HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-06-22 Public Comment - B. Friedman - Development at Bridger Canyon RoadFrom:Barbara Friedman
To:Agenda
Subject:Development at Bridger Canyon Road
Date:Thursday, January 6, 2022 10:56:19 AM
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.
I am a resident of Bridger Creek subdivision phase 1. I am opposed to the dense development that is coming up for
a vote. We have two ways to leave our subdivision,one is StoryMill and Bridger Canyon Road where we relay on
courtesy and good judgement to get out on the main road. The other is Birdie drive where vehicles line both sides of
the road everyday and in the winter is practically impassable. We already have 62 townhouses going up on the area
adjacent to Story Mill park. The stockyard property is slated for development. All these projects will contribute to a
great deal of congestion at these intersections and roads. Traffic aside our neighborhood east and west of StoryMill
is single family ,low density and not appropriate for medium density. Of course we have the issue of 3 railroad
crossings that prevent ambulances and fire trucks from reaching us in case of an emergency coinciding with a train
closing off all three crossings.
We already have a dense commercial area at the Cannery which is on the other side of the tracks. This is totally
appropriate development and is an asset to our community.
However development at the 16 acres in question would only benefit the developers and not the community . Tall
buildings would block the views to the south and to the east for existing residents. It was not long ago the a barn
was ordered to be removed because it blocked the view of the Bridgers. The homes that border this property would
lose privacy because of buildings towering over creating lose of light and privacy.
In conclusion the reasons for not allowing this project are many, safety and health, traffic, congestion, privacy.etc.
I suggest that this development be revisited in a year, after the other projects that are already permitted are built. If
the commissioners believe at that time that this project is needed and would be an asset to the area then it might be
approved. There doesn’t seem to be the need to rush this at this time.
I have an additional comment on all development going forward. We have a finite amount of water in the valley. It
is my opinion that any new housing or commercial development have mandatory zeriscaping with native plants and
not wide swaths of lawns that require constant watering and maintenance .
Sincerely,
Barbara Friedman
1037 Boylan Road
Sent from my iPad