HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-15-24 Public Comment - M. Kaveney - Public comments for the Bozeman Landmark packet for City Comm. mtng 11_19_24From:Marcia Kaveney
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Public comments for the Bozeman Landmark packet for City Comm. mtng 11/19/24
Date:Thursday, November 14, 2024 10:46:32 AM
Attachments:2024.11.14.HPLP_comments for CC from BTC.pdf
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.
Please add the attached public comment to the Historic Preservation Landmark Programpacket that is scheduled to be sent to the City Commissioners today or tomorrow.
Thank you,Marcia Kaveney
2024.11/14. HPLP_ Comments for City Commission
Dear Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and City Commissioners,
The Bozeman Tree Coalition (BTC) is writing to comment on the City Commission’s November
19, 2024, work session on the Bozeman Landmark Program: Initial Guidance Report.
The Initial Guidance Report is divided into Policy Conversations and Program Conversations
and our comments are organized accordingly. Overall, we are supportive of this program and
appreciate Community Development Board members Nicole Olmstead, Mark Egge, and
Commissioner Madgic expressing their interest in tree protections and the Heritage Tree Program
during the CDB meeting Landmark Program presentation on October 21, 2024. We agree with
the statement that "CPC is a facilitator for this process, sharing information around available
policy options, while Bozeman citizens and the community are the experts in identifying
Bozeman’s needs and goals.” As a community-based grassroots coalition, the BTC appreciates
the opportunity to comment on the Bozeman Landmark Program.
Policy Conversations Pros:
As advocates for the protection of Bozeman's natural environment—including Bozeman's urban
forest—we are pleased the Landmark Program Project Initial Guidance Report (Report) includes
the following language:
(1) "Modify City Code section 2.05.860 and 2.05.930 to expand the responsibilities of
the Historic Preservation Advisory Board (HPAB) to include cultural heritage and
evaluation of landmark nominations."
(2) "Create a city-wide local landmark program that includes both architectural and
cultural significance. This would allow for designation of individual historic or cultural
landmarks inside and outside the NCOD, including buildings, environmental
spaces and natural features*, and sites of cultural importance." (Bolding is ours.)
Recommendation:
*We suggest adding definitions and examples of “environmental spaces and natural features.”
The Bozeman Landmark Program Initial Guidance Report proposes to include both Bozeman’s
built environment as well as “environmental spaces and natural features.” Eliminating the
adoption of tree regulations in the policy conversations is in direct opposition to the idea. Large,
old trees, such as many of Bozeman’s potential Heritage Trees are commonly considered as
small, natural features:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320716307893
Policy Conversation Cons:
We disagree with the consultants’ following recommendation:
(1) “Additional policy options to explore in the future that
are beyond the scope of the current project” including "Consider adopting tree regulations."
Our justification is as follows:
Adding tree protections to the Bozeman Landmark Program aligns with the work Historic
Preservation Advisory Board members have already done to develop the Heritage Tree Program.
They have been talking about it for well over a year. A Heritage Tree Program reflects
community wishes as well as the environmental goals of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020,
The Climate Action Plan, The Strategic Plan, and the Urban Forestry Plan.
Recommendation:
We ask you to add the following sentence to the Policy Conversations section:
(1) “Consider following through on the HPB’s voluntary Heritage Tree Program and adopting a
Tree Ordinance within the UDC.”
Program Conversations Pros:
We are pleased that this section includes the following language,
(1) “Create a historic preservation master plan or include a historic preservation element in future
updates to the Growth Policy [aka Bozeman Community Plan].”
Program Conversation Cons:
We are concerned to find:
(1) No direct references to Bozeman’s “environmental spaces and natural features” in the
Program Conversations section. Direct references to Bozeman’s natural environment,
environmental spaces, and natural features (including trees) could—and should—be added to this
section.
Recommendation:
Insert language that includes Bozeman’s environmental spaces and natural features. Example
language could include:
(1) “Implement a local historic marker program to highlight important cultural sites and
heritage trees, groves, and other notable vegetation.”
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Bozeman Tree Coalition co-founders:
Marcia Kaveney
Daniel Carty
Angie Kociolek
April Craighead