Fire Bucket Meadows subdivision delayed after neighbors raise groundwater concerns; hydrogeologist and water rights consultant present conflicting context

The commission opened the third hearing on the proposed Fire Bucket Meadows subdivision and took extensive public comment on groundwater availability before agreeing to delay a final action so a groundwater analysis and water‑district review could be presented at the next meeting.

Patrick Swart, county planner, recapped the proposal: a five‑lot residential minor subdivision on a 19.82‑acre parcel at 11109 Fire Bucket Loop, yielding roughly one dwelling per 3.96 acres, with access from Fire Bucket Loop. Earlier hearings had been continued to allow the applicants to provide additional information on groundwater availability and potential impacts to neighboring wells.

The applicants retained Water Rights, Inc. to prepare a groundwater analysis and provided that report to the county. Ron Ewart, representing the applicants (PCI), summarized the project and the hydrologic work: he said consultants recommend building envelopes, cisterns as a mitigation option, and well construction by experienced drillers. Ewart said a December 2023 well in the general area tested at about 20 gallons per minute and cited the submitted Water Rights, Inc. report and a hydrogeologist's summary in support of adequate groundwater if wells are constructed correctly.

Hydrogeologist Howard Newman testified that the area's geology consists of alluvial deposits and lenses with variable yields and that many local wells intersect different water‑bearing lenses that do not necessarily communicate with one another; he concluded that well interference risk at the distances discussed is low and that local conditions can yield adequate domestic supply when wells are sited and constructed appropriately.

Opponents and nearby residents gave multiple comments describing recent well problems and replacement costs, and urged up‑to‑date, site‑specific testing. Gordon Schmill and Autumn Schmill urged current field data rather than reliance on older reports; Sarah Curtis noted a personal well that had lost 40% of its depth since it was drilled in 2017 and said cisterns are not a reliable solution for some households. Deborah Bell cited Missoula County subdivision regulations (chapter 3.6 0.21 as quoted) requiring demonstration of a dependable water source for subdivisions.

Applicants and their consultants said they have commissioned hydrogeologic analyses and are prepared to comply with health‑department and DEQ sanitation review; Ewart said pump testing and formal health‑department processes will follow preliminary plat approval and that the applicant had agreed to a short continuance so the Water Rights, Inc. report and county water‑district comments could be presented. Swart said Missoula Water Quality District specialist Elena Evans had requested time to review the Water Rights report and would attend the next meeting. Commissioners agreed to continue the hearing to May 29 (the next scheduled public meeting) to receive the Water Rights, Inc. presentation and Ms. Evans' comments.

No final decision was made at the hearing; commissioners framed the continuation as allowing the technical record to be completed before action and reiterated that sanitation and DEQ review remain required steps for final plat approval.