The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-16-25 HPAB Agenda and Packet MaterialsA. Call to Order - 6:00 pm B. Disclosures C. Changes to the Agenda D. Approval of Minutes D.1 Approval of the March 19, 2025 meeting minutes (Chase) E. Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and Jurisdiction of the Board THE BOZEMAN HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA HPAB AGENDA Wednesday, April 16, 2025 General information about the Historic Preservation Advisory Board is available in our Laserfiche repository. If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda please send an email to comments@bozeman.net or by visiting the Public Comment Page prior to 12:00pm on the day of the meeting. At the direction of the City Commission, anonymous public comments are not distributed to the Board or staff. Public comments will also be accepted in-person and through Video Conference during the appropriate agenda items. As always, the meeting will be streamed through the Commission's video page and available in the City on cable channel 190. For more information please contact Sarah Rosenberg, srosenberg@bozeman.net This meeting will be held both in-person and also using an online video conferencing system. You can join this meeting: Via Video Conference: Click the Register link, enter the required information, and click submit. Click Join Now to enter the meeting. Via Phone: This is for listening only if you cannot watch the stream, channel 190, or attend in- person United States Toll +1 669 900 9128 Access code: 973 0055 8356 This is the time to comment on any non-agenda matter falling within the scope of the Historic Preservation Advisory Board. There will also be time in conjunction with each agenda item for public comment relating to that item but you may only speak once per topic. Please note, the Board cannot take action on any item which does not appear on the agenda. All persons addressing the Board shall speak in a civil and courteous manner and members of the audience 1 F. Action Items F.1 Approval of Bozeman Landmark Project Phase 1 Report, application 22388, to City Commission.(Burke) G. FYI/Discussions G.1 Announcement of Historic Preservation Month events (HPAB) G.2 Cancellation of May Historic Preservation Advisory Board Meeting (HPAB) H. Adjournment shall be respectful of others. Please state your name, and state whether you are a resident of the city or a property owner within the city in an audible tone of voice for the record and limit your comments to three minutes. General public comments to the Board can be found on their Laserfiche repository page. This board generally meets the 3rd Wednesday of the month from 6:00 to 8:00pm City Board meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires assistance, please contact our ADA Coordinator, David Arnado, at 406.582.3232. 2 Memorandum REPORT TO:Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board FROM:Luz Chase with Community Development SUBJECT:Approval of the March 19, 2025 meeting minutes MEETING DATE:April 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes RECOMMENDATION:Approve STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:None UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:Approve with Corrections FISCAL EFFECTS:None Attachments: 03192025 HPAB Minutes.pdf Report compiled on: March 20, 2025 3 Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board Meeting Minutes, 03/19/2025 Page 1 of 2 THE Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MINUTES 03/19/2025 General information about the Historic Preservation Advisory Board is available in our Laserfiche repository. A) 00:00:53 Call to Order - 6:00 pm Present: Chelsea Holling, Linda Semones, Elizabeth Darrow, Sarah Rosenberg, Allyson Brekke, Ashley Wilson, James Webster Absent: Michael Wiseman Excused: None B) 00:01:03 Disclosures C) 00:01:12 Changes to the Agenda D) 00:01:19 Approval of Minutes D.1 00:01:38 Approval of Minutes 021925 HPAB Minutes.pdf 00:01:45 Motion to approve Approve Elizabeth Darrow: Motion Ashley Wilson: 2nd 00:01:51 Vote on the Motion to approve Approve The Motion carried 5 - 0. Approve: Chelsea Holling Linda Semones Elizabeth Darrow Allyson Brekke 4 Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board Meeting Minutes, 03/19/2025 Page 2 of 2 Ashley Wilson Disapprove: None E) 00:02:29 Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and Jurisdiction of the Board 00:02:47 Scott Boyd provides public comment. 00:06:44 Allison Sweeny provides public comment. F) 00:10:50 FYI/Discussions F.1 00:10:56 Unified Development Code (UDC) Update Supplemental Engagement Phase 1 Report and Work Session UDC Survey Results.pdf UDC Open House Report - CDB 2-3-2025.pdf 00:11:11 Tom Rogers presents to the board. 01:02:22 Allison Sweeny provides public comment. 01:04:14 Daniel Cardi provides public comment. 01:06:47 Natsuki Nakumara provides public comment. F.2 01:47:31 Discuss Historic Preservation Month 2025 01:54:37 Allison Sweeny speaks on behalf of the Better Bozeman Coalition (BBC) about collaborating with HPAB. F.3 02:03:44 Upcoming items for future Historic Preservation Advisory Board meeting G) 02:06:37 Adjournment This board generally meets the 3rd Wednesday of the month from 6:00 to 8:00pm 5 Memorandum REPORT TO:Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board FROM:Sarah Rosenberg, Planner/Historic Preservation Officer Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager Erin George, Director of Community Development SUBJECT:Approval of Bozeman Landmark Project Phase 1 Report, application 22388, to City Commission. MEETING DATE:April 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:Having considered the Landmark Project Phase 1 Report, application 22388, all public comment, and information received, I move to recommend City Commission approve the Phase 1 Report as submitted. STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:The Historic Preservation Program began in the early 1980's when a comprehensive historic architecture survey of the "historic portion" of the city was conducted. Surveying over 3,000 properties provided the foundation to nominate ten National Historic Districts in subsequent years, adopt historic preservation regulations, and create the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) in 1991. Since then, the current regulations in Section 38.340 of the Bozeman Municipal Code have been applied to new development and alterations within the historic districts or the NCOD via the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) process. Reports evaluating the NCOD were prepared in both 2015 and 2019 that note the successes of the NCOD and the Historic Preservation program, but also recommend changes. The City issued an RFP in December 2022 seeking consultant assistance to conduct additional research and community engagement to inform and draft policy and regulation changes, including a local landmark nomination process, in line with the 2015 and 2019 reports and recent national trends. After a competitive procurement process, Community Planning Collaborative (CPC) was selected to assist with the project. The scope of the Bozeman Landmark Project included the following: Evaluate Section 38.340 of the Unified Development Code - where all things historic preservation and standards for the NCOD reside; Assess the review criteria and standards for certificate of appropriateness applications; Reevaluate the NCOD - determine the effectiveness of the district and its boundary and how it 6 relates to the historic preservation program as a whole since this project is looking at the entire city and not just the NCOD; Create a Landmark Program and nomination process which can identify places of importance that may not be recognized as significant at the National level and can establish its own locally-specific standards and regulations. The project is divided into two phases. This report is the final part of the first phase which outlines recommendations based on research, community engagement (which occurred in summer and early fall of 2024), and data analysis. The Phase 1 Report provides recommendations for the next steps in phase 2, including but not limited to changes to the code, creating a nomination process and criteria for landmarks, updating the NCOD Guidelines, and more. Recommendations are intentionally written in broad language, and Phase 2 (scheduled for summer/fall 2025) will involve additional public engagement and drafting the actual code amendments. The City Commission will consider adoption of the Phase 1 Report on May 18, following discussion and recommendations from HPAB on April 16 and the Community Development Board on April 21. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the Board. FISCAL EFFECTS:Funds for the project are included in the FY25 budget. Attachments: Appendices Phase 1 Report Report compiled on: April 3, 2025 7 1PB APPENDICES Historic Preservation Policy & Local Landmark Project Prepared for City of Bozeman, MT By April 4, 2025 8 32 APPENDICES ...............................................................................................................................................89 A Historic Overview of Bozeman ................................................................................................................3 B Bozeman Planning and Land Development History .............................................................10 C Summary of 2015 and 2019 NCOD Reports ..............................................................................13 D Community Engagement Summary...................................................................................................17 E Survey and Context Study Recommendations .......................................................................52 F Funding and Incentives ..............................................................................................................................58 G Historic Cemetery Preservation ...........................................................................................................64 H Education, Outreach, and Interpretation Recommendations.........................................67 I Resources and Best Practice Examples .......................................................................................72 Table of Contents APPENDIX A HISTORIC OVERVIEW OF BOZEMAN 9 54 Appendix A Historic Overview of Bozeman For additional context on Bozeman’s history, see the historic narrative included in the Belonging in Bozeman plan adopted December 19, 2023 and the background provided in the 2020 Community Plan Appendix C adopted November 17, 2020. The land known today as Bozeman has been shaped by everything from animals, plants, hunting, trading, dispossession, commerce, organizing, agriculture, and tourism. It tells a complex story of the west, at times mirroring narratives of Indigenous, Montana, and United States history. At other times, like any place’s story, a true understanding of Bozeman diverges from general histories into a specific set of stories. It is a widespread human practice to geographically relocate in search of resources, safety, and social well-being. For thousands of years before today’s 20.91 square miles was incorporated as the city of Bozeman, that land and much of what is now known as southwest Montana was a common hunting ground for many 9. The Séliš (Bitterroot Salish), Qlispé (Pend d’Orreille), Ktunaxa (Kootenai), Pikuni (Blackfeet), Tsistsis’tas (Northern Cheyenne), Apsáalooke (Crow), Anishinaabe (Chippewa), Nehiyawak (Cree), Metis, Nakoda (Assiniboine), A’aninin (Gros Ventre), Dakota, Lakota, and other peoples long historically resided on lands throughout Montana. The land now called Bozeman was part of a much larger area in which many tribes hunted and gathered sustenance seasonally. Rather than living here long term, they arrived to seek beavers, bison, and other flora and fauna. Indigenous people’s seasonal time in this area allowed them not only to forge relationships between their nations, but with the land and its plant and animal inhabitants. Tribal nations were not stagnant or alike. Over time, tribes such as the Apsáalooke, Pikuni, and A’aninin moved into the state in the 1600s and 1700s, while the Qlispé, Séliš, and Ktunaxa trace their ancestral birthplace to the region. Allegiances and alliances formed and waned. Nations were connected by trade. The arrival of European American settlers forever changed these dynamics. In 1805 Lewis and Clark and the Corps of Discovery set foot on the land known today as Montana. They may have been preceded in the Gallatin Valley by European trappers and fur traders in the late 1700s. Clark’s group traversed land several miles from present-day Bozeman. In the decades that followed, European Americans returned, attempting passage through these lands or to settle. Their arrival and different expectations about land practices created conflict with Indigenous people. The 1851 Fort Laramie Treaty was signed by 21 chiefs of Indigenous nations, demonstrating the widespread desire for peace. Although largely achieved for the next 13 years, white land demands soon created tension that erupted into hostility between Indigenous nations. Although the treaty required the United States federal government to protect Indigenous resources, including from damage to tribal hunting grounds by settlers on the Oregon Trail, the US failed to do so, breaking the treaty. In 1863, John Bozeman and John Jacobs used Indigenous trails to lay out the Bozeman Trail and “led the first wagon train of emigrants through the Gallatin Valley to gold mines in Alder Gulch the following year. At the crossing of what we now call Bozeman Creek, Bozeman, William Beall, and Daniel Rouse platted a town to supply emigrants.” Bozeman’s calculated opportunity to grow his personal fortune set off a chain reaction. Indigenous nations retaliated against the incursions, so the US then constructed Fort Ellis. From this fort and Fort Parker, the US undertook a violent effort to secure the land for itself, ultimately forcing Indigenous inhabitants onto Reservations. Nelson Story, who would become Bozeman’s first millionaire, added to his net worth by supplying flour to both forts. The Bozeman Trail created wealth for John Bozeman when gold was found west of the valley. Some of those who trekked across it rushing for gold made a return trip. They became farmers or started businesses in the new town of Bozeman, established in 1864. The city was incorporated in 1883. From the 1860s-1980s, Bozeman would serve as the commercial hub for an agricultural county. By the 1880s, settlers had dramatically changed the landscape of the Gallatin Valley. With Bozeman situated on arable land, newcomers were plowing fields, destroying beaver dams, and killing bison at an unsustainable pace. Early irrigation efforts transformed the land. The irrigation systems developed by early settlers are one of the longest continuously used human creations in the valley. These new residents did not view themselves as connected to the plants and animals and land, as the Indigenous nations did. Although settlers did not live with it the way Indigenous custodians had, they recognized the abundance of water in the Gallatin Valley. This would be part of the area’s key to agricultural success, combined with wagon and later rail access to customers. Bozeman was an important outpost for miners from Virginia City, Helena, and Bannack. The mining economy was changing these areas forever, sometimes with environmental impacts that were not understood at the time. Bozeman, unlike so many boom and bust Montana towns of the late 1800s, would succeed in establishing a stable economy and resident base that allowed it to grow long after the heyday of other towns. Bozeman’s location in an agriculturally prosperous area was important to its economy for more than 100 years. Wheat, potatoes, and vegetables were also important early crops. Farms also raised cattle, horses, and sheep. Wheat, along with oats and barley, were produced in great quantities here in the late 1800s. This led to the development of flour mills and other grain 10 76 production facilities in Bozeman. Flour mills encouraged construction of railroads through the area in 1883 providing more rapid access to goods and people and continuing the development of the area. More than 168 people lived in the city by 1870. Many of the white men who contributed to the exploration and colonization of Bozeman are regionally well-known: John Bozeman, William Beall, Nelson Story and Daniel Rouse among them. Men comprised almost 75% of the population in 1870, and 65% a decade later. While often not recognized, women, Black, and immigrants played important roles in Bozeman’s success and development. The majority of 19th century residents were white Americans, but early Bozeman was diverse. Its inhabitants included Black residents and immigrants from Germany, China, Haiti, and other nations. In the early years of Bozeman, its small size resulted in relative racial and economic integration, although this would change as the 19th century came to a close. Early Black residents typically arrived from the southern US. The town’s agricultural and trade focus may explain why they were a small group relative to other Montana settlements. In 1870 Bozeman had 13 Black residents; the number grew to 23 in 1880. It climbed to somewhere between 30- 50 residents by the 1910s. Early Black leaders include Lizzie Williams, Samuel Lewis, and Mary and Richard McDonald. The McDonalds, formerly enslaved in Missouri, arrived in 1864. Richard’s successful freight hauling business allowed him to build the first two story home in Bozeman at 308 South Tracy. . Bozeman’s large immigrant population was also distinguished by business owners like the Germans who founded the Speith and Krug Brewery and Chin Ah Ban, a Chinese businessman who owned multiple restaurants, and successful developer Samuel Lewis from Haiti. However, most immigrants and Black residents performed service work. Almost 20% of Bozeman’s inhabitants were immigrants in 1870. Germans were the most numerous, while there were about a dozen Chinese immigrants – and others. Main Street developed as the center of commerce and was where most of the city’s major buildings were erected prior to the arrival of rail in 1883. The first brick building in Bozeman was constructed here in 1872. During this early period of Bozeman history, Main Street was a crucial site of trade and supplies and an entry point to the region’s mines. In the final decades of the 1800s, Bozeman grew and gained new institutions. The arrival of the railroad in 1883 began to transform the city. Not only did commercial construction boom on Main Street, but residential development accelerated. The Women’s Christian Temperance Union was founded in 1884. Montana State University was established in 1893. Ten years later the Bozeman Library opened. The city even made a bid to become the Montana capital, although leaders surely knew that it would not be selected over the larger and wealthier cities vying for that honor. Many of the areas now seen as historic areas were platted during the competition for the capital to make the City appear larger and more desirable on paper. The incremental buildout of these platted areas contributed to the diverse architecture of these areas. During this time, white supremacy became more overt. Chinese laundries were accused of taking jobs from “worthy white women” while trade unions barred Black men from joining. It was impossible to win: Chinese business success was blamed for taking white women’s domestic jobs, while Black men found it hard to leave a similar class of jobs due to their exclusion. Chinese residents were assaulted in public, while the Ku Klux Klan’s 1926 picnic lecture at the Bozeman Hot Springs surely chilled Black residents. By 1900, the city’s 3,419 residents were no longer so geographically connected. There was increasing economic disparity, which manifested in the physical construction of the city. Neighborhoods south of Main Street received investment, attracting wealthy residents. Lacking the same, north Bozeman’s character became working class. Wealthy Main Street business owners moved from their homes north of Main Street to places like the area now known as Bon Ton Historic District (though that neighborhood had begun to develop in the 1880s). Today, the North Tracy Avenue Historic District is one of few areas north of Main Street with a concentration of buildings that retain a high degree of integrity. Development in the early 1900s continued to cluster around what today forms Bozeman’s downtown core. A group of local builders including Elmer Bartholomew, J. A. Bartholomew, William Cline, George Dier, Guy Ensinger, Ora E. Long, A. J. Moe, and A. J. Svokmoe played an outsize role in constructing the now historic neighborhoods of Bozeman. Architect Fred Wilson was a prolific designer in the city from 1910 through the 1950s. It is common for Montana communities of this period to have a large number of buildings designed by a single architect. Wilson’s hundreds of buildings included the county courthouse, most schools built 1910-1950, commercial buildings, and residences. Typical of the era, he was skilled in designing in the array of popular revival styles, but also designed-then contemporary Craftsman homes. During the early 1900s, white and Black women organized for widespread change and local resources – though often through their own organizations. White women Mary Alderson and Belle Chrisman were respectively essential to securing women’s suffrage in Montana in 1914 and establishing the Bozeman Library in 1903. Melinda Rich, Sarah Tracy, Emma Wilson, and Rosa Beall were all socially prominent white members of the Women’s Christian Temperance Union. 11 98 Mollie, Belle, and Melissa McDonald founded the Sweet Pea Study Club, Bozeman’s chapter of the Montana Federation of Colored Women’s Clubs. The local club did everything from organizing for civil rights legislation to securing money for Black students to attend college. Leisure gained importance in the early 1900s and some of it had a distinctive Bozeman character. The first Bozeman Roundup was held in August 1919. That tradition continues today. Department stores and theatres were constructed downtown, sometimes in new styles, such as Art Deco in the 1930s. Although the city continued to grow (its population was 6,183 by 1920), it was small compared to the then-growing Butte (pop: 41,611), Great Falls (pop: 24,121), Billings (pop: 15,100), and Anaconda (pop: 11,668). Helena and Missoula were also more populous than Bozeman. Bozeman continued to develop and modernize throughout the late 1930s through 1950s. Development expanded further afield from downtown, while infill in the historic core grew to include modern amenities such as service stations and garages in mid-century modern style. During World War II the city hosted the Army Air Corps training facility. Like so many places throughout the country, Bozeman experienced a postwar surge in population and construction. Bozeman’s population went from 6,855 in 1930 to 8,665 in 1940. By 1950, it was 11,325, a 30% increase from the prior U.S. Census. During this period, automobile culture shaped Bozeman just as its early wagon and rail connections did. Commercial airline service began in 1947. Motels for visitors motoring into town popped up on major streets. Drive in theaters flourished. During the 1960s, the turbulence and change sweeping across the United States had somewhat muted effects in Bozeman. At Montana State University, far more students enrolled during this decade, particularly at the graduate level. Although the student body was fairly conservative, in the wake of President Kennedy’s assassination, some liberalizing occurred. This could be seen in changes to student policy. As the decade progressed, there was certainly concern over the Vietnam War, but no flashpoints that led to major events like elsewhere in America. The city’s population ticked up to 13,361 in 1960. Interstate 90 arrived in 1966, supporting tourism. Housing was created further from downtown, facilitated by widespread car use. In the 1970s, two major institutions opened: the Museum of the Rockies and Big Sky Resort (about 50 miles south of Bozeman). The museum was established in 1957, the brainchild of Butte physician Caroline McGill and historian Merrill Burlingame. For about 15 years, its collections were housed on part of MSU’s campus. Ground broke on its future home in 1971. Big Sky Resort opened in 1973, attracting upscale skiers to the area. The Sweet Pea Festival began in 1978. The annual creative celebration continues today. Back on MSU’s campus, female faculty won their case against the university for discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The population exploded in 1970 to 18,670 - a 40% increase from the prior US Census. Development continued to expand. Growth continued in the 1980s, initially perhaps locally fueled in part by cattle and grain prices and a generally prospering Montana economy. Skating rinks, restaurants, and shops opened. The population reached 21,645 in 1980. When the economy went bust in the state as it did nationally, falling natural and agricultural resources prices affected the city. Arguably, some struggling farmers may have transitioned to more urban lifestyles. Development slowed somewhat in the second half of the decade. Much of the city’s early efforts to preserve its history began during this decade, perhaps fueled in part by the recent changes and growth in Bozeman. These are detailed in the section “Evolution of Historic Preservation in Bozeman.” Also notable, MSU’s Native American studies program grew, becoming a national leader. The city’s only unsolved murder occurred in 1985, when MSU student Randy Church was shot while closing up the Pizza Hut at 2300 W Main Street. As the 1980s closed, the city was being defined increasingly by its diverse modern economy. Agriculture remained important, but tourism had gained a new prominence that would only accelerate in Bozeman. Shops catering to visitors, especially winter sports enthusiasts increasingly dotted downtown. Already in the 1990s, residents and newspapers alike noted the dramatic changes in the city. The North 19th Avenue interchange opened in 1995, and with it came substantial development west of downtown. The population continued to grow, doubling between 2000 and 2020. Infrastructure changes and the need for more housing resulted in both new housing on the outskirts of Bozeman and infill development around downtown. During the past 20 years, Bozeman has become somewhat more racially diverse. The average Bozeman resident earned $45,037 in 2020, far more than the US average. In 2000, that figure was $32,156. While the city has changed significantly in the past 20 years, what is apparent in studying its history is that the Gallatin Valley has been a place of rapid and dramatic changes for 200 years. Population explosion is not new here, nor is changing industry. Whether colonists displaced Indigenous hunters, miners flocked to purchase potatoes, or tourists arrived in town, industrious men and women have long sought to enhance their lives in Bozeman. Yet, time after time, city residents and leaders have also looked back, seeking to remember what came before. 12 1110 Appendix B Bozeman Planning and Land Development History The city’s history of intentionally developing its community through planning and land use formally dates to 1883. In that year, the city incorporated, which meant that its first mayor (John V. Bogert) and eight aldermen took office. Together, they began regulating life throughout the city, including how it was to be physically developed. Unlike today, Bozeman in the late 1800s was divided into four wards represented by two aldermen. A street commissioner was appointed in 1883 to preside over streets, alleys, and sidewalks – as well as keep them in good repair. Two years later, a city engineer was hired to preside over matters related to survey, platting, drawings, and other information related to public works. Planning and land use in their modern forms were not yet practiced during this era. While city employees practiced early versions of this work with a focus on public works such as roads, parks, water works, bridges, and sometimes public buildings, other development was not so comprehensively regulated. Instead, a hodgepodge of regulations attempted to deal with many issues that eventually became consolidated in land use and zoning governance. For instance, public health and cleanliness were issues that affected Bozeman and virtually every other American city during this time. Without contemporary land use regulations to keep denser urban development separate from agricultural activities, the fledgling city quickly needed to ensure that such places did not become filthy and disease-causing. On April 9, 1883, the city’s 5th ordinance decreed that barns, corrals, and other animal housing must be kept clean or the offender would be “…deemed guilty of maintaining a nuisance.” The next ordinance focused on clean and traversable sidewalks. Both ordinance, and most others targeting nuisances were punishable by fines. Fire limits and associated building codes were developed at the same time and focused on downtown. Ordinance 16 required the use of fireproof building material unless a special permit was approved. These fines were substantially higher than those for nuisances, underscoring the threat posed by violation. These ordinances are not the only relevant legislation related to early land use and zoning efforts, but provide a picture of the decentralized method of managing these needs. As the city and state grew, governance changed and processes were formalized. In 1922, the city adopted a city commission/city manager form of government, which remains in use today. The mayor acts as chair and four commissioners are elected at large. This replaced ward APPENDIX B BOZEMAN PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT HISTORY 13 1312 representation. Also in 1922, the Office of the City Engineer was reorganized with all departments under the Commissioner-Manager Plan. The office’s duties did not meaningfully change. In 1935, the city adopted a modern zoning code, creating what is today known as the Unified Development Code. It began the process of standardizing and concentrating all relevant regulation in one place. Centralization helped pave the way for modern planning practices. In 1957, the city created a joint City-County Planning Board under the authorization of the 1947 Revised Codes of Montana. This absorbed the city engineer’s activities and added others. The following year, the first community plan was created. Six more have been developed since. In 1999, this Planning Board was disbanded and was replaced with the Bozeman City Planning Office. (Gallatin County created its own planning office at the same time.) Today, the Planning Division and Historic Preservation are both part of the Community Development Department, along with the Development Center and Building Division. Responding to 21st century issues with the existing development regulations, the city is presently completing a total overhaul of the Unified Development Code, which includes zoning regulations. This includes a consolidation of zoning districts. However, it does not include any changes to the NCOD regulations. The two city codes that guide Bozeman historic preservation efforts today are Chapter 2, Article 5, Division 6 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, which provides for the establishment of the Historic Preservation Advisory Board and Chapter 28, Article 3, Division 38.340, which creates the overlay district standards for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. APPENDIX C SUMMARY OF 2015 AND 2019 NCOD REPORTS 14 1514 Appendix C Summary of 2015 and 2019 Reports The 2015 NCOD Audit was initiated because of substantial reinvestment in the NCOD area since its creation in 1991. This reinvestment led to questions about how to best balance the sometimes conflicting goals of historic preservation, affordable housing, and infill development within the district. The report’s key findings were: ● A lack of comprehensive and up-to-date information about historic properties in the district was making it difficult to effectively apply the existing NCOD Design Guidelines. ● Affordability was becoming a major issue within the NCOD, as housing costs were rising faster than incomes. ● Infill development was proving to be difficult and expensive, due in part to the restrictive nature of the zoning code. The 2015 report recommended that the city: ● Remove the NCOD boundary within 5 years and replace it with a combination of historic districts and design overlay districts (DODs). ● Prioritize updates to existing historic property inventories. ● Conduct a comprehensive parking study. ● Develop design guidelines specific to the unique characteristics of each of the eight National Register historic districts within the NCOD. ● Consider expanding the use of ground-floor ADUs. ● Change the term “Deviations” to “Permissible Modifications” and allow for greater flexibility in their use. ● Continue or expand implementation of affordable housing incentives, such as waiving impact fees. ● Better align zone districts with historic districts to reduce conflict The report also included an implementation matrix outlining the steps necessary to put these recommendations into action. Overall, the 2015 NCOD Audit presented a vision for a more nuanced and flexible approach to managing growth and development within the NCOD. The report acknowledged the importance of preserving Bozeman’s historic character while also recognizing the need to address contemporary challenges such as affordability and infill development. 2019 NCOD Final Policy Direction Summary The key findings from the community outreach portion of the 2019 NCOD study are: ● The community supports the NCOD’s goals, but they would like to see some changes to how it’s implemented. ● The community is very passionate about historic preservation and they would like to see more done to protect Bozeman’s historic resources. ● There is a desire for more flexibility and innovation in the NCOD’s design guidelines, particularly north of Main Street. ● There is a need for more clarity and transparency in the NCOD review process. ● The community wants more information about development projects and they want to be more involved in the review process. The 2019 report recommended that the city: ● Create two programs within the NCOD, one focused on historic preservation and the other on neighborhood character. ● Do not significantly change the NCOD boundary, but remove North 7th and move the boundary to Front Street. ● Create three sets of design standards and guidelines, one for each of the following areas: north of Downtown, south of Downtown, and Downtown. ● Phase in a local historic preservation program, which would provide more protection for historic properties that don’t qualify for the National Register of Historic Places. ● Explore a variety of incentives for historic property owners, such as tax breaks and grants. ● Allow the Historic Preservation Advisory Board (HPAB) to make recommendations on historic projects. ● Create historic preservation standards and guidelines.● Study the B-3 transition zone to see if there are ways to better protect residential neighborhoods from the impacts of commercial development. ● Explore adjusting the historic district boundaries to better align with existing zone districts. ● Consider aligning zone district allowances with neighborhood character. ● Ensure the NCOD review process is understandable and streamlined. ● Strengthen existing project information channels and make it easier for the public to find information about development projects. 15 1716 ● Develop a plan to have public meetings with impacted neighbors before development applications are reviewed. ● The report also included a work plan that categorized these recommendations into short-, mid-, and long-term goals. Overall, the 2019 report was a comprehensive review of the NCOD and its impact on the Bozeman community. The report’s recommendations were based on extensive community outreach and data analysis. The report’s work plan provided a roadmap for implementing these recommendations in a timely and efficient manner. APPENDIX D COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY 16 1918 Appendix D Community Engagement Summary 1 Summary: Landmark Program Project Community Engagement Efforts Learning what makes Bozeman unique is at the core of the Bozeman Landmark Program. This requires looking beyond the visual character. Since the Bozeman Landmark Program kicked off in November 2023, the project team has worked alongside City of Bozeman staff to implement passive and active engagement strategies to understand what the community’s priorities are for a local landmark program. In November 2023, the consulting team visited the City of Bozeman for conversations with city staff from various departments and local community organizations to develop an understanding of the preservation program’s efficacy as it currently operates, active city programs/initiatives, and community organization priorities. The project started with an overview of the Gallatin Valley and Bozeman’s Indigenous history and living culture from Dr. Shane Doyle along with a tour of Bozeman. Additional conversations were had virtually between November 2023- September 2024 to assist in the development of the summer 2024 engagement programs and the digital survey. During the Spring 2024 semester at Montana State University, students were engaged by Professor Sarah Church to research and conceptualize historic markers for sites of significance in Bozeman. Sarah Rosenberg provided a guest lecture to guide the students and empower them to define significance based on their connections to the community. Students selected sites, researched the history of the site, wrote historic marker text, and designed a historic marker that they thought would captivate a pedestrian. Consultants utilized the student projects in two ways: 1) As contributions to the community facilitation focused on identifying sites of significance 2) To assist in the development of temporary historic markers, which were installed across town. A sampling of student locations and text were utilized to help tell stories of Bozeman’s past and promote the Bozeman Landmark Program survey. Youth activity sheets were created and offered at the Gallatin History Museum beginning in May 2024, as well as at the Historic Preservation Advisory Board’s annual Preservation Month activities. The youth activities included a make your own marker worksheet, with prompts to encourage multi generational conversations, and a Bird’s Eye view coloring sheet of the city inspired by archival images of the community. Youth were encouraged to share their historic 2 marker to be awarded Downtown Dollars, which were generously provided by Downtown Bozeman Partnership. In July, the community showed up to parks, a fire station, the farmers market, the library, city hall, etc. to participate in different Bozeman Landmark Program touchpoint events. People shared stories about their family, specific buildings, environmental features, community events, and more from the City’s history. Utilizing different event formats, the active engagement strategies sought to reach a range of community members. ● Open Houses/Pop-Ups: Events at Bozeman Fire Station 3 and Beall Park provided an opportunity for people to drop-in and learn about the Bozeman Landmark Program in an informal conversational setting. Attendees contributed answers to questions on posters, pinned places of significance on maps, and had conversations with the project team and other city staff. The conversational setting allowed in depth conversations as well as for program questions to be answered. Their answers to questions, contributions to the map, as well as one-on-one conversational topics were all recorded as contributions to the research and policy development. ● Round Tables: Bozeman Senior Center members, Bozeman Parks & Recreation Summer Camp attendees, and Bozeman Historic Narrative participants all had the opportunity to express their perspectives on the Bozeman Landmark Program through facilitated conversations. The round tables reached people who were previously engaged with city preservation efforts, youth, and seniors who live in the city. The different demographics assisted in identifying locations of cultural value to the community, concerns about the city’s future, in addition to helping explore functional preservation strategies for the Bozeman Landmark Program. These structured conversations also allowed in depth exploration of specific topics to address certain policy questions, such as sustainability and local landmark review processes... ● Tabling: Participating in Bozeman’s Farmers Market and Crazy Days were opportunities to reach community members who may not intentionally seek out a Pop-Up or Round Table. These presented unique opportunities to introduce people to the Bozeman Landmark Program, as well as offer an opportunity to participate in an informal vote on if preservation should be a priority for Bozeman. Over 200 City of Bozeman residents voted at the tabling events in support of Bozeman prioritizing preservation efforts. 17 2120 3 The July engagement activities concluded with a storytelling signage event hosted at the Bozeman Library. Attendees stretched their creative muscles in different directions to tell various stories of Bozeman’s past through visual pieces of Gallatin Valley’s story such as the Sunset Hills cemetery, the Northern Pacific Depot, Peets Hill, and the significance of sweet peas. Hosting events in Bozeman’s public structures enabled the touchstone events to meet people where they are - through happenstance or intentional attendance. Sarah Rosenberg, Associate Planner and Historic Preservation Officer for the City of Bozeman, tabled additional events after the consulting team concluded their visit to further promote the Bozeman Landmark Program survey and educate the public on past preservation efforts. Simultaneous to community engagement events, the Bozeman Landmark Program launched a digital survey, which was promoted through social media posts on the City of Bozeman’s Facebook and Twitter, as well as 20+ temporary “micro-story” markers, and fliers installed at key places throughout the city. Capitalizing on Bozeman’s active community, signage was installed at city and county parks and in front of municipal buildings. The locations were dispersed across the city to help ensure all regions of the city were aware of the Bozeman Landmark Program. These temporary markers told “micro-stories” about the Sweet Pea Society, tribal nations who have inhabited the valley since long before Bozeman was a city, the canning industry, city development, etc. The markers simultaneously told a story of Bozeman’s past using archival images alongside a brief history associated with the images and encouraged participation in the Bozeman Landmark Program survey via a QR code. By showcasing a variety of stories of Bozeman’s past the markers strived to help inspire community members to perceive preservation in a broad context. All promotional materials and in person activities encouraged participation in the online survey. The online survey was completed by 292 individuals. Community members were able to identify specific areas of Bozeman’s history (physical or intangible), which they perceive as a preservation priority, in addition to expressing their personal needs as residents and their larger views of preservation needs in the city. Their responses guided the policy research based on the expressed priorities of the community members. The community members represented a well-balanced geographic range of residents, as well as gender and age. Fliers, handouts, and 4 the online survey were all translated into Spanish in an effort to be accessible to Bozeman’s Latino population. People used their time and energy to share their connections to Bozeman’s cultural heritage - physical, intangible, and ephemera, through survey participation, event attendance, one-on-one conversations, facilitated conversations, and visiting the Bozeman Landmark Program booth at events. The robust feedback is integral to the development and growth of the Bozeman Landmark Program, while also affirms that preservation is a part of the Bozeman community value system. In October 2024, the consulting team analyzed research and community feedback to create an Initial Guidance document with suggestions for dialogue around potential policy and program recommendations. The intent of this document was to conduct a “temperature check” on the direction of the project. This document was shared with the public to solicit additional feedback. The document was discussed in detail with the Historic Preservation Advisory Board and the Community Development Board for further input. The Initial Guidance document was presented to the City Commission in November 2024 for feedback and direction. Information from public feedback on the document and Board discussion was included for consideration into this final report. Community Survey Results The following are summaries of information recorded by the 292 respondents to the Landmark Program survey. Historic and Cultural Sites to Protect in Bozeman Neighborhoods & Districts 1. N. Black/N. Bozeman (Historically African American neighborhood) 2. Jandt Neighborhood 3. Downtown Bozeman 4. North and South Side Historic Neighborhoods 5. Bon Ton Historic District 6. North Tracy Historic District Community Survey Results 18 2322 5 7. Cooper Park Historic District 8. South Willson Avenue (Notable for mature trees and historic homes) 9. Northeast Neighborhood (Including Beall Park and surrounding homes) 10. Historic Homes around MSU Campus Notable Buildings and Landmarks 1. Story Mansion and Grounds 2. Samuel Lewis Home (308 S Bozeman) 3. George Harrison Black Architect Home (322 N Tracy) 4. Old Brothel (234 E Mendenhall – now Extreme History Project) 5. Bogert Park Band Pavilion and Pool 6. The Baxter Hotel 7. The Bozeman Hotel 8. Union Hall on Mendenhall 9. The Willson Building 10. Ellen Theater 11. Emerson Cultural Center 12. Gallatin Labor Temple 13. Northern Pacific Train Depot 14. Ag Depot 15. The Crystal Bar 16. Carnegie Library Building 17. The Sapphire Motel & RSVP Motel 18. Old Grain Elevators near Story Mill 19. Red Light District Buildings 20. Stockyard Café 21. Western Café Building 22. Live from the Divide Building 23. Lerkind Mansion 24. First National Bank/U.S. Bank Building (Historic Restoration Example) Historic Parks, Trails, and Natural Features 1. Peets Hill (Burke Park) 6 2. Lindley Park 3. Cooper Park 4. Bogert Park 5. Gallagator Trail 6. Highland Glen Trails 7. Bozeman Creek and Mandeville Creek 8. Sunset Hills Cemetery 9. Valley of Flowers (Indigenous Cultural Landscape) 10. Beall Park 11. Southside Park 12. Story Mill Park 13. Main to Mountains Trail System Industrial and Agricultural Sites 1. Story Mill 2. Misco Mill 3. Bon Ton Mill 4. Old Stockyards 5. Manufacturing/Industrial District Buildings 6. Kirk Homestead 7. Homestead next to Museum of the Rockies 8. Remaining Open Spaces and Farmlands Recurring Themes and Concerns About Places to Protect ● Preserve the character of Downtown Bozeman. Many people want to protect Main Street from overdevelopment, particularly from national chains that would alter its historic character. ● Protect Historic Homes and Neighborhoods. There’s significant concern about older homes being demolished and replaced with large, modern developments that disrupt the historic fabric of the neighborhoods. 19 2524 7 ● Maintain Public Parks and Green Spaces. Parks like Lindley Park, Peets Hill, and Cooper Park are considered vital to the community's character and should be protected from overdevelopment. ● Highlight Indigenous and Agricultural History. People expressed interest in preserving the cultural landscapes and agricultural heritage of Bozeman, including historic trails and farmland. ● Preserve Unique Features like Neon Signs, Barns, and Small Historic Businesses. There’s an emphasis on retaining quirky, iconic landmarks like the Lewis & Clark Motel neon sign, old barns, the Crystal Bar, and historic local businesses. Top Places People Miss in Bozeman 1. Old Bozeman Deaconess Hospital ○ One of the most frequently mentioned. People feel its demolition was a significant loss to Bozeman's historic fabric. Many mentioned that its facade or parts of the building should have been preserved. The hospital had been a community landmark, and its removal made way for development that many see as unaffordable luxury condos. 2. Opera House ○ The original Opera House (also referred to as the City Hall/Opera House) was located on Main Street and is remembered fondly. People lament its loss as part 8 of Bozeman’s cultural history. Its demolition took away a vital community and cultural space. 3. Lehrkind Brewery ○ This historic brewery in the northeast neighborhood was often mentioned. People saw it as a unique and iconic part of Bozeman’s industrial and cultural past. It was valued for its architecture and community use before being demolished. 4. Story Mansion ○ People recall the original Story Mansion that once stood on Main Street (now replaced by the Willson School). It’s remembered as an architectural and cultural loss. 5. Heebs Grocery Store ○ Heebs was a beloved, locally owned grocery store in downtown Bozeman now relocated at Highland Blvd.. People miss having a walkable, neighborhood grocery store that served locals. Its absence is felt as downtown becomes more oriented toward tourists and luxury services. 6. Bungalow Drug ○ A nostalgic memory for many, this small, local pharmacy was part of Bozeman’s downtown charm. Its closure is seen as part of the broader trend of losing small, locally owned businesses in favor of chain stores. 7. Medical Arts Center ○ A historic part of the healthcare system in Bozeman, this building was torn down and replaced with newer developments. People miss its presence as part of the historic downtown landscape. 8. Armory ○ The original Armory building was a beloved community space before being redeveloped into a hotel. People lament the loss of the building's original purpose as a gathering space for local arts and community events. 9. Cottonwood Wetlands and Open Spaces ○ Beyond buildings, many people mentioned missing the open spaces, farmlands, and wetlands around Bozeman that have been replaced by urban sprawl, car dealerships, and luxury developments. 10. Bite of Bozeman (Event) ○ Several respondents mentioned missing the original Bite of Bozeman event. They feel that community festivals like this have changed significantly over time, 9 becoming more commercialized and less inclusive. 20 2726 ^ƵƌǀĞǇZĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƐ ϭ͘ tŚĂƚĚŽĞƐŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĂŶƚŽǇŽƵ͍ Ă͘ tƌŝƚƚĞŶƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞ͕ƐĞĞǆĐĞůĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚ Ϯ͘ ŽǇŽƵŚĂǀĞĂŶƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚŝŶŐŽĨǁŚĂƚƚŚĞŝƚǇŽĨŽǌĞŵĂŶŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽŐƌĂŵĂŶĚƐƚĂĨĨĚŽĞƐ͍ ϯ͘ Do you have an understanding of what the Bozeman’s Historic Preservation Advisory Board does? 21 2928 ϰ͘ Have you ever participated in the City of Bozeman’s Preservation month activities? ϱ͘ ,ĂǀĞǇŽƵĞǀĞƌƌĞĂĐŚĞĚŽƵƚƚŽƚŚĞŝƚǇŽĨŽǌĞŵĂŶĨŽƌĂƐƐŝƐƚĂŶĐĞƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐĂŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŽƌƚŚĞŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐ ƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŽŐƌĂŵ͍/ĨǇĞƐ͕ǁŚĂƚƚǇƉĞŽĨĂƐƐŝƐƚĂŶĐĞĚŝĚǇŽƵƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ͍͍ Ă͘ tƌŝƚƚĞŶƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞŝŶǆĐĞůĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚ 22 3130 ϲ͘ ŽǇŽƵŽǁŶŽƌůŝǀĞŝŶĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚŝƐϰϬнǇĞĂƌƐŽůĚ͍ ϳ͘ ŝĚǇŽƵŝŶƚĞŶƚŝŽŶĂůůǇĐŚŽŽƐĞƚŽůŝǀĞŝŶĂϰϬнǇĞĂƌŽůĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͍ 23 3332 ϴ͘ tŚĂƚǁĞƌĞƚŚĞƚŽƉƚŚƌĞĞĨĂĐƚŽƌƐŝŶƐĞůĞĐƚŝŶŐǇŽƵƌƉůĂĐĞŽĨƌĞƐŝĚĞŶĐĞ͍ Ă͘ tƌŝƚƚĞŶƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞŝŶǆĐĞůĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚ ϵ͘ /ĨǇŽƵŽǁŶĂďƵŝůĚŝŶŐďƵŝůƚďĞĨŽƌĞϭϵϴϬ͕ǁŚĂƚǁŝůůŚĞůƉŝŶŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶŝŶŐͬƐƚĞǁĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͍ 24 3534 ϭϬ͘ tŚĂƚĚŽǇŽƵƚŚŝŶŬƐŚŽƵůĚďĞƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŝŽƌŝƚŝĞƐĨŽƌƚŚĞ/ƚǇŽĨŽǌĞŵĂŶ͍ Ă͘ tƌŝƚƚĞŶƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƐŝŶǆĐĞůĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚ ϭϭ͘ tŚĂƚŝƐĂƉůĂĐĞ;ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͕ƉĂƌŬ͕ƐŝŐŶ͕ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉĞ͕ĞƚĐ͘ͿƚŚĂƚǇŽƵďĞůŝĞǀĞƐŚŽƵůĚĂůǁĂǇƐďĞĂƉĂƌƚŽĨŽǌĞŵĂŶ͍ Ă͘ tƌŝƚƚĞŶƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƐŝŶǆĐĞůĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĂŶĚŵĂƉƐŚŽǁƐƉŝŶƉŽŝŶƚƌĞƐƵůƚƐ ϭϮ͘ ƌĞƚŚĞƌĞĂŶǇďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐ͕ƉůĂĐĞƐ͕ŽƌĞǀĞŶƚƐƚŚĂƚĂƌĞŶŽůŽŶŐĞƌƉĂƌƚŽĨŽǌĞŵĂŶƚŚĂƚǇŽƵŵŝƐƐ͍ Ă͘ tƌŝƚƚĞŶƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƐŝŶǆĐĞůĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚ ϭϯ͘ What aspects of Bozeman’s evolution related to history concern you? Ă͘ tƌŝƚƚĞŶƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƐŝŶǆĐĞůĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚ 25 3736 ϭϰ͘ Do you believe Bozeman’s past contributes to Bozeman’s quality of life ϭϱ͘ ƐŽǌĞŵĂŶĞǀŽůǀĞƐǁŝƚŚƚŝŵĞĂŶĚƐŚŝĨƚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚǇŶĞĞĚƐ͕ĚŽǇŽƵďĞůŝĞǀĞƚŚĞƌĞŝƐĂǀĂůƵĞƚŽƌĞƚĂŝŶŝŶŐŽůĚĞƌ ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐĂŶĚͬŽƌŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐƉůĂĐĞƐĂŶĚƐƉĂĐĞƐ͍ 26 3938 ϭϲ͘ If you believe historic places and heritage should be apart of Bozeman’s future, why is that? Ă͘ tƌŝƚƚĞŶƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƐŝŶǆĐĞůĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚ ĞŵŽŐƌĂƉŚŝĐZĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƐ 27 4140 KƚŚĞƌ͗ƐƚƵĚĞŶƚ͕ĂƌƚŝƐƚ͕ƚĞĂĐŚĞƌ͕ƐĞƌǀŝĐĞǁŽƌŬĞƌ 28 4342 ΎΎƚƚŚĞďĞŐŝŶŶŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞƐƵƌǀĞǇ͕ƚŚĞĂŐĞƌĂŶŐĞϯϱͲϰϰǁĂƐŵŝƐƐŝŶŐΎΎ 29 4544 30 4746 ŝƐĂďŝůŝƚŝĞƐ͗ƉŚǇƐŝĐĂů–ϵ͖ďůŝŶĚ–ϭ͖ŶĞƵƌŽĚŝǀĞƌŐĞŶƚ–ϰ͖ŽƚŚĞƌ–Ϯ 31 4948 Historic Preservation Survey Map Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, Bozeman GIS, Montana State Library, Esri,TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land 10/4/2024 0 2 41mi 0 3.5 71.75 km 1:185,254 32 5150 Event Date What Community Engagement Plan November 1, 2023 Developed Community Engagement Plan for project Kick off November 9, 2023 Launched Engage Bozeman page Historic Preservation Advisory Board Meeting November 15, 2023 Introduced project to HPAB Stakeholder Meetings November 15, 2023 Met with different stakeholder groups: Dr. Shane Doyle, Extreme History, Gallatin History Museum, Mountain Time Arts, Downtown Bozeman Partnership, Gallatin Valley Land Trust, HRDC Internal staff meetings December 8, 11, 15, 19, Meetings with different city departments: Economic 20, 21, 2024 Development, Legal, Sustainability, Communications, Planning, Building, Parks and Recreation, GIS Historic Preservation Advisory Board Meeting February 21, 2024 Update of project to HPAB Inner Neighborhood Council Meeting May 9, 2024 Presentation to INC on project Engage Bozeman project update June 25, 2024 Announce engagement opportunities on Engage Bozeman page Historic Preservation Advisory Board Meeting July 11, 2024 Update of project and launch community engagement Launched project survey July 12, 2024 Launched project survey both in English and Spanish City Commision Meeting July 16, 2024 Special presentation to City Commission on project Posted flyers and signs around town July 16-20, 2024 Posted flyers and signs around town about project and community engagement events Open House July 17, 2024 Open house on project Senior Focus Group July 18, 2024 Small focus group with senior citizens to gather input Cultural Focus Group July 18, 2024 Small focus group with community members who specialize in cultural heritage Open House July 18, 2024 Open house on project Cultural Focus Group July 19, 2024 Small focus group with community members who specialize in cultural heritage Youth/Teen Focus Group July 19, 2024 Small focus group with youth and teens to gather input Main Street Tabling July 19, 2024 Tabled at Summer Crazy Days to get input on project Farmers Market Tabling July 20, 2024 Tabled at Farmers Market to get input on project Make your own historic marker July 20, 2024 Workshop for all ages to partake in an activity that relates to project Farmers Market Tabling July 23, 2024 Tabled at Farmers Market to get input on project Lunch on the Lawn July 24, 2024 Tabled at Lunch on the Lawn at the Emerson to get input on project Engage Bozeman project update July 26, 2024 Project update about survey and more engagement events Engage Bozeman project update July 30, 2024 Project update on engagement events Lunch on the Lawn July 31, 2024 Tabled at Lunch on the Lawn at the Emerson to get input on project Design Professional Meeting August 20, 2024 Presented project virtually to group of design and development professionals Historic Preservation Advisory Board Meeting August 21, 2024 Update of project Catapalooza at Montana State University August 23, 2024 Table at MSU’s Catapalooza to get input on project Engage Bozeman project update August 30, 2024 Project update about survey and more engagement events Farmers Market Tabling September 3, 2024 Table at Farmers Market to get input on project Community Engagement Community Development Board September 9, 2024 Presented project to Community Development Board to get input on project Sustainability Board September 11, 2024 Presented project to Sustainability Advisory Board to get input on project Engage Bozeman project update September 12, 2024 Project update that survey is about to close Historic Preservation Advisory Board Meeting September 18, 2024 Presentation dedicated to educating board members on project content Engage Bozeman project update September 23, 2024 Link to HPAB meeting and written content for education purposes to the public on overlay districts Cooper Park Neighborhood Association Meeting October 3, 2024 Presentation on project to the Cooper Park Neighborhood Association Engage Bozeman project update October 10, 2024 Posting about summary of survey results Launch Initial Guidance Report October 11, 2024 Launched the initial guidance report for phase 1 - outlines repliminary recommendations Historic Preservation Advisory Board Meeting October 16, 2024 Work session with HPAB to gather input on initial guidance report Community Development Board Meeting October 21, 2024 Work session with board to gather input on initial guidance report City Commission Meeting November 19, 2024 Work session with Commission to gather input on initial guidance report Engage Bozeman project update November 25, 2024 Project update on Phase 1 upon conclusion of board and City Commission meetings Historic Preservation Advisory Board Meeting January 15, 2025 HPAB meeting to discuss roles and responsibilities for input on Phase 2 work Engage Bozeman project update February 5, 2025 Project update on Phase 1 report release 33 5352 APPENDIX E SURVEY AND CONTEXT STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS Appendix E Survey and Context Study Recommendations Bozeman undertook a comprehensive survey of its historic resources in 1984-1986. This survey inventoried nearly 4,000 properties in an area that roughly corresponds to the Neighborhood Conser- vation Overlay District (NCOD) and led to the creation of eight historic districts and over 40 National Register listed sites. It remains foundational to city preservation and evaluation efforts today. These survey efforts focused mainly on the built environment and although some of the buildings have been resurveyed, the vast majority of the forms are extremely out of date. Furthermore, the buildings that do have survey forms date to the 1930s and earlier. While the City has conducted resurveys in 2014, 2015, 2020, 2021, and 2022, there are still thousands of properties and areas that require survey and resurvey. Survey needs are wide-ranging. There is a need to continue to resurvey the NCOD, to move forward with designation recommendations from resurvey, and to begin survey efforts beyond the NCOD including non-building resources and landscapes. Recommendations for survey are broken out into several categories: general recommendations; ar- eas to survey; and time periods, resource themes, and resource types meriting special attention. General Recommendations Before moving forward with any of the recommendations that follow, Bozeman should determine its purpose in conducting surveys and make sure that the appropriate resources are allocated to com- plete them. Bozeman may wish to look to the example of communities in Colorado that create survey plans to help guide their efforts. • Visit History Colorado for more information on survey plans. • The City of Lakewood, Colorado shares their survey plans online. Bozeman’s code does not dictate the purpose of surveys, and no new designations have resulted from past resurveys. The purpose is important to determine in order to proceed with useful invest- ments of time and resources. Survey is traditionally the basis for designation efforts, however, there are myriad creative ways to celebrate Bozeman’s historic and cultural resources with the knowledge gleaned from survey. It may be that the city wishes to proceed with designation efforts in some cases, and with celebratory and educational efforts in others. 34 5554 Once that is determined, it would greatly benefit the city both to conduct a comprehensive resurvey of the NCOD and to begin to expand efforts beyond the NCOD. Comprehensive survey and re-survey should be undertaken systematically. The decision about what areas to survey first, later, and last should be based upon a transparent logic that is communicated to residents. This could be a simple linear geographic method with a set start and end location but alternatively could prioritize any of the following: areas seeing the greatest development pressures, areas representing specifically defined histories, or areas with underrepresented resource types. Areas to Survey The following areas should be considered for survey and resurvey. The list below is a result of com- munity input from the survey done as part of the Local Landmark Project, Historic Preservation Advi- sory Board recommendations, and windshield surveys. This list is not exhaustive of all of the places that could or should be surveyed. An expanded list of places that were mentioned can be found in the community survey results appendix. ● Northeast neighborhood ● Midcentury and Post War neighborhoods: o Thompson Addition (East Kagy Blvd and South 3rd) o Lindley Park neighborhood o Capitol Hill Subdivision (south of College) o University Subdivision o Karps and Violett Addition (east of North 7th) o Jandt Neighborhood ● Gallatin County Fairgrounds ● Portions of the NCOD that were never surveyed: ○ South of Garfield ○ Tamarack and Aspen Street ○ South Black Avenue and Tracy Avenue past Harrison Street ● Northern Pacific/Story Mill Historic District ● Kirk Homestead ● Bozeman Creek ● Areas under development pressure, which includes the edges of most existing historic dis- tricts, and the NCOD ● Existing historic district expansions and revisit noncontributing sites for potential significance. Bozeman, like most cities, preserves buildings primarily through their inclusion in historic districts, rather than individual landmarks. Survey corresponds well with this method of preservation, because it allows an entire swath of land to be efficiently documented. However, there are several resources the community or city staff wishes to see individually assessed. This may be accomplished through survey or individual assessment of a particular site. Resource Themes and Periods Meriting Special Focus Several broad themes and time periods merit special survey focus in Bozeman. They include: • Agricultural history – land, farmhouses, utilitarian buildings and structures • Underrepresented histories of groups like women, Native Americans, immigrants, LGBTQ+, Black communities, Jewish communities • Midcentury and Post War Architecture • Montana State University’s Influence • Railroad history In 2008, a Bozeman Historic Resource Survey Report was developed that updated the original con- text report from the 1984-1986 survey to expand the time period to 1970. This report provided addi- tional background and context to Bozeman’s history in terms of development, physical growth, and architectural trends. This report helps set a foundation to expanding the period of significance that should be surveyed. Resource Types Meriting Special Focus To date, survey in Bozeman has focused on the built environment. However, future survey efforts should also look into other resource types that are significant to the community, as explained below. Signs Maintaining historic signs is a great way to connect a changing landscape to its multi-layered history. The City of Bozeman already has a process to recognize historic or culturally significant signs through Section 38.560.170 of the Unified Development Code. However, it is important to survey these signs outside of this process. Signs such as the Cat’s Paw sign, Sapphire Motel sign, ghost signs, and the Baxter Hotel sign are just some of the few that exemplify Bozeman’s sign landscape. Streetscape Streetscapes offer a subtle, but vibrant way of understanding how previous generations lived. Fea- tures of streetscapes include pavement, lighting, and street trees. Surveying streetscapes like South 8th Avenue that was constructed when Bozeman was vying to be Montana’s capitol can illustrate how it has changed over time but still remains a substantial streetscape in Bozeman’s history. Parks Several parks were identified by the community and city staff as survey priorities. Another approach to the inclusion of this landscape feature, which has repeatedly been cited as a community priority in past and other concurrent planning efforts, is to conduct a citywide park survey. Parks, particular- ly those that were developed with minimal ground disturbance near water, are potentially significant sites for archaeological discovery. While archaeology was infrequently mentioned by the community, Native American history has been a focus of interest, and archaeology is one way of making this 35 5756 historical connection. Preservation of green spaces also ties in with city priorities from other recently adopted plans. Cultural Landscapes Cultural landscapes are historically significant geographic areas that show evidence of human inter- action with the physical environment. They are increasingly preserved throughout the United States and are more common in the west. The National Park Service categorizes cultural landscapes into historic designed landscapes, historic vernacular landscapes, historic sites, and ethnographic land- scapes. Each has particular reasons for significance which may impact how it should be preserved. Cultural landscapes can be an excellent way to document agricultural history, as they demonstrate the relationship between a building and other features on the land. They are also a strong method for preserving sites with cultural and spiritual significance to indigenous tribal nations. Cultural land- scapes may even be a suitable way to commemorate seasonal forms of cultural heritage, such as the city’s iconic Christmas spider tradition. Cemeteries Cemeteries are a significant part of any community. There is demonstrated interest in preserving and understanding the histories connected to Sunset Hills Cemetery, Bozeman’s only municipal cemetery. Cemetery survey should include condition assessment and mapping the location of graves. Depend- ing on the condition of older graves, this may necessitate the use of ground penetrating radar. Survey need not be limited to the municipal cemetery; cultural histories are likely to be expanded upon in connection with all of the cemeteries in Bozeman. Context Study Recommendations To start implementing the use of context studies in Bozeman, the following are recommended: Native American Context Study The City acknowledges the deep connections Indigenous peoples have maintained with regional lands for countless generations. The cultural landscapes and sites within what is today the City of Bozeman have been nurtured and sustained by Indigenous communities since time immemorial, and their stewardship continues today. This region is home to many Indigenous nations, including the Séliš (Bitterroot Salish), Qlispé (Pend d’Oreille), Ktunaxa (Kootenai), Pikuni (Blackfeet), Tsistsis’tas (Northern Cheyenne), Apsáalooke (Crow), Anishinaabe (Chippewa), Nehiyawak (Cree), Métis, Nako- da (Assiniboine), A’aninin (Gros Ventre), Dakota, Lakota, and other Indigenous people who have deep ties to these lands. A Native American context study should ideally be produced in collaboration with the Tribal Historic Preservation Offices of multiple tribes whose ancestors hunted on the land now called Bozeman. This context study should be as inclusive of Tribal nations as possible, since Bozeman was not the tradi- tional land of a single tribe, but an important source of food for many co-stewards of the land. Underrecognized Communities Context Study Underrecognized communities should also be documented with context studies. This will likely neces- sitate the development of several studies: women in Bozeman, immigrant history in Bozeman, Black history in Bozeman, and religious minorities in Bozeman. Some of these may be able to be com- bined, but as contexts are intended to describe historical development patterns that allow a particular resource’s significance to be understood, avoid excessive grouping of different histories. However, naturally some overlap will occur. For example, any of these contexts should include women’s history, but any one focused primarily on another topic will not cover all women’s contributions to the city on its own. It may also be worthwhile to consider what other themes arise from these studies: LGBTQ+ history, the history of brothels, and entrepreneurial history may well connect deeply with several of these underrepresented contexts. Post-World War II and Mid-Century Architectural Context Study A context study of post World War II and mid-century modern resources will serve to fill the long-run- ning gap in understanding Bozeman’s built environment after the year 1933. The Montana Post World War II Architectural Survey and Inventory identifies several relevant styles of buildings found in Bozeman: Art Deco, Googie, and mid-century modern. It may also be appropriate to document early postmodern construction, perhaps with a construction end date of 1980. Although these buildings are disparate in appearance and span approximately 40 years of construction, they share a philosophical optimism, interest in the connection between building and setting, a relationship to automobiles and associated infrastructure, and use of modern, high-tech materials. Agricultural History Context Study An agricultural history context study will serve to highlight the industry that shaped the development of Bozeman. It begins with Indigenous presence on the land, colonization, and continues into the present day. In light of the increasing urbanization and suburbanization of historically agricultural land, a study of the agricultural landscape will identify extant historically significant agricultural resources as development moves beyond downtown Bozeman. Collaboration with THPOs and Gallatin County will allow for more nuanced study and documentation of the multifaceted agricultural practices in the region over time and by different populations. 36 5958 APPENDIX F FUNDING AND INCENTIVES Appendix F Funding and Incentives There are multiple resources and incentives that can help private property owners preserve, adaptive- ly reuse or rehabilitate historic structures. However, the majority of these programs are NOT available to private, owner-occupied single-family home properties. Incentives for Residential Properties The following potential incentives can apply to commercial properties as well but are options for as- sisting with privately-owned residential property. ● Building Code ○ There is some flexibility with the building code when rehabilitating historic structures. These can include variances to compliance with the Americans with Disability Act. For information on how the building code can impact a project, contact the Bozeman Build- ing Division. ● City of Bozeman Tax Abatement Certificate of Appropriateness (Division 3 – Tax Abatement, Section 2.06.350) ○ The intent and purpose of the Tax Abatement Program is to encourage the appropriate rehabilitation, restoration, and preservation of historic properties which otherwise would not have been so carefully preserved. Tax abatement is to reward extraordinary efforts in preservation and not minimal compliance with mandatory standards. ○ Tax abatement programs can be used for both income producing properties and pri- vately owned historic homes. This program offers a five year “abatement” of increased property taxes for projects which satisfy the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. This program offers an additional one-year abatement during the construction period and is limited to 100% of the increase in taxable value of the work done to rehab or restore a property. ○ Certification happens during the Certificate of Appropriateness review process. Only properties that do not receive any other tax exemption or special evaluation qualify. A property must be individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places, be at least 50 years of age and located in an established NRHP district, or determined to be eligible for individual listing in the NRHP. ○ The City Commission is the final decision authority on granting tax abatement by reso- lution. 37 6160 Incentives for Income-Producing and Commercial Property and Nonprofit or Government Owned Property ● Historic Building Rehabilitation Tax Credit Programs ○ The State of Montana SHPO is the statewide facilitator for both the Federal and State Historic Rehabilitation Income Tax Credit Programs. These credits offer income tax credits for the rehabilitation of income-producing properties listed in the Nation- al Register of Historic Places or listed as contributing to a locally designated district certified by the Secretary of the Interior. Both programs incentivize the revitalization of income-producing historic real estate and level the playing field when redevelopment exceeds the cost of new construction. The Federal tax credit uses a three-part appli- cation to award successful applicants an income tax credit equal to 20% of their rehab investment. The State of Montana’s income tax credit is equal to 25% of the amount an owner claims under the Federal program. Those wishing to claim the state credit must first be certified for credits under the Federal program. ○ The majority of historic structures in Bozeman aren’t eligible for the Federal and State Historic Building Rehabilitation Tax Credit Programs. Recommend designation of additional sites to the National Register of Historic Places or listed as contributing to a locally designated district certified by the Secretary of the Interior in order for owners of revenue producing properties to take advantage of these programs. ● New Market Tax Credits ○ The New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) program was created as part of the Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of 2000 passed during the Clinton administration with the intent to improve business development in economically distressed areas of the country. NMTCs can be used in the rehabilitation of historic buildings, combined with both the federal historic tax credit (HTC), state HTCs or other incentives. The taxpayer is eligi- ble to claim a tax credit equal to 5 percent of its equity investment in the Community Development Entities (CDEs) for each of the first three years and a 6 percent credit for each of the next four years (39% total). Combining the credits does however add sig- nificant complications to the organizational structure; it is essential to have a solid and experienced team of historic consultants, accountants and attorneys. ● Opportunity Zones ○ Designed to encourage long-term private investments in low-income communities, Opportunity Zones provide a federal tax incentive for taxpayers who reinvest unreal- ized capital gains into “Opportunity Funds,” which are specialized vehicles dedicated to investing in low-income areas called “Opportunity Zones. Excluding the campus of Montana State University, the entire southwest section of Bozeman (Census Tract 11.02) is a federally designated Opportunity Zone. This is a financial incentive avail- able for all forms of development, including historic preservation and adaptive reuse in Census Tract 11.02. ● Montana Historic Preservation Grant Program ○ The Montana Historic Preservation Grant (MHPG) Program is a state-funded program created in 2019, designed to support public or private entities with the preservation of historic sites, including internal or external “brick-and-mortar” improvements that ad- dress infrastructure, building renovation, maintenance, or building code issues through grant funding. Eligible applicants may apply for funding up to $500,000 per eligible project. A 20% match of the total project cost is required for applications. Historic sites will be considered eligible if one of the below criteria is met: ■ Structure or site is listed on National, State, or Local Historic Registry ■ Structure or site contributes to a historic district ■ A structure more than 50 years old and has documented significance to the history of a Montana community or region ● Historic Preservation Grant Programs ○ The National Trust for Historic Preservation provides a list of different grant programs, however, most are awarded to nonprofit organizations and public agencies. ○ Preserve Montana, a statewide nonprofit whose mission is to protect Montana’s histor- ic places, traditional landscapes, and cultural heritage, provides a list of resources on funding, grants, historic tax credits and more. ● Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Grant Programs ○ Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is a way for certain districts to use property tax revenue to fund new development. It works by separating taxable value into base and incre- ment values, so that revenue from the base value continues to go to the regular taxing jurisdiction, but as taxes increase over the years, that growth—the increment—goes to the TIF to pay for development activities within the TIF district. There are six Urban Renewal Districts (URDs) using Tax Increment Financing (TIF) within the City of Boze- man: ■ Downtown Urban Renewal District ■ Midtown Urban Renewal District ■ Northeast Urban Renewal District ■ South Bozeman Technology District ■ North Park Urban Renewal District ■ Pole Yard Urban Renewal District While not directly associated with historic preservation and adaptive reuse, it is possi- ble for these types of projects to be eligible for associated grant programs, if the loca- tion is within URD boundaries and the development project aligns with the objectives and purpose of that URD. Examples include: ■ The Downtown URD Residential Incentive Program is intended to assist with smaller, more affordable units. The overall intent and purpose of the Down- town URD emphasizes the preservation of Bozeman’s historical character as a “working” downtown. Objectives of this plan shall be accomplished by incen- 38 6362 tives whenever possible. Additional Downtown URD grant programs include streetscape assistance, fiber infrastructure, life-safety, technical assistance, and art enhancement/CPTED grants. Contact Downtown Bozeman Partnership for more information. ■ Midtown URD Technical Assistance Grants (TAG) grants support current or potential developers, property owners, and tenants with technical assistance during the preliminary phases of possible redevelopment projects. This pro- gram facilitates navigating code requirements, assessing the feasibility of sites and building designs, and preparing for the planning application and approval process. ■ The Midtown Urban Renewal Board sponsored the creation of streamlined form-based zoning districts to ease the implementation of the community vision for Midtown. Community Commercial – Mixed (B-2M) Zoning features allowable ground floor residential, reduced parking requirements, and a robust mix of uses. For more information on the Midtown, Pole Yard, North Park, South Boz- eman Technology, or Northeast Urban Renewal contact the City of Bozeman Economic Development Office Urban Renewal Program Manager. ● City of Bozeman Rebates & Incentives ○ The City of Bozeman offers a number of sustainability rebates, tax credits, and financ- ing options that might be available for residential properties or businesses. These include Inflation Reduction Act incentives related to climate action, building and electri- fication incentives, and income-restricted rebate for electrification for residential. ● Development Regulations (Land Use & Zoning) ○ The proposed Bozeman Development Code provides additional flexibility that could further incentivize market rate adaptive reuse of existing properties. ○ Planned Development Zoning (PDZ) allows development regulation flexibility for proj- ects that: ■ Create distinct neighborhoods with quality urban design and mutually support- ive uses; and ■ Support implementation of community plans and goals; and ■ Provide community benefits through the creation of affordable housing, inclu- sion of environmentally sustainable design features, and retention of historic structures; and ■ Protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. Funding and Incentives Challenges ● Understanding the real estate capital stack ○ It is important to know and understand your project’s budget, proforma or capital stack prior to pursuing outside funding and incentives opportunities. The capital stack is a tool for understanding sources of capital in a real estate deal and how the deal’s structure influences the investor’s potential return. Incentive programs, including historic tax credits and grants, can be sources of capital included in a project’s capital stack. ● Understanding Federal and State Historic Tax Credit Eligibility Requirements ○ The Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives program encourages private sector investment in the rehabilitation and re-use of historic buildings. Eligible buildings must be privately-owned, income producing and listed on the National Register of Historic Places or be certified as contributing to the significance of a “registered historic district.” ● Understanding Federal Grant Program Eligibility Requirements ○ In general, a grant supports a project through government funding. Typically, to be eligible for a grant, the project applicant would need to be a state government, local government, nonprofit, educational institution, and/or Federally Recognized Indian Tribe, Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian Organization as defined by 54 USC 300300. ● Financial resources for owner-occupied residential properties ○ Only properties individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), at least 50 years of age and located in an established NRHP historic district are eligible for the City of Bozeman Tax Abatement Certificate of Appropri- ateness program. 39 6564 APPENDIX G HISTORIC CEMETERY PRESERVATION Appendix GHistoric Cemetery Preservation Preserving historic cemeteries is important for a variety of reasons including: ● maintaining cultural, historical, and artistic legacies, ● providing educational opportunities, ● supporting genealogical research, and ● contributing to the heritage and identity of communities. Protecting historic cemeteries reflects a recognition of the importance of our shared history and the people who shaped it. Before working in a historic cemetery, reach out to the owner of the cem- etery first before doing any work to get permission. For Sunset Hills, this is the City of Bozeman, but other cemeteries may be privately owned. If you cannot locate the owner, reach out to the City. One way you can help historic cemeteries is working on the landscaping. If you decide to tackle landscaping in a historic cemetery, there are a few things to keep in mind. The priorities are keeping participants safe and being as gentle as possible to avoid damaging any headstones or plots. ● Work with an archaeologist or preservationists to understand best practices in landscaping for cemeteries in Bozeman. ● Regional archaeologists can also provide guidance on grave goods that may have been used with burials and should be left in place. ● Check the stability of headstones and other features before removing or trimming any adjacent landscaping. ● Avoid using heavy equipment and use manual tools and smaller equipment instead. ● Avoid using weed wackers close to headstones. Use manual tools instead. ● Do not attempt to do tree work without professionals. Another way you can help take care of historic cemeteries is cleaning headstones. More advanced headstone work such as resetting stones and repairing damaged stones is best left to professionals. 40 6766 Cemetery Headstone Cleaning DO DON’T (all of these can damage stones) ● Use soft brushes or toothbrushes ● Use water ● Use D/2 Biological Solution ● Use metal or abrasive brushes ● Use bleach ● Pressure wash ● Make gravestone rubbings Always make sure the stone you are working with is stable before attempting to clean. If it does not seem stable, move on to another stable headstone. General cleaning process: ● First gently brush away any dirt or debris from the stone using a soft, dry brush. ● Wet the stone with water. ● If using D/2 Biological Solution, spray the stone. Water alone can be very effective, how- ever. ● Using a soft brush, start at the top of the stone and gently clean in a circular manner, working towards the bottom. ● Clean the stone with water again. ● Stone cleaning is complete, until next time. APPENDIX H EDUCATION, OUTREACH, AND INTERPRETATION RECOMMENDATIONS 41 6968 Appendix HEducation, Outreach, and Interpretation Recommendations Education and outreach around historic preservation is vital to fostering an informed and engaged community that values its cultural heritage. Historic preservation goes beyond safeguarding build- ings and landmarks—it’s about connecting people to the stories, traditions, and identities that shape a place. Effective education empowers individuals to take an active role in protecting their shared history and can make preservation more relatable and accessible. By cultivating understanding and appreciation for historic sites and their significance, communities like Bozeman can ensure that their heritage remains a vibrant and celebrated part of their collective future. Education and interpretation are also key tools in helping celebrate intangible heritage like cultural practices, traditions, knowledge, and expressions passed down through generations that are not physical objects. This could include oral histories, performing arts, rituals, social practices, foodways, events, traditional craftsmanship, and knowledge related to nature and the environment. It represents the living traditions and cultural identity of a community. Because intangible heritage is not easy to regulate like a building, education and interpretation can be a way for historic preservation programs to still address this heritage. This is where government preservation programs can borrow from the field of public history. As the Bozeman Landmark Program considers the best strategies to support proactive preserva- tion, as well as demystify the application process, and help people understand “what is historic,” the program has an opportunity to build upon the preexisting Preservation Month (May) programming to develop active and passive strategies that support community needs throughout the year. Active strat- egies are defined by an interactive element with the public and passive strategies are materials that can be dispersed through digital and physical means. Active strategies could include: ● Historic Preservation Advisory Board (HPAB) Meetings: ○ HPAB could expand what they offer during their meetings such as hosting guest lec- tures. ● Preservation Month ○ Preservation Month is recognized nationally every May, and on an annual basis, HPAB hosts a variety of events to the public. As this tradition continues it is recommended that feedback is collected from previous attendees to identify preferred styles of educa- tional events, understand what topics attendees would like to learn more about, and to find the right balance of events. ● Public Events ○ Historic Designations - HPAB has pursued historic designations of sights of signif- icance, for example Fred Willson Multiple Property Group. Public events could be hosted at the beginning and at the conclusion of such pursuits. The public events could do the following: ■ Raise awareness for historic designation process ■ Raise awareness for HPAB roles ■ Empower attendees to pursue historic designations for sites they view as signif- icant ■ Educate the public on the significance and history or specific themes, spaces, and people ■ Celebrate the successful pursuit of a historic designation. ○ Hands-On Preservation Education - the City of Bozeman manages a variety of historic spaces from the Sunset Hills Cemetery to Peets Hill to Beall Recreation Center and beyond. Utilizing city structures as a learning lab, event attendees could learn how and why preservation maintenance is performed and occasionally be able to assist in pro- active preservation of publicly owned spaces. For example, the public could be invited to learn about how to clean historic headstones or they could help with litter pick up on trails to learn about the different strategies of trail maintenance. Hands-On Preserva- tion Education opportunities can empower people to be connected to publicly owned spaces and learn how the City of Bozeman leads preservation through their actions. ○ Preservation Pop-Ups ■ HPAB members and City of Bozeman staff are encouraged to host tables at events, which may increase awareness of the Bozeman Landmark Program by distributing educational resources, kids activities, and promotion of Bozeman Landmark Program events and HPAB meetings. Recommended content focus areas for active engagement include: ● Exploring how residents can be a preservationist (in a variety of ways) ● Social history, the everyday relatable moments from the past ○ Foodways - historic and current ○ Agricultural history ○ Household ways of life ● Homeowner education ○ Strategies to maintain your home to assist its long-term preservation needs ○ Strategies to restore deteriorating elements of homes - ex: old windows ● Environmental spaces and cultural landscapes ● Urban Planning history - transportation, city development, infrastructure ○ Rail history ○ Aviation ○ Roadways ○ City growth 42 7170 ● Cultural cornerstones ○ Community events ○ History of outdoor recreation - camping, hiking, fishing, etc. Passive strategies could include: ● Educational Resources: ○ Historic Preservation Advisory Board (HPAB) members and staff are encouraged to develop educational resources that reflect areas of expressed interest by the public through inquiries. ■ Educational resources should be pithy documents similar to the National Park Service’s Preservation Briefs, but with local examples of historic places and projects. The educational resources should be approximately 1-2 pages in length with visuals and they can reference documents like the aforementioned briefs for additional information. The intention of these educational resources are to do the following: ● Provide a better understanding of Bozeman’s historic places - their con- text, their materials, their designations, etc. ● Provide a better understanding of Bozeman’s HPAB’s work ● Provide a better understanding of the City of Bozeman’s role in historic preservation ■ At least two educational resources should be developed on an annual basis to be launched as a part of Preservation Month activities digitally and in person ○ Relaunch self-guided tour series (digital and/or physical) ■ Develop self-guided tours for residents and visitors that provide opportunities for individuals/groups to learn more about sites that have been designated and/ or have been determined eligible for designation ● The HPAB should utilize the Fred Willson multiple property group histor- ic designation to develop the first self-guided tour. ● Additional self guided tours should be developed based on preexisting self guided tours (review and edit as needed) and based on emerging storytelling themes of priority. ● Historic Designations: ○ The Historic Preservation Advisory Board (HPAB) should continue to lead the research, development, and writing of historic designations for properties that have been deter- mined to have significance. HPAB should utilize the data collected from the Summer 2024 preservation survey to assist in the selection of future preservation designation priorities. It is recommended that a new designation project should be identified and pursued approximately every 2-3 years. In addition to the labor necessary to success- fully pursue a historic designation, the aforementioned active engagement to amplify the work done and utilize the HPAB labor as an educational opportunity. ● Social Media Posts: ○ The Bozeman Landmark Program should social media posts should: ■ Post regularly in advance of public advisory board meetings ■ Promote the annual historic preservation awards ■ Provide educational posts ○ HPAB members could be assigned a month to write a social media post. The post is recommended to highlight a history that has been designated, as an opportunity to elevate awareness of designated properties. ○ Physical Fliers ○ In addition to social media posts to promote public events related to the Bozeman Landmark Program, it is recommended that physical promotional fliers are placed in City Hall, at the Bozeman Library, and municipal owned locations that have bulletin boards. HPAB members are encouraged to place physical fliers in other community board locations. ● Signage - It is recommended that HPAB perform and create an assessment of existing heri- tage interpretation signs in Bozeman - location, materials communicated, owners of signage, etc. This assessment of existing signage should build upon survey materials which identified cultural cornerstones in facilitated meetings, survey results, and MSU student work. The as- sessment performed will do the following and could help support creation of a local landmark signage program: ○ Develop a map of existing marker locations. ○ Identify storytelling themes that currently exist in signage and emerged through the aforementioned community engagement. ○ Assess potential priority locations for storytelling signage based on pedestrian visibility. ○ Develop a design guideline for interpretive signage and strategy for location assess- ment, content development, and long-term maintenance. ○ Seek funding for fabrication and installation. Cultivating an understanding of cultural significant spaces is an impactful proactive preservation strat- egy, and installing signage is an opportunity for community collaboration/education. 43 7372 APPENDIX I RESOURCES AND BEST PRACTICE EXAMPLES Appendix I Resources and Best Practice Examples Beyond the Built Environment ● Aspen, Colorado ○ Aspen Grove Cemetery Studies● Deadwood, South Dakota○ City of Deadwood Archaeology● Glenview, Illinois○ Heritage Tree Program● Minneapolis, Minnesota○ Heritage Tree Program ● St. Paul, Minnesota○ Daylighting Buried Water● Tucson, Arizona ○ Archaeology of Downtown, Fort Lowell, and Court Street Cemetery● National○ Trails on Indigenous Property Businesses ● Missoula, MT○ Legacy Business Registry ● Boston, Massachusetts ○ Legacy Business Program● Detroit, Michigan ○ Legacy Business Project● Los Angeles, California○ Legacy Business Program● Pasadena, California ○ Legacy Business Program● San Francisco, California ○ Legacy Business Program● National ○ Small Business Anti-Displacement Toolkit 44 7574 Designations ● Altadena, California● Altadena Heritage Area Program ● Denver, Colorado● Cultural District Designation ● Conservation Overlay Districts ● Franklin, North Carolina● Noquisiyi Cultural District● Indianapolis, Indiana ● Conservation Districts ● Minneapolis, Minnesota○ Minneapolis Cultural Districts● New York City, New York ○ HOW CAN HISTORIC PRESERVATION BE MORE INCLUSIVE? LEARNING FROM NEW YORK CITY’S HISTORIC DISTRICTS● Washington D.C.● Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act of 1978 Equity ● Los Angeles, California○ Sustainable Little Tokyo ● New York City, New York○ LPC launches Equity Framework● Montana (statewide) ○ Essential Understandings Regarding Montana Indians○ Montana Indians - Their History and Location● San Francisco, California ○ Historic Preservation Commission Resolution No. 1127 Centering Preservation Planning on Racial and Social Equity● National ○ NAPC Forum Preservation Equity Resource List ○ INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE Understanding and Implementation○ National Alliance of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers Housing ● Cincinnati, Ohio○ Over the Rhine Affordable Housing/HP project● Michigan (statewide)○ The Missing Middle Mixtape ● Tulsa, Oklahoma○ PRO Housing Grant ● National ○ ACHP Housing + HP Policy Statement (Draft) Investment - Grants, Loans, Redevelopment Programs ● Austin, Texas ○ Heritage Preservation Grants● Aurora, Illinois○ Historic Preservation Grant Program● Berlin, Wisconsin ○ Revolving Loan Fund● Eugene, Oregon○ Historic Loan Program ● Fort Collins, Colorado○ Landmark Rehabilitation 0% Loan Program● Galveston, Texas ○ HOME Investment Partnership● Green River, Utah○ Epicenter Fix it First Loan Program ● Lakota Land, South Dakota○ Regenerative Community Development● Marysville, Ohio○ Community Reinvestment Area Program (CRA)● Macon Georgia○ 25-year Economic Impact Report on Revolving Loan Fund Program● Missoula, Montana○ North Missoula Community Development Corporation ● New York, New York○ New York City Historic Properties Fund● Rapid City, South Dakota ○ Revolving Loan Fund○ Downtown Facade Loan● Seattle, Washington ○ Incentives for Historic Properties in Seattle● Sioux Falls, South Dakota○ Historic Preservation Loan Program ● Spokane, Washington○ Historic Preservation Façade Improvement Grant● Saint Paul, Minnesota ○ Homeowner Rehab Loan Program● Wasatch County, Utah○ Revolving Loan Fund● National○ Preservation Basics: Preservation Revolving Funds 45 7776 Mapping/ Surveying ● Lakewood, Colorado○ Survey Plans● Manzanar, California ○ Manzanar Close Up Map● Milwaukee, Wisconsin○ Redlining and Plat GIS Map Layers ● Montana (statewide)○ Tribal Territories● Ohio (statewide)○ Ohio Modern - Preserving Our Recent Past● St.Louis, Missouri○ Mid Century Modern Survey● National○ East at Main Street Planning ● Austin, Texas○ Equity Based Preservation Plan ● Colorado (statewide)○ 2020 Statewide Preservation Plan● Des Moines, Iowa ○ Historic Preservation Plan● Michigan (statewide)○ Predevelopment Assistance for Growth & Advancement ● Washington (statewide)○ Preservation Plan (2021-2026): Inhabiting our History Sustainability ● Portland, Oregon● Deconstruction Ordinance ● San Antonio, Texas● Deconstruction Ordinance ● Los Angeles, California ● Citywide Adaptive Reuse Ordinance ● Milwaukee, Wisconsin● Deconstruction Ordinance● Rhode Island (statewide) ● Best Practices for Adaptive Reuse● Salt Lake City, Utah● Adaptive Reuse Ordinance Storytelling ● Baltimore, Maryland○ Baltimore Buried These Streams - Now An Artist Is Bringing One Back● Chillicothe, Missouri ○ City Murals● Manistee County, Michigan○ Self Guided Historic Tours ● Missolula, Montana○ Downtown Heritage Interpretation Plan● Nassau County, Florida ○ Bicentennial Celebration● Philadelphia, Pennsylvania○ Treasure Philly● Spokane, Washington○ Heritage Tours● Virginia City, Montana ○ Walking Tour Maps● Wheeling, West Virginia ○ Historical Neighborhood Signs 46 78 ©2025 Community Planning Collaborative www.planningcollab.com info@planningcollab.com (904) 577-0255 47 1PB HISTORIC PRESERVATION POLICY & LOCAL LANDMARK PROJECT Phase 1 Recommendations Prepared for City of Bozeman, MT By April 4, 2025 48 32 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .....................................................................................................................7 OVERVIEW OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN BOZEMAN ..........................14 Bozeman History Overview .........................................................................................................................................15 Zoning and Land Use History ...................................................................................................................................19 Evolution of Historic Preservation in Bozeman .............................................................................................21 Further Plan Context .......................................................................................................................................................24 Montana State Legislation and Influence ........................................................................................................26 LANDMARK PROJECT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EFFORTS .......30 RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN PROJECT SCOPE (PHASE II) ...............36 Related to Chapter 38.340 ........................................................................................................................................37 Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District .............................................................................................44 Creation of Local Landmark Program ...............................................................................................................50 FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................56 Design Guidelines Update .........................................................................................................................................57 Historic Preservation Interface with Unified Development Code ..................................................58 Heritage or Landmark Trees .....................................................................................................................................59 Historic and Cultural Resource Survey Efforts .............................................................................................61 Historic Preservation Planning ................................................................................................................................64 Funding and Incentives ................................................................................................................................................66 Historic Preservation Program Support ...........................................................................................................69 Context Studies ..................................................................................................................................................................70 City Commission Mayor Terry Cunningham Deputy Mayor Joey Morrison Commissioner Jennifer Madgic Commissioner Douglas Fischer Commissioner Emma Bode Historic Preservation Advisory Board Chair Chelsea Holling Vice-Chair Linda Semones Elizabeth Darrow Jim Webster Michael Wiseman Ashley Wilson Allyson Brekke Commission Liaison Jennifer Madgic City Staff Sarah Rosenberg, AICP, Historic Preservation Officer Erin George, AICP, Community Development Director Chris Saunders, AICP, Community Development Manager To the residents of Bozeman - thank you for your valuable input and thoughtful guidance in shaping the Landmark Project plan. Your passion and commitment to preserving the community’s historic and cultural resources have been inspiring. We deeply appreciate your dedication to protecting Bozeman’s rich heritage for generations to come. Image Credits Historic Images: Museum of the Rockies Photo Archive Online, Pioneer Museum, Montana Historic Society, Gallatin History Museum, Bozeman Times, Montana State University Archives Miscellaneous Maps: City of Bozeman, CPC Project Team Sanborn Fire Insurance Company Maps: Library of Congress Miscellaneous Images: CPC Project Team or as otherwise noted in captions Illustrations: Sarah Marsom Project Team Community Planning Collaborative is an urban planning and historic preservation consulting practice whose purpose is to elevate the voices and culture of those traditionally excluded from urban planning, land use and zoning. CPC facilitates community-led, history-based planning solutions so that equitable outcomes are possible. | planningcollab.com Mulberry History Advisors is a woman-owned history and historic preservation consulting firm based in Richmond, VA. We help people shape the future by understanding the past. | mulberryhistory.com Sarah Marsom is a heritage resource consultant who specializes in identifying organizational deficiencies and coming up with creative solutions through strategic planning and community programming development that recognizes each community’s history is unique and each structure is distinct. | sarahmarsom.com Front Cover Artwork 1904 Bozeman Sanborn Fire Insurance Map. Credit: Library of Congress Hotel Baxter, Mountains, Sunset Hills Chinese Headstone, Story Mansion. Credit Sarah Marsom 49 54 Sunset Hills Cemetery Master Plan ......................................................................................................................72 Deconstruction Policy and Program ...................................................................................................................74 Legacy Business Program .........................................................................................................................................77 Archaeology ..........................................................................................................................................................................79 Education, Outreach, and Interpretation ..........................................................................................................80 IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................................................................................86 NEXT STEPS .................................................................................................................................................92 HISTORIC PRESERVATION POLICY & LOCAL LANDMARK PROJECT Phase 1 Recommendations 50 76 The City of Bozeman Historic Preservation Program began in the early 1980s when a comprehensive historic architecture survey of the “historic portion” of the city was conducted. This foundation led to the creation of ten National Historic Districts, historic preservation regulations, and the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD). Since then, the current preservation regulations in Section 38.340 of the Bozeman Municipal Code have been applied to new development, alterations, and demolition within the historic districts and the NCOD via the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) process. The Bozeman Historic Preservation Policy & Local Landmark Program project (“Landmark Project”) centers on evaluating and revising the existing preservation policy. This project will: • Revise Section 38.340 of the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC); • Fine-tune the review criteria and standards for COA applications; • Update the boundaries of the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District where conflicts exist; • Create a local landmark nomination process, criteria and application form; • Update Historic Preservation Advisory Board responsibilities in BMC Section 2.05.860 and 2.05.930; and; • Make amendments to the existing Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation & the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. Executive Summary Photo Credits: (Clockwise from left) Little Wolf (c.1820—1904) was a Northern Só’taeo’o Chief and Sweet Medicine Chief of the Northern Cheyenne who fought the war for the Bozeman Trail between 1866 and 1868. Credit: Montana Historical Society. The intersection of East Main Street and Bozeman Street circa 1970s. Properties built in the 1970s may be eligible as historic. Credit: Gallatin History Museum. Streetcars in downtown Bozeman, c.1895. Credit: Montana Historical Society. 51 98 The scope of this project includes a holistic approach to historic preservation. Preservation should not be treated as a stand-alone initiative. Rather, it should be a consideration in larger planning issues. Where applicable, the following icons will appear throughout the report to indicate where those planning issues and preservation intersect. Preservation and Planning Connections HOUSING PEOPLE RESILIENCE ECONOMICS OCTOBER 2023 NOVEMBER 2023 FEBRUARY 2024 JULY 2024 Consulting contract signed. Project kickoff; research and engagement begins. Continued outreach to community representatives and city staff. Community engagement and outreach events. Community survey launches. TIMELINE SEPTEMBER 2024 Community survey closes, having received 292 responses.OCTOBER – NOVEMBER 2024 Initial policy and program recommendations document prepared. Recommendations shared at HPAB, Community Development Board, and City Commission meetings. DECEMBER 2024 – MARCH 2025 SPRING 2025 Phase 1 deliverable report finalized. Phase 1 deliverable report presented to HPAB, Community Development Board, and City Commission for final adoption. The City of Bozeman engaged Community Planning Collaborative (CPC) in Fall 2023 to assist with the Landmark Project. The Landmark Project is split into two phases. The first phase has focused on research, data collection, and community engagement, which have been incorporated into the recommendations in this report. The second phase will implement some of the recommendations with code amendments as needed. This phase is intended to happen in spring and summer 2025 and wrap up during fall 2025. SUMMER – FALL 2025 Phase 2 policy development and code amendments based upon adopted recommendations. Bozeman combined a variety of active and passive community engagement strategies. Early efforts included consultations with city staff and community organizations, as well as an exploration of the area’s Indigenous history led by Dr. Shane Doyle. Engagement extended to Montana State University students, who researched and designed historic markers for sites of significance. These projects informed temporary marker installations and contributed to public events, such as Preservation Month activities and youth-focused initiatives at the Gallatin History Museum. Through open houses, roundtables, and tabling events at locations like farmers markets and parks, residents of all ages and backgrounds shared their stories, identified culturally significant locations, and expressed priorities for preservation. In parallel, a digital survey, supported by temporary signage, social media outreach, and translated materials, captured input from nearly 300 participants. These efforts ensured inclusivity and highlighted diverse aspects of Bozeman’s history, from Indigenous traditions to industrial development. The community’s robust feedback, gathered through events and surveys, shaped the program’s Initial Conversations document, which outlined potential policy recommendations and was reviewed by the Historic Preservation Advisory Board (HPAB), Community Development Board (CDB) and the City Commission. By fostering a sense of shared heritage through education, outreach, and active participation, this project has laid a foundation for preserving Bozeman’s cultural identity while aligning with community values. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR THE LANDMARK PROJECT 52 1110 RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN PROJECT SCOPE (PHASE 2) Related to Chapter 38.340: Overlay District Standards • Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) Process and Application ◦ Certificate of Appropriateness - address standards, exemptions, application requirements, review procedures and criteria. Consider alternative name for Certificate of Appropriateness. ◦ Deviations - update section related to deviations from the underlying zoning requirements to include definitions for “historically appropriate,” clarify criteria, and make consistent with recent state law. ◦ Demolition section - update criteria, review process, documentation, two-year stay, “economic life remaining.” • Documentation requirements - update process for submitting state inventory. Create local historic/cultural resource inventory form. Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District • Address Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Boundaries (NCOD). • Make amendments to the existing Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation & the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District to correct outdated information. Local Landmark Program • Create local landmark nomination process. Historic Preservation Advisory Board • Update Historic Preservation Advisory Board Roles and Responsibilities. This project builds on the successes of the City of Bozeman’s existing preservation efforts. The City of Bozeman actively secures funding to support preservation efforts, including a 2009 Saving America’s Treasures Grant to restore the Story Mansion, digitizing property inventory forms from the 1984-1986 survey, and updating or creating new surveys for properties. The City’s GIS mapping system offers valuable technological tools like the Historic Architecture Inventory Map and digitized Sanborn maps. Recent inventory updates for historic structures and research on homes associated with the African American community add to the base of information about Bozeman’s history. Each May, Bozeman celebrates National Preservation Month with a themed lineup of events, such as scavenger hunts, tours, and speaker events, culminating in the Historic Preservation Awards, which honors projects, people, and places that highlight the city’s historic and cultural heritage. Above, from the top: 308 South Bozeman Avenue was built by Samuel Lewis in 1881 and listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1999. Born in Haiti in 1835, Lewis settled in Bozeman in 1868 and was a Main Street barbershop owner and commercial real estate developer. Credit: Montana Historical Society The City’s Preservation Awards, given out during Preservation Month in May, are an excellent strategy to celebrate preservation in Bozeman and honor the efforts of historic preservation stewards. Credit: Sarah Rosenberg Below: The City’s GIS Division has uploaded historic Sanborn Fire Insurance Company maps that can be layered on contemporary aerials. This is an incredibly helpful and publicly accessible feature that helps show the evolution of buildings and development in Bozeman. Credit: City of Bozeman GIS Division Screenshot image of the Engage Bozeman website for the Landmark project. Credit: City of Bozeman 53 1312 FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS Outside of Phase 2 Scope • Initiate complete update to the Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation & the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District as soon as possible. • Consider how historic preservation interfaces with the Unified Development Code update. • Consider Heritage Trees as part of the Urban Forestry Management Plan update. • Strategize historic and cultural resource survey efforts. • Consider a citywide historic preservation plan or equivalent chapter in a future Growth Policy update. • Explore options for preservation project funding and incentives. • Provide ongoing support for the historic preservation program. • Develop context studies. • Consider using Urban Renewal grants to incentive survey and documentation and adaptive reuse and rehabilitation for projects that align with URD goals. • Collaborate with the Parks and Recreation Department on a Sunset Hills Cemetery master plan update. • Consider adopting a deconstruction policy and program. • Consider creating a legacy business program. • Consider integrating archaeology into the historic preservation program. • Implement a more comprehensive education, outreach, and interpretation program. Project teams visits included visits across the City to understand the various types of historic and cultural resources in the community. Credit: Adrienne Burke Project team members Jacqueline Drayer, Adrienne Burke, and Sarah Marsom with Sarah Rosenberg, Bozeman Historic Preservation Officer, showing their heritage marker artwork created during community outreach in July 2024. Credit: Stephen Newport (From left to right) Project team members engage children at the Parks and Recreation Department’s summer camp in July 2024. Credit: Adrienne Burke Microballots available during community outreach gave participants a chance to show support for Bozeman’s heritage. Credit: Sarah Marsom 54 1514 The land now known as Bozeman, Montana, tells a multifaceted story shaped by millennia of human and natural activity. Indigenous nations, including the e Séliš (Bitterroot Salish), Qlispé (Pend d’Orreille), Ktunaxa (Kootenai), Pikuni (Blackfeet), Tsistsis’tas (Northern Cheyenne), Apsáalooke (Crow), Anishinaabe (Chippewa), Nehiyawak (Cree), Metis, Nakoda (Assiniboine), A’aninin (Gros Ventre), Dakota, Lakota, and others, used the area as a seasonal hunting and gathering ground, forging deep connections with the land. These tribes traded, allied, and evolved over centuries, leaving a profound legacy that predates Bozeman’s establishment. European contact began in the early 1800s with explorers like Lewis and Clark, followed by settlers who disrupted Indigenous ways of life. John Bozeman and others developed the Bozeman Trail in the 1860s, exploiting Indigenous routes to fuel gold rush migration and commerce. This incursion led to violent conflicts, the establishment of military forts, and ultimately the forced relocation of Indigenous peoples to reservations. Bozeman, founded in 1864 and incorporated in 1883, grew as an agricultural hub supported by irrigation, fertile land, and access to markets via wagon trails and later railroads. By the late 19th century, the city thrived on grain production, cattle ranching, and trade, becoming a stable community amidst the boom-and-bust cycles of other Montana towns. Many diverse groups contributed to its development, though racial and economic inequalities persisted. The 20th century brought modern growth and cultural shifts. Railroads, automobiles, and the arrival of Interstate 90 in 1966 transformed Bozeman into a regional center. Institutions like Montana State University, the Museum of the Rockies, Yellowstone National Park, and Big Sky Resort underscored its role in education, history, and tourism. However, this growth also reflected national challenges, including racial tensions and economic disparities. Bozeman’s population surged in recent decades, driven by tourism, outdoor recreation, and an evolving economy. Despite dramatic changes, the city remains tied to its history—a story of resourcefulness, resilience, and rapid transformation over centuries. BOZEMAN HISTORY OVERVIEW See Appendix A for a more detailed history. Overview of Historic Preservation in Bozeman Beginning this project with an introduction to the Indigenous culture of the Gallatin Valley was the appropriate foundation from which to start. Article X, Section 1(2) of the Montana Constitution states “The state recognizes the distinct and unique cultural heritage of the American Indians and is committed in its educational goals to the preservation of their cultural integrity.” The Montana Code §20-1-501(2)(a) states “every Montanan, whether Indian or non- Indian, be encouraged to learn about the distinct and unique heritage of American Indians in a culturally responsive manner.” While the Constitution and MCA provisions are related to the responsibility of educational institutions, the intent behind the language is valuable in considering updates to the City’s historic preservation program. Local governments can also play a role in helping elevate and educate regarding Native American cultural heritage. MONTANA’S CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATION REGARDING AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURAL HERITAGE spotlight Photo Credits: (Clockwise from left) Margaret Pickett Yellowtail of the Crow Agency, 1936. The Apsáalooke (Crow) people have connections to the Gallatin Valley since time immemorial. Credit: Museum of the Rockies. Pikuni camp c.1910 near Browning. The Pikuni (Blackfeet) people have connections to the Gallatin Valley since time immemorial. Credit: Museum of the Rockies. Credit: Montana Historical Society. This image of Story & Co. Millers reflects the agricultural, industrial, and railroad history of Bozeman. Credit: Montana Historical Society. 55 1716 Photo Credits: (from top) Historic Gallatin County High School. Credit: Montana Historical Society. Ladies Imperial Band, here in 1905, are a women’s history story in Bozeman. Credit: Museum of the Rockies. Ellen Theater 1935, downtown Bozeman. Credit: Museum of the Rockies. The Roundup Parade through downtown Bozeman. Credit: Museum of the Rockies. Photo Credits: (from top) The Bozeman Colored Women’s Club in 1924 illustrates the diverse heritage of Bozeman. Credit: Montana Historical Society. Millers Jewelry 1951, downtown Bozeman: Credit: Museum of the Rockies. Leora Hapner Home, c.1910. Credit: Museum of the Rockies. West Main Street in 2023. Credit: Ennis Davis, AICP 56 1918 Community events make a place special by uniting people and celebrating traditions, stories, and cultural expressions. They highlight intangible heritage by preserving and sharing customs, ensuring they remain meaningful for future generations. Bozeman’s Sweet Pea Festival is a community tradition connected to the city’s agricultural past. Today’s modern version of yesteryear’s Sweet Pea events maintains a cultural thread across time. THE SWEET PEA FESTIVAL (from top) One of the highlights of the historic Sweet Pea event was a parade with vehicles decorated with flowers. Credit: Montana State University Archives Sweet Pea parades took place at least until 1930. Credit: Museum of the Rockies Bozeman’s history of urban development through institutional planning and land use began with its incorporation in 1883. Unlike today, Bozeman in the late 1800s was divided into four wards represented by two aldermen. The first city officials, including Mayor John V. Bogert and eight aldermen, initiated early efforts to regulate the city’s physical and civic development. A street commissioner managed streets, alleys, and sidewalks, while a city engineer, appointed in 1885, handled surveying, platting, and public works projects. Early planning primarily focused on public works like roads, parks, and water infrastructure, with limited regulation for broader urban development. Public health and cleanliness were pressing concerns, leading to ordinances addressing nuisances such as maintaining clean barns and traversable sidewalks. Fire safety prompted building codes requiring fireproof materials for downtown construction. These regulations, though fragmented, laid the groundwork for modern land use governance. In 1922, Bozeman adopted its current charter from of government; it utilizes a city commission-city manager structure. The city engineer’s role remained integral, but was restructured to align with the evolving governance model. A significant milestone came in 1935 with the adoption of a zoning code, now substantially evolved and known as the Unified Development Code, which centralized regulations and introduced modern planning practices. The establishment of a joint City-County Planning Board in 1957 further professionalized planning efforts, leading to the city’s first community plan in 1958. Subsequent plans have guided Bozeman’s growth. In 1999, the joint city-county planning program was replaced by the Bozeman City Planning Office, with Gallatin County forming its own planning office. Today, the Planning Division and Historic Preservation functions operate within the Community Development Department. Bozeman is currently overhauling its Unified Development Code to address contemporary challenges, including zoning district consolidation. Historic preservation is guided by Chapter 2, Article 5 of the municipal code, which establishes the Historic Preservation Advisory Board, and Chapter 38, Article 3, Division 340, outlining standards for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. These efforts reflect Bozeman’s commitment to balancing growth with heritage conservation. ZONING AND LAND USE HISTORY See Appendix B for more detailed information. spotlight 57 2120 Map illustrating the 19th century wards in Bozeman.. Credit: Ennis Davis, AICP The local community’s formal efforts to honor its history began nearly 50 years ago with the founding of the Gallatin Historical Society in 1977, followed by the opening of the Pioneer Museum (now Gallatin History Museum) in 1982. In 1978, architect John DeHaas, Jr. initiated the city’s first historic preservation effort by preparing a National Register nomination for the South Willson Historic District, laying the groundwork for future preservation initiatives. In 1983-1984, a comprehensive survey of nearly 4,000 properties, led by preservation architect James R. McDonald, established a foundational inventory of Bozeman’s historic resources, focusing on buildings then over 50 years old. This survey largely defined the boundaries of the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) established in 1991, encompassing 3,100 properties, 8 historic districts, and more than 40 National Register-listed sites. Presently there are 10 historic districts and 48 National Register-listed sites. The creation of the Historic Preservation Advisory Board (HPAB) in 1985 formalized the City of Bozeman’s preservation efforts. The program originally relied exclusively on standards established by the Secretary of the Interior. Those were found to be difficult to use, therefore, the Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation and the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District were adopted in 2006. Besides subchapter 4-B, which was added in 2015 that addresses infill development in the B-3 zone district and Main Street Historic District, the guidelines have not been updated to reflect evolving standards and trends in planning and historic preservation best practices. Preservation efforts have concentrated on architectural integrity, while cultural and historical significance remain underexplored. The City of Bozeman also became a Certified Local Government (CLG) in 1986. This is a program with the State Historic Preservation Office that aims to bring attention to local preservation issues and support communities with a historic preservation program. Bozeman receives an annual CLG grant to support efforts to help reach its preservation goals. Subsequent surveys have re-evaluated some historic resources within the NCOD. Between 2015 and 2021, surveys of the B-3 Downtown District, B-2M Midtown District, and adjacent areas identified hundreds of properties eligible for the National Register, many from the mid-20th century that were previously overlooked or did not meet the 50 year age mark that is often used to classify historic structures. Between 2015 and 2021, surveys of the B-3 Downtown District, B-2M Midtown District, and adjacent areas identified hundreds of properties eligible for the National Register. Many were from the mid-20th century that were previously overlooked or did not meet the 50 year age mark often used to classify historic structures. Along with the overlooked histories and stories that are not reflected in existing inventories, Bozeman continues to develop new history every day which illustrates the need for program and data updating on an ongoing basis. Today, Bozeman’s preservation efforts are managed by the Community Development Department. As historic resources age and technology advances, EVOLUTION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN BOZEMAN See Appendix D for more detailed information. 58 2322 HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN BOZEMAN 1977 Gallatin Historical Society Founded 1978 First National Register nomination prepared in Bozeman for the South Willson Historic District (now part of Bon Ton Historic District) 1984–1986 Comprehensive survey conducted of Bozeman buildings 1985 Historic Preservation Advisory Board and Historic Preservation Officer staff position created 1986 City of Bozeman becomes a Certified Local Government 1991 Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District established 2006 Bozeman creates city-specific design guidelines for historic properties 2008 Consultant recommends re-evaluation of Bozeman’s historic resources 2015–2022 City conducts three surveys of specific areas within the NCOD 2023 Bozeman begins the process of reimagining its historic preservation ordinance and creation of a local landmark program What does historic preservation mean to you? ANSWERS FROM LANDMARK PROJECT COMMUNITY SURVEY (July - September 2024) “It gives the community a sense of place and identity.“ “A living window into Bozeman’s heritage” “Appreciation for the character of my community “ “Respecting that our past matters and is significant“ “Maintaining a connection to our history” “Acknowledging the past while recognizing the future“ “ Celebrating the acknowledgement of the past and learning from the past to understand the present and develop a positive future.” “Proud past, promising future with our shared values and roots” “Culture” “Keeps the character of the city” “The continuation of a culture’s important objects for future generations to venerate.” “Truth” 59 2524 GALLATIN COUNTY Historic preservation is always connected to larger issues in federal, state and city planning and services. In order to put together this report, other reports and initiatives were reviewed. These include: FURTHER PLAN CONTEXT (From top) Cover of Bozeman’s Community Plan, 2020. Cover of Bozeman’s Climate Plan, 2020. Cover of Montana Post-World War II Architectural Survey and Inventory, 2020. Credit: City of Bozeman Updating the City’s historic preservation policy must also take into account other initiatives and regulations, including Urban Renewal Districts, zoning districts, design standards, and additional adopted plans. Historic preservation does not have to be seen as in opposition to these other efforts; rather, it can complement them and help provide additional context. PLAN OR POLICY CONNECTION TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION 2024-2026 City Commission Priorities 2025: City Affordable Housing Ordinance 2024: Bozeman Local Food Systems Plan and Mapping Project 2023: City Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan 2021: UDC Affordable Housing Assessment 2020: Bozeman Community Plan 2020: Bozeman Climate Plan A Well-Planned City: Rework and restore a new historic preservation policy – including trees and landmarks Potential to complement adaptive reuse efforts with existing buildings. Encourages future agricultural preservation planning and building relationships with members of the Indigenous people’s community to strengthen connections to the region’s diverse agricultural heritage. Promotes stewardship, protection and enhancement of natural resource areas, trees and sensitive lands and the design of parks that reflect their unique neighborhoods. Includes recommendations to support and work with partner organizations to increase long-term affordable housing supply and housing preservation initiatives. Promotes stewardship, protection and enhancement of natural resource areas, trees and sensitive lands and the design of parks that reflect their unique neighborhoods. Includes policies that support vibrant and resilient neighborhoods, encouraging compact development, context-sensitive infill development in historic areas, mitigation for existing properties to facilitate climate and hazard resilience, and support of construction waste diversion and reuse of building materials. PLAN OR POLICY CONNECTION TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION 2017: Sunset Hills Cemetery Twenty- Year Plan 2016: Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan 2024: Envision Gallatin (County Growth Policy) 2023: Gallatin Valley Sensitive Lands Protection Plan 2020: Gallatin County Hazard Mitigation & Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2023-2027: Montana Historic Preservation PlanGallatin County Hazard Mitigation & Community Wildfire Protection Plan (2020) 2010: Montana Post World War II Architectural Survey and Inventory Plan provides recommendations and guidance for short-term and long-term planning for perpetual care of the future historic cemetery. Recommends using Montana’s Big Tree Program as a way to increase awareness of heritage trees and creating a heritage tree program to increase awareness for legacy trees. Provides historic overview of Gallatin County, identifies “heritage” as one of the plan’s three overarching themes recognizing the County’s cultural and historic significance especially Indigenous culture and contributions and agricultural heritage as well as natural heritage. Acknowledges Gallatin Valley’s Indigenous heritage and living legacy, agricultural heritage, and Tribal partnerships. References historic values of a community that includes historic sites and buildings, historic structures as related to the economy, and historic structures at Montana State University. SHPO priorities through 2027 include seeking and securing preservation funding and incentives, historic preservation promotion and education, increasing diversity in the field, documenting and evaluating Montana’s cultural resources. This project identified, documented, and evaluated select properties from Montana’s post-war period. It helps provide guidance in understanding mid-century architecture in the state. Bozeman sites surveyed include the Billion Dealership and several buildings on the campus of Montana State University. CITY OF BOZEMAN PLAN OR POLICY CONNECTION TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION STATE OF MONTANA PLAN OR POLICY CONNECTION TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION 60 2726 Preservation is addressed in Montana state law in the Montana State Antiquities Act (§§ 22-3-421 to 22-3-442, MCA). Local governments have a fair amount of flexibility with regards to local historic preservation programs. However, recent changes to Montana’s laws in the 2023 legislative session as well as the 2025 legislative session are affecting how local governments handle land use planning and historic preservation. For example, the Montana Land Use & Planning Act, passed in 2023 and effective as of the date of these phase 1 recommendations,, changes how local governments handle land use decisions by requiring all permit and design reviews to be conducted administratively by city staff. Decisions must be factually supported and consistent with state and locally adopted standards and criteria. Montana’s State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) maintains a relationship with local governments through the Certified Local Government (CLG) program. Bozeman is a CLG and receives a small amount of grant funding from SHPO via a contractual agreement. Additionally, SHPO creates the Montana Historic Preservation Plan, which provides helpful guidance for preservation activities across the state. “It is vital for Indigenous people living here today to guide the inclusion of their cultures, foods, and Indigenous food sovereignty into City initiatives and educational programming. As the City explores how to authentically recognize the heritage of the Indigenous peoples for whom this valley is ancestral territory, it needs to take an intentional approach to building relationships, listening, and partnerships. As one project participant cautioned, ‘Do not reach out if you are not serious about putting in the time, offering space, giving those voices a seat at the table.’” – City of Bozeman Local Food Systems Preliminary Mapping Project (2024) MONTANA STATE LEGISLATION AND INFLUENCE spotlight • The 2019 NCOD Policy Direction report focused on gathering community input to refine the existing NCOD and strengthen the city’s historic preservation program. Key findings from the extensive community engagement process revealed widespread support for the NCOD’s goals, but also a desire for more flexibility and clarity in its implementation. The report recommended creating two distinct programs within the NCOD, one for historic preservation and one for neighborhood character, and developing three sets of design standards and guidelines tailored to different areas of the city. It also emphasized the need to phase in a local historic preservation program, expand incentives for historic property owners, and streamline the NCOD review process to make it more understandable and transparent for all stakeholders. Cover of Final NCOD Policy Direction Report from July 2019. Credit: City of Bozeman The Historic Preservation Policy and Local Landmark Project is a continuation of these prior reports, building on community support demonstrated for historic preservation. This project will implement the recommended local historic preservation program and provide a roadmap for further defining NCOD policy as suggested in the 2019 report in particular. Support for surveying and other programmatic preservation efforts is outlined in more detail in this report. PRIOR NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT REPORTS (2015 AND 2019) • The 2015 NCOD report concluded that the existing NCOD boundary should be phased out and replaced with a combination of historic districts and design overlay districts. The report identified several key issues with the current policy, including a lack of up-to-date information on historic properties, rising housing costs, and a restrictive zoning code that made infill development challenging. It recommended prioritizing updates to historic property inventories, conducting a parking study, and revising the design guidelines to be more context-sensitive and flexible, particularly by expanding the use of ground-floor ADUs and simplifying the process for obtaining deviations from existing standards. See Appendix C for summaries of the 2015 and 2019 reports. Cover of Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Report from December 2015. Credit: City of Bozeman 61 2928 Landmark Project Community Engagement Efforts Learning what makes Bozeman unique is at the core of the Bozeman Landmark Project. Since the Bozeman Landmark Project kicked off in November 2023, the project team has worked alongside City of Bozeman staff to implement passive and active engagement strategies to understand what the community’s priorities are for a local landmark program. See Appendix D for more detailed information on community engagement efforts. Engagement by the numbers 292 30 16 Full Community Surveys Completed Social Media Posts Across Accounts 20+ Temporary Heritage Markers Installed 224 Micro-surveys Completed Community Events Held or Attended 13 City Advisory Board Meetings to Date 16 Engage Bozeman Project Page news updates Project team members table at the Downtown Crazy Days event in July 2024. Credit: Adrienne Burke Landmark Project open house event at Fire Station 3 in July 2024. Credit: Adrienne Burke Even canine residents were interested in the Landmark Project. Credit: Adrienne Burke A temporary marker encouraging participation in the Bozeman Landmark Program. Credit: Sarah Marsom 62 3130 NOVEMBER 2023: PROJECT KICKOFF The consulting team visited Bozeman to meet with city staff and community organizations. Conversations focused on understanding Bozeman’s current preservation efforts, city programs, and community priorities. The kickoff included a historical overview from Dr. Shane Doyle, who provided insight into the Indigenous history and living culture of the Gallatin Valley. SPRING 2024: STUDENT ENGAGEMENT AT MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Professor Sarah Church engaged her students in a project to research and design historic markers for significant sites in Bozeman. Sarah Rosenberg provided a guest lecture to guide students in connecting historical research with community narratives. The students’ projects contributed to community engagement and the development of temporary historic markers. MAY 2024: YOUTH ACTIVITIES Youth activity sheets were launched at the Gallatin History Museum and during Preservation Month events. The activities encouraged intergenerational conversations about local history.A make your own marker worksheet. Credit: Sarah Marsom Dr. Shane Doyle gives the Landmark project team an overview of the Indigenous history and living culture of the Gallatin Valley, November 2023. Credit: Sarah Marsom JULY 2024: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EVENTS The project team held various touchpoint events to engage the community and gather feedback: • Temporary historic markers, featuring selected MSU student projects, were installed throughout the city to share Bozeman’s history and promote the online survey. • Open Houses/Pop-Ups at locations like the Bozeman Fire Station and Beall Park allowed informal conversations with residents. • Focus Group Conversations with seniors, youth, and cultural community representatives provided structured dialogue to explore preservation priorities. • Tabling Events at the Farmers Market and Crazy Days festival reached a broader audience, with over 200 residents voting to prioritize preservation efforts. • The team hosted a Storytelling Signage Event at the Bozeman Library, where community members used art activities to share personal stories about Bozeman’s history. Sarah Rosenberg promotes the Bozeman Landmark Project at Catapalooza at MSU in August 2024. Credit: City of Bozeman July 2024 Storytelling Signage Event at the Bozeman Library. Credit: Stephen Newport 63 3332 Word cloud illustrating responses from the Landmark Project community survey in June - September 2024. Credit: CPC Team JULY – SEPTEMBER 2024: DIGITAL SURVEY PROMOTION The Bozeman Landmark Project digital survey was promoted through social media, temporary markers, and fliers placed around the city. The survey was translated into Spanish to ensure accessibility for Bozeman’s Latino community. It gathered input from 292 community members, providing valuable insights into preservation priorities. AUGUST – OCTOBER 2024: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EVENTS CONTINUE Sarah Rosenberg and other city staff attended additional tabling events at Lunch on the Lawn and the Farmers Market in August, September, and October 2024, as well as neighborhood association meetings, to further promote the digital survey and raise awareness about the project. OCTOBER 2024: INITIAL CONVERSATIONS DOCUMENT RELEASED The consulting team analyzed research and community feedback to date to create an Initial Guidance document with suggestions for dialogue around potential policy and program recommendations. This document was shared with the public to solicit additional feedback. The document was discussed in detail with HPAB and the Community Development Board for further input. NOVEMBER 2024: CITY COMMISSION GUIDANCE The Initial Guidance Document was presented to the City Commission for feedback and direction. Information from public feedback on the report and board discussion was included for consideration into this final report. JANUARY 2025: HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD SURVEY Members of the HPAB took part in a survey sharing their thoughts about HPAB roles and responsibilities. Key Themes from Community Survey Responses Protection of Historic Structures: People value preserving buildings, homes, and landmarks. Cultural Heritage: Residents place a strong emphasis on the cultural significance of places. Neighborhood Identity: Maintaining the character and feel of neighborhoods is critical. Balancing Growth and Preservation: There’s a concern about balancing new developments with the protection of historic areas. Connection to the Past: People see historic preservation as a way to connect with and honor the past. Preservation Beyond Buildings: The responses also mention preserving natural landscapes and cultural traditions. Historic Buildings: The loss of historic structures, especially those designed by architect Fred Willson, was repeatedly highlighted. Gentrification Concerns: Many respondents expressed frustration about old homes and affordable housing being replaced with luxury condos that don’t align with Bozeman’s character or provide housing for locals. Community and Identity Loss: There’s a sense that Bozeman is losing its unique character and community-oriented feel. People miss the small-town charm, affordable places, and gathering spaces that fostered a sense of belonging. Preservation vs. Development: A recurring theme is frustration with the lack of preservation efforts. People feel that developers and city officials do not adequately prioritize preserving Bozeman’s history and character. Infographic summarizing results from the Landmark Project community survey in July - September 2024. Credit: City of Bozeman 64 3534 Map illustrating the location of Landmark Project community engagement sites in 2024. Various photos from July 2024 engagement activities. Credit: CPC Project Team The community survey included the option for people to map locations they think should be preserved and/or celebrated. Sites include areas around the City and even outside City limits. This is a sample map showing sites closer to downtown. Credit: City of Bozeman/CPC Project Team 65 3736 Recommendations within Project Scope (Phase II) Sanborn Fire Insurance Company Map of Bozeman, 1904. Credit: Library of Congress RELATED TO CHAPTER 38.340 PURPOSE OF CHAPTER 38.340 Stimulate the restoration and rehabilitation of structures, and all other elements contributing to the character and fabric of residential neighborhoods and commercial or industrial areas. New construction is invited and encouraged, as long as preservation is emphasized and new construction enhances and contributes to the aesthetic character and function of the property and the surrounding neighborhood or area. Contemporary design is encouraged as an acknowledged fact of the continuing developmental pattern of a dynamic, changing community. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA) PROCESS AND APPLICATION RECOMMENDATIONS Certificate of Appropriateness application is required for exterior alterations, demolitions, and new construction of properties within the NCOD. New construction is invited and encouraged, as long as preservation is emphasized and new construction enhances and contributes to the aesthetic character and function of the property and the surrounding neighborhood or area Recommendations for the COA process and application: • Consider a different name for Certificate of Appropriateness. Some municipalities call them Certificate of Approval, while others use more general names such as Historic Preservation Permit. • Require COA applications for properties outside of NCOD if they are in a historic district or are individually listed on the National Register or as a Local Landmark. • Further define architectural appearance design guidelines to consider. Clarify elements that can be codified versus those best suited for design guidelines and when other code framework should be applied (i.e. Unified Development Code, Article 5). • Expand COA exceptions outlined in 38.340.040.A.1 especially for properties that are not within historic districts. • Differentiate minor vs. major projects and what process applies. • Clarify definition of historic structure in 38.700.090. DEVIATIONS FROM UNDERLYING ZONING REQUIREMENTS (38.340.070) Much of historic Bozeman was developed before modern zoning, subdivision, and construction regulations. As a result, some buildings and properties within the NCOD do not conform to current zoning standards. To support restoration, rehabilitation, and compatible new construction that enhances the district’s historic character, certain deviations from zoning requirements may be permitted. Recommended changes to the deviation section include: • Add a definition of “historically appropriate.” • Establish clearer criteria, requirements, and public notice (if required) for deviations. • Make review of deviations administrative, to comply with recent state law (Montana Land Use & Planning Act). 66 3938 Preservation Brief 16: The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors was updated by the National Park Service in October 2023. This document provides guidance on the use and applicability of non-historic materials when reviewing projects under the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. This document can provide insight into requests for alternate materials during the COA process. NATIONAL PARK SERVICE SUBSTITUTE MATERIALS BRIEF spotlight 1 16 PRESERVATIONBRIEFS The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors John Sandor, David Trayte, and Amy Elizabeth Uebel National Park ServiceU.S. Department of the Interior Technical Preservation Services The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation generally require that deteriorated distinctive architectural features of a historic property be repaired rather than replaced. Standard 6 of the Standards for Rehabilitation further states that when replacement of a distinctive feature is necessary, the new feature must “match the old in composition, design, color, texture, and other visual properties, and, where possible, materials” (emphasis added). While the use of matching materials to replace historic ones is always preferred under the Standards for Rehabilitation, the Standards also purposely recognize that flexibility may sometimes be needed when it comes to new and replacement materials as part of a historic rehabilitation project. Substitute materials that closely match the visual and physical properties of historic materials can be successfully used on many rehabilitation projects in ways that are consistent with the Standards. The flexibility inherent in the Standards for Rehabilitation must always be balanced with the preservation of the historic character and the historic integrity of a building, of which historic materials are an important aspect. Any replacement work reduces the historic integrity of a building to some degree, which can undermine the historic character of the property over time. With limited exceptions, replacement should only be considered when damage or deterioration is too severe to make repair feasible. When needed replacement is made with a material that matches the historic material, the impact on integrity can be minimal, especially when only a small amount of new material is needed. When a substitute material is used for the replacement, the loss in integrity can sometimes, although not always, be greater than that of a matching material. Also, whether historic or substitute material, there is a point where the amount of replacement can become excessive and the building’s historic integrity is diminished to an unacceptable degree, regardless of the material used—that is, a loss of authenticity and the physical features and characteristics closely associated with the property’s historic significance. The term substitute materials is used to describe building materials that have the potential to match the appear-ance, physical properties, and related attributes of historic materials well enough to make them alternatives for use in current preservation practice when historic materials require replacement. Compelling reasons to use a substitute material instead of the historic material include the unavailability or poor performance of the historic material, or environmental pressures or code-driven requirements that necessitate a change in material. When using a substitute material for replacement it is critical that it match the historic material in all of its visual and physical properties to preserve the historic character of the building and minimize the impact on its integrity. Substitute materials can be cost-effective, permit the ac-curate visual duplication of historic materials, and provide improved durability. While the behavior of traditional, his-toric materials is generally well understood, the behavior of newer materials can be less established and sometimes less predictable. Substitute materials are most successful when the properties of both the original material and the substitute are thoroughly understood by all those involved in the design and construction process. The architect must be adept at the selection of substitute materials and their incorporation into architectural plans and specifications. The contractor or tradesperson in the field must also be experienced with their use. This Preservation Brief provides general guidance on the use of substitute materials as replacement materials for distinctive features on the exterior of historic buildings. Due to the ever-evolving product market for construction materials, this Brief does not provide specifications for substitute materials. This guidance should be used in conjunction with qualified professionals who are knowledgeable in current construction and historic preservation practices. CATEGORY NOTES NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS Commercial Development Residential Development Demolition* Deviation** Major Projects – New Construction, Large Exterior Alterations Minor Projects – Storefront Remodels, Window and Door Replacement, Minor Improvements Add new dwelling – new unit, accessory dwelling or single family home All other residential COA 50 buildings total 7 of 12 reviewed by City Commission 25 54 91 345 39 12 566 Certificate of Appropriateness Applications: 2019-2025 TOTAL APPLICATIONS * Not all demolition applications have resulted in a demolition of a structure (i.e. COA expired, denied, still in review). See demolition section below for more details. **Deviations greater than 20% or more than one deviation request require City Commission review. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Community Development A Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) is a certification that the design of a project is appropriate within the neighborhood or area in which it is located. COA approval is required for any alteration, demolition or new construction in the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD). COA approval may be required in conjunction with site plan review, planned unit development and/or conditional use/special use permit review. COA approval is required before the issuance of building permits. There are three types of COA applications: 1.Neighborhood Certificate of Appropriateness (NCOA) - residential properties within the NCOD 2.Commercial Certificate of Appropriateness (CCOA) - commercial properties within the NCOD 3.Demolition Certificate of Appropriateness (DEM) - demolition of a structure within the NCOD CodeReferenceUDC 38.340 Overlay District Standards Deviations from underlying zoning requirements Many structures within the NCOD do not conform to contemporary zoning standards. In order to encourage restoration and rehabilitation activity that would contribute to the overall historic character of the community, deviations from underlying zoning requirements. A deviation can be granted administratively or by the City Commission if there is more than a 20% change in the standard or more than two deviations is request. Per BMC 38.340.070, the criteria for granting deviations from the underlying zoning requirements: 1.Modifications must be more historically appropriate for the building and site in question and the adjacent properties. 2.Modifications will have minimal adverse effects on abutting properties or the permitted uses. 3.Modifications must assure the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. Process Overview This flow chart visually describes the COA process for all development proposals in the NCOD. The application is reviewed for adequacy against the Unified Development Code (UDC), Design Objectives Plan and the COA standards. Dependent on the scope of the project, your application will be routed and reviewed by the Development Review Committee (DRC) or other advisory boards if deemed necessary. If your COA is part of a subsequent application (i.e. site plan), please see the Development Review Process handout for process overview. Below is the process for an independent COA application that does not require a deviation or public hearing. If an application is not complete or requires revisions to comply with the code, this timeline will be extended. START HERE 1 INTAKE Digitally submit your application through the Planning website. 2 ACCEPTABILITY REVIEW Application is checked over. Project is formally submitted. Planner assigned reviews it to determine if all related information on checklist is acceptable. 3 PROJECT REVIEW Planner and any other advisory boards review project to determine adequacy. If project needs more information, it will require revisions/corrections. 4 PUBLIC NOTICE If a notice is required (i.e. new dwelling within NCOD), a public notice period is conducted. 5 FINAL REVIEW Staff report is prepared, public notice ends and public comment is reviewed and considered. WEEK ONE WEEKTHREE -FOUR WEEK FIVE WEEK SIX 6 DECISION The City makes decision and determines approval of project. Once approved, a building permit can be applied for with the Building Division. WEEK SEVEN City of Bozeman Department of Community Development \ 20 East Olive, Bozeman, MT 59715 \ www.bozeman.net/planning \ 406.582.2260 Page 1 of 2 The City’s current COA approval process. This information is available online and is a good way to communicate process with the community. Fact sheets like this one are very helpful in making preservation requirements more accessible. Credit: City of Bozeman 67 4140 DEMOLITION (38.340.080-110) A multipronged demolition policy is vital to ensuring that historic buildings are preserved when they are structurally sound, and that there is suitable motivation to maintain them in the first place. A demolition policy must balance the need to ensure buildings and structures are safe, preserved when possible, and not excessively cumbersome to use and maintain. Defining each of these elements is frequently the cause of substantial disagreement among professionals. Preservation of older, if not necessarily historic, buildings is often environmentally favorable due to the embodied energy of existing buildings versus the carbon required to demolish and redevelop sites. However, if such buildings are dilapidated or in poor repair, they can contribute to blight in the area. Demolition policies vary widely by municipality. The most successful include: a clear way to determine threats to human health and safety, balance economic and historic considerations, incentives for reuse of materials, meaningful disincentives for illegal demolition, and mitigation. LIMITATIONS OF DEMOLITION POLICIES Local government historic preservation policies play a crucial role in regulating demolition within designated historic districts and for landmarked structures. However, these policies are limited by property rights considerations and broader legal frameworks. While cities can impose review processes, delay periods, and incentives to encourage preservation, they generally cannot permanently prevent demolition. The fundamental principle of property rights in the United States, reinforced by state and federal laws, ensures that property owners retain the ability to make decisions about their properties, including the right to demolish structures under certain conditions. As a result, one of the main functions of a demolition policy is to require a level of review prior to demolition. This allows for a process to occur that adds criteria and procedure for evaluating demolition requests. In addition, local governments often rely on policy tools such as demolition delays, economic hardship reviews, and negotiated alternatives rather than outright bans. This balancing act between preservation and property rights illustrates the challenges cities face in enforcing long-term historic protection while respecting property rights. BOZEMAN DEMOLITION DATA: 2018-2024 The number of demolitions since 2018 generally reflects an increase over time, corresponding to increased development pressure in Bozeman. The majority of approved demolitions are for non-contributing structures. Non-contributing means that the structure does not fall within the historic period of significance or has been substantially altered. A contributing or eligible structure is a historic structure that is either listed on the National Register of Historic Places, eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places individually, or as a contributing building to an existing or potential historic district. Some demolitions fell under the unsafe provision of the code that is outlined in 38.340.110. As noted later in the report, routine surveying and/or ways to get updated inventory forms is very important in helping identify eligible contributing historic resources. 2018 1 2019 5 5 2020 5 2021 4 2022 7 2023 10 2024 5 37 8 27 9 YEAR NUMBER OF CONTRIBUTING NON-CONTRIBUTING UNSAFE PROVISION* DEMOLITIONS /ELIGIBLE 1 - Residence, contri- buting to potential historic district 1 4 considered unsafe 2 - Residential, contri- buting to potential historic district 3 - 2 commercial, 1 residential 4 - 2 commercial, 2 residential 2 - 1 residential structure contributing to Cooper Park Historic District; Hospital individually eligible 5 - Residential 2 - 1 eligible, 1 noncontributing 3 - 1 residential contributing to Cooper Park Historic District, 2 eligible commercial buildings 7 - 5 residential, 2 commercial 2 - Noncontributing3 - Residential 2 - 1 residential contributing to North Tracy Historic District; 1 group living contributing to potential historic district 10 - 7 residential; 1 commercial; 2 industrial 1 - Noncontributing , residential TOTAL BUILDINGS DEMOLISHED PENDING *Per 38.340.110, “The demolition of unsafe properties/structures may be subject to the public nuisance abatement provisions of chapter 16, article 2 of this code. Upon the chief building official’s determination that the property is unsafe and declaration of a public nuisance if the property owner does not resolve the unsafe condition, the review authority must give final approval on a COA, which may be initiated by the city, and the demolition permit will be issued so the city may abate a nuisance.” Demolition by neglect ordinances are legal measures aimed at preventing the gradual deterioration of historic properties due to prolonged neglect by property owners. While these policies are common across the country, the state of Montana has not adopted the International Property Maintenance Code and precludes municipalities in the state from doing so. If that changes at some point in the future, Bozeman should consider how property maintenance regulations or demolition by neglect provisions could help preservation efforts. This presents challenges for documenting properties for demolition as well as larger survey efforts. As part of Phase 2, a less complex, local inventory form will be created that helps capture basic locational and architectural information, general history, and photographs. This option will allow documentation of properties in a more economically feasible manner. The demolition of Deaconess Hospital in 2022 is a source of sadness for many in Bozeman. In earlier days of the Deaconess, photos show a party for babies born c. 1920s and the hospital in 1936. This Deaconess Hospital was demolished in the 1960s. Credit: Museum of the Rockies DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT 68 4342 Bozeman’s current demolition policy was adopted in 2015. The following recommendations to section 38.340.080-110 will further strengthen and clarify requirements around Bozeman’s existing demolition policy. The full extent of the code language in the demolition section will be part of Phase 2. Below is a list of overarching suggestions on what is recommended to be revised and altered: Demolition or movement of a historic structure or site • Apply demolition policy to sites in the NCOD as well as other landmarks and historic districts outside of the NCOD that would be considered historic structures. • Clarify review criteria, including the following: ◦ Alter economic viability provision (38.340.080.C.2) with clearer standards and process on how to determine economic viability and hardship subject to State Statute. ◦ Revise code exception language. ◦ Clarify the two-year stay demolition provision and guidance on the proceedings required at the end of the two years. ◦ Create additional criteria for the early termination clause for the applicant. Demolition or movement of all structures – historic or non-historic • Add documentation provisions for demolition proposals that require updated inventory forms if the form is more than 10 years old with initial submittal. • If housing will be demolished, evaluate whether the city can have the same number or more of housing units constructed in the replacement project consistent with design guidelines and site plan standards. • Create standards for movement of all structures. Demolition of unsafe structures • Require demolition of unsafe structure standards to only apply for historic structures. • Add standard requirements for information needed to determine that the property is unsafe. DOCUMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES – INVENTORY FORMS (38.340.120) There are over 3,000 properties that have historic inventory forms in the City of Bozeman. Most of these are located within the NCOD and were completed in the 1980s. These valuable forms act as a comprehensive record of a property’s historical significance and document a place’s cultural heritage. While there have been some efforts to update these inventory forms, most of them are out of date. While the City will continue to update these forms over time, this will take a lot of time and financial resources to accomplish. There are also hundreds of properties that have never had an inventory form completed. Presently, only demolition permits for properties within the NCOD require an updated or recent inventory form be submitted (38.340.120). It is recommended that the City expand documentation requirements through the following: • Require an updated inventory form if none is on file or an existing form is more than 10 years old for the following projects: ◦ Demolition of structures over 50 years old citywide ◦ Major modifications to structures that are in the NCOD, in historic districts, or individually listed on National Register or as a Local Landmark Requiring documentation of properties being demolished outside of the NCOD will take a more proactive approach on places that have not been inventoried or those that have inventory forms last completed in the 1980s. A building that was inventoried in 1986 might not have been considered historically significant, but decades later could be. This is common practice across many cities nationwide and allows for a much greater degree of building inventory than preservation survey and designation-focused efforts alone. Montana is unique in that the level of information required for a state A/ER inventory form is extensive. These forms must have “thorough architectural descriptions, histories of the properties, including title searches, significance statements, photography, and mapping/shape files” with an expectation that “properties will be inventoried in person and local research conducted at historical societies, city/county records, museums, and other organizations.” (Kate Hampton, Montana State Historic Preservation Office, February 2024) As a result, the cost per form can run from $1000-3500 per form depending on the complexity of the property. This presents a challenge for documenting properties for demolition as well as larger survey efforts. Bozeman could create a less complex local inventory form that could seek to capture basic locational and architectural information, general history, and photographs. This is a good option for documenting properties in a more economically feasible manner. MONTANA A/ER INVENTORY FORMS spotlight 69 4544SpringCreek90N17thAveN10thAveN15thAveN11thAveWBabcockStN14thAveWMainSt BozemanHighSchool&BridgerAlternativeHighSchool S15thAveS11thAveW KochSt WDickersonSt W StorySt S10thAveW KagyBlvd WAldersonSt BozemanCreek90 90LStEOakSt W PeachSt E GriffinDr NIdaAveWOakSt WTamarack St W GriffinDr StoryMill RdNBlackAveW VillardSt NTracyAveWBeall St EMendenhall St NBroadwayAveE Peach St NWallaceAveE Aspen St NChurchAveNBozemanAveBigGulchDr N3rdAveWMendenhallSt NWillsonAveELammeStN9thAveN5thAveWLammeSt CedarSt B o hart L n HillsideLn Baxter L nWCurtissSt WOliveSt WBabcockSt E Olive St EBabcock StN7thAveN7thAve Bridger Dr NRouseAveE Main St EMainSt Headlands StoryMillPark Story MillSpurTrail Bozeman F igginsCreekS3rdAveWDickerson St EKagyBlvd W StorySt SGrandAveWKochSt HighlandBlvdSRouseAveSWillsonAveKenyonDrEStory St Ellis St EGarfieldSt SBlackAveS9thAveS7thAveS7thAveS6thAveS4thAveS5thAveSChurchAveWKagyBlvd W CollegeSt WAldersonSt WGrant St W HayesSt Sunset HillsCemetery New HyaliteView SoftballComplex GallagatorLinear1Park BozemanDeaconessHospital Montana State University, Bozeman GIS, Montana State Library, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph,GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA,USFWS The current historic preservation program and related policies only apply to properties within the NCOD. While it has had many successes bringing awareness to neighborhood context and character and historic preservation, there have also been challenges such as how to differentiate between historic preservation and neighborhood character. There is no intention to eliminate the NCOD. However, using some guidance from the 2015 and 2019 NCOD Reports, updated survey data, further map analysis, and City Commission direction from the Initial Guidance Report, it is recommended to make some small adjustments to the boundary edge where conflicts exist. NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT (NCOD) NCOD BOUNDARIES Current boundaries of the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District and Historic Districts. Credit: City of Bozeman N12thAveN10thAveN11thAveJuniper St S11thAveS10thAveWCurtiss StS12thA veBozeman HighSchool&BridgerAlternativeHighSchool W Dickerson St W Story St S10thAveW Alderson St 3 14 6 8 197 Aasheim Gate Duck Pond BozemanCreekW Peach St W Tamarack St NBlackAveW Villard St NTracyAveW Beall St E Mendenhall StNGrandAve NWallaceAvePerkinsPlE Aspen St E Tamarack St NChurchAveN8t hAveN8thAveNBozemanAveN6thAveN4thAveN3rdAveN3rdAveW Mendenhall St NWillsonAveE BeallSt S7thAveS8thAveN5thAveE Lamme St W Aspen St W Lamme St NMontanaAveS9thAveSGrandAveSWillsonAveDurston Rd SWallaceAveSChurchAveSBlackAveW Curtiss St W Olive St W Babcock St SBozemanAveSTracyAveS6thAveN7thAveW Main St E Main St Northeast Midtown Bozeman W Dickerson St W Story St S3rdAveSTracyAveSGrandAveW Koch St SWillsonAveE Story St SBozemanAveS9thAveS4thAveS5thAveSChurchAveW College St W Alderson St W Hayes St GallagatorLinear1Park 9 Alumni Plaza 22 16MichaelP.MaloneCentenialMall Romney Oval 11 12 Plew Lot BozemanCreek Bogert ParkSouthCentral Cooper Park 90 B urlin gto n Northern RailroadNId aAveNBroadwayAveNPlumAveVillageDowntownPark Lindley Park KenyonDrPostDrKnolls Dr Sunset HillsCemetery Burke Park Knolls AtHillcrest Esri Community Maps Contributors, Montana State University, Bozeman GIS, Montana State Library, Esri, TomTom,Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US CensusBureau, USDA, USFWS Possible changes to the current NCOD boundary. Credit: City of Bozeman 70 4746 NORTH 7TH AVENUE RECOMMENDED BOUNDARY CHANGES The City Commission provided direction to remove North 7th Avenue from the NCOD on multiple occasions – during the adoption of the 2019 NCOD Policy Report and when providing input on the Initial Guidance Report for this project in November of 2024. Based on this feedback, the review of updated survey data, analysis of the underlying zone districts and the Midtown Urban Renewal District, and conversations with some property owners, it is recommended that not all of North 7th be removed, but small portions of it as follows: • Bozeman School District requests Whittier Elementary School to be removed. • Adjust boundary along Mendenhall back to North 5th due to lack of contributing structures. • Remove properties on corner of North 11th and Main Street due to lack of contributing structures. • 502 W. Mendenhall (American Indian Institute/Harris House) would still fall under Section 38.340 and COA review since it is on the National Register of Historic Places. N10thAveN11thAve191 N10thAveN11thAveS11thAveWOliveSt WBabcock St S12t hAveW Peach St N6thAveN4thAveN3rdAveN3rdAveN8thAveN9thAveN5thAveWShort St WAspen St NGrandAveDurston Rd N7thAveWestlake Park ChildrensMemorialGardens WestlakeCommunityGarden WhittierElementarySchool 191 WBeall St NGrandAveNGrandAveW Villard St N8thAveWMendenhallStN9thAve S7thAveS8thAveW LammeSt N5thAveS9thAveN3rdAveSGrandAveWOliveSt W Babcock St S6thAveS4thAveN7thAveW Main St BozemanSchoolDistrictProperty Midtown Bozeman Esri Community Maps Contributors, Montana State University, Bozeman GIS, Montana State Library, ©OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau ofLand Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, USFWS Possible changes to North 7th Avenue NCOD boundary. Credit: City of Bozeman NORTHEAST RECOMMENDED BOUNDARY CHANGES • Remove City Shops Complex as it lacks historic significance. • Adjust boundary from Birch Street down to Tamarack due to buildings with lack of historic significance. • Simkins Hallin lumberyard property along Plum and Avocado to be removed because the majority of the property is outside of the NCOD. • It is likely that buildings in the M-1 zone district will not be repurposed for new use due to condition. B urlin gton N orthern R ailroad EOakSt BozemanCreek86 E Peach St NWallaceAvePerkinsPlE Cottonwood St E CottonwoodSt E Aspen St E Tamarack St NChurchAveE Fridley StNBozemanAveNBlackAveNRouseAveCityShopsComplex Bozeman PublicSafetyCenter Beall Park Northeast NBlackAvePerkinsPlE VillardSt NChurchAveNBozemanAveE Beall St NWallaceAveE Davis St NMontanaAveNRouseAveCity Hall HawthorneElementarySchool 90 BohartLn PearSt B urlingtonNorthernRailroadNId aAveNBroadwayAveNPlumAveFrontSt EFridley St EFridleySt NortheastNeighborhoodPocketPark NorthernPacificAdditionPark VillageDo w ntow n B lv dNBroadwayAveNPlumAveVillageDowntownPark Esri Community Maps Contributors, Montana State University, Bozeman GIS, Montana State Library, ©OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau ofLand Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, USFWS Possible changes to northeast corner NCOD boundary. Credit: City of Bozeman 71 4948 SOUTHEAST RECOMMENDED BOUNDARY CHANGES • Remove Library and properties east from NCOD and align boundary to match up with property lines. • Residences to the south of South Bozeman and Dell Place lack historic significance related to the overall NCOD and were constructed between the 1990s and 2000s. Boundary line matches up with property lines. • Adjust boundary to remove any PLI property and parks from the NCOD if they are on the edges. 191 EMendenhall St SWallaceAveSChurchAveSBozemanAveE Olive St E Olive St E CurtissSt E Babcock St SRouseAveLindleyPlE Main St Alfred M.StiffProfessionalBuilding BogertPark Boz emanCreek E StorySt SBozemanAveE CollegeSt ButtonwoodAveE Koch St DellPlI ce PondRdSBlackAve SChur chAveBogart Pl Ice House Park BurkePark GallagatorLinear1Park Bogert Park 191 CypressAveE Olive St E Babcock St Golf WayE Main St BozemanPublicLibrary Lindley Park Lindley Park ButtonwoodAve Sunset HillsCemetery Esri Community Maps Contributors, Montana State University, Bozeman GIS, Montana State Library, ©OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau ofLand Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, USFWS Possible changes to northeast corner NCOD boundary. Credit: City of Bozeman From top to bottom: Miami-Dade County, FL updated their historic preservation design guidelines in 2022. The guidelines are oriented in particular towards resiliency in the face of climate change effects in Miami. Credit: Miami-Dade County Design Guidelines for the La Alma Lincoln Park Historic Cultural District in Denver are available in English and Spanish. These guidelines were updated in 2022 after extensive community engagement and allow flexibility for characteristics important to the neighborhood. Credit: City of Denver All structures removed from the NCOD will be thoroughly documented. To adjust the NCOD boundary requires going through a Zone Map Amendment; notice is provided consistent with City requirements. In the future, if additional historic districts or other kinds of overlays are created with separate guidelines or standards, the NCOD may no longer be needed. This will be dependent on the implementation of the Local Landmark Program, future survey efforts, and updates to the Design Guidelines. DESIGN GUIDELINES The Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation & the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (“HP Guidelines”) were adopted in January 2006 and amended in July 2015 to add Subchapter 4B. Design guidelines are tools that help provide guidance on alterations, new construction, demolition, and maintenance and serve as a suggestive guide and are not mandatory. In 2018, the city amended its zoning standards to include design requirements in all areas of the community that overlap with some elements of the HP Guidelines. While the HP Guidelines are still largely consistent with best practices in historic preservation, they should be updated to correct out-of-date references and improve usability. Updating the entire HP Guidelines are not part of this project scope, but in the interim, there will be amendments to the document to ensure they are consistent with the updated Unified Development Code until a larger update can take place. Recommendations for these amendments include: • Simplify how design guidelines apply to specific properties, how chapters apply, and the definition of each type of building evaluated. • Update any area that references old versions of the Secretary of the Interior Standards. • Update subchapter 4B for the B-3 Commercial Character Area to align with Article 5 of the UDC and any other related UDC changes. • Clarify residential, commercial, and mixed-use character areas with a map inserted into the guidelines. • Address zone edge transitions between residen- tial and commercial zoning as reflected in the upcoming UDC update. • The HP Guidelines should be referenced by title in the update to Chapter 38.340 and noted “as amended.” 72 5150 In recent years it has become increasingly common for municipalities to adopt local landmark programs that focus on cultural heritage when evaluating historic significance. Instead of just relying on the National Register of Historic Places standards, which has rigid requirements, these local programs can choose how to recognize what the community considers important to its heritage and culture. Broadening designation and review criteria can also help recognize people and places that have been historically excluded. The City of Bozeman does not currently have a citywide local landmark program. The code standards and design guidelines only apply to properties within the NCOD. In order to establish a Historic District or be individually listed as a Historic Landmark, the property must qualify for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Establishing a local landmark program, as was also recommended in the 2019 NCOD report, will allow individual landmarks to be designated both within and outside the NCOD. A local landmark program will enable individual significant sites and districts across the city to be recognized, broadening the array of historic stories told in Bozeman. Landmark program policies must also include a process for appeals of COA decisions as well as a de-designation process. Appeals must follow state mandated land use appeals processes. There is an important difference at the local level, the landmark process can be made more accessible to members of the public wishing to nominate their properties. Buildings, structures, cultural landscapes, human-made landscape features, natural features, and more may all be designated under a local landmark program. Creating this program will require adding provisions to the code to implement it. There is a difference between historic landmarks/districts, overlay districts, and zoning districts. CREATION OF LOCAL LANDMARK PROGRAM Peets Hill could be considered a local landmark as a cultural landscape. Credit: Adrienne Burke Types of Districts NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES – DISTRICT OR INDIVIDUAL LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT ZONING DISTRICT Recognizes historic places and cultural heritage Established by Federal Government Voluntary, no regulation by itself, approved by the National Park Service via State Historic Preservation Office Bon Ton Historic District, Main Street Historic District, Baxter Hotel, Willson School Recognizes historic places and cultural heritage; may add extra rules to base zoning with special requirements Established by City Regulatory, but level may vary depending on type of designation Buildings, structures, cultural landscapes, natural features that might not qualify under National Register standards but are significant at the local level Adds extra rules to base zoning with special requirements Established by City, created by a Zone Map Amendment following state law criteria Regulatory, enforced by code and sets additional criteria Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District, Certificate of Appropriateness Regulates land uses and development Established by City, created by a Zone Map Amendment following state law criteria Regulatory, enforced by code Zone Districts – B-3 (Commercial) R-2 (Residential), REMU (Mixed Use) *Section 38.340.030 allows for properties to be added to the NCOD by the City Commission upon recommendation of the HPAB subject to the Section 38.260 Text and Map Amendment process. This provision also allows for removal from the NCOD. FEATURE PURPOSE CRITERIA ENFORCEMENT EXAMPLES 73 5352 Establishing a local landmark program requires categories, criteria, and a designation process. The recommended categories for a local landmark program in Bozeman are: 1. History/Historic Association: The landmark is associated with a historical person, event, period, social movement, group, or association that contributed significantly to the heritage, culture, or development of Bozeman. 2. Architecture: The landmark is associated with distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style, building type, or method of construction that is significant to Bozeman. It can also be the work of a major architect, builder, or craftsman whose works have influenced the evolution of their fields or are significant to the development of Bozeman. 3. Artistry: A landmark that displays artistic or aesthetic values that contribute significantly to the heritage and appearance of the neighborhood in Bozeman or promotes understanding and appreciation of the built or natural environment by means of distinctive physical characteristics or rarity. 4. Culture: The landmark is associated with an era of culture or heritage that allows an understanding of a community’s historically rooted beliefs, customs, and practices, how the site was used by past generations, or is a source of pride or cultural understanding. 5. Townscape or Landscapes: A landmark that represents an established and familiar feature of a geographic area due to its prominent location or physical characteristics. It represents a resource whether natural or human-made, which has historically or culturally contributed to the character of an area and to Bozeman. Examples could include trees, green or open space, waterways, settlement patterns, areas of industry, and methods of urban planning. 6. Archaeology: A landmark that yielded or may be likely to yield information significant to an understanding of historic or prehistoric events; cultures; and standards of living, building, and design. Criteria for potential landmark categories will be included in the Bozeman Municipal Code in Phase 2 of the project. Two criteria that are commonly found in landmark criteria include: • Integrity: Landmarks should possess sufficient integrity to convey or represent the qualities for the category. A property designated for architectural significance would have a different lens on integrity than cultural significance. • Age of landmark: The federal standard for classifying something historic is 50 years old. Municipalities can elect their own age standards; this may involve an evaluation that enough time has passed to provide perspective and evaluation of significance. Bacchus Pub, Hotel Baxter, c.1929. The interiors of properties are typically not regulated in local landmark programs. Credit: Museum of the Rockies DESIGNATION PROCESS As part of the creation of a local landmark program, a local landmark application will be developed along with an administrative manual that lays out the designation process. The following designation process is recommended: 1. Initiation of Nomination: Property owner, government agency, or community organization submits an application to nominate a landmark. Property owner consent is required. 2. City Review: The Historic Preservation Officer does initial review of application and works with applicant to ensure that all appropriate information is provided. 3. Notification of Nomination: Once application is deemed adequate, public notice is provided. 4. Historic Preservation Advisory Board Review: HPAB reviews the landmark nomination at a public meeting and makes a recommendation to the City Commission. 5. City Commission Adoption: City Commission would be the final decision authority to designate the landmark. POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF LOCAL LANDMARK PROGRAMS AND DESIGNATIONS: • Protection from Demolition or Unsympathetic Alterations – Local landmark status can ensure a review process before significant changes or demolitions can occur. The COA process helps provide additional review and regulatory benefits to the landowner that can help preserve these historic sites. • Zoning & Code Flexibility – Historic structures may qualify for adaptive reuse allowances or relaxed zoning regulations to encourage preservation. Section 38.340 already provides zoning relief and code flexibility through deviations for structures designated as historic or located within the NCOD. With the establishment of a Local Landmark Program and the further designation of historic properties, potential additional deviations will be explored. • Increased Property Values – Studies show that historic designation often stabilizes or increases property values over time. • Tourism & Economic Development – Landmark properties contribute to heritage tourism, attracting visitors and boosting local businesses. • Neighborhood Stability – Preservation efforts can enhance community identity and deter incompatible development. • Official Recognition – Landmark designation highlights a property’s historic significance and can enhance its cultural prestige. Additionally, landmarks could be recognized through a plaque program (funding allowing) and on the City’s website and mapping system. • Educational & Advocacy Opportunities – Owners can collaborate with historical organizations, host tours, and receive public recognition. • Promotion of Sustainable Development– Rehabilitating existing structures reduces landfill waste and conserves embodied energy. • Funding & Incentives – By being designated a local landmark, historic resources may be eligible for incentives, grants, or other benefits. See the Funding and Incentives section in “Future Recommendations” for additional information. 74 5554 Miami-Dade County, Florida’s historic preservation ordinance dates to 1981, which enables the County to designate local landmark properties and sites. Only one criterion has to be met to designate, and a site may be landmarked as associated with elements of the cultural, social, political, economic, scientific, religious, prehistoric, paleontological, or architectural history that have contributed to the history of the community. This is intentionally broad and has allowed for designation of sites associated with cultural heritage (vs. architectural heritage). The County currently oversees 141 individually designated historic sites, 46 archaeological sites and zones, and 8 historic districts. The nature of designation is included in the designation reports accompanying landmark applications. This determines what and how the property will be regulated for purposes of Certificate of Appropriateness review. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY’S LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION PROGRAM spotlight The Liberty City Elks Lodge was designated for cultural significance. Because the property was not landmarked for architecture, limited character-defining features were noted for COA review in the designation report. Demolition also requires COA review. No other work requires a COA. HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES (2.05.860, 2.05.930) The Historic Preservation Advisory Board is an appointed citizen advisory board made up of seven volunteers. Meeting on a monthly basis, HPAB focuses on promoting the historic preservation program through education, outreach, and policy direction. HPAB does not have any sort of review authority for development applications but upon request of the review authority (City Commission or Director of Community Development, depending on application type as identified in BMC 38.200.010 and as allowed by state law), may make recommendations regarding development applications. Members of the HPAB took a survey and discussed results at their January 15, 2025, meeting. This survey sought input from board members on their roles, responsibilities, and how they could shift in the future with the creation of a Local Landmark Program. While advisory boards have some limitations on their roles under Montana State Law, board members expressed interest in being more active and involved in larger policy projects that occur in the City. Based on the HPAB survey results and the Landmark Project team input, some recommendations for modifying their roles and responsibilities as outlined in 2.05.860 and 2.05.930 include: • Evaluate landmark nominations to make recommendations to City Commission • Participate in City policy and project discussions where appropriate and related to HPAB purpose • Encourage preservation of and education about cultural heritage Another preservation success is providing training for HPAB members. During Preservation Month in 2024, the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions visited Bozeman for Commission Assistance and Mentoring Program training. CAMP Trainers presented on “Why Preserve?” identifying and designating historic resources; preservation planning; resources of the recent past; conservation overlay districts; and diversity, equity, and inclusion in historic preservation. CAMP TRAINING MAY 2024 Members of the Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board attend CAMP Training on May 11, 2024. Credit: Sarah Rosenberg spotlight HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD WORK PLANS The HPAB and City staff utilize a work plan to outline the board’s priorities for the upcoming two years. The 2022- 2024 Work Plan focuses on three key areas: education and outreach, historic resource survey and inventory, and preservation program development. The 2025-2027 Historic Preservation Advisory Board work plan is under development as of the writing of this report. Above: An Extreme History tour at Sunset Hills Cemetery. Credit: Sarah RosenbergBelow: Attendees at a Gallagator Tour held in partnership with Extreme History during Preservation Month. Credit: Sarah Rosenberg During Preservation Month 2024, the City partnered with Friends of Story Mansion for a cookie painting party where participants painted house cookies. Credit: Sarah Rosenberg The purpose of the Historic Preservation Advisory Board is to provide for an appointed citizen board for the city charged with establishing a local historic preservation program; integrating historic preservation into local, state and federal planning and decision-making processes; identifying, evaluating and protecting historic resources within Bozeman; and educating the general public about historic preservation. PURPOSE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD IN BOZEMAN 75 5756 Sanborn Fire Insurance Company Map of Bozeman, 1904. Credit: Library of Congress Future Recommendations The following policy and program recommendations have been identified that are beyond the scope of this current Landmark Project. They are noted to ensure that historic preservation is considered in future updates and program advancements and aim to enhance preservation planning, community engagement, and the protection of historic and cultural resources. Through these strategies, Bozeman can further strengthen its connection to its heritage and history. The recommendations below are generally tied to the priority order outlined in the Implementation Chart as the end of this report. Many projects require funding, which should be a key consideration as the historic preservation program evolves. If the goal of the community and City Commission is to develop a more robust historic preservation program, it will require durable dedicated resources including staffing, funding, and maintenance. DESIGN GUIDELINES UPDATE The City should prioritize completing an update to the design guidelines as soon as possible. Existing design guidelines, with any updates, should remain in place until a full overhaul is completed. At that time, the old guidelines can be repealed, and the new guidelines can take effect. Recommendations for full design guidelines overhaul include, but are not limited to: • Expand period of significance to at least 1980 or 45 years from whenever the guidelines are updated. • Take into account any updates to The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • Create district-specific guidelines based on the different areas of the NCOD and local landmarks and districts. Emphasize resilience and sustainability through incorporating appropriate building materials. • Design guidelines should have a planned maintenance schedule and be updated at a minimum every 10 years, ideally concurrent with updated survey efforts. 76 5958 HISTORIC PRESERVATION INTERFACE WITH UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE Community members expressed concern around the height, scale, and mass of new development adjacent to smaller-scale historic homes in particular. There is an inescapable tension between a desire to maintain an existing status quo and the need for communities to reflect the history they are experiencing today. Differences in construction practices, lending practices, and individual preferences cause new construction to differ from past construction styles. The disconnect between traditional zoning practice and local existing context has prompted frustration, confusion, and conflict in reaction to new development and historic properties and districts. New development continues to occur in Bozeman around areas like the downtown core, where commercial services and employment are located in walkable proximity to residential areas. Nevertheless, there are standards that could be put in place that would be more sensitive to historic structures and districts and still accommodate new development. The following should be evaluated in the current or a future UDC update: • Zone Edge transitions (38.320.060) ◦ Consider if adjustments to zone edge transition standards are warranted. • Historic Districts and Zone District Boundaries ◦ Consider how the existing built environment and historic districts relate to zoning district boundaries and planned future land uses. ◦ Evaluate the number of zone districts within one cohesive historic district ◦ These transitions could be cross-referenced in Section 38.340 and/or the design guidelines for coordination purposes. Supplemental guidance could be addressed in the updated design guidelines. Historic Martin Luther King, Jr. parsonage site on S. Jackson Street in Montgomery, AL with adjacent new construction. This demonstrates the disconnect that happens when buffers and transitions are not used adjacent to historic sites. Credit: Adrienne Burke HERITAGE OR LANDMARK TREES Throughout community engagement for the Landmark Project, numerous citizens voiced support for a heritage tree program that would help protect important trees in Bozeman. A heritage tree program was discussed at the Historic Preservation, Urban Parks and Forestry, and Sustainability board meetings. The City’s current Urban Forestry Management Plan (2016) includes language regarding heritage trees: • Use Montana’s Big Tree Program as a way to increase awareness of heritage trees • Create a heritage tree program to increase awareness for legacy trees The Forestry Division, housed in the City’s Parks & Recreation Department, is planning to kick off an update to its Urban Forestry Management Plan in summer 2025. The City Commission priorities for 2024 and 2025 (Resolution 5626) also references interest in exploring options for landmark trees: • Analyze City’s authority in declaring trees on private property as Landmark Trees • Include options in Urban Forestry Management Plan In most cases, local heritage tree programs are NOT run through historic preservation boards. Programs are typically managed by departments focused on parks, recreation, public works, or urban forestry. This is because these programs require arboricultural expertise for tree identification, maintenance, and enforcement. Tree protection and heritage tree policies are typically found in City codes related to site design, landscaping, or the environment. They are not usually found in historic preservation ordinances. There are sometimes collaborations between urban forestry divisions and historic preservation commissions. Historic preservation boards could play a role in heritage tree programs when trees are: located in a historic district, associated with historic properties or landmarks, or recognized as part of a cultural landscape (i.e., trees in cemeteries). In these cases, the preservation board might review tree removal or designation requests or work with urban forestry divisions to designate trees of historic significance. Designation would require consent of the property owner and there must be a process for withdrawing a designation. 77 6160 Fort Worth, TX has a legacy of honoring trees, hiring their first arborist in the 1920s and boasting Tree City USA designation, the longest running in Texas. Heritage trees can be nominated based on several criteria and nominations are reviewed annually. The City has created an ArcGIS Story Map to share existing heritage tree and process information. The Forestry Division of the City manages the program. FORT WORTH’S HERITAGE TREE PROGRAM Jerry Cashman with Cashman Nursery speaks during a Preservation Month tour in 2023. Credit: Sarah Rosenberg Fort Worth, TX has a heritage tree program that utilizes an ArcGIS Story Map to help share information about designated heritage trees in the city. Credit: City of Fort Worth, TX spotlight See Appendix E for full survey recommendations. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY EFFORTS The initial 1984-1986 survey in Bozeman covered nearly 4,000 properties, primarily within the NCOD. Most of those surveys are now over 40 years old and don’t reflect current conditions or changes due to renovations and development. Resurveys in 2015, 2020, and 2021 documented about 300 additional sites, but resulted in no new designations. Additional survey work could assist in seeing additional sites added to the National Register of Historic Places or designated local landmarks. Past surveys primarily assessed pre-1930s buildings, neglecting landscapes and non-building features. Future efforts should modernize NCOD surveys, expand beyond the NCOD, and prioritize mid-20th century and culturally associated resources. Bozeman must clarify survey goals to ensure effective preservation, balancing designations with educational and celebratory uses. Survey efforts should extend to non-building resources such as signs, streetscapes, parks, cultural landscapes, and cemeteries. There is no requirement or maintenance standard to update survey forms and outdated inventory creates long-term challenges. In order to alleviate future situations where 2000+ inventory forms are out of date, the City must consistently dedicate funds for survey updates. A structured, transparent approach will ensure that Bozeman’s heritage is preserved for future generations. Prior NCOD report guidance suggests resurveying the NCOD, because inventory forms for the NCOD are out of date for certain areas, or areas have yet to be surveyed at all. The challenge is that prioritizing resurvey of the NCOD means areas outside the NCOD that also need survey would be further left behind unless a plan for concurrent surveying is developed. This is where a Citywide historic preservation plan could help establish priorities and strategy. 78 6362 In 2022, the City of Milwaukee’s Historic Preservation Commission kicked off an intensive level survey of the city’s houses of worship erected between 1920 and 1980. The survey specifically looked at this era to document sites that represented waves of immigration and cultural contributions beyond the city’s initial settlement. In 2020, Madison, WI released an Underrepresented Communities Historic Resource Survey Report. This survey evaluated resources related to the following communities and groups of people: First Nations, African American, Hmong, Latino/a, LGTBQ+, and women. MIDWEST SURVEY EFFORTS The City of Milwaukee’s survey of 20th century religious architecture documented a wide range of styles and religious traditions of city residents. Credit: City of Milwaukee spotlight Farmer threshing and farmhouse in rural Gallatin Valley scenes. Credit: Museum of the Rockies The accompanying map shows sites both in Bozeman outside of the NCOD and in Gallatin County that are associated with agriculture, green spaces, infrastructure, and oil that city staff wish to see surveyed. Credit: City of Bozeman GIS Department 79 6564 HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLANNING POTENTIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR A BOZEMAN PRESERVATION PLAN In addition to the typical elements found in a preservation plan, the City of Bozeman could consider the following items in a Preservation Plan: • Use this report’s recommendations as a foundation for preservation planning. • Develop a preservation priority list based on community-identified areas to highlight significant places. • Consider integrating historic preservation into broader planning efforts such as the Bozeman Community Plan (Growth Policy), as is done with other community planning efforts. • Create a resilience and disaster planning preservation strategy for historic and cultural resources. • Explore ways to restore and optimize usage of existing historic City facilities such as Story Mansion, Beall Park, and the Lindley Center. A preservation plan is a long-range plan that can communicate, organize, and strengthen preservation efforts and coordinate with other community priorities. It can be a standalone document or part of another plan, and can be as broad as an entire city or as specific as a subarea. It creates an agenda for future preservation planning that can help prioritize protection of historic resources in a community and measure preservation’s progress. Preservation planning is a process that can: • Organize and strengthen preservation activities. • Define vision, goals, and priorities. • Proactively manage historic and cultural resources while preserving community character. • Guide the development and enhancement of a preservation program. • Balance historic preservation with competing land-use goals. • Integrate preservation with broader planning issues – housing, resilience, land conservation, cultural heritage, and economic development. • Foster community engagement and representation. The 2023 Des Moines, IA, Preservation Plan listened to the community and developed a plan based on three identified goals for the City’s historic preservation program - 1) Equitable and Inclusive 2) Community-Centered 3) Strategically Integrated. The goals, objectives, and actions detailed in the plan will guide the City for the next 10-20 years. This plan received the Commission of the Year award from the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions in 2024. DES MOINES, IA A July 2024 community engagement activity at the Farmer’s Market at Story Mansion. Cover of Reflect DSM: Des Moines Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, 2023. Credit: City of Des Moines spotlight 80 6766 See Appendix F for more information on funding and incentives. FUNDING AND INCENTIVES Historic preservation offers a range of incentives and resources to support the rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, and preservation of historic structures. However, most of these programs are designed for income-producing properties, nonprofits, and government-owned sites, leaving owner-occupied homes or other small residential properties with limited options. That is important for local governments and citizens to recognize, as locally established incentive programs could be created to close that gap. The Funding and Incentives appendix outlines a list of resources that currently exist to help private property owners preserve and restore a historic structure. The City of Bozeman has a few options to assist in preservation efforts. However, they could be further promoted. TAX ABATEMENT PROGRAM The City of Bozeman’s Tax Abatement Certificate of Appropriateness program rewards significant preservation efforts on properties listed on the National Register or located in historic districts. Promoting this program as an option is recommended. It has not been utilized much in the recent past, and the City should evaluate any barriers to use. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE Located in the Unified Development Code, Division 38.430, Planned Development Zone Districts allow for flexibility and encourage retention of historic buildings. This is a new program and to date, this option has not been utilized. PRESERVATION INCENTIVES A list of preservation and adaptive reuse incentive opportunities that the city could look into in the future: • Increase number of properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places ◦ Generally, Bozeman does not have many properties or neighborhoods on the National Register. Being on the National Register of Historic Places could allow contributing properties in these new historic districts or individually listed properties to tap into historic preservation tax credit and grant programs. • Overlap Incentives Programs: ◦ Overlap other federal, state and local economic incentives programs with preservation focused programs such as the National Register of Historic Places. This creates the opportunity to financially capital-stack adaptive reuse projects. • Permit process: ◦ Reducing bureaucratic hurdles and shortening approval times can make adaptive reuse projects more attractive. The YWCA Helena building was rehabilitated in 2016 to meet a critical social need with transitional housing and supportive services for homeless women and their children. $118,000 in Montana Historic Tax Credits and $470,000 in Federal Historic Tax Credits helped fund the $3 million rehabilitation project. ADAPTIVE REUSE AND HISTORIC TAX CREDITS YWCA Helena / The YWCA Helena building in Helena, MT. spotlight • Adaptive reuse: ◦ Adaptive reuse incentives, like tax credits, encourage repurposing existing buildings instead of demolition and new construction, promoting sustainability and economic revitalization. • Economic Development functions: ◦ Tax Increment Financing (TIF) grant programs provide funding for public or private projects by borrowing against the future increases in property-tax revenues to encourage preservation and adaptive reuse development projects. ◦ The City already uses a TIF program. However, applicability for adaptive reuse and restoration of existing structures could be revised. • Housing Tax Credits ◦ These offer financial benefits, like a percentage deduction from taxes, for projects involving the rehabilitation of historic structures or the repurposing of commercial buildings for residential use. 81 6968 The Astor, originally The Washington Building, was built in downtown Tacoma, WA in 1925. The property was recently rehabilitated into boutique-style apartments, bringing residents and vitality back to Tacoma’s urban core. Credit: Unico Properties ◦ Incentivizing maintenance is key; building partnerships with nonprofit organizations that offer home repair programs can support aging homes to remain safe and habitable. These partnerships can help fund essential repairs, such as roofing, plumbing, and energy efficiency upgrades, which might otherwise be unaffordable for homeowners. ◦ Explore historic property redevelopment programs with nonprofit partners. ◦ Implementing policies that promote alternatives to demolition, such as deconstruction or rehabilitation grants, can preserve existing housing stock while minimizing waste. The path to securing funding and incentives is not without challenges. Understanding the “capital stack”—the mix of funding sources and their impact on a project’s financial structure—is crucial. Eligibility requirements for tax credits and grants can also be restrictive, often requiring properties to be income-producing or publicly owned. Despite these hurdles, successful projects demonstrate the potential of these programs. For commercial and income-producing properties, tax credit programs provide significant benefits. The Federal Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit allows a 20% income tax credit for rehabilitating properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places or listed as contributing to a locally designated district certified by the Secretary of the Interior, while Montana adds a state tax credit equal to 25% of the federal credit. City of Bozeman Department of Community Development20 East Olive, Bozeman, MT 59715 \\ www.bozeman.net/planning \\ 406-582-2260 \\ 1 Preserving Our Heritage: Listing Your Property on the National Register of Historic Places Updated 11/15 Preserving Our Heritage:Listing Your Property on the National Register of Historic Places WHAT IS THE NATIONAL REGISTER? The National Register of Historic Places is the Nation’s official list of cultural resources worthy of preservation and is part of a national program to coordinate and support public and private recognition of our historic places. Over 90,000 properties nationally, including hundreds of historic districts, have been listed in the National Register Collection since it’s inception in 1966. This important collection holds information on over one million individual resources—buildings, sites, districts, structures, and objects that are related to a wide variety of United States historical themes, from social movements to industrial technology to political and military history. Each individual resource provides a link to the country’s heritage at the national, state, and/or local level. The National Register is more than simply an honor roll of important prehistoric and historic properties, but rather seeks to foster a greater understanding of our history through the preservation of significant places, and by supporting and fostering public and private efforts to identify, evaluate and protect our cultural resources nationwide. In Bozeman, over 1,200 properties are listed on the National Register, some within the City’s ten distinct historic districts and some located outside the historic districts. Your home, if eligible for registration, might contribute to the fabric of our shared past. WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR NATIONAL REGISTER DESIGNATION? Properties must be nominated for National Register Designation and must be distinguished by having been evaluated according to uniform standards and historic criteria, which are applicable for historical importance at the local, state, or federal level. Basic significant criteria for an historic property or site include: ·An association with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. ·An association with the lives of persons significant in our past. ·An embodiment of a significant architecturalstyle. · An ability to yield important data in prehistory or history. The most common criteria applied to National Register structures is whether the structure is an expression of significant architectural style, although the other criteria have been applicable in Bozeman. Usually, only cultural resources that have reached their level of significance of at least fifty years ago are eligible for listing on the National Register. Most importantly, for nomination, three key elements must be demonstrated regarding the significance of a property:·Historic significance – the overall importance of a property to the community, state and/or nation and is usually defined by the application of one or more of the four significant criteria listed previously. ·Historic integrity – demonstrated by the authenticity of a property through historic physical characteristics. ·Historic context – provides a framework for understanding the property by placing it in the proper theme, place and time. WHAT IS A NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION? Anyone can write a National Register nomination. The nomination itself is composed on the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (available at www.nps.gov/ nr/publications/forms.htm). The form allows you to share the physical description of the property, information about its historical significance, dates of historic use, historic context, and a bibliography of references used in researching the property. Along with the form please include documentation consisting of photographs and maps. The City of Bozeman has been designated as a Certified Local Government by the Montana State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), which means that the City will assist in the National Register nomination process through the Bozeman Historic Preservation Office. The SHPO will also assist by providing guidance to the applicant, providing National Register forms and instructional guides, by reviewing the nomination, and by advocating nomination of the property to the National Register. Please contact the City or the SHPO before completing a National Register Nomination form. WHY LIST MY PROPERTY ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER? Listing in the National Register contributes to preserving historic properties in a number of ways: ·Recognition that a property is of significance to the nation, the state, or the community. · Consideration in the planning for Federal or federally assisted projects. ·Eligibility for Federal tax benefits. The City already shares a fact sheet about the National Register program. Adding more information about tax credits specifically or creating a separate fact sheet about incentives would be a helpful outreach tool. Credit: City of Bozeman • Additional Considerations Sustaining a historic preservation program requires ongoing funding and staffing to ensure that historic resources are continuously documented and integrated into local planning efforts. Preservation is not a one- time effort, but an ongoing process that involves regular surveying of historic properties, updates to preservation plans and codes, and revisions to design guidelines to reflect evolving best practices. Without adequate funding, these essential activities fall by the wayside, leaving communities vulnerable to losing their historic character and cultural assets. Currently, the City of Bozeman has a Historic Preservation Officer (HPO) that is housed in the Community Development Department. The HPO acts as a staff liaison to HPAB, coordinates the historic preservation program, and helps in the development of local surveys, projects, and historic preservation planning documents. Along with ensuring the program acts accordingly with Certified Local Government status, the HPO also typically reviews planning development applications for properties within the NCOD. Since 2018, the City processed on average 80 Neighborhood Certificate of Appropriateness applications annually. Neighborhood COAs are applications reviewed for residential properties. The annual number of Commercial Certificate of Appropriateness applications is approximately 12 on average, and many of these applications are affiliated with site plan applications. With creation of a Local Landmark Program, COA applications and reviews will likely increase with the addition of local landmarks over time. This will impact the current staff workload and could generate the need for additional staff as the program grows. Many of the recommendations in this report that are beyond this project scope will necessitate ongoing funding to accomplish. For example, updating inventory forms averages $1000 per property and requires either staff or HPAB coordination. Investing in such initiatives with ongoing funding support will help the City honor its history while continuing to recognize historic preservation as a priority for the City and its residents. HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM SUPPORT 82 7170 Historic context studies can be understood as a narrative survey of a thematic historic preservation topic. In fact, these documents are often foundational in making choices about what resources to survey, evaluate, and treat as historic resources. Historic contexts are frequently the primary basis from which new landmark and district designations are proposed. They are particularly valuable in meeting Bozeman’s preservation needs because they can cover geographically disparate resources. Context Studies are also important because they provide the basis for evaluating potential historic resources’ integrity and identifying places that could be surveyed. It is increasingly understood that resources associated with underrepresented histories and time periods may not retain the high degree of integrity or architectural significance that other resources do. However, the point of the context study is to provide an opportunity to identify these important places and to further understand the history behind different groups of people or themed resources. These deeply researched documentation projects should be carried out by qualified historic preservation professionals. There are four context studies in particular that should be prioritized in Bozeman: • Native American history and communities, • Underrecognized communities, • Post World War II and mid-century modern resources, and • Agricultural history. In recognition of the city’s consideration of new land annexation, these may use as their focus part of or the entire Gallatin Valley, not only the city of Bozeman. See the appendix for more detail on the context studies. CONTEXT STUDIES See Appendix E for full context study recommendations. To recognize and honor those who have been part of Denver’s (CO) history, the City’s Landmark Preservation department launched an American Indian/Indigenous Peoples Historic Context Study in 2023. Supported by the National Park Service’s Underrepresented Community Grant, the project is the second in a series of historic contexts to explore the diverse ethnic and cultural history of Denver. The first was a Latino/Chicano Historic Context Study. DENVER INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ CONTEXT STUDY Left: The City of San Francisco adopted the African American Citywide Historic Context Statement in early 2024 after extensive community engagement. Credit: City of San Francisco Below: Educational brochures from Fort Collins created after completion of context studies. Denver has created an outreach brochure during their in- progress Indigenous Peoples’ study. Boulder highlights historic neighborhoods. Credit: Cities of Boulder, Denver, and Fort Collins Denver’s Latino/ Chicano Historic Context Study was also published in Spanish. Credit: City of Denver Left: A Crow Village in the Yellowstone River Valley circa 1874-1881. Credit: Montana Historical Society spotlight 83 7372 In Bozeman, Sunset Hills is one of the most recognizable cemeteries. Owned by the City and managed by the Parks and Recreation Department, the cemetery has a 20-year plan in place that was adopted in 2017. This four-page plan helps guide portions of the cemetery’s care. It is recommended that the City develop a robust master plan to help address challenges like landscape management, conservation of monuments, space planning, community engagement, and making the cemetery accessible to everyone. In a growing city like Bozeman, planning ensures cemeteries are preserved while staying an important part of the community. SUNSET HILLS CEMETERY MASTER PLAN Sunset Hills Cemetery, November 2023. Credit: Adrienne Burke See Appendix G for additional information on cemetery preservation. Many cities across the U.S. have successfully implemented master plans for their historic cemeteries, ensuring their preservation and ongoing relevance. These master plans provide helpful best practice examples for similar efforts that Bozeman may wish to explore. Examples vary from small to larger cities and include: Austin, TX; Salt Lake City, UT; Pleasanton, CA; Cambridge, MA; Dayton, OR; Shaker Heights, OH; Salem, MA; Kennesaw, GA; Fernandina Beach, FL and others. CEMETERY MASTER PLANS Fairmount Cemetery in Denver encourages public use of the cemetery with a dog walking group, while also ensuring dog walker etiquette. Credit: Fairmount Cemetery “Cemeteries provide access points to social history and opportunities to learn and reflect. Cemeteries offer rich interpretive opportunities, exhibiting the tangible and intangible heritage of a community. The act of interpretation…can provide a critical avenue for the preservation and survival of cemeteries.” - Mary Breffle and Mary Margaret Fernandez, Historic Oakland Cemetery (Atlanta) from “Unearthing Buried Histories” in Storytelling in Museums (ed. Adina Langer), American Alliance of Museums, 2022. Graphic representation of one of the historic Chinese community member’s headstones at Sunset Hills. Credit: Sarah Marsom. spotlight Above: Cover of Brookside Cemetery Preservation Plan in Dayton, OR. Credit: City of Dayton, OR 84 7574 Bozeman’s 2020 Climate Plan includes language encouraging movement towards a circular economy and being a zero-waste community. Two policies support this: supporting construction waste diversion and encouraging the development of material markets. During the engagement process for this project, the project team met with the City’s Sustainability staff to discuss this topic. Deconstruction ordinances require that buildings slated for demolition be carefully dismantled to preserve salvageable materials. These policies align with historic preservation goals by promoting the reuse of historic architectural elements, such as old-growth wood, bricks, windows, and decorative features, that would otherwise be lost to the landfill. DECONSTRUCTION POLICY AND PROGRAM Benefits of Deconstruction Ordinances PRESERVES HISTORIC MATERIALS Communities can maintain connections to their architectural history, reduce waste, and provide opportunities for adaptive reuse in future construction projects. SUPPORTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS Policies can be paired with workforce training programs, creating job opportunities in deconstruction and salvage industries. ENCOURAGES CONTEXT- SENSITIVE INFILL DEVELOPMENT Use of historic materials can ensure that new construction better reflects historic development of the community. PREVENTS RAPID LOSS OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS Deconstruction is a method to be proactive about preservation and reuse of materials, ensuring demolition is done in a methodical way. Creating a deconstruction program is not as simple as adopting an ordinance. Rather, it involves at a minimum addressing workforce training, a market for salvaged materials, and potential incentives for selective deconstruction. While Bozeman and the surrounding area does have some deconstruction services, there is lack of sufficient vendors and service locations to support a city-wide deconstruction ordinance. It is recommended that if the City is interested in pursuing a deconstruction program that they research best practices, engage with interested parties to inform recommendations, and create a program and associated policies. • The Butte Citizens for Preservation and Revitalization organization salvages historic architectural features from demolition projects and sells the materials from April to October. • The Missoula Redevelopment Agency has a demolition alternatives policy that encourages deconstruction for demolition projects that are requesting tax increment assistance. They offer a brief deconstruction resource guide and deconstruction and demolition recycling resources. DECONSTRUCTION IN MONTANA spotlight Building in the process of selective deconstruction. Credit: San Antonio Reuse, City of San Antonio Report on Value of Material Reuse completed for the City of San Antonio Office of Historic Preservation, 2021. Credit: City of San Antonio 85 7776 PROGRAM BUILDING TYPE HERITAGE COMPONENT MANAGEMENT OF PROGRAM Boulder, CO Residential and commercial None, includes all full structure removal and major remodeling projects City does not dictate where the reused materials go, requiring only that 75% of the materials from deconstruction are diverted from the landfill. Portland, OR Residential Anything on the historic register as well as structures older than 1940 that are not necessarily historic Requires certified deconstruction contractor, reuse of materials left up to contractors and private market. City doesn’t store materials. City offers grant program to help with deconstruction projects. San Antonio, TX Residential - single- family homes and multi-family up to eight units Built before 1960 and is designated historic or within a conservation district Material Innovation Center - Partnership between Office of Historic Preservation and Port San Antonio, offers hands-on training courses for deconstruction and rebuilding, material warehouse, and community tool library. There are a variety of communities across the country that have deconstruction ordinances that contain a heritage component specifying deconstruction methods for structures that were either of a certain age or possessed historic significance. A list of some of these programs is below: A Deconstruction and Salvage Initiative was adopted by the City of San Antonio, TX, in 2022. The ordinance requires all demolition permits for structures constructed prior to 1920 (regardless of zoning overlay) or prior to 1945 (designated or within a neighborhood conservation district) to be issued with proof of work to be performed by a Certified Deconstruction Contractor. Deconstruction must be documented and the property owner may re-use, sell, or donate salvage materials from a deconstruction site. DECONSTRUCTION IN SAN ANTONIO spotlight Legacy business programs are local ordinances created to recognize, protect, and support longstanding businesses that contribute to a city’s cultural heritage and social fabric. These programs aim to preserve small, independently owned businesses that are at risk of displacement due to rising rents, redevelopment, or gentrification. Businesses can hold as much historical and cultural value as buildings and landmarks, and they play a vital role in maintaining a city’s unique identity and sense of place. During community engagement, Bozeman citizens identified important local businesses, including Owenhouse Ace Hardware, Daniels Meat and Sausages, Cashman Nursery, and Pickle Barrel, as examples. Communities that have legacy business programs include: San Francisco, Santa Monica, and Pasadena, CA; Austin, TX; Atlanta, GA; Chicago, IL; Washington, D.C.; Missoula, MT; Phoenix, AZ; and Laurel, MD. Most legacy business ordinances include similar components:: LEGACY BUSINESS PROGRAM Cities create a registry of businesses that meet certain criteria such as age of business or cultural significance. Programs may offer grants, tax rebates, or rent subsidies to business or property owners. Programs may offer business assistance, such as help with marketing, succession planning, or permitting. Members of the public may be involved through nomination of businesses to the registry or program. Legacy businesses may receive recognition in the form of a physical marker, inclusion in marketing or branding efforts, or proclamation. REGISTRY OF BUSINESSES FINANCIAL INCENTIVES TECHNICAL SUPPORT COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT RECOGNITION • Spearheaded by Missoula’s Historic Preservation Commission • Recognizes businesses serving the community for 50+ years • Tool for providing educational and promotional assistance to legacy businesses • Serves as promotion of Missoula’s diverse heritage that includes business • Outcomes envisioned: branding recognition, legacy business tours, walking maps MISSOULA’S LEGACY BUSINESS PROGRAM spotlight 86 7978 Above: In 2023, DC Preservation League (DCPL) launched a promotional and educational legacy business program designed to raise awareness of longstanding businesses in the District, such as Ben’s Chili Bowl with was established in 1958. Credit: Ben Schumin at Wikipedia Right: The Stockyard Cafe, although no longer in operation, is an example of a community business that held special significance to members of the community. Credit: Mark Shaiken Montana archaeology helps uncover the state’s rich history and the stories of the people who have lived on this land over thousands of years. Archaeologists study artifacts, structures, and other remains to learn about how people adapted to Montana’s landscapes, hunted, traded, and built their communities. Indigenous peoples thrived in the region long before European contact. Many groups frequented the area at different times, including the Séliš (Bitterroot Salish), Qlispé (Pend d’Oreille), Ktunaxa (Kootenai), Pikuni (Blackfeet), Tsistsis’tas (Northern Cheyenne), Apsáalooke (Crow), Anishinaabe (Chippewa), Nehiyawak (Cree), Métis, Nakoda (Assiniboine), A’aninin (Gros Ventre), Dakota, Lakota, and other Indigenous people. Archaeologists have found campsites, tools, and rock art that reveal how these groups lived and interacted with the land. The arrival of Europeans in the 19th century brought major changes. Archaeological research on trading posts, forts, and settlements highlights the relationships and conflicts between Indigenous peoples and newcomers. Montana’s history also includes diverse groups like Chinese immigrants and African Americans who migrated to Bozeman in the latter part of the 19th century. Excavations of their homes and artifacts could offer a glimpse into their daily lives and contributions. By preserving and studying these sites, Montana archaeology connects us to the past, deepening our understanding of the state’s diverse heritage and inspiring appreciation for its cultural legacy. Partnership with the Tribal Historic Preservation Offices would be essential in development of any archaeological program in Bozeman. Potential archaeology action items: • Obtain archaeological predictive model maps to better understand probability of archaeological resources in the City, being mindful of protecting archaeological information for security and preservation reasons. • Explore options for creating an archaeological resource protection ordinance. • Honor and celebrate the archaeological heritage of the City through education and learning opportunities. ARCHAEOLOGY Above: The Mountain Time Arts installation outside City Hall adjacent to Bozeman Creek speaks to Indigenous experiences and recognizes the legacy of Tribal communities. Credit: Sarah Rosenberg. Right: Example of an archaeological predictive model map in Minnesota. Credit: Minnesota Department of Transportation 87 8180 See Appendix H for full education, outreach, and interpretation recommendations. EDUCATION, OUTREACH, AND INTERPRETATION Education and outreach are essential to historic preservation, fostering an engaged community that values both tangible and intangible heritage. Beyond protecting buildings and landmarks, preservation connects people to the stories, traditions, and cultural practices that shape their identity. The proposed Bozeman Landmark Program aims to enhance historic preservation by demystifying the designation process. Additional educational activities could also be incorporated to broaden public participation and understanding. Active strategies could include: • Hosting educational events during Preservation Month, typically held in May when it is recognized nationally, such as public meetings and workshops on historic designations. • Hands-on education opportunities, like cleaning historic headstones or trail maintenance, can engage the community in preserving public spaces. • Preservation pop-ups at local events can further promote the program, distributing resources and encouraging participation. • Homeowner education on preserving historic homes, social history, foodways, agricultural practices, and urban planning history. Passive strategies could include: • Developing educational resources, such as short guides that provide context on historic sites, preservation processes, and handouts on owning a historic structure. It is recommended that at least two new resources be released annually, ideally during Preservation Month. • Self-guided tours, both digital and physical, could highlight significant sites and storytelling themes, such as the Fred Willson property group. • Regular social media posts promoting events, meetings, and preservation tips. • Physical fliers at public locations. • Explore creating a local landmark signage program to enhance cultural storytelling. • Send out regular newsletters. By combining active and passive strategies, the Historic Preservation Program could create a more inclusive, informed, and engaged community, ultimately strengthening the city’s preservation efforts and celebrating its cultural heritage. The Medicine Wheel installation on Peets Hill is officially unveiled. Credit: Kurt Wehde via Gallatin Valley Land Trust Manistee, MI, has created eight self guided tours, which cover 150+ sites, and cover 150+ miles of road/trails. These guides are available digitally and physically; additional storytelling connected to the guides is found across the community on permanent interpretive signage. These materials were created through collaboration between Manistee County Visitors Bureau, Manistee County Historical Museum, the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, and the City of Manistee. Developing storytelling materials through partnerships has ensured diversified distribution of materials and dynamic storytelling, which respects and honors a range of cultural histories. Bozeman has previously had self-guided heritage tour brochures. Dusting these off for updates and adding a digital component would be an easy way to support heritage tourism and educational opportunities for the community. SELF-GUIDED TOURS AND INTERPRETIVE HERITAGE TRAILS Bozeman Women’s Heritage Trail (1994) Booklet. Credit: Staudohar, Banks, Peavym, Smith, and Strahn (Photo by Adrienne Burke) African American Heritage Trail marker in St. Petersburg, FL. This marker is part of a larger trail in the Deuces neighborhood. Credit: Adrienne Burke Previous Bozeman tour brochures could be updated; accompanying digital versions or ArcGIS Storymaps could expand the educational experience. Credit: Historic Preservation Board of Gallatin County (n.d.); Bozeman Convention and Visitors Bureau (2005/2007) spotlight 88 8382 The “Ghost Rivers” installation in Baltimore, MD, provides artistic interpretation of landscape features that have been lost due to city development; the artist Bruce Willen creates “ghost rivers” to showcase the streams that are hidden below structures, but still impact local’s lives through flooded basements. Artistic endeavors to educate the public and interpret the past can present unique opportunities to help people see what once was or to be inspired by what still exists. ghostrivers.com GHOST RIVERS spotlight The Ghost Rivers project incorporates physical markers and digital components to highlight non-visible waters on the landscape. Credit: Public Mechanics via Colossal In January 2020, Missoula approved the Downtown Heritage Interpretive Plan. This is not a historic preservation plan. Rather, it focuses on using heritage interpretation in Downtown Missoula to preserve sense of place, communicate about Missoula’s heritage, build awareness of the city’s heritage, provide a resource for partners, support the Downtown Master Plan and the City’s Growth Policy. MISSOULA DOWNTOWN HERITAGE INTERPRETIVE PLANspotlight Bozeman is already engaging in heritage education in a unique way by including historic facts on trash cans downtown. Credit: Adrienne Burke Cover of the 2020 Missoula Downtown Heritage Interpretive Plan. Credit: City of Missoula 89 8584 Above: Brochures highlighting neighborhood and architectural history in New Orleans; Portland, ME; and Macon, GA. Credits: Preservation Resource Center of New Orleans, Greater Portland Landmarks, and Visit Macon (photos by Adrienne Burke) Left: A heritage storytelling signs event at the Bozeman Library held in July 2024 is a form of education, outreach, and community engagement. Credit: Stephen Newport This page intentionally left blank. 90 8786 Recommendations within Project Scope (Phase 2) Action Steps Responsible Party Partners Timeline Resources Needed Progress Metrics Revise Chapter 38.340 (Overlay District Standards) Draft ordinance, map analysis and creation Planning Division Consultant, GIS Department, City Attorney’s Office, HPAB, CD Board, City Commission Fall 2025 Staff time, GIS assistance, public engagement Adoption of updated code language Create local historic/cultural resource inventory form Identify best practices, create and implement local historic/cultural resource form Planning Division Consultant, HPAB Fall 2025 Staff time Implementation of local inventory form and use for documentation Update boundaries of Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) Identify any boundary updates and justification, Zone Map Amendment Planning Division Consultant, City Attorney’s Office, HPAB, CD Board, City Commission Fall 2025 Staff time, public engagement Adoption of updated NCOD boundaries Make amendments to the existing Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation & the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District to address immediate concerns Draft guideline language update, coordinate with current UDC updates as needed Planning Division City Attorney’s Office, HPAB, CD Board, City Commission Fall 2025 Staff time, public engagement Adoption of updated guidelines language Create local landmark program in Chapter 38.340 Develop criteria for local landmark program, establish application and review process, create administrative manual and application Planning Division Consultant, City Attorney’s Office, HPAB, CD Board, City Commission Fall 2025 Staff time, public engagement Adoption of updated code language, number of local designations; number of properties in a local district taking advantage of federal historic preservation tax credits Modify Historic Preservation Advisory Board responsibilities in Chapter 2.05.860 and 2.05.930 Draft code language proposal Planning Division Consultant, City Attorney’s Office, HPAB, City Commission Fall 2025 Staff time, public engagement Adoption of updated code language Future Recommendations Action Steps Responsible Party Partners Timeline* Resources Needed Progress Metrics Initiate complete update to the Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation & the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Identify needed changes, develop RFP for design guidelines update, proceed with RFP process and select consultant, develop and implement community engagement strategy Planning Division Future Consultant, HPAB, City Commission Short-Term Staff time, public engagement, funding Adoption and implementation of updated guidelines Historic Preservation Interface with Unified Development Code Discuss districts and zone edge transitions with UDC project team, advisory boards and City Commission Planning Division UDC Consultant, City Attorney’s Office, HPAB, CD Board, City Commission Short-Term Staff time, public engagement Separate project (UDC) adoption 1 Implementation 91 8988 Consider Heritage Trees as part of Urban Forestry Management Plan update Research best practices and allowable options under Montana state law, create criteria for heritage tree designation, draft plan language, determine whether future code amendment needed Forestry Division Planning Division, City Attorney’s Office, Urban Parks and Forestry Board, Sustainability Board, HPAB, GIS Department, City Commission Short-Term Staff time, public engagement, potential funding Implementation of heritage tree program, number of designated heritage trees Strategize historic and cultural resource survey efforts Identify survey priorities, determine survey process, develop RFP for consultant assistance if needed, complete surveys Planning Division Future Consultant, HPAB, City Commission Ongoing Staff time, funding Updated historic and cultural resource surveys, surveys completed for areas that have never been surveyed before, survey priorities completed Consider a citywide historic preservation plan or equivalent chapter in a future Growth Policy update Develop RFP, proceed with RFP process and select consultant, develop and implement community engagement strategy Planning Division Future Consultant, HPAB, CD Board, City Commission Mid to Long-Term Staff time, public engagement, funding Creation and adoption of a historic preservation plan or chapter Explore options for preservation project funding and incentives Identify existing barriers, research best practices, identify local incentives, implement incentives, develop any needed applications Planning Division City Attorney’s Office, HPAB, City Commission, Development Community, partners in historic preservation (i.e. nonprofits, state agencies, historic societies, etc.) Ongoing Staff time, public engagement, potential funding Number of projects completed utilizing funding or incentives Ongoing support for the historic preservation program Continue to include funding for historic preservation staff and initiatives in future City budgets, demonstrate need and impact CD Director, City Manager, City Commission HPAB Ongoing Staff time, funding Budget dollars in each biennial budget, historic preservation initiatives funded Develop context studies Develop RFP for consultant assistance or determine opportunities for partnerships to complete, develop community engagement strategy, complete studies Planning Division Future Consultant, HPAB, City Commission, partners in historic preservation (i.e. nonprofits, state agencies, historic societies, etc.) Mid-Term Staff time, public engagement, funding Completed context studies, number of local designations based on context studies Consider using URD grants to incentivize survey and documentation and adaptive reuse and rehabilitation for projects that align with URD goals Research best practices, develop criteria incentivizing reuse of historic or existing buildings, coordinate with URD programs, promote opportunities, implement program Planning Division Economic Development, CD Board, Urban Renewal Boards, HPAB, City Commission, Development Community Mid-Term Staff time, funding Increased number of historic or existing buildings preserved or reused within the Urban Renewal Districts Collaborate with the Parks and Recreation Department on a Sunset Hills Cemetery master plan update Convene working group, research best practices, develop RFP for creation of master plan (if consultant desired), select consultant, identify community engagement strategy, develop plan Parks and Recreation Department Future Consultant, Planning Division, HPAB, partners in historic preservation (i.e. nonprofits, state Mid-Term Staff time, public engagement, funding Approval and implementation of Sunset Hills Cemetery Master Plan 2 92 9190 agencies, historic societies, etc.) Consider adopting a deconstruction policy and program Research best practices, engage with industry partners to inform recommendations, and create a program and associated policies Sustainability Planning Division, City Attorney’s Office, HPAB, Sustainability Board, City Commission, Contractors, Development Community, industry partners Mid to Long-Term Staff time, public engagement, potential funding, training, salvage market Implementation of deconstruction program and policy, number of construction materials diverted from landfills and reused, number of contractors trained to do deconstruction, number of places for salvage Consider creating a legacy business program Research best practices, create program, promote through public outreach Economic Development Department Planning Division, HPAB, City Commission, Bozeman Chamber of Commerce Mid to Long-Term Staff time, public engagement, potential funding Number of businesses designated as legacy businesses, number of legacy businesses that stay in operation for a determined period of time after being designated Consider integrating archaeology into the historic preservation program Research best practices, research allowable options under Montana law, partner with experts or find consultant to develop an archaeology ordinance or program Planning Division HPAB, MSU, SHPO Long-Term Staff time, public engagement, funding Implementation of archaeology ordinance and/or program Implement a more comprehensive education, outreach and interpretation program Research best practices, develop materials, host events, utilize social media and traditional media, establish partnerships for co-outreach opportunities, continue existing programs like Preservation Month and Awards Planning Division HPAB, Communications, partners in historic preservation (i.e. nonprofits, state agencies, historic societies, etc.) Mid-Term/Ongo ing Staff time, public engagement, funding Number of educational/outreach programs developed, number of people engaging with content and programs Continue existing partnerships with internal departments and external organizations Continue regular coordination, share updates and resources regarding historic and cultural resources Planning Division Other City Departments, HPAB, partners in historic preservation (i.e. nonprofits, state agencies, historic societies, etc.) Ongoing Staff time Number of routine meetings established, number of coordinated projects that include historic and cultural resources *Timeline: o Short-Term – This action is already underway or scheduled, and resources (funding, staffing) are available or likely to be obtained soon. o Mid-Term – This action may be dependent on other actions to begin first; may not be as time sensitive and/or resources (funding, staffing, partners) need to be identified or secured. o Long-Term – The action is a longer-term priority, it may need to begin after other mid-term actions and requires additional resources (funding, staffing, partners) for implementation. o Ongoing – No set timeline, but this action involves feasible periodic tasks to keep momentum for achieving historic preservation goals. 3 93 9392 Phase II of this project includes working on suggested amendments to Chapter 38.340 and supporting creation of the local landmark program. This effort is expected to happen after City Commission approval of this report and continue through Fall 2025. Community engagement will continue, and in-person formal presentations to HPAB, the Community Development Board, and the City Commission will occur. The following tasks are part of Phase II: Code Amendments and Design Guidelines • Draft amendments to Section 38.340, Overlay District Standards, and Section 38.220.090, Certificate of Appropriateness; additional application requirements, review procedures, and review criteria. • Draft amendments to Chapter 2, Article 5, Division 6 – Historic Preservation Advisory Board, which outlines the roles and duties of the Historic Preservation Advisory Board. • Draft amendments to the Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation and Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District as outlined in this report. Draft Local Landmark Program Administrative Manual and Associated Materials • In coordination with staff, Phase I feedback, and any additional community outreach and engagement, draft an administrative manual including application process, selection criteria, and review standards. • Create process and procedures to implement the program including a local landmark application form, local historic/cultural resource inventory form, and community outreach materials to introduce the program. Next Steps 94 94 ©2025 Community Planning Collaborative www.planningcollab.com info@planningcollab.com (904) 577-0255 95 Memorandum REPORT TO:Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board FROM:Sarah Rosenberg, Historic Preservation Officer Erin George, Director of Community Development SUBJECT:Announcement of Historic Preservation Month events MEETING DATE:April 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:Information only, no action required. STRATEGIC PLAN:1.2 Community Engagement: Broaden and deepen engagement of the community in city government, innovating methods for inviting input from the community and stakeholders. BACKGROUND:The Historic Preservation Advisory Board will be putting on some events for Historic Preservation Month in May. Board members will announce the events that are taking place. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:NA FISCAL EFFECTS:NA Report compiled on: April 3, 2025 96 Memorandum REPORT TO:Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board FROM:Sarah Rosenberg, Historic Preservation Officer Erin George, Director of Community Development SUBJECT:Cancellation of May Historic Preservation Advisory Board Meeting MEETING DATE:April 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:Information only, no action needed. STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:In lieu of Historic Preservation Month events taking place in May, the Historic Preservation Advisory Board May meeting will be cancelled. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:NA ALTERNATIVES:NA FISCAL EFFECTS:NA Report compiled on: April 3, 2025 97