HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-15-21 Public Comment - R. Bakker - Annexation and Zoning Request #21337From:richard bakker
To:Agenda
Subject:Annexation and Zoning Request #21337
Date:Wednesday, December 15, 2021 9:13:38 AM
Attachments:Microsoft Word - Canyon Development Comments_Bakker.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.
Please register my comment letter with the Commission
Regards,
Richard Bakker1470 Boylan Rd.
406.402.5418
December 15, 2021
Subject: Comments on Canyon Gate Annexation and Zoning Map Amendment Application
#21337
Dear Commissioners,
I oppose the proposed high-density development for the proposed annexation parcel and am in
favor of R-3 and B-1 as maximum allowable densities for the parcel. I am in favor of annexation,
just not at the levels proposed that would allow high density commercial enterprises, such as
hotels. I am a homeowner within 150 feet of the proposed parcel.
I attended the November Zoning Committee zoom meeting and have several comments about
the meeting and the proposal that are relevant to the developer’s proposal and the
Commissioners’ decision:
Valid Concerns of Residents. The developer characterized those who spoke in favor of
R-3 and B-1 zoning as “fearful Nimbys.” However, no one who spoke in opposition of the
zoning application was against annexation or development of the parcel. Speakers just
wanted the development to be in character with the existing neighborhood and to
consider the unique features of the area, including being at the entry to Bridger Canyon
and other unique features of the area. The developer insulted a Commission member
and spoke derisively of those who expressed a preference for zoning at lower than
requested densities.
Undisclosed Affiliation of Developer Posing as Residents. Some people at the
November meeting spoke in favor of the proposed densities but did not identify their
address or affiliation. After the meeting, it has come to light that those speakers were
either Home Base employees, affiliates, or members of the development team. Not
disclosing this to the Commission is disingenuous at the least and unethical in good
business practices. Developers and their representatives should not pretend to be
concerned residents, but should speak solely as developers during their allotted time.
Attack on Commission Member. The developer insulted a Commission member and
spoke derisively of those who expressed a preference for zoning at lower than requested
densities. During the November meeting, Mr. Halloran accused a Zoning Commission
member of being ‘biased’ simply because she questioned City Staff and Home Base
about the content of their report and application. I find the behavior inappropriate for the
public process. Please consider a formal warning to Mr. Holloran for the upcoming city
commission meeting.
Traffic Analysis Needed. The developer made conclusory statements about traffic
impacts and the City Staff Report has not cited sources for their statement of a ‘no traffic
impacts’ determination. The Commission must ask staff for the traffic studies they used
to come to this conclusion. These studies need to add Bridger View, Story Mill and
Canyon Gate developments into their report. Three existing roads provide access roads
to the proposed Canyon Gate parcel, the Bridger View development, and Story Mill
development–these are Griffin Drive, Rouse Ave/Bridger Drive, and Wallace Ave. All
these roads have at-grade RR crossings that suffer delays for current residents that are
only going to worsen with the increased traffic under the proposed zoning. The Bozeman
Fire Department already states that response times to our neighborhoods are close to, if
not exceeding, National Fire Protection Association standards. The proposed Canyon
Gate zoning at such high densities would further decrease existing traffic levels-of-
service and compromise further public health and safety response times.
Lack of Affordable Housing Commitment. After the November meeting, Mr. Holloran
was recently quoted in the Bozeman Chronicle saying, ‘there will be affordable housing
in Canyon Gate.’ This is contradicted by what Legends II HOA Board was told when
Home Base made a presentation to that board in August of 2021 and by the absence of
affordable housing as an element of his site plan or application. If he means it, Mr.
Halloran must be willing to put pen to paper on that. I hope the Commissioners enforces
that because there is no guarantee that the housing that will be built will be affordable
and contribute to a live/work model where people who work in an area can afford to buy
there. As proposed, housing would be unaffordable, and hotels could be built to serve
only tourists and not contribute to alleviating the shortage of affordable housing.
Community Involvement. After annexation and zoning is approved, we can expect this
developer, or any other developer in the future if the parcel is subsequently sold to
another developer, to do everything to maximize their profits by building as high as
allowable, and minimizing open space to the least allowable. The 2020 Community Plan
directs for community involvement in City annexation, zoning, and planning. The
members of our communities in the neighborhood ask for just that. Contrary to
statements made by Mr. Halloran, there was no outreach by Home Base to establish
working groups with neighbors, only presentations where input was not welcome,
leading up to the November Zoning Commission meeting. I strongly encourage Mr.
Halloran to organize working input groups from the surrounding six HOAs as he moves
forward with plans to develop this piece of property.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Ricard Bakker
1470 Boylan Road
Bozeman MT 59715