The Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board recommended reducing the maximum building height in the B-3 downtown zone from 90 feet to 70 feet and approved modifications to zone edge transition standards during an Aug. 19 meeting focused on historic preservation policy.
The board's recommendation on height came after more than two hours of discussion about how tall buildings affect neighborhood character, historic district integrity, and the "sense of place" that defines Bozeman. Board members acknowledged trade-offs between allowing vertical development to maximize land use in the constrained downtown core and protecting the visual prominence of existing historic structures and neighborhoods.
"I do feel that 90 feet is absurd," said board member Chelsea Holling. "It's only helping developers and not the community." Another member noted that buildings at that height, once constructed, would remain for decades and establish precedents for additional tall development in adjacent areas.
Chair Michael Wiseman, an architect, pushed the board to articulate a preservation-focused rationale beyond simply stating that tall buildings look bad next to shorter ones. "Does a tall building destroy or diminish the historic integrity of a structure or of a district or of a town?" he asked. The board ultimately concluded that height itself, combined with other factors like setbacks and design quality, does affect historic character and that the 90-foot standard would accelerate a process of change that erodes the city's distinctive sense of place over time.
Height Recommendation Approved
Board member James Webster moved to recommend a maximum height of 70 feet in B-3. Board member Ashley Wilson seconded. The motion passed 5-0.
Zone Edge Transitions Modified
The board approved two motions addressing zone edge transitions—the required setbacks and step-backs that apply where higher-density B-3 zoning abuts lower-density residential zones like RA and RB.
Board member Chelsea Holling moved to eliminate Type 1A transitions and consolidate them into a single Type 1 standard where the step-back (the upper building edge setback) relates to the setback line rather than the property line, maintaining a fixed 12-foot step-back from the building face. Ashley Wilson seconded. The motion passed 5-0.
Wilson then moved to require landscaping at all Type 1 zone edge transitions adjacent to RA or RB zones, regardless of whether an alley is present. Chelsea Holling seconded. The motion passed 5-0.
Chair Wiseman explained the intent: a 12-foot step-back from wherever the building sits helps mitigate the bulk and height impact on adjacent lower-density neighborhoods. The previous code allowed the upper step-back to remain at a fixed distance from the property line, which meant as lower setbacks increased, the step-back effect diminished. The board's change ensures the step-back moves with the setback, maintaining consistent visual relief.
Demolition Code Discussion
The board spent much of the meeting reviewing staff and consultant feedback on demolition regulation suggestions the board had submitted in July. Community Development Director Erin George and Staff Planner Rebecca Owens outlined a comprehensive demolition code update in development with consultant Community Planning Collaborative.
Staff affirmed they will incorporate several board recommendations into a draft code: expanding public notice requirements to nonhistoric buildings in the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District, expanding demolition regulation to historic structures outside the NCOD, requiring updated surveys or inventories prior to any demolition approval, and pursuing a 50-year age threshold to identify potentially historic structures outside the NCOD.
Staff committed to consulting with the City Attorney on several enforcement questions, including whether fines can be assessed on a per-day basis over a two-year period and whether a stay on new development could be imposed as a penalty for illegal demolition without permits.
On one contentious issue—requiring documentation that property owners have explored alternatives during the two-year demolition stay—legal counsel recommended against requiring such documentation as a condition of the stay itself. However, staff suggested the code could impose a two-step stay: an initial stay, followed by a checkpoint requiring the owner to demonstrate good-faith exploration of alternatives; if the city deems those efforts insufficient, the stay could extend further. The board expressed interest in exploring this approach with the consultant.
The board was unable to involve itself directly in demolition review decisions due to Montana's Land Use Planning Act, which requires administrative decisions on private development to be made by city staff without board involvement unless specific technical expertise is needed. However, the board suggested and staff agreed to provide quarterly reports on demolition applications and approvals so the board can monitor whether adopted policies are working as intended.
On the separate issue of demolition by neglect, staff indicated it could draft code language under the city's public nuisance chapter to address building maintenance, though this would require significant legal work and would apply citywide, not just within the NCOD. Code enforcement is complaint-based and depends on residents filing complaints.
Earlier Actions
At the meeting's start, the board approved amended minutes from the previous meeting unanimously after staff corrected a vote recording error.
Staff also presented an update on two large historic preservation projects—a local landmarks program and updates to the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District design guidelines—based on direction the City Commission provided in a July 28 work session. The Commission recommended that code revisions proceed first, followed by completion of the local landmark program, with NCOD design guidelines updated last. This sequencing allows the city to continue with the current consultant on code and landmarks work before seeking a new consultant for design guidelines later this fall or winter.
On the contentious issue of B-3 height and zone edge transitions, staff noted that the City Commission will discuss these topics in a work session on Tuesday, Aug. 25, and that an additional UDC "housekeeping" workshop is planned for Oct. 27 to consider refinements to the code adopted last year. The height question is not settled, despite being codified in the Unified Development Code adopted in December 2025; Commission indicated willingness to revisit the issue based on board feedback.