HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-10-26 Public Comment - S. Boyd - Comment letter on application 25667 From: Scott and Frances Boyd
To: Bozeman Public Comment
Cc: Joey Morrison;Douglas Fischer;Jennifer Madoic; Emma Bode;Alison Sweeney
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Comment letter on application 25667
Date: Tuesday,March 10,2026 11:53:23 AM
CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to register my opposition to CCOA application 25667. First and foremost,
both the applicant and the city are aware of active litigation regarding the subject
property and its proposed redevelopment under application 24493.
In particular, one of the most pertinent issues in contention is the treatment of the
large, mature trees on the site and the NCOD Design Guidelines' mandatory
elements regarding landscaping.
From the Guidelines:
Should. If the term "should" appears in a design guideline, compliance is
required. (emphasis added) In cases where specific circumstances of a
project make it impractical to do so, the City may determine that compliance
is not required if the applicant demonstrates how the related policy statement
still will be met.
• Design Guideline E. Landscape Design
o Policy: Traditionally, plant beds were located around building
foundations, along walkways and sometimes in front of fences.
(emphasis added) Some of these plantings may have historic
significance and should be retained, to the extent feasible. Some
mature trees may also contribute to the historic landscape
and should be preserved. (emphasis added)
Guidelines to achieve this policy include:
1. Preserve and maintain mature trees and significant vegetation
within all corridors.
o Include existing vegetation as a part of a landscape design scheme
where appropriate.
o In development areas, healthy trees and vegetation clusters should be
identified for preservation. (emphasis added) Special consideration should be
given to mature trees, 6" or greater in diameter, and to vegetation clusters
with significant visual impact. (emphasis added) Vegetation designated for
preservation should be incorporated into new development site design to
the maximum extent possible. (emphasis added)
Secondly, it is remarkable that the city would reward demolition by neglect as contemplated by this
application. All of the conditions that are contributing to the building's classification as unsafe and
dangerous are a product of the applicant's own actions. Clearly, the applicant's intent was to leave all the
debris from the asbestos mitigation on site until demolition could proceed, so they wouldn't have to pay to
remove it twice. That is supported by the fact that all of the external debris also remained onsite since the
asbestos mitigation initially took place (photos attached). Even the satellite view of the subject property
on the public notice shows the piles of debris. Those piles were only removed due to a code enforcement
complaint that was filed and pursued by the city(case#CS-25-1255). Furthermore, it was a result of the
applicant's leaving the building unsecured, exposed to the elements, and easily accessible by vagrants
that led to the conditions referenced in the report. Securing the property with fencing didn't take place
until the code enforcement action.
The prudent course of action at this point would be to mitigate the concerns of fire load due to
combustible materials being 'filled to the ceiling' (another self-inflicted condition) by removing the debris.
There is now fencing surrounding the property to secure it. Protecting the structure from the elements
with better means than plastic film and duct tape or plywood simply leaning against a broken window, as
supported by the applicant's photos, is called for. Allowing the structure to remain as is and secured from
unauthorized entry will cause no harm to the public until the active appeal in the District Court is resolved.
In no uncertain terms, the city should not permit the removal of or damage to the large mature trees on
the site, given the unresolved applicability of the NCOD Design Guidelines. To do so would cause
irreparable harm to the neighborhood and prove to be prohibitively expensive for the applicant or city to
remediate.
Regards,
Scott Boyd
T
I
r
M
a
" �-•��.,.,. � £„ tp�. -•We- '� aYsaett'u -w- n��
�T/C � � f�.- .C•� 4 .•p 1�• lip h _�+G3
p, ���- _ �1S ^�,";. is �,•. -F S, j,. "�'
"Z' �1� 5 3 ?�.,, :5='Ta �ls. y a•,tBt a�.�e�3"'F, rz +..'� � -��""rr
� � v ,{tom ,� ��.� ���
...fir .�,,.. �%J "� �� C!.. ..�: V:r
7P-
t
ems•, _ - `"dl0. ,.�
± at