Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-04-15 BHPAB minutesHistoric Preservation Advisory Board November 4, 2015 6:00 pm Upstairs Conference Room of the Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street, Bozeman, Montana A. Call meeting to order Mark Hufstetler - Present Kelsey Matson - Present Pat Jacobs Present Merri Ketterer - Present Lora Dalton - Present B. Changes to the Agenda – No changes to the agenda. C. Disclosure of Ex Parte Communication – No ex parte communication D. Public Comment – Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record. This is the time for individuals to comment on matters falling within the purview of the Committee. There will also be an opportunity in conjunction with each action item for comments pertaining to that item. Please limit your comments to three minutes. Public comment by: Brian Caldwell regarding the Rialto Theater. He is presenting during public comment due to a timing issue to formally get on the agenda. Applicant gives background on the project. Informs the board that he plans to bring live music back to the venue. Should be more of a community center. Applicant advises the board that they will be bringing back to original 1925-style awning. Applicant said they researched the block uses from the late 1800’s to present to chart uses. Applicant provides history of uses for the project and how they will preserve some of the features. Applicant discussed changes that need to be made to accommodate storage to make it as a multi-use building. The lower level will be primarily geared towards live performance. The second floor will be more open and light for hosting events. Applicant stated he’s meeting with the board to discuss the façade of the building. He stated they will be looking to incorporate French doors that will incorporate the style of the existing windows but allow the window to come down to the floor to allow for outdoor seating. He thinks it will be a great opportunity for a variety of community events, not just a bar and restaurant. Confirmed that the windows will not change in shape – they would hold the character of the window and simply lower the sill. Pat Jacobs questions if the balcony will be on top of the marquee. Applicant confirmed that yes, he will be trying to utilize part of the space above the marquee for outdoor use. If not granted the encroachment into the public right of way, he thinks they will still try to allow for the windows to be opened. Lora Dalton questions why he is creating a community space on main street. Mr. Caldwell states that they own the Lark Hotel and were going to expand. He thought that doing this project will allow for them to create a fun community space instead of another hotel conference room. Said he is trying to create a space that has a wine bar and other features to make it accessible at all time. Lora Dalton states that she appreciates that they have a vision for the space and the means to achieve it. She feels his vision appears very clear and an apparent respect for the property. Applicant states they will have a management company that is skilled in this area and will hopefully keep it active as much as possible. Applicant continues to discuss some of the ways they will alter and preserve the building. Applicant discusses the approval process to get the project approved. He said they hope to open in May of 2017. Kelsey Matson stated that she appreciates him coming before them. They think that the project looks nice. Mark Hufstetler stated that they should not be discussing it until it’s on the agenda. E. Minutes – approval of minutes from October 13, 2015 Merri Ketterer moves to approve. Second by Lora Dalton. Board unanimously agrees. F. Introduction of Invited Guests/Special Presentation – Kelsey introduces Pat Jacobs as representative of NCOD Evaluation. G. Action Items 1. Action Item 1 Discussion and recommendation regarding draft NCOD report. Pat Jacobs begins presentation of NCOD report and states that she will be focusing on the Historic Preservation side, but there is a presentation tomorrow night that will provide more detail. Mrs. Jacobs begins discussing the time line of the project and that there was an extension that allowed for additional input from boards and neighborhoods. Mrs. Jacobs discusses the components they were evaluating from historic preservation to affordable housing. She said they incorporated information from reviewing best practices from other communities and ranked the similar communities in their similarity to Bozeman. Mrs. Jacobs discusses briefly the number of deviations in the NCOD and how they map out on the city map and how widely dispersed they are. There are not certain things happening in certain pockets, it’s happening all across the board. Mrs. Jacobs stated that there were fewer ADU’s than expected. Laura _____ stated that she is aware of significantly more ADU’s that are not on the map. Mr. Saunders stated that they used some pretty extensive data to come to these numbers. Some ADU’s may not actually be dwelling units, but just additional units. Mrs. Jacobs discusses the issues neighborhood groups addressed regarding demolition in the districts. She stated that there was some concern regarding the notification process, parking and vacation rentals Mrs. Jacobs states that she feels the design guidelines have been successful in achieving their goals to preserve areas in old buildings and building new. Mrs. Jacobs stated that the feedback is that the guidelines do not accurately preserve the character of some districts. In some other areas, the guidelines were too strict. She stated this is the feedback they received. She stated the neighborhoods need to collaborate to determine what is important in each area to design guidelines for the neighborhoods. She said that they need to strengthen the neighborhood voice. As she stated, the guidelines are doing their original job, but how have the goals changed is what they are addressing. She said the NCOD is strong and there have been many improvements in the areas. Mrs. Jacobs questioned Mr. Saunders on demolition. Mr. Saunders stated that they are internally creating a list of what exactly is historic and worth preserving and will them begin to roll that out to the community. Mrs. Jacobs stated that it was identified that there was no way to create new districts and that there is potentially other areas that need to be added. She also mentioned some places that are historic, but are not included within the districts. She stated that she wants to address what the community feels their preservation goals are. She stated we need to build stronger communities, educate the community and release the over arching NCOD and creating more local districts – and district-specific guidelines based on the goals for each smaller district. She stated that there was an apparent issue with process, but that may be misguided, in that some individuals may not know the process. Mrs. Jacobs addresses a lack of affordability within the NCOD. Discussion among board members regarding affordability in the district and how it has risen over time. Mrs. Jacobs states that there had been infill all over the NCOD, not in any particular pockets. She also highlights the properties that are still able to be developed. Mrs. Jacobs addresses the recommendations and the immediate goals vs long term goals. Mr. Saunders states that they’re hoping to fit the immediate changes into the code up date that is currently taking place and incorporate it into the first round which should go into effect in the spring. Mrs Jacobs discusses that they would like to incorporate a buffer district around the districts which had little regulation, but still served to compliment the district. She expanded on that in terms of how it would affect the B-3 district around Main Street. She also stated that there may be additional types of districts to preserve different types of things (such as a sign district). Mrs. Jacobs displayed slides of potential districts to add to the program and adding different nodes to create special areas. Mrs. Jacobs states the importance of good data to determine what can and cannot be demolished and what should be preserved. Mrs. Jacobs addressed some recommendations regarding infill development. Finally, she addressed the implementation matrix on how to get various items changed. Board begins discussion on the NCOD report. Lora Dalton states that read the report and was curious if there was a way to communicate that the historical record from 1984 was not correct currently and was even flawed in its own way at the time. She wants to know how we can evaluate property on an individual basis. Mrs Jacobs responds that it’s important to update that information regularly. The board discusses that there were many properties that should have been included, but were not. Mr. Hufstetler states that he feels this is a great start. He feels it will be a challenge to implement, but it will be great for the community. He questions the comparable cities and that they are not particularly comparable in his opinion – he feels the comparable cities are significantly larger. He feels we may be more comparable to Aspen or White Fish and that the other examples are different economically. Mrs. Jacobs states that there needs to be enough information in the ordinance to be able to say “no” to some projects that may be detrimental to the districts. Mr. Hufstetler adds that he would encourage the individuals to not start with the current districts. He feels we should create a separate set of districts that are used for planning purposes to more accurately represents the districts. He thinks the districts should be honorary, not just regulatory. Mrs. Jacobs addresses that was the point of the local districts to be more specific in the goals. Pat Jacobs leaves the meeting at this time. Board continues discussion on the districts and attributes for them and how they differ. Mr. Hufstetler states that he feels we need to address the areas between districts and perhaps have more stringent guidelines in those spaces to connect neighborhoods. Mr. Saunders gives the timeline for the project and best time line for submitting comment. Lora Dalton begins discussion on the recommendations. Mr. Saunders states that it may be difficult to address all of the items in the article and so the board should recommend which aspects are most important. Lora Dalton states that she thinks she would support the part where the board would have more input in the decision process and therefore have a real historic preservation review. She stated that the board should be advisory, but is hardly advisory and there’s no point in providing input, if you’re not going to take it. Board continues discussion on implementation. Mr. Hufstetler feels there needs to be a lot of thought into what is considered historic and it could really be a challenge. Merri Ketterer feels the matrix on how to implement parts of the report was incredibly helpful. Mr. Saunders stated that the priorities table was helpful. None of this can happen all at once, so the City needs to start with one piece at a time Lora Dalton stated that she appreciates the idea of buffer boundaries, that it will encourage the planners to consider the historic areas, as opposed to just basing decisions on the overall code. Mr. Hufstetler states that it will be hard to communicate that to the community because each area will have different guidelines. There will be a need for communication to the community. Mr. Saunders states that there are not programs available that can make that easier, because you can locate your property and it can bring up regulations directly relating to your property, not just overall. Mr. Saunders states that data management is becoming more accessible. Board discusses further the data management and how it will help with the evaluation. Meri Ketterer states that she appreciates the “best practices” and that Bozeman needs to raise its standards. Mr. Hufstetler states that we’re different in the affluence in our community. It is harder to deter individuals when they have the financial means to deal with the results. Bozeman is unique in that it is not a working class city anymore. We are in a unique position because of our lack of affordability. Mr. Saunders states that we’re in an area where people can live anywhere and they chose Bozeman. Not many in the community are from the area. Discussion continues comparing other local communities and how they compare to Bozeman. Kelsey Matson consolidates the feedback to state that we need to better inventory of historical properties. We need to address the development of the specific districts. She addressed that we have a unique problem with following money and affluence in the area. Lora Dalton states that she made her point about the board’s opinion holding more value Mr. Hufstetler states that he thinks it’s a solid document and that we need to balance what’s available in terms of inventory. Discussion continues regarding moving away from existing maps and inventory and basically starting from scratch. Lora Dalton questions what the commission is planning to do with the information. Mr. Saunders stated that they will utilize the report to do goal setting for the future. Lora Dalton states that the board should submit a resolution to implement the goals presented in the document. Mr. Hufstetler moves to support the broad philosophies presented in this document reflecting the issues raised during the discussion this evening and highlights accurate inventory, accurate boundaries and guidelines put in place that are relevant the district. Lora Dalton seconds. Board approves unanimously. 2. Action Item 2 Preservation Board applicants – Kelsey states that there are additional members for the board. Lora Dalton states that in the past they’ve been able to meet the members and would be appreciated for it to continue. Recommendation was made to e-mail new members as a “welcome to the board”. H. FYI/Discussion Updates from Mr. Saunders states that items that were taken action on at the last meeting have been submitted for review to be submitted to the commission. Discussion regarding who will be responsible for the approval of the Rialto. Board expresses interest in being kept up to date on the project. Further discussion by the board on the project and applicant history. 1. Preservation Awards - stated that they need to update the dates on the application forms. Once Merri Ketterer gets the correct dates, then they just need to send them to Chris Saunders to get them posted. Lora Dalton will be responsible for publicity. She will come up with a plan over the next couple weeks and submit it to Merri Ketterer. I. Adjournment For more information please contact Chris Saunders at csaunders@bozeman.net or 406-582-2267 This board generally meets the second Tuesday of the month from 6:00 to 8:00 PM in the Upstairs Conference Room of the Stiff Professional Building at 20 East Olive Street in Bozeman. Preservation Board meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, James Goehrung at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301).