HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-19-21 Public Comment - R. Gavin - Buffalo Run App. 21076From:Renee Gavin
To:Agenda
Subject:Letter of opposition / Buffalo Run application
Date:Friday, March 19, 2021 1:14:50 PM
Attachments:Zoning Commission.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hello,
Attached please find a letter with our objections to the zone map amendment & annexationapplication for the proposed Buffalo Run project. #21076
Thank you for forwarding this to the Zoning Commission members, Jennifer Madgic and Tom
Rogers in advance of the upcoming meeting on March 22, 2021.
Kind regards,
Renee Gavin
March 18, 2021
City of Bozeman / Zoning Commission
Commission Liaison Jennifer Madgic & Staff Liaison Tom Rogers
Re: #21076
Dear Commission Members, Commissioner Madgic and Mr. Rogers:
We are Renee & William Gavin, residing at 4929 Fowler Lane, Bozeman 58718.
Thank you for taking the time to read our comments on the proposed Buffalo Run development /
Zone Map Amendment and Annexation Application.
After reviewing the documents, participating in recent online Zoom meetings and joining the last
virtual Zoning Commission meeting in January on this matter, we would like to submit the following
objections to this application:
1) Leapfrog Zoning. The initial R-5 zone map amendment for approximately 20 acres was strongly
opposed by the Zoning Commission at its January meeting. The developers have gone back to the
drawing board and come forth with a slightly amended proposal for R-4 instead of the original R-5
designation. This proposal still constitutes leapfrog zoning. Only the Meadow Creek
subdivision to the east has been annexed. All other surrounding acreage has not been annexed. As
you can see from the drone photograph submitted by the developer, the 20 acres in question is an
isolated tract with no development on the north, south or west sides. Meadow Creek is to the east.
2) Spot Zoning. The City’s Zone Map Criteria (Part K - Spot Zoning Criteria), poses the following
question: "Would the change be in the nature of “special legislation” designed to benefit only one or
a few landowners at the expense of the surrounding landowners or the general public? The answer
to this is clearly yes and at the January Zoning Commission meeting, you clearly pointed out that
rezoning this tract would quality as spot zoning.
3) False Transition Zone. Historically the city has encouraged maintaining “transition zones” that
provide a buffer between urbanized areas and agricultural/open space. In answer to the developer’s
amended plan for R-4 zoning, the Meadow Creek Homeowners Association Board has presented an
alternative view to this R-4. They are asking for the tract of land to have two separate designations:
R-2 on the acreage closest to their own homes, and an R-4 designation on the western portion of
Buffalo Run near Fowler Lane. This suggestion is completely backwards as a transition, since it
goes from Meadow Creek’s own R-3 zoning to propsing Buffalo Run’s lesser R-2 zoning and then
scales up to R-4 as Buffalo Run approaches a much more rural character along Fowler Lane. If
anything, this proposal should be flipped so that the higher density development takes place next to
Meadow Creek and then eases down into less dense development as it meets the agricultural lands.
4) The Bozeman Community Plan (growth policy) designates the subject property as
Residential. Rezoning this tract for R-4 development is not in keeping with the current land
use and patterns as there are NO "commercial centers to facilitate providing services and
employment opportunities.” The city’s own regulations state that the development must be within
close proximity to amenities so that walking or biking is possible. But there are NO amenities close
to this proposed project. All of the property surrounding the subject property on three sides
and across Fowler Lane are open space, farms, or a combination of the two.
Zoning Commission / Commission Liaison / Staff Liaison
March 18, 2021
Page 2
In short, the subject property is not in close proximity to anything.
5) Transportation Plan. The City of Bozeman encourages annexations which will enhance the
existing traffic circulation system or provide for systems that do not exist at the present time. The
creation of these high-density residential units whose drivers will travel either through
Meadow Creek’s residential neighborhoods or down Fowler Lane does nothing to “enhance”
current traffic circulation. In addition, claiming that Kurk will eventually be connected to Fowler
Lane will not enhance new traffic systems. Fowler Lane dead ends into Stucky Road. As you may
know, Fowler Lane is an unimproved county gravel road. When hundreds of cars exit Buffalo Run in
the morning, where will they drive? Many will travel through the Meadow Creek subdivision while
some may attempt to travel north on Fowler Lane, where they will be backed up while waiting to turn
right or left on Stucky, depending in their destination.
6) Climate Change and Initiatives. When the City of Bozeman adopted our climate plan in
December 2020, there were 6 focus areas with 16 actionable solutions identified to reduce the City’s
greenhouse gas emissions and create a more equitable, resilient and sustainable community.
Buffalo Run will not aid in any of those admirable goals. This high-density proposal clearly and
directly conflicts with the achievable and admirable goals of the Bozeman Climate Plan with a
significant increase in automobile use from a subdivision that is located several miles (not walkable)
from grocery stores, local schools, the university, and most commercial operations. Stucky Road is
not suitable for safe biking or walking as it has no appreciable shoulder, bike lane or sidewalk.
Fowler Lane does not either. As a result, this subdivision will encourage more driving and will
conflict directly with climate change goals. High-density residential housing that is
surrounded on three sides by open space and located far from central services, businesses,
and places of employment will only encourage nearly residents of this development to
commute into Bozeman on narrow residential streets.
7) Character of the District. In the applicant’s response to Zone Map Criteria (Part H - The
Character of the District), he states that the surrounding area is primarily residential or undeveloped
and that the addition of “offices, restaurants and/or retail” could be perceived as changing the
character of the district.” Absolutely. One cannot predict that high density residential
development will eventually fit in with the character of the district. One needs to look at
current and historic character as well. We doubt the landowners currently residing on Fowler
Lane agree that its destiny is already determined to be urban. This should not be viewed as a self-
fulfilling prophecy.
8) The City of Bozeman encourages annexations to make City boundaries more
regular. Changing the designation of this subject property would leave gaps and islands of
unannexed land. In fact, this would create a peninsula of annexed land with three of its four sides
unannexed.
9) Baseless Predictions. The developer’s proposal states that “it is anticipated that additional zone
classifications such as R-0 and R-5 will be located along the Fowler Lane corridor.” What evidence
supports this claim? Currently, all of the landowners along Fowler Lane from Blackwood Road to
Zoning Commission / Commission Liaison / Staff Liaison
March 18, 2021
Page 3
Stucky Road (1 mile) are deeply involved in either agricultural endeavors or the land is in open
space. There are currently no other proposed developments or zoning changes in the
works. The statement that Fowler Lane zoning will change is simply false. The developer also
proposes that the zone map amendment will encourage the most appropriate use of the
land.” Nothing could be further from the truth.
10) Negative Impacts. The applicant responds that “no substantial negative impacts to surrounding
landowners have been identified due to this proposed zoning.” We disagree. Potential significant
impacts are obvious: The city is correctly interested in promoting viable climate change goals and
protocols, yet this development will lead to an estimated 1,000 daily driving trips into commercial
areas by the residents of these nearly 300 additional proposed units. If the city allows a zoning
change to R-4, it also increases the pressure on surrounding landowners as they see the destruction
of valuable open space and wildlife habitat, couple with increased noise, congestion, and traffic. It
becomes less likely that landowners will want to continue preserving agricultural and open space
when they are surrounded and squeezed.
In summary, the short-term financial objectives of this development are simply not in
harmony with the City of Bozeman’s growth policy, the City’s comprehensive climate change
initiatives, the City’s Transportation Plan nor is it in keeping with the character of this
agricultural area. It is an isolated peninsula and appears to be a classic case of spot zoning.
Throughout the community, the alarm has been raised over the speed and quality of development in
our valley. We hope the City doesn’t believe that inappropriate development is the inevitable
pathway into the future. It is a delicate balancing act for sure, but with the solid guidance provided by
our growth policy, climate initiatives, transportation plan and local character, we urge you to use
these tools for decision making, and to vote no on this zone map amendment/annexation
application.
Thank you for your time and for considering these objections.
Sincerely,
Renee & Will Gavin
4929 Fowler Lane
Bozeman, MT 59718