HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-25-19 Public Comment - A. and A. Bekkerman - HRDC Warming Center SiteFrom:Amy Bekkerman
To:Sarah Rosenberg; Agenda
Cc:Anton Bekkerman
Subject:3025 Westridge HRDC Warming Center Questions
Date:Friday, October 25, 2019 11:21:43 AM
Attachments:HRDC_to_city.docx
Hi Sarah and team,
I'd like to reach out regarding the proposed HRDC Warming Center on 3025 Westridge Drive. We live at the
property directly adjacent to the proposed location and have a number of questions about the plan and explanation
that HRDC has published. We have met with several HRDC representatives and attended the October 15 meeting
but have remaining questions that we'd like to have clarified. Specifically, following the Tuesday, October 15,
meeting and a house-to-house visit from HRDC staff, we felt that our specific concerns had been addressed.
Unfortunately, some of the things that we were told by HRDC staff do not appear to align with (or directly
contradict) the documents submitted to the City Planning Division.
We understand that the speed with which HRDC is pursuing the permitting process is directly related to their desire
to have a safe, warm space for guests of the warming center, but we are concerned that this haste is creating
pushback from the neighborhood and confusion as regards their management plan. There are multiple internal
inconsistencies in their policy guidelines as well as information that contradicts verbal statements made by HRDC
staff.
I'd like to stress that we do not oppose HRDC's efforts to implement a warming center at the Westridge location.
However, because we would be immediate neighbors of the Warming Center, we are concerned about issues of
public health and safety, and the contradictory statements made by HRDC representatives have created significant
uncertainty that the Warming Center location will maintain the neighborhood environment of public safety and
health that has heretofore existed. Again, we understand the need for facilities such as the proposed Warming
Center, but would like further clarification.
I am attaching a document that outlines our concerns. We have also reached out to HRDC directly to discuss these
issues.
Thank you,
Amy and Anton Bekkerman
We did not originally intend to submit feedback regarding the proposed HRDC overflow
warming center at 3025 Westridge Drive. There is a need in the Bozeman community for such
facilities, and the Westridge building is designed to handle more people than the average single-
family home. HRDC has a track clear record of providing necessary services and their goals are
admirable. Following the Tuesday, October 15, meeting and a house-to-house visit from HRDC
staff, we felt that our specific concerns had been addressed. Unfortunately, some of the things
that we were told by HRDC staff do not appear to align with the documents that they have
submitted to the City Planning Division. This is troubling.
As the neighbors closest to the proposed facility, one of our great concerns was the
potential for noise, odors, litter, and public health issues from multiple individuals smoking
taking place outside the building. We were assured that smoking would occur during designated,
monitored “smoke breaks” and that these would be as “low impact” as possible. However, the
Westridge Operations Handbook submitted to the City Planning Division and available at
http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/198005/Electronic.aspx lists monitored smoke
breaks at 8pm, 9pm, 10pm, and 5am (page 4) or 6am (page 8) (there is a discrepancy as to the
time for the morning smoke break). Additionally, the 6am smoke break noted on page 8 “does
not require supervision because it coincides with the first wake up announcement.” A further
smoke break at 1am is noted in the Executive Summary that has been distributed. We are
concerned about the potential for noise, odors, litter, and public health issues at these times of
day, particularly at 1 in the morning. A much more detailed plan needs to be publicized and an
indication of how these rules will be enforced (and consequences if they are not enforced) need
to be provided.
At several points during the Tuesday, October 15, meeting, HRDC staff assured the
gathered community that guests of the warming center were not permitted to leave the facility
without an escort. This was clarified at least twice, and Shari Eslinger specifically noted that if a
guest were to want to leave, the police would be called to provide them with an escort. However,
tThe Westridge Operations Handbook submitted to the City Planning Division and available at
http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/198005/Electronic.aspx states specifically that
“those who choose to leave the property after checking in will not be able to return until the
following night. If a staff or volunteer witness a guest leaving the property, they will need to
inform the guest that they are not permitted to return until the following night” (p. 8). This
directly contradicts what we were told on multiple occasions at the community meeting.
Additionally, the handbook states that “if a guest is asked to leave the premises and
refuses to do so, contact Bozeman Police Department…” (p. 8) This implies that a guest of the
warming center could be asked to leave, exit the building, and then be free to go. Further, “the
Warming Center reserves the right to require guests with a history of inappropriate behavior to
leave the premises. … The Warming Center is not responsible for the health and safety of a guest
once they have been asked to leave the premises.” (p. 15) Similarly, “If a guest is being unruly or
presents a danger to himself or herself, other guest, volunteers, or staff, the guest should be told
to leave. If the guest refuses to leave, contact local police for assistance in removing the guest”
and “If a guest cannot follow the stipulations of the Participant Agreement, he or she should be
told to leave” (p. 17). The neighborhood in the vicinity is extremely residential. There is no other
place to go, and the nearest Streamline stop is over a mile away on Kagy Boulevard. As such,
Warming Center guests who leave the property may seek shelter in nearby homes (causing a
disturbance) and could potentially act behave in a way that would cause property and/or personal
damage to residents in the neighborhood. Because our property is directly adjacent to the
proposed Warming Center location, we are particularly concerned about these issues and the
HRDC has provided convoluted answers as to how it plans to address this. Again, we are
concerned at this direct contradiction of what we were told at the Community Meeting and
disturbed that a problematic individual could be asked to leave without further indications as to
where they should go or who will be responsible for transporting them.
We were told that all individuals would be at the center by 7:30, but page 8 of the
handbook states that “a secondary shuttle will pick up again at the 32 Tracy Main office at
8:30pm.” Again, this contradicts what were told about bus traffic in and around the facility.
Additionally, page 18 of the handbook indicates that “returning guests may no longer check in”
beginning at 11pm. The Participant Agreement included as an appendix to the Warming Center
Handbook also states that check in is 7pm to 11pm. WeI assume that this is a typo based on
procedures at the main warming center handbook, but weI would like this point clarified. We
were also told that all guests would be leaving simultaneously at 7am using Galavan
transportation. Page 18 of the Warming Center Handbook indicates that the front door of the
facility will be unlocked at 5am and “guests may come and go as they please.” This contradicts
what we were told earlier and again crates public safety concerns.
The Participant Agreement included as an appendix to the Warming Center Handbook
requires guests to agree that “I shall hold all participating staff and volunteers—including HRDC
Warming Center agents, volunteers, employees, officers, and directors—free and harmless from
any claim or liability that may arise as a result of my stay.” If this is the case, who is liable in the
(admittedly extremely unlikely) possibility of property damage to adjacent homes or personal
harm to nearby residents?
Finally, HRDC’s Special Use Permit (SUP) application does not address Sec.
38.360.130.B: “The density of residents in a group living use is limited to generally approximate
and correspond with the density limits that apply to other types of housing in residential zoning
districts.” Specifically, areas zoned R1 require 1,250 square feet of lot space per resident. At
14,244 square feet, this is equivalent to 11.39 residents. How does the HRDC intend to address
this discrepancy? The SUP application also fails to identify any additional public health, safety
and general welfare, ignoring the cumulative effect of multiple smoke breaks every day. The
impact of one or two neighbors in a single-family home who smoke outside is not comparable to
up to 36 individuals taking hourly, 15-minute smoke breaks. These are not insurmountable
issues, but we want to understand the steps that HRDC intends to take to minimize their impacts.
Again, weI want to emphasize that we do not oppose HRDC’s use of the facility located
at 3025 Westridge Drive as an overflow warming center. What concerns us are the discrepancies
between HRDC’s verbal statements at the community meeting of Tuesday, October 15, and
documents submitted to the City Planning Division. If these incongruities can be addressed, we
will once again feel comfortable welcoming the HRDC to our neighborhood.