HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-25-16 Public Comment - M. Hennessy - Golden Gate January 9, 2016
City Clerk's Office
Attn: City Commission
PO Box 1230
121 North Rouse Avenue
Bozeman, MT 59771
Re: Golden Gate Condominiums (development application)
City Commissioners:
The purpose of this letter is to explain our opposition to the Golden Gate Condominium project, as it is
currently proposed. We have reviewed the proposed plans, as well as the original development
application for Loyal Gardens and the amended plat that was recommended for approval by the
Bozeman Planning Department in 2013.
We understand that the Planning Department has determined that the proposed development complies
with the current zoning of the property (R-4 Residential High Density) and the City's Uniform
Development Code (UDC). However, there are significant problems that with this project that are not
addressed by the UDC. Based on these problems (outlined below), we urge the City Commission to
intervene by providing the Planning Department with additional guidance for their review of the
development of this property.
Anticipated Density/Population
The proposed 84-unit development results in a density that is far in excess of what was anticipated
in the original subdivision application for Loyal Gardens. This was clear in the application's
engineering reports, such as water and sewer demands and parkland dedication. These
calculations used density estimates in the range of 12 to 14 units per acre. A density of 25 units per
acre for this 3.3 acre lot was certainly not anticipated, and would be unprecedented in Bozeman. It
follows that the total population living in the Loyal Gardens subdivision would be increased from
—500 to over 600 people (20%or more).
Density without buffering
According to the UDC,the minimum density of Residential High Density(R-4) is considered to be 8
units per acre. The proposed development has an approximate density of 25 units per acre. The
rest of the subdivision has a density of 4 units per acre. This density is unprecedented in Bozeman,
and is simply too high without an adequate buffer between these two different types of use and
density.
The only buffer that existed between the R-4 and R-3 was eliminated in October of 2013 when the
area that is now across Golden Gate Avenue from the proposed Golden Gate Condominiums was
re-zoned to R-3 and the plat was amended to divide an R-4 parcel into six lots for single family
homes (consistent with the rest of the subdivision). By it's approval,the City inadvertently placed
single family lots directly across Golden Gate Avenue from the future R-4 land use. The original plat
F
at
ted within
appeared to do a much better job of buffering the different residential
d antaans uses
cohmmon'salley between
subdivision by placing the "backs' of the different-use structures
each other, rat
her than the "fronts" of the different-use structures facing each other. This is a basic
principal in land use planning.
Health &Safety
If the current plan is approved without changes to require buffering, our neighborhood will have
two 40+ft tall 12-plex apartment buildings directly across to thereet y proposed planom these e we family
re lots,
and the the
y will be only 16 ft from the sidewalk. Without changes s in our neighborhood. These problems may not
certain to have significant and persistent problem
b e limited to the obvious issues that come to mind (traffic, parking, aesthetics, etc.). For example,
health and safety is a concern under several different scenario
height to prevent therst, it is our collapse of burning that a
safe firefighting distance from a structure is 1.5 times its g fight a fire m the
structures onto the fire trucks and firefighters. This means that in order to safely gon the
two 12-plex apartment buildings,the fire trucks would have to be over the curb, up
boulevard portion of lawns on the opposite opposite side of Golden Gate Avenue. Cars parked on
is safe
this side of the street would prevent the trucks from being able all of the on street spaces on the
since the parking requirements for the 84 units require use o usable width
north side of Golden Gate Avenue, cars are certain vehicles the size of fie trucks t y ng to fight a fire from
of the street would likely be a problem for ve
Golden Gate Avenue, or trying to enter the parking lot. Secondly,ielfam'family lots across the street.re trucks fighting a fire in either
And
of the two 12-plex units would be blocking access to the sing
city firetruck has a small enough turning radius
lastly, it is not clear from the parking layout that a
to navigate through the parking lot to the 18-plex buildings or the 24-plex building. Has the Fire
Department reviewed this project?
Traffic
it is our understanding that a traffic impact study was not required for this development because
the developer claimed in the application that traffic impacts were considered in the traffic study
the original development application for Loyal Gardens. This claim is
that was required by now over 10 years old, only
irresponsible, as well as disingenuous. The original traffic study,
addr
essed the impact on the major adjacent roads outside of Loyal (Huffine, Cottonwood,
vision
etc.). No consideration was given to traffic within the sue dither streets within the subdivision. Yet
The width of Golden Gate Avenue is no different than th
t of a single driveway. At full build
all traffic generated by this development will be forced onto GoldenGate Avenue. It's very difficult
(and painful)to imagine—160 to 170 cars coming and going ly disturbed across the subdivision that
out, Loyal Gardens will have 136 single family units uniform osed unprecedented density
utilizes a total of 14,000 lineal feet of road and alley access. The prop
of 84 units (25 units per acre) only utilizes-2,000 lineal feet of road access. When broken down to
distribution of unit per foot of access or"congestion efirmsach 'that traffic onngle family �Golden t has OGate will access
and each condo unit only has 24 LFT of access. This con
and
4 times more congestion than any other street in d to other streets in the subdivision.
subdivision. Advance
experience compare
Alpha Drive will also be affected disproportionately
This new concentration of internal traffic impact seems excessive and we believe the City needs to
i
exercise its right to request anew traffic study that focuses on the impacts of this traffic on the
existing streets within Loyal Gardens as a requirement for development of this lot.
Stormwater
The stormwater retention plan appears to rely on underground retention chambers in order to
minimize the area required for retention ponds, in order to further maximize the density of housing
units. It should be noted that underground retention chambers are only effective for stormwater
detention when they are empty prior to a storm event. The presence of groundwater above the
elevation of the bottom of these retention chambers means that they will be at least partially full,
and not be fully useful for stormwater retention. It should also be noted that the depth to
groundwater in Loyal Gardens is notoriously shallow. And the proposed development is at the
downhill end of Loyal Gardens, and is bounded on both the east and the west sides by wetlands
with standing water, cattails, etc. Given that the proposed density and layout relies on minimizing
the area for stormwater detention ponds by shifting much of the total required stormwater
detention volume from detention ponds to underground retention chambers,the viability of the
proposed design/layout should be questioned by the Design Review Board (DRB) in consideration
of the fact that the detention chambers may well be permanently full or partially full of
groundwater.
It is clear that the design of the proposed development was taken to the absolute maximum of what is
allowed by the various applicable regulations, and probably beyond what is allowed in some aspects.
Now we need the City Commission that represents us to invoke good judgment by intervening to pull
back this development to what is compatible with the neighborhood, reasonable for its location and still
compliant with the R-4 high density residential zoning. It is still very possible for this property to be
developed with a density well in excess of the minimum of 8 units per acre for R-4, and with more
reasonable and responsible buffers from the adjacent densities of 4 units per acre. For example, see the
attached layout showing five 8,100 square foot lots fronting Golden Gate,with three multi-unit buildings
containing—45 units. This would yield a density of—15 units per acre.
We recognize the need for affordable housing in Bozeman and we understand that this is achieved, in
part, by higher densities. But doesn't the unprecedented density that is proposed really belong closer to
the center of town or campus, rather than at the outskirts of the City limits? And wouldn't ultra-high
density development like this be more successful if it could rely on its residents using small cars,
bicycling, and walking to destinations such as work, shopping areas,campus or downtown? Loyal
Gardens is 3 miles from campus and 3.5 miles from the center of downtown...any further west and you
are not even in the City limits!
Regards,
Ve
I/t e. E 1 4AL05S (Name)
,c1 r (Address)
44T, m7/
Enclosures: One possible layout that would restore buffers and result in a density of 15 units per acre
•
�1! O r-I 1; E � f .�l'l _;�,' `i�r l i y...�T'y�; •:f� i
4-4
a `
4-)
O
a
O Ul
t r
si
U] 44
44
'"y�} `#s ♦A k-+� ¢,mkt.
Ei N Pa f ,
lip
IN
{ yy A
i
' ��` a i' '•� ��`',y.�� ,fit !\
v
V r
11
d
c
��„ row 1 ® �.i �� + � �•,
�y \•-:.
N
�1• '1 r s`: s ��� r
s
r