Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-02-25 Public Comment - K. Filipovich - UDC - request for final language review and clarification before ratificationFrom:Karen Filipovich To:Bozeman Public Comment Subject:[EXTERNAL]UDC - request for final language review and clarification before ratification Date:Monday, December 1, 2025 10:02:25 PM 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 Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and Commissioners: I appreciate the care and thought that has gone into the UDC update. Before you ratify this update, please have fresh eyes look at the entire document to ensure that future commissioners, staff, residents, and landowners will be able to interpret it consistently. I request this final step, after final substantive changes are made, because I noticed some difficulties in how to interpret sections in areas that I am familiar with. The first example is in the transitions section. In it is a 60’ street width trigger for transition requirements between zones. Since the method to determine this measurement is not included beyond a statement of "property line," inquiries were made as to how to determine this. Two different definitions were provided by city staff: a buffer, sidewalk, boulevard and street measure formula OR a determination made by measuring from plat line to plat line across a street. Then, at the Community Development Board meeting on November 16, it was suggested that a landowner could simply cede any necessary inches to the city to create a 60’ street easement width, which would then negate the need for a transition. These three different approaches could easily lead to different interpretations, confusion, and conflict. The second example is guidance on how to address irrigation ditch and canal easements and operations. The language in this section does make references to MCA, but as the Association of Gallatin Agricultural Irrigators (AGAI) pointed out in their comments, the explanation of how all this interacts with water law is somewhat confusing, especially to someone who is not deeply family with a water rights-based system and the specifics of the regulations around agricultural irrigation ditches. While I have no doubt that current staff know how to address this issue, the absence of this connection mean that landowners and future staff may not grasp these requirements exist and how to correctly following the state law and local UDC. A good example of how reference to additional jurisdictions is found in section 38.610.060-38.610.110 of the code pertaining to wetlands. Writing code is difficult, and I believe that this was written with every intent to be clear. However, the standard is to ensure that future parties can understand and implement it consistently. A final, outside review that identifies places that are not clear or do not reference important context is essential so that future parties can all agree on what the code means. The City has a deadline of May 2026 to comply with the new state requirements. You have time to do this after making final substantive changes to the UDC. I urge you to add time for this action and delay final ratification until an outside review for clarity and needed corrections are completed. Limiting unintended consequences is worth doing. Sincerely, Karen Filipovich