HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-16-23 Public Comment - B. Kaeding - Shady GlenFrom:kaedingl@aol.com
To:Agenda
Cc:kaedingl@aol.com
Subject:Shady Glen
Date:Friday, March 17, 2023 7:27:23 AM
Attachments:ShadyGlenDevelopment17March2023-comments.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.
Commissioners -- My comments on this project are below and attached. Thank you for your consideration
of my comments.
17 March 2023
Comments on Shady Glen Subdivision proposal
Dear Bozeman City Commission members
I am a neighbor to this proposed project, living at 1024 Boylan Road. I am opposed to granting the
development application for Thomas Murphy’s Shady Glen subdivision proposal and ask that you, our
elected Bozeman City Commissioners, again deny this development. While there may be some changes
to this development proposal from what was presented 2 years ago, it remains a project that is wrong for
the area. Six “relaxations” – exceptions – from the city’s development code are still being requested. As
the Bozeman Daily Chronicle noted in its 9 July 2021 opinion, while the pressure to develop parcels
within the city boundaries is intense (and appropriate in many instances), “allowing exceptions to codes . .
. sets precedent . . . and can have a snowball effect.” The opinion goes on to note that these codes were
“carefully thought-out building standards designed to promote smart growth and preserve quality of life
amenities.”
As a biologist and an avid birder, I am particularly unhappy that this proposed development still
encroaches upon wetlands, a very important wildlife habitat in this state and our nation that is fast
declining. I am also very opposed to allowing any fill in the floodplain – no matter how small the developer
says it will be. I was living in the Stonegate subdivision in March 2007 when a rapid snowmelt and runoff
event occurred followed in May 2008 by another heavy rainfall event on high snowpack. In both cases,
many homes in the subdivision were adversely affected by surface flooding. Soon after this subdivision
was approved by the county in the early 1990s, the federal government began the process of reviewing
floodplain boundaries. After that scientific investigation was completed in the 2000s, there were revisions
to floodplains in areas of the Gallatin Valley. Prior to this better understanding, some floodplain areas
along the East Gallatin River and Churn Creek had been filled in many years before, which, to some
degree, did contribute to the flooding situation in the Stonegate subdivision. Today, we know better and
have better floodplain maps – floodplains must never be filled in nor built upon or near.
An additional and significant concern I have as a neighbor to this proposed development is the fact that
there is only ONE public entrance to the area; the proposed “emergency vehicle access” does NOT
comply with the code requirements for a full secondary access. What happens if the fire truck or
ambulance responding to any emergency does not have the key to get through the “emergency vehicle
access” point or it is somehow inadvertently blocked? And, as for that one point of access, which is off
Birdie Drive, this area is already a congested mess, especially in winter when vehicles park farther intothe street because snow removal did not happen before they got there. I cannot even begin to imaginethe additional traffic issues this one entrance to the proposed Shady Glen subdivision presents to arearesidents. In reviewing what was said two years ago, this seems to be the major concern that CityCommission members at the time (Cindy Andrus, Jennifer Madgic, I-Ho Pomeroy, and Chris Coburn) allexpressed. That concern is STILL there in this current proposal.
Please deny the Shady Glen Subdivision proposal. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Beth Kaeding 1024 Boylan Road kaedingl@aol.com
17 March 2023
Comments on Shady Glen Subdivision proposal
Dear Bozeman City Commission members
I am a neighbor to this proposed project, living at 1024 Boylan Road. I am opposed to granting
the development application for Thomas Murphy’s Shady Glen subdivision proposal and ask that
you, our elected Bozeman City Commissioners, again deny this development. While there may
be some changes to this development proposal from what was presented 2 years ago, it remains a
project that is wrong for the area. Six “relaxations” – exceptions – from the city’s development
code are still being requested. As the Bozeman Daily Chronicle noted in its 9 July 2021 opinion,
while the pressure to develop parcels within the city boundaries is intense (and appropriate in
many instances), “allowing exceptions to codes . . . sets precedent . . . and can have a snowball
effect.” The opinion goes on to note that these codes were “carefully thought-out building
standards designed to promote smart growth and preserve quality of life amenities.”
As a biologist and an avid birder, I am particularly unhappy that this proposed development still
encroaches upon wetlands, a very important wildlife habitat in this state and our nation that is
fast declining. I am also very opposed to allowing any fill in the floodplain – no matter how
small the developer says it will be. I was living in the Stonegate subdivision in March 2007 when
a rapid snowmelt and runoff event occurred followed in May 2008 by another heavy rainfall
event on high snowpack. In both cases, many homes in the subdivision were adversely affected
by surface flooding. Soon after this subdivision was approved by the county in the early 1990s,
the federal government began the process of reviewing floodplain boundaries. After that
scientific investigation was completed in the 2000s, there were revisions to floodplains in areas
of the Gallatin Valley. Prior to this better understanding, some floodplain areas along the East
Gallatin River and Churn Creek had been filled in many years before, which, to some degree, did
contribute to the flooding situation in the Stonegate subdivision. Today, we know better and have
better floodplain maps – floodplains must never be filled in nor built upon or near.
An additional and significant concern I have as a neighbor to this proposed development is the
fact that there is only ONE public entrance to the area; the proposed “emergency vehicle access”
does NOT comply with the code requirements for a full secondary access. What happens if the
fire truck or ambulance responding to any emergency does not have the key to get through the
“emergency vehicle access” point or it is somehow inadvertently blocked? And, as for that one
point of access, which is off Birdie Drive, this area is already a congested mess, especially in
winter when vehicles park farther into the street because snow removal did not happen before
they got there. I cannot even begin to imagine the additional traffic issues this one entrance to the
proposed Shady Glen subdivision presents to area residents. In reviewing what was said two
years ago, this seems to be the major concern that City Commission members at the time (Cindy
Andrus, Jennifer Madgic, I-Ho Pomeroy, and Chris Coburn) all expressed. That concern is
STILL there in this current proposal.
Please deny the Shady Glen Subdivision proposal. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Beth Kaeding 1024 Boylan Road kaedingl@aol.com