HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-25-24 Public Comment - A. Sweeney - Public Comment on Application # 23354, the GuthrieFrom:Alison Sweeney
To:Agenda
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Public Comment on Application # 23354, the Guthrie
Date:Monday, March 25, 2024 4:09:55 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 and Commissioners
I’m requesting that you exercise the prerogative granted to the commission in
section 38.200.010 B.2. of the Bozeman Municipal Code to reclaim the role of
review authority in regards to Application # 23354, known as the Guthrie.
· Exception. The city commission may, by an affirmative, simple majority vote of its
members at a regularly scheduled meeting reclaim to itself the final approval of a
development application normally subject to the approval of the community development
director. The vote must occur prior to the action of the community development director.
The applicant has failed to meet the criteria for a Certificate of
Appropriateness (COA) for demolition within the Neighborhood
Conservation Overlay District(NCOD) according to Bozeman Municipal Code.
· 38.220.090 A.1.j If demolition of a historic structure, as defined in article 7 of this
chapter, is proposed a structural analysis and cost estimates indicating the costs of repair
and/or rehabilitation to bring the structure to a (1)habitable condition as established by the
applicable technical codes in Article 10.02, (2)versus the costs of demolition and
redevelopment. (3)Analysis must include cost estimates from more than one general
contractor for the work. The cost comparison is between the cost to rehabilitate the
structure to a condition which meets the building code standard for occupancy
and (2)demolition and construction of a new structure of the same type and scale to
building code standards.
1. A COA for demolition within the NCOD requires a cost estimate
for the existing structure to be brought up to habitable condition
according to code. Was the bid to bring the structure up to
habitable condition, or did it include excessively nice finishes and
systems not required by code to make the bid for renovation more
expensive? Arco Murray projected hard costs of close to $9
million. There were no other bids. This bears closer scrutiny.
2. No bid was provided by Homebase Partners for the cost of
construction of a new structure of the same type and
scale. Homebase Partners only provided a pro forma for the new 5
story 111 unit building, which will necessarily require steel
construction, not a new building of the same type and scale. The
current structure is described as follows on the historic inventory
form: The building is wood framed with a concrete foundation. It has a
U-shaped plan, which is open on the west side. The gable-front wall is
clad in brick, with decorative mid-century fiberglass panels filling space
between window openings. To the north and south are two-story residence
wings that extend east-west, forming the two arms of the “U” shaped plan.
The residence wings have a parapeted flat roof and are clad in EIFS
3. Homebase Partners has not provided competing bids. Only one
estimate for renovation is listed in the documents for public
review. Arco Murray projected hard costs of close to $9
million. Were any local companies asked for bids?
· Article 7 defines a historic structure as “Any building or structure that is:
1. listed in the State or National Register of Historic Places;
2. designated as a historic property under local or state designation law or
survey;
3. certified as a contributing resource within a National Register listed or locally
designated historic district; or
4. eligible, as determined by the City of Bozeman, to be listed on the National or
State Register of Historic Places either individually or as a contributing building
to an existing or potential historic district.
Bozeman’s map of historic places contains a property record for 321 N
5th describing the current convalescent center as eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places.
https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/DocView.aspx?
id=228180&dbid=0&repo=bozeman
When asked by our own Historic Preservation Officer to provide the required
documentation described above, Homebase partners said they provided the
following:
“budgets, pro formas, and financial analyses which provide clear evidence of
why pursuing a renovation of the existing building is not feasible. In the
renovation analysis you can see that based on the construction and operational
costs the project would not even be able to cover debt service. Neither we, nor
any bank, would undertake a project with these projections.”
The question asked, and the requirement for issuing a COA for demolition
within the NCOD, is not, can the developer make a profit!
It is; does the cost of bringing the structure to a habitable condition exceed
the cost of demolition and redevelopment of a new structure of the same
type and scale to minimum standards.
Homebase Partners has not satisfied the requirements to issue a demolition
permit.
Though Bozeman code does not provide any obligation of the city to guarantee
the developer makes a profit on their choice of project for the adaptive reuse
of a historic resource I would draw your attention to the following.
I question whether the income projections for the renovation are deliberately
low in order to make the project seem financially insolvent. The pro forma for
the renovation lists the monthly rents per unit type as follows:
· a studio at $1350/mo
· 1 bedroom at $1500/mo
· 2 bedroom at $1700/mo
· 3 bedroom at $1900/mo
This is below market rate rent for Bozeman. Remember this renovation
requires no affordable housing be provided. The new build is renting
“affordable” units as follows:
· studios at $1650/mo
· 1 bedroom at $1684/mo
I question why the affordable units that give the developer the deep incentives
rent higher than estimated market rate units in the renovation. By my
calculation based on current market rate rents in Bozeman, the pro forma for
the renovation underestimates income by at least $225,000 annually. This calls
into question all of the work submitted, and makes the case for the commission
to reclaim final review authority of the project. I can tell you the developers fee
doubles in the new construction.
The Commission has set a priority to strengthen historic preservation in
Bozeman. This can begin by enforcing existing code.
The 2020 Community Plan cites historic preservation as an area where the
city can do better according to the residents who participated. Page A-3.
The Commission has set a priority to rebuild trust and pride in local
governance.
Reclaiming review authority over this project will help you accomplish all
three.
Thank you for your service and consideration,
Alison B. SweeneyBernadette's Handmade Jewelry
Bozeman MT406-404-5740
alison-bernadettes.com