Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-02-19 Public Comment - E. Mason-4 - HRDC Warming Center SiteFrom:Emily Mason To:Sarah Rosenberg; Agenda Cc:Okie Okie; paige culver; Chris Mehl; Cyndy Andrus Subject:Public Comment - City Needs to Deny HRDC SUP Application Date:Saturday, November 02, 2019 7:35:29 AM October 31, 2019 Dear City of Bozeman, I am writing to you to express my extreme concern about the proposed HRDC warming shelter located at 3025 Westridge Dr. I am totally opposed to this proposed site for several reasons, including the sheer number of people that HRDC is hoping to house, the amount of cigarette smoke that will impact the health and quality of life for those living nearby, the proximity to Morning Star Elementary and Sacajawea Middle Schools, and the potential for increased crime. All of which will undoubtedly alter the character of our neighborhood. The sheer number of people HRDC is planning to house is outrageous. The home in question was built in 1981 for a single family, as were all of the other homes in the neighborhood. In 1992, the house was approved to be used as a youth home for about 8 children and two “house parents,” or staff that lived with the children. While not perfect, we accepted the youth home since it in many ways was like another family. The children went to school with our children, the kids played in the yard after school, and the number of people in the home was no more than a large family – two adults with a number of children of varying ages. HRDC’s proposal is so out of line with the character of our neighborhood – 36 people plus two staff members for a total of 38 people?! That’s tantamount to building a motel in our R1, single family home neighborhood! We bought houses in this neighborhood in large part because it’s quiet and safe. The city can’t keep moving the goal posts on it’s constituents. Bussing 36 people across town seems like an attempt to solve one problem by creating a host of other problems. And it’s simply an ill-conceived idea. HRDC is on the record, saying multiple times, that they acknowledge the site is a terrible location! Shuttles rumbling into our neighborhood at 7am and 7pm, seven days a week, idling their engines out in front of the house and staff changes at 1am will be a major disruption to the character of our quiet neighborhood. I have called HRDC and asked them to consider lowering the number to be more in line with the character of our neighborhood. They said no. I asked them to make the proposed site a non-smoking facility. They said no to that, also. Clearly, they have no concern for the surrounding neighbors. What if a child lives nearby and suffers from asthma or an elderly neighbor is battling cancer? Thirty-six individuals puffing away on cigarettes for hours at night and then for two hours in the early morning cannot be good for anyone’s health, much less those with compromised immune systems. Another big concern of mine, shared by most of the parents of the 1400 kids who attend Morning Star Elementary and Sacajawea Middle School, is the close proximity that the shelter would be to those schools. To not take into consideration, or even worse, to try and minimize the major “behavioral issues” many of the HRDC clients have (as quoted by an HRDC official in the NBC Montana piece that aired recently), is simply irresponsible. It is simply a terrible idea to place such a shelter that close to an elementary school and a middle school. Clearly, the city needs to go back to the drawing board with Ordinance 1997 and set some clearer boundaries for acceptable locations for these types of emergency housing applications. Many of the 1400 children walk or bike to school. By approving this application, the city is accepting responsibility for anything, god forbid, that threatens the safety and well-being of our children. Why and how HRDC bought this $429,000 home is a wonder, given how they say they need more funding. Was there some sort of wink and a nod from the city that a SUP would be approved regardless of public outcry? Why would they spend that much money on a house they didn’t know was a slam-dunk approval unless the city made it clear that they had nothing to worry about? HRDC has said they have knocked on neighbors’ doors and sent letters to those who are impacted by this decision. A neighbor I spoke with lives three doors down and hasn’t received anything about the proposed shelter. Is she not impacted? The problem with this so-called “outreach strategy” is that when a shelter is less than 300 feet from an elementary school and a few hundred feet from a middle school hundreds of people are impacted – not just those within 100 feet of the proposed shelter. There are many churches in this community that would be much better suited for housing these individuals overnight than a R1, single family neighborhood. I think of Grace Bible Church or Hope Lutheran – there wouldn’t be anyone nearby that could smell that much cigarette smoke or have their health dangerously compromised by all those cigarettes being smoked for hours on end. Shuttles rumbling in and out at odd hours, including staff changes at 1am – no neighbors to disrupt at those churches. Why hasn’t HRDC reached out to more churches to house the women and families? It's pretty obvious why HRDC is refusing to hold another public meeting on their proposed site. We all know it's because it would give those hundreds of concerned parents a united platform to voice their concerns - and it would be extremely obvious to all that the shelter should not be approved. Honestly, it's a cowardly approach. Given the amount of public comments (over 100 and growing), the city needs to say no to this ill-conceived homeless center in an R-1 zone for 38 individuals in a single-family home less than 300 feet from an elementary school. Thank you in advance for making the common-sense decision to deny the HRDC Special Use permit. Emily Mason Westridge Dr. Figgins resident, parent of Morning Star and Sacajawea school children.