HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-17-23 Public Comment - T. Traynor - Shady Glen PUDFrom:Tim Traynor
To:Agenda
Subject:Shady Glen PUD
Date:Friday, March 17, 2023 11:10:34 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.
Dear City Commissioners,
As a former developer who understands residential and commercial development in high
density areas, I am writing to you in the hopes that you will oppose the application for the
Shady Glen PUD.
There are major concerns over building density, accessibility, the environment, and the
potential impact on abutters. The current proposal is trying to maximize profits at the expense
of good design and to some peril to its neighbors, and the community at large. If the
Commission would direct the Planning Department to work closely with the developer to
forgo the numerous exceptions sought and lower the number of planned lots to achieve that
goal, the project would have significantly greater merit. However, even with a reduced
number of buildable lots, there remains the task of providing a second viable entrance for
emergency vehicles to service homeowners in a safe and reliable manner.
The applicant stated that a future HOA would be responsible to enforce all the constraints
needed to make some of the exceptions work. There was a great deal of discussion regarding
the need for residents to respect the integrity of the reduced wetland buffers, keep their pets
and other debris from migrating into this fragile area. There is a reason for these buffers and
expecting human nature to be vigilant through self-policing methods ad infinitum is naive.
These reduced buffers are likely to become compromised and ineffective over time.
One of the PUD committee members testified that she thought that the State ought to set a
lower standard for wetlands that weren’t deemed high quality. I was surprised to hear such a
position from someone who is supposed to protect and defend assets like natural resources
and wetlands, especially in the State of Montana. This is usually an argument made by a
developer who is looking to dismiss the significance of these valuable assets regardless how
they came to be.
The applicant suggested that he could mitigate the filling of a wetland by relocating “seeds”
and other elements of the existing wetland. He went on to declare that he was “hopeful” that
such mitigation would work. I heard that word “hopeful” throughout the applicant’s
presentation to the board. The acceptance of such uncertainties by those who voted to
approve the application was a new one for me. I can assure you in my twenty years of real
estate development, I never got such lenience when it came to the environment.
Another surprising comment was the applicant’s representation that he was creating a
significant increase in compensatory storage by digging out an area of the project. The city
staff was silent in objecting to any filling of a flood plain no matter how minor. No one spoke
to the significant increase in impervious surface caused by paving, structures, and other
compacted areas, the likelihood of long-term siltation of detention areas and any higher-than-
normal precipitation from rain or snow melt that would put additional and unnecessary
pressure on the East Gallatin River floodplain.
This plan does not meet the “at elevation” requirement for creating new compensatory flood
water storage in mitigation of filling. People living downstream from Shady Glen should be
concerned. The fact the Army Corp accepted the filling of 1/10th acre of floodplain storage
was not reassuring considering the above. We all must recognize the significance of any filling
within a floodplain with today’s environmental realities. The downstream flooding caused by
such actions is irresponsible and ought to be reconsidered. The applicant’s representation that
there was a net increase in compensatory storage “does not hold water” when all factors are
taken into consideration.
Testimony was offered by one of the abutters that she had a conversation with the fire
marshal who expressed concerns that a vehicle turning point study had not been conducted to
ensure the Fire Department’s ability to get emergency vehicles into the site in the event the
primary access was compromised. The reduced roadway from sixty feet to forty-five feet will
also make maneuvering within the project difficult especially during an emergency where
more than one piece of equipment is required.
The fire marshal also expressed frustration with the current practice of poor snow removal
and maintenance of these emergency access points throughout the community. It was
countered by a sitting member who said, “this is a private way and if the people don’t
maintain it, it is not the city’s problem”. I was shocked to hear this coming from a
representative of the commission who is, in part, responsible for the safety and welfare of its
residents through its actions.
Finally, the applicant illustrated that snow storage would take place in an area adjacent to the
abutters. There was some testimony that when the snow melted it would follow a specific
course and make its way into the storm water drainage system. The problem with this perfect
scenario is that it will require that all the snow must be stored as indicated on the plan and the
melt must take place in one direction away from the abutters. I think it is very unreasonable to
expect the snow and the contracting removal service to cooperate with the ideal design
suppositions rather than flooding the abutter’s property when spills out of the confines it has
been assigned to.
The task you will have to approve this ten-pound project trying to fit into a five-pound bag is
that your regulations stipulate that “a PUD is a discretionary approval, and the review
authority must find that the overall development is superior to that offered by the basic
existing zoning standards. I am not sure how, with good conscience, one could accept this
offering as superior to basic existing zoning standards now in effect. I would argue that it does
much to circumvent them.
Respectfully,
Timothy J. Traynor, Sr.
TTraynor1948@GMail.com