HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-23-24 Public Comment - E. Trygstad - Bozeman pipelineFrom:Ellen Trygstad
To:Agenda
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Bozeman pipeline
Date:Tuesday, January 23, 2024 10:15:28 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.
A deeply felt comment here - Bozeman (business) entities have been hyping Bozeman for 20 and more years. This
has brought growth too fast which thus has bypassed the mechanisms we’ve had in place for the past century for
absorbing growth, paying for services, and making wise land use decisions. The residents clearly have wanted
slower paced growth and have appealed for this, and the more moderate accompanying community commitments
this entails for absorbing costs. It has been shown growth requiring infrastructure always costs more and raises
taxes and bond obligations. Fast growth is too costly for our community and this is straining local resources greatly.
People who have invested in alignment with past zoning; people who have invested in a rural town; people who
have given back a huge amount of community service are leaving or at least very angry. The 2020 plan made at the
end of the 1990’s vanished and something else has marched in - and is marching all over our residents. Claims for
need for “affordable “ housing are not accompanied by a study of what is needed, and how much. Growth now is a
“carte blanche” for the city failing to say “no” to development that takes away wildlife corridors, people’s sunlight,
people’s open space, and people’s expectations of zoning, manageable traffic etc.
While filling in “the triangle” with new annexations and new zoning may look good on paper, for ease of providing
“services” - how do the people THERE feel? Development pressures likely make their land valuable, and they sell
and go elsewhere. End of school continuity, job continuity , community, and likely end of local wildlife and plant
communities, dark skies, etc. People who remain are angry, disappointed, stressed, as in-fill increases population.
Did it ever occur to The City that in-fill may not be the best thing for the health of people in communities?
Reports nationally of older homes being torn down for high rises and in-fill push out low income people and creates
instability. Look at how many mobile home areas have been gutted here - Story Mill is a great example. And I
doubt those folks would find the new “affordable:” places affordable. But before the original developer there had
“ideas”, people had homes.
The runaway train of growth in Bozeman is a hollow profiteering gimmick which we have counted on the City to
manage. We need to live within our means, not add more bonds, more infrastructure costs, more stress on folks
wondering what building or community change will happen next. The Story Mill project is again an example of real
stress on a community. This is not change for improvement of that neighborhood. 400 plus folks had very
reasonable reasons for why the plan is too massive and intrusive in that rural-urban interface area. Little adjustment
has been made to a huge plan, and the City apparently looked the other way when its own rule was run over and 100
mature trees cut down, without apparent penalty even.
The in-fill in “the Triangle” will be more building on wetlands and high groundwater table, and more trees cut
down. It is also the path of the water flow danger if Hylite Dam gives. We are, after all, in an earthquake region.
Credible geologists have for many decades warned the City about building plans and the urban dangers requiring
thoughtful planning with earthquake safety FIRST in mind. I don’t hear any mention of this, and haven’t for years.
But it’s in geological documents, and used to be addressed in the City’s own emergency plan.
Which brings me to the Bozeman Pipeline. If water concerns are essential Why are we building continuing to build
on wetlands? Why are we still trading out local wetlands for saving wetlands elsewhere, when the impacts of
existing wetlands remain. People have water in their basements, in their yards, and the paving over of wetlands
increases flooding issues (consider the experience of New Orleans). The Gallatin Valley is a plain that floods. That’s
why the original town of Bozeman is on somewhat higher ground. The valley is suitable for agriculture, not
development. We will have an earthquake. We do not have the resources to recover from one. Yet the City wants
to ensure growth through 2070 with a Water Pipeline. It is time to slow growth, and make it clear to people we DO
NOT HAVE THE WATER for more development. Period. Because, we don’t. IF you stop permitting due to lack of
infrastructure, you slow growth.
I have no doubt the talent and skill and hard work within the Bozeman City Government is committed to doing agood planning job. But the people are begging you all to pull back and put up a shield from feared developer suitsand start REALLY listening to the people and acting accordingly. We do not want, and cannot pay for, a mega-city.We can’t handle, on this fragile landscape, the impacts of a big urban population, without losing the quality of ourlandscape and its uniqueness, and the financial stability of our community. It’s time to Stop Fast Growth, high rises,and the whole development dream of filling in the valley. The price down the road is too high, and the damageirreversible.
Thank you very much,Sincerely,E. TrygstadBozeman, MT