HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-16-23 Public Comment - H. Hester - Public Comment regarding the Shady Glen PUDFrom:Heidi Hester
To:Agenda
Subject:Fwd: Public Comment regarding the Shady Glen PUD
Date:Thursday, March 16, 2023 11:21:19 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.
This is in regard to Application 22293.
The Rev. Heidi Hester
Hope Lutheran ChurchBozeman MT 59718406-586-5572 office www.hopebozeman.com
---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Heidi Hester <pastorheidi@hopebozeman.com>Date: Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 4:47 PMSubject: Public Comment regarding the Shady Glen PUDTo: <agenda@bozeman.net>
Dear Community Development Board Members and City Commissioners,
I am writing in opposition of the Shady Glen PUD. I live in the Links
Condominiums which would be adversely affected by this development.
According to the July 20, 2021 City Commission Meeting, this same
development attempted to be passed, and since the major concern of a
second point of access was not addressed, this proposal should not pass
once again.
This winter proved difficult enough to navigate the streets with all of the
snow/ice build up, and to make this one access running through our
neighborhood the only point of access does not correspond to the
promotion of public safety and health. I would ask that you continue to
defend comments and concerns and ultimate vote from the last meeting.
Here are some of the comments:
City Commissioner, Jennifer Madgic:
“I think our requirement for a 2nd
point of access when a subdivision
goes past a certain threshold is a
good one and I worry about the
precedence that this would set if we
approve this relaxation.” “For good
reason our community has decided
that cul de sacs are not a way to
promote traffic circulation and
public health and safety. I don’t
think a pattern of the past should be
made again. The standard of today,
of a 2nd point of access, is a good
one.”
“I do not feel that we, the city, should
be responsible for approving
something that has public health
and safety implications because an
applicant cannot attain something
that is needed, in this case a 2nd
point of access.”
“I am concerned with the viability of
the emergency access and
particularly its proximity to the
primary access.”
Ms. Madgic voted no for this
development
City Commissioner, Christopher
Coburn: “The hard part for me about
this application is that we don’t have
another point of public access. This
design really is making assumptions
about the past. About what we
know about floods, what we know
about fires, what we know about
what kind of emergencies that can
happen and what this year has
taught us is that we don’t know, We
can’t rely on making assumptions
about the past. We are seeing
record fires and floods… and so for
us to just approve something based
on our hope that it probably won’t
flood or in an emergency, people
will probably be okay, I don’t feel
comfortable making that
assumption, so I won’t be able to
support this motion because I don’t
believe this is a responsive design.”
“It’s not in the interest of public
health from the perspective of not
having another access point. When
I’m thinking about PUD’s and what is
a superior outcome and what is
innovation and for me, a cul de sac
with 1 access point with lots that are
going to be unaffordable or
unattainable to most of Bozeman,
it’s not an innovative approach to
development. I don’t think it
represents the true intent of a PUD
which is to be innovative and
responsive to the needs of our
community.”
Mr. Coburn voted no for this
development.
City Commissioner, I-Ho Pomeroy:
“For public safety and environment
like cul de sac and snow and fire
trucks and also no second public
access and it’s wetlands… I cannot
support this development.”
Ms. Pomery voted no for this
development.
Mayor, Cyndy Andrus: “I do not
believe that what we are seeing is
something that is a superior design
and I think there are definite
questions about health and safety as
it relates to the public and public
access to this property.”
“I don’t believe we are getting an
innovative product. These
relaxations, primarily due to safety
concerns specifically as it relates to
2nd means for a public access and
block lengths and a are particularly
concerning as it relates to public
health and safety (note Madam
Mayor also references watercourse
setback but that has been mitigated
since last application). For those
reasons, I will not be supporting this
motion.”
Madam Mayor voted no for this
development.
Again, the concern for the public’s
health and safety because of the
lack of a 2nd point of access is
referenced time and time again. This
has not changed in the new
application.
This new proposal of the Shady Glen development will also impact the
wetlands in the immediate area and could potentially cause flooding issues
for those communities downstream. The wetlands need to remain not only
for the sake of the environment, but also to preserve what makes Bozeman
an amazing community to live in.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Heidi Hester
The Rev. Heidi Hester
Hope Lutheran ChurchBozeman MT 59718406-586-5572 office www.hopebozeman.com