HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-25-23 Public Comment - M. Kaveney - Urban Parks and Forestry Board Mtng. 5_25_23 public commentFrom:Marcia Kaveney
To:Agenda; Mitchell Overton; Addi Jadin
Subject:Urban Parks and Forestry Board Mtng. 5/25/23 public comment
Date:Thursday, May 25, 2023 11:43:48 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 Board Members-
I am writing in support of tonight's discussion on the benefits of native plants in
our community as well as to offer comments on the PRAT plan.
Native Plants: I think a lot of good progress has been made towards incorporating more drought tolerant
species into Bozeman's community plans, as well as on public and private properties. I wouldlike to see that action taken to the next level by placing native drought tolerant species at the
highest priority. Native species provide the best opportunity for hosting butterfly and mothlarvae, and other insects, which in turn support bird life and pollination ( Nature's Best Hope,
Tallamy, 2019) which in turn builds the biodiversity that humans need for long term survival.
While drought tolerant plants alone can be helpful with our water supply , they are lesshospitable to hosting insects and thereby do not contribute much to biodiversity.
Douglas Tallamy suggests we think of non-native plant species as more like sculptures orshade providers and limit their use.
Considering that UDC code comments are wrapping up at the end of this month, I hope the
UPF Board will consider viewing the UDC development codes that focus on preservingexisting and native habitat and draft a statement in support of staff enforcement of existing
codes or perhaps offering improved language specifically the following:38.410.010. 2.b.Natural Environment38.220.060. A. 5. b. Vegetation Protective Measures.
38.240.110 - section on waivers that developers must apply for when not protecting trees etc. ,but which has not been required by staff in the case of Canyon Gate.
PRAT PLAN:
1. I am still not in favor of the new name as it diminishes the support of open space as weknow it and have become familiar with what it means. It also does not highlight the new
view/terminology of natural spaces in the name. I would prefer PROST be continued.
2. I am very much in all but one of the edits made by the Gallatin Watershed Council andsubmitted to the board on 4/14/23. I think the wordsmithing was excellent and much more
clear.
3. The one aspect of the plan I am most leery of and think should be allowed in rarecircumstances only or not at all- is the allowance of trails in Zone 2 of the watercourse
setback.
Case in point- The trails along Bridger Creek in Legends II subdivision. Trails compress soil
and make it easier for flood waters to channelize on the existing trails. The Trails in LegendsII were placed in Zone 1 and Zone 2 of Bridger Creek and have since been flooded and now
channel water on the trails which has led to large areas of constant erosion. This floodingoccured naturally by beaver activity which would not have been nearly as consequential if the
trails had been placed outside of the 75 foot setback. Subsequently this area has been approvedfor the city's capital improvement plans and $100,000 has been allocated towards the
armament of that portion of Bridger Creek- although to date, no action has been taken. Thisarea of management has also cost the local HOA hundreds of hours of attention and over
$10,000 in expenses.
Thank you for considering my comments. I appreciate all of your hard work and efforts tokeep Bozeman a 'most liveable place".
Best,
Marcia Kaveney