HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-01-25 Public Comment - P. Yasbek - GuthrieFrom:City of Bozeman, MT
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]*NEW SUBMISSION* Public Comment Form - City Clerk
Date:Tuesday, April 1, 2025 12:34:58 AM
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.
Public Comment Form - City Clerk
Submission #:3895834
IP Address:47.45.229.222
Submission Date:04/01/2025 12:34
Survey Time:2 minutes, 9 seconds
You have a new online form submission.
Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login.
Read-Only Content
Full Name
Patti Yasbek
Email
pattiyasbek@gmail.com
Phone
(406) 539-3040
Comments
Please see attached comments.
If you would like to submit additional documents (.pdf, .doc, .docx, .xls, .xlsx, .gif, .jpg, .png, .rtf, .txt) along with
your comment, you may alternately address comments@bozeman.net directly to ensure receipt of all
information.
2025 Guthrie 25033.docx
Thank you,
City Of Bozeman
This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email.
I urge the Bozeman City Commission to reverse the decision on the Guthrie Application
25033.
I have had the opportunity to read the public comments submitted. The comments
indicate non-adherence to NCOD is widely considered egregious.
I have lived in the mid-town area for >20 years and have submitted numerous NCOD
applications, including a garage, ADU, siding, and roofing. I was REQUIRED to follow all the
NCOD requirements upon each submittal. I met with the city planning, prior to submittal to
improve my projects’ chance of approval. The submittal required an architect, as many of
the NCOD requirements were beyond my knowledge. It was a tedious, time-consuming
and expensive endeavor to submit all the required information. I had to submit the color &
all the materials that was going to be used (windows, light fixtures, siding …). I had to
submit pictures of my existing structures and had to demonstrate how all the proposed
elements fit together. The process was rather intimidating. I always held my breath waiting
for approval. During the pre-review of the NCOD application with city planning, I was
informed there were certain parking, setbacks, height restrictions, water/sewer
requirements, and area coverage calculations that must be met. I’m not sure which were
NCOD, and which were Building codes, regardless, these items were expected to be
included in the NCOD submittal.
Reducing the NCOD’s authority by selectively applying or “considering” guidelines as
suggestions is not justifiable when approving the Guthrie project. This project opens the
door for incompatible development, introducing height, mass, and scale that dwarf
surrounding structures and erodes neighborhood integrity.
If anyone in the city has been in the mid-town neighborhood when Whittier school begins
and ends the day, or when the ELM, the Fairgrounds, BMX park or Aspen Crossing have
events, they would surely think twice about adding more vehicle traffic and parking. There
will be a large increase in traffic associated with No 3rd apartments under construction.
This existing traffic and parking are a lot for the neighborhood to absorb. It is already
difficult for a vehicle to turn onto Peach Street for a good part of the day.
Elementary students and parents must cross 5th, 6th, 7th, and Peach, it is precarious without
adding more congestion. Delivery trucks, UPS and FedEx must park in the middle of the
street to make a delivery. During the winter months, the snow limits 2-way traffic. Approving
the Guthrie will surely exacerbate safety and congestion in this area.
If a project like The Guthrie is considered acceptable in neighborhoods, like mid-town, it
ensures these neighborhoods will become less desirable for single family dwellings.
Should we all relocate, and if so, where? It would be difficult to find affordable housing and
the amenities this neighborhood offers in Bozeman. I hope to be able to live here through
my retirement and have made many improvements to my home, albeit following all the
rules.
As one person said “Bozeman’s affordable housing and historic preservation goals are not
mutually exclusive. One need not be sacrificed for the other. At this critical juncture in our
developmental history, the city must pursue win-win solutions that simultaneously
advance its historic preservation and affordable housing goals. Only in this way can our
community continue to live up to its inspiring slogan, “The Most Livable Place.””
I do not oppose growth or progress, rather I want to see our city do it right. The community
has not rejected new development or even affordable housing on this site. Residents want
this development to comply with the same standards that have guided all prior projects. I
propose we build more housing, while respecting the folks who already live here, by
defining “infill” in a neighborhood friendly way.
I believe, if the community was involved in these proposals long before the city and
developers spend so much time and money, we would develop solutions that would
balance the neighborhood, community and city objectives. It would surely be a less
expensive and contentious option.
Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments.
Patti Yasbek
518 N 5th Ave