HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-21-21 Public Comment - A. Griffith - Canyon GateFrom:Alanah Griffith
To:Agenda
Subject:Canyon Gate Comment
Date:Tuesday, December 21, 2021 10:00:19 AM
Attachments:Canyon gate letter 12 21 21.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.
Good Morning:
I will also be on the Webex, but wanted you to have this. Thank you.
Alanah
--
Griffith & Cummings, PC
Alanah Griffith
11 Lone Peak Dr., Ste. 202
P.O. Box 160748
Big Sky, MT 59716
(406) 624-3585
E-mail correspondence is not always confidential. If you wish to discuss sensitive or confidential
matters, it is best to do so by telephone or in person.
This e-mail contains information that may be attorney-client privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient, please delete this e-mail from your computer system as soon as possible. Thank you.
(406) 624-3585 ● www.bigskymtlaw.com ● P. O. Box 160748 ● Big Sky, Montana 59716
December 21, 2021
Bozeman City Commission
Sent via email to: agenda@bozeman.net
RE: Canyon Gate Annexation
Dear Commissioners:
I represent the Legends II Homeowner’s Association. They have asked me to draft a
letter to you regarding the recent request to annex the Canyon Gate Development into Bozeman.
While my clients agree that this property should be developed, because of the access issues, the
residential portion should only be annexed as R-3, without R-5 or even R-4, Residential High
Density, zoning designation.
First, let me address notice. My client owns property directly adjacent to the Canyon
Gate Development, on the east side of the development. There is a large strip of Legends II open
space. The developer did not provide the required notice to my client. This happens quite
frequently with Homeowner’s Associations. Mr. Haloran also testified that he met with the
adjacent homeowner’s associations. To be clear, he did not meet with my clients before or after
submitting this ZMA.
This is quite troubling as his development plan justifying Residential High Density
zoning seems to rely on the fact that it will not only have the R-5 zoning access Bridger Drive
through B-2M on Story Mill, but an easement onto Northview Street to the east. However, the
southern part of the loop simply will never exist as it will require an easement across parkland
from my client. See below, map provided by developer in the A-1 application.
According to the developer’s own map, without the easement anyone leaving the R-5
zoning traveling up Bridger Canyon, to hiking, the ski hill, and similar amenities (which is a
fairly large amount of traffic) will naturally go through the Legends II on Maiden Sprit Drive,
through R-1 zoning to get to Bridger Dr. To direct R-5 zoning through not only R-3 zoning, but
R-1 zoning is simply not congruent with Bozeman’s Community Plan, nor the Zoning
Regulations. (See Chapter 38.300.100(e), the use of this zone “is appropriate for areas adjacent
to mixed use district, commercial districts and/or served by transit to accommodate a higher
density of residents in close proximity to jobs and services.”)
While it is correct that future development must comply with a host of regulations, which
may or may not limit development in the future, that does not do away with the need to carefully
consider what zoning designation is appropriate for any given area. In this case, with the current
easements available to the property, R-5 and even R-4 is simply not appropriate. Therefore, we
would ask that you deny this application. If Mr. Halloran can secure the additional easement that
even he shows he needs, then perhaps he can come back with his plan. Until then, only R-3
zoning is appropriate for this property where access will be through R-1 neighborhoods.
Thank you for considering my letter.
Sincerely,
Alanah Griffith