Residents and agencies push back on Shriber Meadows subdivision over water, wildlife and fire concerns

Lincoln County planning staff presented preliminary plats for Shriber Meadows North (12 lots on ~90 acres) and Shriber Meadows South (about 15 lots on ~158 acres), then opened a public hearing that drew sustained opposition from area residents and agency commenters.

Planner Jesse summarized the proposal and the seven statutory criteria the county must consider under the Montana Subdivision Platting Act, including impacts on agriculture and water-user facilities. He said developers drilled four test wells and the applicant’s hydrogeologist concluded there was no direct hydraulic connection between the groundwater aquifer and Shriber Lake. "In their memorandum, they present evidence to support their assessment that there is not a direct hydraulic connection between the aquifer and the lake," Jesse told the board.

Multiple commenters disputed that conclusion. Dr. Robera McCanns, a newly appointed member of the county planning board, said she abstained from the planning board vote because many questions remained unanswered, notably about aquifer capacity and how the county would monitor dozens of individual wells if the subdivision proceeded. "I abstained because of the number of questions I felt hadn't been answered," she said.

Residents cited recent changes in local water levels. Earl Messik described an artesian well in his area that dried up last summer for the first time in living memory and said the proposed development could exacerbate water shortages. "My grandfather said years ago water was going to be a big issue — and I think he's hitting the nail on the head," Messik said. Don Tracy and others urged reduced density, suggesting fewer lots would reduce impacts to water and services.

Agencies and emergency services also expressed concerns. MDOT noted the project abuts a state wetland mitigation site created during highway reconstruction; MDOT staff flagged potential impacts to wetland hydrology and the need to avoid encroachment into mitigation areas. Fish, Wildlife & Parks recommended buffers and 'living with wildlife' covenants, saying the site is used as movement corridor and winter range for elk, moose, deer and bears.

Fisher River Valley Fire and Rescue and its representatives said they could provide protection only if developer conditions are met; the developers offered a 30,000-gallon cistern and proposed a secondary emergency egress. "Fisher River Valley is not opposed to this or support as long as the criteria is met that we've been asking for," said Stu Chris, chairman of the Fire District board.

The applicant's project engineer, Andy, told the board that conditions and proposed covenants were intended to protect the mitigation site and address fire-safety measures, and that final engineering would address access and slope stability. He said well logs and static water levels showed groundwater levels lower than the lake surface, which the applicant interpreted as evidence the lake and aquifer are not directly connected.

Planning staff noted remaining technical questions — including differing interpretations between the applicant's hydrogeologic memorandum and MDOT’s concerns — and recommended approval of the plats subject to 34 conditions for the north project and additional conditions for the south project. The board also was reminded of a July 2 statutory deadline to make a decision.

The hearing record shows sustained local opposition focused on water availability, habitat and emergency response capability. Planning staff and the applicant said conditions and further studies (geotechnical analysis for slope stability, clear easement and approach permits, and specified buffers) could mitigate impacts; several residents urged commissioners to deny or substantially reduce the proposal.