HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-17-24 Public Comment - S. Vidmar - Harper's Corner Annexation Shannon Vidmar 2210 Watts Lane Bozeman, MT 59718 June 13, 2024 Bozeman City Commission 121 North Rouse Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 Dear City Commissioners: I, Shannon M.Vidmar am the owner and joint tenant in common with my husband Greg Vidmar,with right of survivorship of the residential home located at 2210 Watts Lane, Bozeman, MT. We have lived in this house for 22 years and I am a fifth generation Montanan. Our property is in direct view and with-in 100 feet of the proposed Harper's Corner Annexation,Application 23127. I protest and am opposed to this application for R-3/114 zoning for reasons outlined in the letter you received from Erin Arnold and the fact that Mr. Knokey did not follow your recommendation to taper his proposed project in height and setbacks along Hidden Valley Road. At the January 23rd city commission meeting Mr. Knokey's application for R4 zoning was denied and at the commissioners'suggestion,the developers and adjacent property owners met. Our concerns were voiced to Mr. Knokey and Drew Russell. Mr. Knokey told the group we had to trust him but they were still applying for R4 and that if we protested the application they may have to sell the property to another buyer who would not be as willing to work with us as Mr. Knokey was. Following the meeting, Mr. Knokey sent us a written summary of the meeting along with his "intentions"for the development.We reiterated our concerns and that we wanted something in writing that would stay with the property in the event the property was sold. Mr. Knokey told us that it was not possible because the zoning of the property would supersede any written agreement. At this point we sought legal council, which confirmed our suggested agreement was indeed possible. This confirmation letter was emailed to Mr. Knokey. In a phone conversation, Mr. Knokey acknowledged he knew the written agreement was possible all along but wanted nothing to do with it. He once again said he was applying for R4 and that if we protested his application he was not willing to work with us in the next stages of the process. I believe Mr. Knokey went through the motions of meeting with us (landowners) only to appease you as commissioners so he could say he did what you asked. Our objective as landowners was to find a compromise and come to an agreement. We compromised multiple times trying to give Mr. Knokey something he would accept. In fact,we would have agreed to having the majority of the property zoned R4 if Mr. Knokey was willing to write an agreement(that went with the property) to have a larger setback on the West side of the property along with lower building heights and density in the first two rows of his development. If Mr. Knokey's intentions were truly as he expressed they were, this whole process could have been finalized with the adjacent landowners'support. It is my feeling that Mr. Knokey has not been honest. Furthermore, I don't appreciate having my time wasted, being misled and his attempts at intimidation. It is my feeling Mr. Knokey is only out for himself. Mr. Knokey said he would not apply for anything less than R4 because it would cost him more. The expenses to develop the property are what they are. It will NOT COST Mr. Knokey more, he may just MAKE LESS on the project. The ball was in Mr. Knokey's court, but he did nothing to compromise. I am appalled that Mr. Knokey tried turning in the same application as the one denied in January,which he backed out of at the 11th hour. His reason to request a change was based on"new information". His outreach and communication schedule is not accurate. He stated he did not know R-3 was an option. We never agreed to R-3/11-4, R-3 was an option only if the entire property was zoned R-3. This was made clear to Mr. Knokey. In fact Mr. Knokey has not reached out to us since stating he would continue to apply for R-4 and if we protest he will not work with us. I believe he is trying to make himself look good in your eyes and will not follow through with his intentions and desires. Thank you for your time and consideration of the request to deny Mr. Knokey's proposed development Yours sincerely, Shannon M. Vidmar