Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-01-25 Public Comment - B. Adams - Stop the GuthrieFrom:Beverly Adams To:Bozeman Public Comment Subject:[EXTERNAL]Stop the Guthrie Date:Tuesday, April 1, 2025 7:41:48 AM Attachments:Commentary letter v4.docx 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. Beverly AdamsBozeman resident Sent from my iPhone Public Comment to the Bozeman City Commission Re: Opposition to the Guthrie Project – Support for Appeal of COA Approval [Your Name] | [Date] Mayor, Commissioners, Thank you for the opportunity to provide public comment. I am speaking today in firm opposition to the proposed construction of the Guthrie project at the site located in the Karp Addition and in full support of the appeal to overturn the Certificate of Appropriateness and site plan approval issued for this project. Let me be clear: this is not a rejection of growth, affordable housing, or development in our city. Rather, this is a request that development within the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) be consistent with the mandatory code we collectively agreed to enforce. The Guthrie project, as currently proposed, clearly and substantially violates the NCOD Design Guidelines—guidelines that are adopted into Bozeman’s Unified Development Code and must be upheld. Staff have wrongly asserted that the NCOD Guidelines are “not compulsory.” That is legally and factually incorrect. Section 38.110.010(B) of the Bozeman Municipal Code explicitly adopts the Design Guidelines by reference, making them enforceable law. Moreover, Section 38.100.050(A) clearly states that where regulations conflict, the more restrictive standard must govern. This means that NCOD guidelines override base zoning like R-5 when they conflict—and they do in this case. Further, staff’s interpretation of the term “should” is flawed and diminution of the Design Guidelines because of its intentional flexibility is in error. In Appendix B, “should” is defined as: “If the term ‘should’ appears in a design guideline, compliance is required.” Discretion is only allowed when a project proves it still meets the related policy goal associated with the guideline. The meeting of the related policies do not apply to the Guthrie project, which fails to meet multiple policies related to building mass, scale, and context. Approving this project sets a dangerous precedent by selectively ignoring city code. The claim that the project is “adjacent to” the relevant neighborhood that should be used as a basis for determining compatibility and appropriateness is also misleading. The project site is within the NCOD. Its legal subdivision—Karp Addition—is shared with surrounding residential properties. It was platted in 1946, and development followed in the postwar period. In fact, Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, commissioned by the city in 2019 and 2020, explicitly recommended that Karp and Violett Additions be studied as potential historic districts due to their architectural integrity and cohesive neighborhood character. These areas, Metcalf noted, reflect the Nationalization and Postwar Expansion phases of Bozeman’s development—eras not well represented in our existing National Register listings. Instead of using this expert guidance to evaluate the Guthrie project, staff have leaned on the boundaries of the Midtown Neighborhood Association—an organization created for civic communication, not legal land-use definition. Neighborhood character, as shaped by subdivision history, architectural surveys, and context, should be the basis of determining appropriateness—not arbitrary boundaries. Moreover, the Guthrie, as proposed, is deeply incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Volume analysis presented by appellants shows that it is up to 10 times larger by volume than surrounding buildings—20 times larger than some single-family homes nearby. Its size, mass, and scale are drawn from commercial zones—not residential character areas protected by the NCOD. It overwhelms rather than complements, and disregards NCOD Guidelines, such as Design Guideline B: Building Mass and Scale, which states: “A new building should not be so dramatically greater in scale than the established context that the visual continuity of the neighborhood would be compromised.” And compromise it would. This isn't just a code dispute. It's a question of whether Bozeman honors the principles of fairness, transparency, and community protection. The NCOD has been in place since 1991. It has shaped the look, feel, and livability of our historic neighborhoods for over three decades. It was created to prevent precisely this kind of development mismatch. If the city wants to change that vision, it must do so through a public legislative process—not by quietly invalidating the code in the permit review phase. Allowing this project to proceed without requiring compliance with the NCOD not only erodes neighborhood character—it erodes public trust. It sends the message that our planning code is optional, that developers can ignore established guidelines if they’re inconvenient, and that community voices don’t matter. That is not how Bozeman should grow. Bozeman can build affordable housing and honor its code. The neighborhood has welcomed housing at this site. Many residents even preferred adaptive reuse of the existing structure—an environmentally responsible and contextually appropriate option that would have delivered nearly the same number of bedrooms. The community did not reject housing; it rejected a proposal that flagrantly disregards the rules we all must follow. I urge this Commission to uphold the appeal and require that any future development on this site comply fully with the NCOD Design Guidelines. This is about more than a single building—it’s about preserving Bozeman’s identity, honoring our code, and protecting the integrity of our process. Thank you.