions of dollars in affordable housing revenue byallowing the extra 20 feet by right. You have asked me to consider these carefully, discuss with my fellow Commissioners, and roll the B3 height limit back to 70 feet while we further debatethe plusses and minuses of tall buildings downtown. I have had a number of conversations with stakeholders both for and against this, as well as with staff and my fellow commissioners. I want to be clear: after suchconsideration, I do not support rolling the B3 height limit back to 70 feet at this time. First, as you have shown, this is a complex issue with significant consequences on both sides. While you have made compelling arguments for a shorter limit, there aremany compelling reasons for a taller limit – as well as evidence and arguments thatsuggest the risks may be less severe or less certain than they are sometimes framed. Second, I would suggest that neither I nor the City Commission is well-positioned toresolve disputes like this at the 11th hour from the dais. We have learned, time andagain, that complex land-use questions are rarely well-served by last-minutedecisions from the dais. The 90-foot limit was reviewed by various experts and stakeholders – from staff todowntown associations to the Community Development Board – before the priorCommission switched it at the last minute, and then switched it back. That review did not produce unanimity, but it did surface tradeoffs that deserve more than an up-or-down vote under deadline pressure. Several of you were present this Tuesday evening as the Commission considered the College St. renovation. That work session offered a master class in goodpolicymaking: Staff took a proposal to the community, listened, had a back-and-forthwith stakeholders, incorporated concerns and found compromises. The process worked not because everyone agreed, but because it allowed concerns tobe tested, refined, and improved before decisions were locked in. We were not at thedais deciding where to put stop signs and crosswalks. The B3 discussion, if we re-open it, would be the opposite: The five of us would bedebating, again at the 11th hour, a technical and consequential issue based on limited,one-way feedback. Finally, we spent almost three years drafting the UDC. It is a good code but acomplex one. We owe that process and the community time to see how it works. I have suggested to my fellow commissioners that we give staff four months to work with the UDC as-is. As staff (and the public) encounter sticking points or problems, Isuggest we put those aside in a basket that we then take up and examine. We alreadyhave a few items in that basket now: Transitions and this B3 discussion. Once wehave a better picture, we can prioritize and chart a path. I share your deep attachment to downtown Bozeman – its scale, its walkability, andthe sense of place that makes it feel like home rather than just a real-estate market.My guiding belief is that Bozeman should accommodate growth deliberately and transparently in places already built to handle it, rather than pushing it outward orfreezing decisions out of fear. Bottom line: I hear the urgency and concern by you and other residents about a 90- foot height limit downtown. From my conversations with staff and others, I don’tthink our town’s heritage or our ability to secure meaningful resources foraffordability is at dire risk. I also feel recent public discussion has discounted themany benefits of that extra height that led to the current limit. I see consequential downsides to a snap decision, and I want to let staff and this community work withthe code as-is for a few months before we make changes. This is not the answer you want, but I deeply appreciate your engagement on this. Douglas Douglas Fischer Bozeman City Commission dfischer@bozeman.net 406-595-5721