Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-10-16 HPAB MinutesHistoric Preservation Advisory Board May 10, 2016 6:00 pm City Commission Chamber 121 N. Rouse Ave., Bozeman, Montana A. 6:01:08 Call meeting to order – Roll Call Kelsey Matson – Present Mary Ketterer - Present Tulli Fisher - Present Mark Hufstetler - Present Vikki York - Present Chris Saunders - Present Cyndi Andrus - Present B. Changes to the Agenda – No Changes to the Agenda C. Disclosure of Ex Parte Communication – No Ex Parte Communication D. Public Comment – No Public Comment E. Approval of Minutes – 6:02:50 1. April 12, 2016 No comments regarding the minutes from 4/12/16 Tulli Fisher moves to approve Board unanimously approves the minutes. G. Action Items – 6:03:50 1. 725 South 6th Ave COA and Demolition A Neighborhood Certificate of Appropriateness and Demolition application was received to demolish the house at 725 S. 6th Avenue and build a new house conforming to our current zoning code conservation overlay design standards. Upon the review of the historic record it was determined the house is considered contributing to the Cooper Park Historic District. Kelsey Matson gives short background to the project. Chris Saunders introduces Andrew Boughan to the board. Vikki York questions what the criteria is that the board will be basing their decision on. Chris Saunders responds. Discussion continues about different levels of authority for demolition based on conditions of the home. Vikki York questions if the project will come back to the board after the report on conditions has been completed. Chris Saunders responds. 6:10:00 – Andrew Boughan begins presentation of project. 6:14:16 Andrew Boughan concludes presentation. 6:15:00 Questions for staff from the board. Mark Hufstetler questions the home contributing to the historic district. Mr. Saunders responds. Mr. Hufstetler questions if the update in contribution status has been updated by a professional. Mr. Saunders responds. Vikki York questions the condition of the home and why it is no longer contributing. Mr. Boughan responds. Jeff Saints – 14245 Frontage Road – provides comment on the home and its condition. 6:21:00 - Vikki York comments that the home has deteriorated over the last 10 years. She is not sure how contributing it may be with not having work done for so long. 06:22:16 PM (00:21:24) Tulli Fisher questions when the front porch was done. Applicant responds that he is not sure, but it was atleast 10 years ago and appeared to be done by the home owner. Mr. Fisher questions if the current set backs are conforming. Andrew Boughan states that the current set backs are not conforming, as soon as they begin to do any work on the home, they would need to bring it into conformance. The new proposed building would be conforming. 06:23:44 PM (00:22:52) Commissioner Andrus questions if anyone is living in the property. Mr. Boughan states that no one is currently living in the home, and he’s not sure how long it has been vacant. Commissioner Andrus confirms that the new structure will be within the required setbacks. Andrew Boughan responds that yes, they will meet setback requirements. Kelsey Matson questions the status of the City’s Demolition by Neglect Ordinance. Mr. Saunders states that it is about 80% written. Mr. Saunders provides details on the process and what is remaining in the process. 06:26:26 PM (00:25:34) No additional questions for staff and applicant. 06:26:41 PM (00:25:49) Mr. Hufstetler states that he visited the property and feels it is still contributing to the area. He does not feel they have sufficient information to discuss the structural integrity at this time. He said he could provide more information on the contributing characteristics if needed. 06:28:40 PM (00:27:48) Kelsey Matson states that she too feels the structure is contributing still. She feels they should recognize the geographical location as a major character defining area of the City. 06:30:05 PM (00:29:13) Mr. Hufstetler asks what information they want from the board. Mr. Saunders responds with options on how the board should move forward. He requests they make a determination on demo of the structure and also on the appropriateness of the new structure. 06:31:38 PM (00:30:46) Vikki York questions if there is historical value with regards to the families who have lived there and the lot itself. Mr. Saunders stated that there were no particularly notable residents or architects and that it does not have a landmark status. Mr. Hufstetler states that when determining historical contribution, they should apply the National standards. He indicates ways that it is contributing based on the criteria. He states its most representative of when it was built and architecture at that time. 06:34:13 PM (00:33:21) Commissioner Andrus states that the City Commission looks at the reason why individuals voted a certain way, in addition to the votes themselves. So, she encourages the board to mention why they are voting a certain why. Mr. Hufstetler states that there are a number of architectural elements that are representative of the time and lists specific elements that he noticed. 06:35:54 PM (00:35:02) Mary Ketterer states that in the past there have been streetscapes provided and questions if there were any streetscapes available for context. Mr. Boughan responds. 06:37:10 PM (00:36:18) Commissioner Andrus questions if staff feels the craftsman style is represented better or as good as any of the other homes in the area. Mr. Saunders states that he is not an expert on this, but there are several homes that show similarities in the area. Mr. Hufstetler states that the criteria does not necessarily mean that the structure needs to be particularly ornate or grand, but could be a good representation of that time. He states that this property meets that part of the criteria. He states that without analyzing the site forms, that the home in question – when compared to others in that area – is likely one of the earlier versions of this form and is one of the smaller. Some of the others may date 15-20 years after the structure in question. It has distinct characteristics of what a working class home in Bozeman would have been at that time. 06:41:03 PM (00:40:11) Commissioner Andrus questions if we are required to apply the secretary of the interiors standards to our review. Mr. Saunders states that we do look at those. We do not necessarily look at the “A, B, C and D” criteria that Mr. Hufstetler is discussing, but the board does tend to look to those standards with regards to questions about appropriate materials. 06:41:51 PM (00:40:59) Commissioner Andrus questions if there are instances where we use those standards – for example, if it’s on the National Historic Registrar. Mr. Saunders responds that if there a conflict, they would use those standards. Kelsey Matson adds that they would also use those standards if the project were publicly funded. 06:43:08 PM (00:42:16) Tulli Fisher questions if there are any more details on the structure being proposed to replace the building. Mr. Boughan responds with what was provided and that siding materials and window specs would be in the notes. Pause as board reviews the specs and materials. 06:45:34 PM (00:44:42) Mr. Saunders provides information on siding and shingles. 06:46:24 PM (00:45:32) Mr. Fisher states that he is seeing a metal roof, fir and cedar siding and no information on the windows. 06:47:15 PM (00:46:23) Mr. Hufstetler moves: the board expresses a sense that this building is in all likelihood still a contributing element in the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District area. Primarily due to its status as a surviving example of early 20th century craftsmen cottage, which was an important architectural type in the historic development of Bozeman’s south side and it’s retention of a number of architectural features highly characteristic of that type. Tulli Fisher seconds the motion. Cynthia Andrus discusses what type of discussion could be beneficial for the City Commission to make a decision on this project. Chris Saunders states that is currently listed as a contributing structure. 06:49:41 PM (00:48:49) Vikki York states that she would likely be the dissenting vote. She does not dispute any of the characteristics that are being proposed at historical, but she believes it is so far lost, that it’s not worth being preserved. She has doubts about its current value. 06:51:00 PM (00:50:08) Mr. Hufstetler states that the historical integrity is different than its structural integrity. 06:51:30 PM (00:50:38) Mary Ketterer states that she feels they need to protect the character of the homes in that area and she does not want to lose this property in the historic district. 06:52:13 PM (00:51:21) Vote on the motion: In favor: Mark Hufstetler, Kelsey Matson, Tulli Fisher Opposed: Vikki York Motion Passes 06:52:51 PM (00:51:59) Board begins discussion on the second motion regarding whether the board feels the proposed home is consistent with overlay design guidelines. 06:53:34 PM (00:52:42) Vikki York states that they don’t really know what the materials are at this point, but based on what they have been given tonight it appears it fits the foot print of the previous home. Mr. Hufstetler states that he agrees with Ms. York’s comment. He states that we need to not just look at materials, but also the cultural landscape. He feels they should have respect for the other houses of the area. He feels the design is a good fit for the rhythm of the streetscape and invokes a lot of early architectural elements. 06:56:36 PM (00:55:44) Mr. Fisher agrees that he likes the design as well, but feels details are missing with regards to color and the windows. He thinks it’s great that it will not be a conforming structure. 06:57:45 PM (00:56:53) Ms. Ketterer states that she agrees that the design will blend consistently with the neighborhood. She feels reviewing this is premature though. 06:58:18 PM (00:57:26) Kelsey Matson stated that she doesn’t feel comfortable saying yes or no at this time, but she does feel it’s a successful design. She would like more information on details. 06:59:12 PM (00:58:20) 06:59:28 PM (00:58:36) Tulli Fisher moves: On the issue of whether or not the proposed structure complies with the COA guidelines, we should delay until we have more detailed information. Second: Ms. Ketterer 07:00:09 PM (00:59:17) Commissioner Andrus questions when this will go to the City Commission. Mr. Saunders states that since there are no deviations, this will not be going to the City Commission, but they will need to wait for the structural analysis before it can go to the director to make a decision. 07:00:42 PM (00:59:50) Commission Andrus questions if their request to delay is feasible. Mr. Saunders states that it is possible, but undesirable. Commissioner Andrus states that as a board they should not be abstaining from voting. They should vote for or against the project and include why they are against it: i.e. need more information. Tulli Fisher states that he could amend the motion to make it clearer. Amended motion: I move to approve the proposed structure and that the proposed structure complies with the COA regulations as it is, with the information provided. Second by Mr. Hufstetler Tulli Fisher comments that the drawings and plans do not have a lot of detail regarding windows and he has questions about materials. As a result he will not be supporting the motion. 07:04:21 PM (01:03:29) Mr. Hufstetler states that he has already provided his feedback. His only concern is the windows with the modern style that are not consistent with the design details of the rest of the building. He sees a lot of details that are representative of the era of the existing structure. So, he will likely vote in favor of the motion. 07:06:04 PM (01:05:12) Mary Ketterer states that she will oppose the motion as she would like more details on the structure being proposed. 07:06:32 PM (01:05:40) Kelsey Matson states that she has her reservations because of the limitations of detail, but based on available information she does find it to be consistent with the character of the neighborhood. So, she will vote in favor of the motion. Vote on the Motion: In Favor: Mary Ketterer and Tulli Fisher Opposed: Kelsey Matson, Mark Hufstetler and Vikki York. Motion Passes. H. FYI/Discussion 1. 07:08:43 PM (01:07:51) Determination of an alternate Chair for the June meeting. 07:09:20 PM (01:08:28) Commissioner Andrus states that she would like to put together a helpful agenda with tips on how to chair the meeting. Kelsey Matson states that in this discussion they are just looking for someone to step in for June. Typically the board does not meet in July and she will be stepping down in August, at which point the board will need to find a new chair. Tulli Fisher states that the roster shows a number of positions will be expiring in June. Mr Saunders states that the clerk’s office should be reaching out to see if members would like to rejoin. 07:13:13 PM (01:12:21) Kelsey Matson questions if the board would like to continue the discussion. They have found their board chair replacement for next month, but the board is welcome to further discuss membership beyond June. Mr. Hufstetler states that he would like to congratulate Kelsey Matson on her time served on the chair. Board discusses when the next meeting will be. Mr. Saunders states there was a demo request that may come to the board, but it was not a complete application, so it will come to future meeting when complete. Mr. Fisher questions who Guy Crawford is – as he does not attend meetings. Discussion continues regarding which members will remain active following June. 07:16:24 PM (01:15:32) Mr. Saunders gives an update of the Rialto project. Construction is expected the Summer of 2016. Deviations were granted to replicate signage. He states the interior will be changed pretty significantly because of damage and integrity over time. 07:19:18 PM (01:18:26) Vikki York questions the status of the Historic Preservation Officer position. Mr. Saunders states that it will be determined during the budget discussion. I. 07:21:12 PM (01:20:20) Adjournment For more information please contact Chris Saunders at csaunders@bozeman.net or 406-582- 2260 This board generally meets the second Tuesday of the month from 6:00 to 8:00 PM in the City Commission Chamber at 121 N. Rouse Ave. Preservation Board meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, Chuck Winn (TDD 582-2307).