HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-16-25 Public Comment - C. & T. Merica - 5211 Baxter, App 24570From:pwkyocera@bozeman.net
To:Alex Newby
Date:Monday, June 16, 2025 11:58:29 AM
Attachments:doc01061020250616115818.pdf
-------------------
TASKalfa 3552ci
[00:17:c8:4c:d8:5a]
-------------------
City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and
may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its
sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the
City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to
individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law.
Carol & Tyler Merica
2493 Thoroughbred Lane Bozeman, MT 59718
merica@dainteriors.com or 406-579-6018 ba1911@bresnan.net or cell 406-579-6020
Date: June 15, 2025
Bozeman City Clerk
121 North Rouse Ave
P.O. Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59715
Re: Formal Protest of Annexation and Zone Map Amendment -Application #24570 (5211 Baxter Lane)
Dear Mayor, Commissioners, and City Clerk,
We, the undersigned, are the owners of property located at 2493 Thoroughbred Lane, which lies within 150 feet of the area affected by the proposed annexation and zoning map amendment referenced as Application #24570. Per Montana Code Annotated 76-2-305, we are submitting
this formal written protest against the proposed annexation and zone change for 5211 Baxter Lane.
We are deeply concerned that this development threatens the character, livability, and ecological integrity of our neighborhood. Specifically:
Unsupportable Increase in Traffic and Public Safety:
Application #24570 would establish Bozeman's NW city limit. Both Baxter Lane and Harper Puckett will remain County-administered two lane blacktop roads beyond the annexation
boundary, and the 2,000-acre area referenced ("between Baxter Lane, East Valley Center, Love Lane, and Harper Puckett") would rely on the same inadequate rural road network
absent major regional upgrades.
The application provides no analysis or awareness of road improvements, concern for traffic
impacts, or understanding of safety measures, despite proposing development at a scale
that will substantially increase vehicle traffic.
Allowing high-density zoning at the current city-county interface would overload the two-lane deep ditch no shoulder road network that has lacked infrastructure investment for the last 1 O years. There is no hint of planning, traffic studies, or defined funding to address known
impacts. This is not transitional zoning; it's a leap in use and intensity at a time when citycounty coordination on these issues seems strained.
Bozeman PD is able to field about 5-6 patrols citywide, leaving speeding uncheckedfrustrating both residents and officers. Harper Puckett has effectively become a drag strip,
including during school hours. There is virtually no traffic enforcement, not even on routes
serving Chief Joseph Middle School. While BPD officers do what they can, adding dense housing at the city's edge without resources to expand enforcement creates legal risk and
compounds existing public safety gaps.
Strain on Infrastructure Sewer and Water:
The "Bozeman Wastewater Service Area Report & Impact Fee Study" (March 2025) outlines capacity constraints in various service zones.
Sewer lift facility requirements will likely increase substantially for servicing high-density R-5
zones. The annexation narrative openly admits that key infrastructure (e.g., the Gooch Hill
regional lift station) is not yet in place. Laurel Glen lift capacity currently is more than 75% obligated. A temporary lift is proposed; the outfall is ambiguous and not aligned with long
term plans. This introduces operational and financial risk for the City and neighbors.
The development's reliance on future sewer infrastructure adds risk to
surrounding landowners and undermines responsible planning.
According to the City's 2015 Water Facility Plan and the 2024 draft update, water
availability, not infrastructure extension, is the long-term constraint. The proposed R-5 zoning on the along Baxter and in the northeast and northwest corners will require 4 to 7
times more water per acre than R-2 zoning.
The developer's offer to pay 'cash in lieu' does not address this fundamental capacity issue.
Bozeman cannot create new water-only allocate the limited supply it has. High-density zoning must be limited to areas that contribute new water rights or provide a clear,
documented public benefit. This application does neither as the single domestic well offered
is for a single family dwelling.
Incompatible Land Use:
The proposed R-5 zoning introduces high-density residential and mixed-use intensity that is fundamentally incompatible with the surrounding land use. The area west of Harper Puckett
to Love Lane is a rural, agricultural, and low-density single-family corridor-by design. This corner is not a gap in Bozeman's growth pattern; it is one of the city's gateways that offers unobstructed views of the Hyalite and Spanish Peaks. This natural setting contributes to
Bozeman's identity and first impression, not just for those living nearby, but for the broader public.
Allowing R-5 at this location undermines the intent of transitional zoning and ignores the
principle of step-down development at the edge of city limits. The density proposed here is driven more by development profitability than by a demonstrated alignment with the city's
growth goals or infrastructure readiness. The application suggests that approving R-5 now
will encourage the rest of the area to build out-but leapfrogging existing conditions in hopes of future compatibility is not responsible planning. This annexation should reflect
Bozeman's values, not a short-term financial return.
The application also misrepresents the developable potential of the site by downplaying regulatory constraints-most notably, required setbacks from wetlands and Baxter Creek.
These statutory buffers significantly reduce the usable area, yet the zoning map and
narrative present a misleading picture of what R-5 or R-3 zoning can realistically accommodate. By understating environmental setbacks, the proposal inflates the feasibility
of high-density development and obscures the long-term costs of approving land uses that
are incompatible with both the physical site and the community context. This creates risk for the City in the form of stalled or piecemeal development, legal disputes over environmental
compliance, and public backlash over avoidable planning failures
High-Density Zoning#:- Long-Term Affordability
R-5 zoning predominantly facilitates interim housing in the form of high-turnover rental units,rather than promoting long-term, owner-occupied residences. This undermines Bozeman'sstated goals for stable, inclusive neighborhood development and reduces future housingdiversity as the last buildable land in the city's northwest corner is absorbed by high-density,investor-driven projects.Real estate investment data shows a 20% vacancy rate in new high-density housingsignaling oversupply and weakening any planning rationale to expand this category further.In this case, the request for R-5 zoning appears not to reflect community need, but ratherthe financial pressure to salvage a difficult investment.The parcel is heavily constrained by wetlands and lacks gravity-fed sewer infrastructure
limitations that make traditional development unviable without maximizing density. This isspeculative zoning designed to recover land value, not responsible planning. It compromiseslong-term neighborhood stability and depresses adjacent home values, all for the short-termgain of the developer
We respectfully request that the Commission deny or significantly amend Application #24570. As submitted, the annexation proposal overstates the site's development potential, understates environmental and infrastructure constraints, and introduces zoning densities that are fundamentally incompatible with the surrounding area. High-density R-5 zoning at the city's rural edge-absent supporting infrastructure, traffic mitigation, or transitional land use buffers
creates financial, operational, and legal risk for the City. It prioritizes speculative land recovery over responsible planning and fails to meet Bozeman's long-term goals for neighborhood stability, water conservation, and compatible growth. We urge the Commission to require a
revised plan that respects the physical realities of the site, the city's infrastructure limitations, and the established character of the surrounding community.
Thank you for your time and service to the Bozeman community.
Sincerely, Carol & Tyler Merica
Our Qualifications to Protest:
We are the legal owners of [Your Property Address], which lies within 150 feet of the affected area. Owner(s):
•Carol & Timothy Merica
Signatures:
c;;