HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-05-18 Public Comment - E. Sirr - Strategic PlanFrom:Web Admin
To:Chuck Winn
Subject:Strategic Plan Comment Form
Date:Thursday, April 05, 2018 1:05:09 PM
A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted.
Form Name:Strategic Plan Comment Form
Date & Time:04/05/2018 1:04 PM
Response #:46
Submitter ID:6006
IP address:172.24.96.111
Time to complete:5 min. , 23 sec.
Survey Details
Page 1
We want to hear from you!
First Name Emma
Last Name Sirr
Email sirremma@gmail.com
Questions or Comments
This outline of the strategic plan is far to vague and devoid of detail for me to comment adequately on the
issues and goals addressed, so I have extrapolated the general statements in the plan to include the detail I
would like to see in the final strategic plan. I don't know if a more detailed document exists, that has not
been released yet.
In the first sentence under "Vision" : "Bozeman remains" makes it sound like the goal of this plan is not to
actively improve Bozeman, but to attempt to keep it the same as it grows. This is not realistic, nor is
Bozeman already the perfect utopia described in the remainder of the sentence: "a safe, inclusive
community, fostering civic engagement and creativity, with a thriving diversified economy, a strong
environmental ethic, and a high quality of life as our community grows and changes." These are laudable
things to aspire to, but Bozeman is not already there. We should not be patting ourselves on the back
before we have even begun to address the challenges ahead.
I agree wholeheartedly with the goals in this vision, but there is too much room to interpret these goals as
one wishes which is worrying. Bozeman needs a clear path forward if we want to put the environment and
quality of life before the interests of those seeking to make a profit from development. Above all we need
to be creative! Using these cookie-cutter street and neighborhood plans is limiting alternative
transportation and affordable (under 250,000) dollar housing.
Safety:
My main issue here is the biking/pedestrian infrastructure.
Bike-ability: This is a major concern for me and many other people my age (24 year old recent MSU STEM
graduate).
The major thing Bozeman is largely missing: Separated (protected) Bike lanes as the most common form of
bike avenue.
The following is a good article - I have removed one quote that I think most cyclist would agree with:
" 'Many cities are investing in the 2 percent who already bike, not the 98 percent who don’t,' said Penalosa,
citing trail maps, bike parking, racks on buses and lines on streets. These are all well and good, but the only
thing that will attract new riders is making them feel safe on the road... [Creating a bike-able town] takes
two things: slowing speeds down to 20 mph or less, and separating bike lanes from roadways with raised
curbs, planters or dedicated streets." - https://knightfoundation.org/articles/want-build-bikeable-city-
focus-those-who-dont-bike
Intelligent, well thought out, creative design can help Bozeman build a bike infrastructure that costs the
same or less than normal road/bike lane/sidewalk combo and it will literally save lives, and decrease traffic.
Thus far, Bozeman has installed the minimum 5 ft. bike lane on many roads, just enough to be able to check
the box of being "bike-friendly" on paper. I have biked my entire life (to school and work, in every season, in
Missoula, Helena, and Gardiner MT). I have also traveled much more than most Montanans to Asia, Africa,
New Zealand, and to most of Europe, including Amsterdam and Copenhagen (two of the most bike friendly
cities in the world), and I can you that Bozeman is not bike friendly. There is a reason when you started
gathering public input on your strategic plan that a safe route for cyclists/kids to school and home came up
so often. Because it doesn't exist, and people doubt it ever will the way roads are currently being developed
(see the current Rouse expansion project) - sidewalks and narrow bike lanes = cookie cutter.
Biking should be one of the fastest and safest ways to get to works and school, that is the only way to get
more people to bike. I wish I only needed to drive my car on the weekends to go out of town on hiking or
mountain biking forays. I already get my groceries and do other errands by bike year round, but sometimes
it is not worth the risk and as traffic worsens I will bike less and less, which of course will only add my car to
the traffic.
Growing up in Montana, I understand all to well that many people dislike cyclists and purposely crowd them
or even hit them. I have had several friends hit by cars, I was hit myself in high school in Helena MT, by a
woman who was looking for cars, but not bikes and plowed right into me. Montana drivers have no clue
how to drive around bikes, and many college kids and adults bike around without helmets and in disregard
of biking laws. This speaks to a lack of education, but much of the educational effort in Bozeman (the bike
kitchen, MSU efforts, etc....) is focused on educating cyclists not divers. Yet, those who drive but have no
idea what it is like to be a cyclist are the greatest threat to bike safety in Bozeman. In addition, the XXL size
of many trucks in Bozeman, means they crowd cyclists without even meaning to. It's terrifying when a huge
truck comes up behind you on Wallace St. at 35 mph (yes its a 25 mph zone, but I bike that route every day
twice, people speed very frequently. Also, Wallace is supposed to be a "bike route." Hardly anyone knows
what "bike route" means!? Most cyclists don't have a clue and most drivers, if they notice the tiny green
signs, have no idea what it means. I used to just think it meant this was a street bikes often used.
Also, plow bike lanes! Don't just plow snow and leaves into them. Isn't that obvious? We need to build bike
lanes so that they don't have to end up as snow storage areas in the winter.
Bozeman is very unsafe for cyclists. I've read Bozeman's Transportation Master Plan and the classification of
roads in there for biking safety is extremely inaccurate. Just because a road is residential, or has bike route
signs doesn't make it safe for bikes! I have seen the phrase "experienced cyclist" and "comfortable in
traffic" in the Transportation Master Plan. I would argue that no one on a bike should feel comfortable in
traffic, especially in a town with so many bad drivers and drivers from different states who drive very
differently from the locals creating more variability. I feel like I am being brave and doing something risky
(stupid) when I bike in traffic. I never want to do it, I only do it because there is no other place to go. I was
also curious why, bike and pedestrian overpasses and underpasses were not mentioned in the
Transportation Master Plan ? I assume cost is the major reason.
I live 5 miles from work (one side of town to the other) but I still try to bike year round, except at a certain
point it is not worth the risk to my health. So then I run (I've had several cars blow through stop signs in
front of me while running too) or I drive; which I never want to do, but I can't run 10 miles 5 days a week,
every week, all winter. I've tried taking Streamline, but I still have a a mile and 1.5 mile gap on either end I'd
need to run to get to home and work, so it's not worth it. I could run strait to work faster. I like Streamline,
but for me in particular it doesn't help with the commute. If the routes were extended say out to Story Mill
and to the area past Museum of the Rockies than I would use it to commute more often in winter.
There are many people who want to bike, who love to bike in Bozeman, but the cookie cutter -
unimaginative road planning it stifling our resolve to keep biking. Montanan's are not the best drivers, and I
include myself in that, so cyclists need the city infrastructure to protect them from terrifyingly wide and
aggressively driven trucks.
Even protected bike lanes that are not plowed in the winter would be better than what the city is doing
now. At least it would be safe to bike when there is no or very little snow. When it is snowy the bike lanes
are heaped with snow from the plow anyways so they might as well not exist. There are many many designs
for protected/separated bike lanes online with various price tags and safety rankings.
Affordable Housing:
This is a huge issue for Bozeman and many other towns, I am hoping the city will handle it well and push
back against the developers when necessary. I read in the BDC recently hat 56% of Bozeman families and
individuals are renting instead of buying a house right now. That is insane. I was renting and now I am living
in a cabin on my parents property, I feel much the same as I imagine everyone does right now. There is no
house I can afford that is worth the money. Plus property taxes are so high in Bozeman why would I buy a
house at the moment? Fresh out of college young people cannot afford to stay in Bozeman - hence "The
Brian Drain" as college youth refers to it. Bozeman is loosing those " skilled and creative people" you say
you want to attract in #2 on the first page of this vision statement.
I agree 100% that we should develop upwards not outwards. In order to do this the city will have to impose
laws and restrictions on developers, they will not do what is good for the community or the environment
unless they are forced to. If the city does not use laws to regulate development Bozeman will become the
next Jackson Hole or Fort Collins. A town built for tourists not locals with Sprawl in every direction. I would
love to believe Bozeman will buck the trend, but what I have seen so far does not make me hopeful. I would
like to see evidence that the City of Bozeman understands what affordable housing means. I would like to
see an exhaustively detailed definition and preferably some law saying housing cannot be advertised as
affordable unless it meets these requirements and a certain % of new development needs to meet these
cost/energy efficiency requirements. I don't know if something like this already exists, if it does it is not
stringent enough.
Economy: We need to stop the brain-drain and high quality of life, alternative transportation, affordable
housing, focus on the environment and on local culture are all ways that we can attract and retain
intelligent young people. I know many companies are only here because of the outdoors and quality of life,
if those are damaged Bozeman could loose some of it's best high-tech employers to California, Texas, or
Colorado. As an employee of one of those companies I don't want to see that happen.
Attracting tourists is good for the economy, but I would like to see more detail in your plan of how we will
cope with this influx of people and vehicles in both the summer and winter. Will the city enact a resort tax
like other towns (whitefish MT for example) have done? What about a gas tax? That would be a tangible
way to fulfill your commitment to the economy and the environment. Plus the gas tax has not been
adjusted for inflation in decades - so really this is a no-brainer.
Quality of life: What is included in your benchmark for that? more detail please. My benchmark would
include "Environment!" This includes clean water, clean air, healthy environmental development practices,
enforcement of littering laws, etc...
It is not enough to "cultivate a strong environmental ethic," to me that says "we are not going to make any
inconvenient laws to protect the environment in and around Bozeman, because that would make
developers unhappy, so we are going to make a politically correct statement like 'cultivate a strong
environmental ethic' which requires us to do absolutely nothing to protect trees, grasslands, deer, bears,
clean water, or any of the things that make Montana the last best place."
Likewise, "promote environmentally sustainable businesses and lifestyles" tells me the city will not be
obligated to do anything tangible, like enforce littering laws, outlaw plastic containers and Styrofoam
takeout, get rid of plastic bags in grocery stores, expand the city bus and bike network network. People
generally do not make inconvenient choices unless they are made to by law. It is basic human nature.
Some thoughts on Development:
Best practices are a great place to start, but Bozeman should craft custom solutions to our problems not do
the bare minimum outlined in many development and housing best practice models. For example, when
the speed limit on a road (say Bridger drive is 45 mph and people frequently drive faster than that should
we follow the best practice of a 5 foot minimum bike lane on either side of the road? Common sense says
no, that a much faster speed limit than the 25 mph residential roads the 5 foot bike lane is meant for, this
bike lane should be either much wider or it should be separated from the road as a multi-use path, and we
can do away with the sidewalk.
Also why do all sidewalks have to be strait no matter how easy it would be to go around the 100+ year old
tree? There is a sidewalk on Wallace that goes around a big old tree. We need to practice what we preach
when it comes to environmentalism and preserving nature in the city limits. There is a huge difference
between a large old tree and newly planted seedlings - developers shouldn't be allowed to get a way with
cutting down all those years of growth and replacing them with seedlings that will have to grow up in the
world of climate-change.
Montana is a dry and hot place in the summer, and things grow very slowly here, we need these large,
cooling old trees to stay.
I recently watched a whole mini-ecosystem with large trees cut down outside my work to make room for a
road trough the center of two fields. It would have been so easy to move the road just a few feet to one
side or the other and save all that growth along the edge of the road. Those were the only large trees close-
by! Now its just flat dry fields. The city needs to put it's foot down on contractors and developers, they are
not going to choose to be environmentally conscious on their own. I cannot stress this point enough.
There is no detail under "2.3 workforce development" so it is difficult to offer constructive feedback.
1.3 Public agencies collaboration
It would also be nice to see the city take in input from places like the bike kitchen and various other bike
organizations around town when it comes to designing bike infrastructure. The only people who can give
you a plan that will work are those who will be using it.
Public Transit:
I love the fact that Streamline is free, I hope it can stay that way. That is something I would happily pay
taxes for.
"Public transit should be comfortable, affordable and efficient. But that’s not all.
Public transit should be accessible from all parts of the city, to give people choice.
Public transit should be attractive. For example, when a bus is designed to look like a trolley, people have
more positive reactions.
Public transit should send a message that those who ride it are important."
- https://knightfoundation.org/articles/want-build-bikeable-city-focus-those-who-dont-bike
I am very passionate about Bozeman, because I have enjoyed living here much more than Helena, Gardiner,
or Missoula. I hope my feedback was not too harsh/honest, I have thought about this a lot and I would love
to be more involved. I can foresee Bozeman becoming somewhere I do not want to live or raise a family in
another 10 years, and I desperately want to prevent that from happening. I am at that point in my life, at 24
where I am thinking about where I would like to live long term. If Bozeman does a good job with
development, especially environmentally and with alternative transportation, I will probably stay here. If
not, that will be encouragement for me to look elsewhere for a job and a thriving outdoor community.
Thanks for reading my thoughts, (if you made it this far) :)
Thank you,
City Of Bozeman
This is an automated message generated by the Vision Content Management System™. Please do not reply
directly to this email.