HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-22-21 Public Comment D. Brawner - Buffalo Run 2 Diane L. Brawner
106 Village Downtown Blvd
Bozeman, MT, 59715
January 22, 2021
City of Bozeman City Commission
ATTN.- Cyndy Andrus, mayor, and Terry Cunningham, I-Ho Pomeroy, and Michael Wallman
Regarding Application 20112 for rezoning and development:
I am addressing the City Commission directly to rp otest the proposed R5 rezoning develop-
ment, and annexation of the 20.79 acres adjacent to my 40 acre parcel that borders the
proposed development of Buffalo Run along Fowler and my additional 40 acre parcel that
borders the Meadowcreek subdivision along Kurk and 27th. I have written to Chris Saunders
separately, but what I draw to your attention here involves the City and County Commission.
I am the sole owner of these property/parcels which are currently in City of Bozeman payback
districts. My 2 parcels are legally described as:
S23 T02 S R05 E, C.O.S. 1861 Tract A NE4SW4 40.773AC 06-0798-23-3-01-50-0000
S23 T02 S R05 E, C.O.S. Tract 1 Section 23 2S 5E 40.735AC COS 2074 06-0798-23-3-01-10-
0000
In my January 7th, 2021 communication to Chris Saunders prior to the Zoning Commission
meeting, I did not use the term "protest" as required by State Law. And since that January 11th
Zoning meeting, I have learned of additional, applicable reasons to protest this large
development (see below.)
I realize that development in the Bozeman area is inevitable. In fact, I have complied with
THREE past requests for city easements and with developers on 3 sides of my property (along
my entire east border and parts of my northern and southern borders.)
But I protest the proposal to rezone this new 20+ acre development in a rural property area to
an R-5 residential mixed-use high density district by this out-of-state developer when the
surrounding area is still rural and the developments nearby are all single family homes—
essentially functioning as an R1. The proposed R5 zoning is not appropriate for this part of
Bozeman and does not exist there now.
Not only will this be life-changing for me since I use my land for agriculture purposes, but there
are other very important considerations to which a large number of Meadowcreek subdivision
home owners spoke eloquently before the Zoning Commission as to the many reasons how
and why this proposed Buffalo Run subdivision will impact the quality of their lives. I will not
repeat those here because I know they will. However, there are very important issues that I
have since discovered that were not covered at that 4.5 hour Zoning Commission meeting on
January 11th, 2021. 1 address those here:
Derek Williams, the developer who is proposing the development (Application 20112) and who
has contacted me personally several times last year told me in one phone conversation in
November 2020 that he plans to install his development's connections to water and sewer at
Stucky by going down the center of Fowler from the south end of his proposed subdivision
north to Stucky, approximately 0.8 mi. In a recent conversation with Chris Budeski, PE, a well-
respected and well-informed professional engineer with Madison Engineering with many years
of extensive knowledge of development in this valley, Chris asserted that connecting to City
services at Fowler and Stucky is the only option for Buffalo Run subdivision because:
1. the sewer system in the Meadowcreek subdivision is maintained entirely by gravity
flow. There are no pumps.
2. In addition, Kurk Drive is supplied with only an 8 inch pipe, and the sewer grade is
shallow (10 ft deep); the ground slopes quickly.
3. The sewer pipe size and drainage system were designed by the City based on the
requirements for that specific area, and are meant to serve that district all the way to
Patterson Rd. They were not designed to include service for the proposed Buffalo Run
subdivision so there are no stubs that extend to Derek Williams' 20 acres.
Therefore, hook ups via Kurk Dr and the Meadowcreek subdivision could not handle the needs
of the large Buffalo Run subdivision via gravity flow, and the only option is to connect to sewer
(and water) via Fowler all the way to Stucky.
This reality leads to the real crux of this isse because of an historical conflict and a
precedent ruling set by the City and County in response to a development proposed, but
denied, to developers of the property owned by a New Mexico consortium who had applied to
develop their 40 acres along Stucky road near Fowler (next to the Rafferty property) 5 years
ago. At that time the City said that those developers would be required to put their water
mains and sewer down Stucky Rd to 19th. The City also told the developers that they would be
required to improve Stucky Rd to City standards with paving, curbs, and sidewalks from their
development to 19t" because Stucky is a collector road as well as a county road. However, an
impasse quickly arose between the County and City when at that time the County determined
that they would not allow the City to install improvements or City services on a county road
unless the City was willing to subsequently take over the road and maintain it. City and County
did not agree, and the improvement costs for the developer were prohibitively high for those
required improvements. Consequently they had to scrap their development project.
For New Mexico developers, this is no longer an issue since they have access to sewer and
water through the Grand Cielo development. However, a precedent has been set here for
expected improvements along county roads and the requirement for the City to maintain them.
Fowler is an unimproved county road that will be forced to collect and absorb a
tremendous amount of traffic for the huge number of proposed units in the
development of Buffalo Run. It will require City upgrades. This historic precedent must
apply to the proposed Buffalo Run division and its developers, who must be required to
fund costs of not only bringing City services to their specific property along 0.8 miles of
a County road, but also must bring that access road, now a poorly-maintained, 2 lane
gravel road, to City standards, after which the City must maintain that road.
Greatly concerned,
Diane L. Brawner, Adjacent Property Owner