HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-23-26 Public Comment - E. Talago - Public Comment to Transportation Board re_ BHS RPPDFrom:Emily Talago
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Cc:Nicholas Ross
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Public Comment to Transportation Board re: BHS RPPD
Date:Tuesday, June 23, 2026 3:28:05 PM
Attachments:Transportation Board Comment BHS RPPD.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.
Please see the attached comment and circulate to the board members in advance of their
meeting tomorrow evening. With gratitude,
Emily Talago
Board Members,
I am writing regarding Agenda Item I.1 and urge the Transportation Advisory Board to recommend
maintaining the Bozeman High School Residential Parking Permit District.
Before drafting this email, I reached out to members of the neighborhood association who reside within
the district boundaries. Those residents were not directly engaged regarding this agenda item and were
largely unaware that the future of the district was being discussed. That alone suggests this conversation
may be premature. It seems reasonable that the people most directly affected should have an
opportunity to weigh in. The city has their contact information.
Parking is also one of those topics that never fails to generate strong opinions. It may be Bozeman's most
consistently contentious issue. Regardless of where one falls in the debate, I think we can agree on a
basic principle: before retiring a management tool, there should be a compelling reason to do so.
The data presented does not appear to provide that reason. The district continues to pay for itself.
Revenues have increased despite a decline in permit numbers this year. Citation activity remains
significant. If anything, fluctuations in citation volume may reflect enforcement staffing capacity as much
as parking demand. Nothing in the staff slides suggests the district is failing.
State law and local policy have fundamentally altered the parking equation. The Legislature has
effectively determined that units under 1,200 square feet need not provide off-street parking. Regardless
of whether one supports that policy, vehicles do not disappear simply because parking requirements do.
Within a few blocks of this district, more than a thousand approved housing units are in various stages of
development. Much of that growth has yet to materialize on the ground. I hope your discussion focuses
less on whether parking pressure exists today and more on if the City should voluntarily surrender a
proven parking management tool immediately before a substantial increase in nearby residential density.
At a minimum, maintaining the district preserves options while the community gains a better
understanding of the impacts of growth already approved.
I would also encourage the Board to think about a bigger picture issue: approximately 73% of Bozeman
subdivisions are governed by private CCRs. As a result, a relatively small number of core neighborhoods
are absorbing a disproportionate share of the density and affordability mandates being adopted at both
the state and local level. Those neighborhoods deserve practical tools to manage resulting impacts on
public infrastructure, including curb space.
The InterNeighborhood Council previously recommended that neighborhoods subject to reduced or
eliminated parking minimums should have access to managed parking tools when warranted. I believe
that recommendation remains relevant today, and there would be value in a future board work session
dedicated to neighborhood parking management strategies.
This is a topic of growing interest within Midtown. Several neighbors and I have engaged a quantitative
analyst with a Ph.D. in mathematics from Montana State University to help develop a technically
defensible parking benefit unit allocation model based on the assessed costs and assigned privileges
associated with public street space. The work incorporates amortized reconstruction costs, maintenance
costs, curb cuts, public safety allocations, and other factors affecting use of the public right-of-way. This
effort is being conducted on a volunteer capacity basis and transportation staff and economic
development staff are aware of it.
One reason we undertook this work is that the City's Parking Benefit Zone/Parking Management District
tool, adopted in August 2020 via Ordinance 2033, has, unsurprisingly, not yet been meaningfully
implemented. In our estimation, this is because the highly prescriptive permit allocation details were
established without the underlying quantitative framework necessary to make the tool broadly
defensible or adaptable across different conditions.
Rather than removing one of the few existing managed parking tools currently in use, I would encourage
the Board to focus on refining and operationalizing the City's existing framework. The goal should be a
Parking Benefit Zone/Parking Management District tool that is technically reflective of costs and truly
plug-and-play, so that it can be deployed when warranted without requiring reinvention or ad hoc
calibration each time.
As growth continues and parking minimums continue to disappear, neighborhoods will seek managed
parking tools. Will the City have a reliable, pre-vetted framework ready when they do?
Please do not recommend removing this district. If future conditions demonstrate it is no longer
necessary, that discussion can occur then. But it is far easier to modify an existing program than to
dismantle it now and attempt to recreate it later.
Thank you for your consideration.
Emily Talago