HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-17-25 Public Comment - M. Kaveney - 5532 Fowler Lane- #24-492 annexation, Comm. Dev. Board mtng,From:Marcia Kaveney
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]5532 Fowler Lane- #24-492 annexation, Comm. Dev. Board mtng,
Date:Monday, March 17, 2025 11:58:33 AM
Attachments:5532 Fowler Lane.png
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 Community Board Members-I am writing you today to give a quick comment on the project you will be discussing tonight.
I regret I cannot attend in person.
While considering this application, I hope you will consider the following observations andconcerns:
1. The applicant's narrative did not, in my opinion, make a good argument for annexing the
property at this time. City staff have reported at the recent UDC meetings that there are about1,000 homes per year in the "pipeline" which was the City's goal to meet demand. There
have also been reports that there is about a 10% vacancy rate currently. I attended each UDCmeeting and also heard a resounding desire from the public to slow the City's sprawl since
new developments do not contribute to things like public transit, police staffing, or schoolswith their impact fees.
I think the applicant needs to show more proof to justify this annexation. Please recommend
no annexation at this time.
2. The narrative also did not provide justification for zoning the property R4 instead of R3. R4 allows the developer to make more money if they can fill the 4 story apartment buildings
than building smaller units that are in R3. The City staff and residents understand that largeapartment buildings (4 on 1) and large single family homes are investment products. However
R3, which is also "allowed" in Urban Neighborhoods, provides ample opportunity for a widevariety of housing including 3 story structures and multiple story townhomes while addressing
the "missing middle" housing gap. It is also more conducive to the outskirts of town blendingvisually into the rural landscape and providing fewer cars to the commute each morning.
Please recommend a zoning of R3 instead of R4.
3. If you are in favor of annexation and zoning, then please add the recommendation to
require that all mature trees (6" caliper diameter or greater) on the property be protectedduring construction and retained for their existing shade and wildlife benefits. Once annexed,
these well cared for trees become part of the City's Urban Forest and should be protected forfuture residents to enjoy and benefit from. It would be an absolute waste of good bird habitat
and mature shade trees to allow them to be demolished.
4. Please also recommend the repurposing or selling of the current existing homes rather thandemolishing them to allow for a less unique site plan in the future. Perhaps the center home
could be a community/neighborhood center, etc. and the surrounding trees could fulfill thepark requirement.
Thank you for considering these recommendations.
Marcia Kaveney