Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHPAB 01-10-17 minutes Historic Preservation Advisory Board January 10, 2017 6:00 pm City Hall, Madison Room 121 North Rouse Ave., Bozeman, Montana A. 03:23:43 PM (00:00:10) Call meeting to order and Roll Call. Present were: Michael Walner Pat Jacobs Vicki York Chris Saunders, Community Development Cyndy Andrus, Commissioner Liaison B. 03:24:04 PM (00:00:31) Changes to the Agenda. No changes were made to the agenda. C. 03:24:15 PM (00:00:42) Disclosure of Ex Parte Communication. No ex parte communication was identified. D. 03:24:21 PM (00:00:48) Public Comment. No comment was received under this agenda item. E. Action Items 1. 03:24:33 PM (00:01:00) Discussion of upcoming HPAB retreat in January. Chris Saunders noted there was no quorum at the last meeting, so this discussion was delayed until this meeting. He stated the issue is whether to hold the retreat during a standard meeting or at a different day and time. He noted the board has done a variety of alternatives over the years, including meeting on a Saturday; and there is no standard rule of practice. 03:25:51 PM (00:02:18) Michael Walner asked what the goals of the retreat are. 03:26:02 PM (00:02:29) Chris Saunders stated the purpose of the retreat is at the board’s discretion. He noted that in the past, some retreats have been devoted to training, while others have been for open discussion. 03:26:41 PM (00:03:08) Cyndy Andrus noted that retreats have sometimes been devoted to addressing items identified by the Commission as being raised by the board but not thoroughly discussed. She noted that the demolition by neglect ordinance and a discussion about possibly restructuring the board are possible topics. 03:27:54 PM (00:04:21) Pat Jacobs stated she has been pushing for a retreat because she feels the board is consistently flat lined, and it is important to organize and set some goals. She voiced concern that there is not a quorum at this meeting again. She feels that outreach and policy are two different directions. It is important to dive into duties of the board as outlined in the code and look at each item and take ownership on making sure to participate in the areas that the board should be participating in. She feels this board not a go to group because there is nothing to go to. 03:29:43 PM (00:06:10) Michael Walner asked about what happened when the historic house was recently taken down. 03:29:59 PM (00:06:26) Chris Saunders stated the house on Koch Street was taken down contrary to approvals. He noted the board was not involved in the aftermath because it became a code enforcement issue. He stated there was some discussion about what took place during that process. 03:30:46 PM (00:07:13) Cyndy Andrus stated she has been on the board about eight years and has seen people come to voice an opinion about issues they are interested in. She noted that those issues were sometimes in the purview of board and sometimes not. She suggested it may be beneficial to have a discussion on whether there is a need for a historic preservation board or if things are best done in a different setting or by a task force. She feels this would be a worthwhile discussion, and questioned what not having a quorum at meetings is really saying. 03:32:59 PM (00:09:26) Chris Saunders confirmed that the City receives $5,000 a year from the State for the certified cities program. He noted the City contributes on a basis of about 10 to 1 with the staff time. He noted training opportunities and grant opportunities come with that program, but he is uncertain about how much it has assisted financially. He stated those monies come with a lot of strings and, as a result, are often not accepted. 03:36:28 PM (00:12:55) Pat Jacobs stated she thinks this group’s lack of impact severely hinders use of monies and tax credits because people were afraid of strings. She noted that if this were a more depressed community, those programs might be more attractive. She suggested that the board could help a developer use these programs. She noted this board is the direct link to city government, but that can only happen if a quorum is present and if the information is filtered through the board. She noted the MidTown project was brought forward to this board when it was formulated. She suggested that if this type of project were submitted to the board earlier, it could begin to have an impact and drive the interest in preservation. She noted ADUs are in the forefront right now and will have an impact throughout the city. If historic districts are concerned, this group could have a voice and should be represented on the appropriate committees. Until this board starts ingraining itself into those efforts, no one will care; and that can’t happen unless the board reorganizes at a retreat. 03:40:56 PM (00:17:23) Michael Walner reviewed the issues he has heard, including organizing the board and setting goals; creating objectives; outreach and education; policy; reviewing the duties of the board; and discussing whether the board is needed and, if so, where is should participate. 03:41:25 PM (00:17:52) Pat Jacobs stated all of these issues need to be looked at in light of the constraints of the job of the historic preservation board. She noted policy issues arise and changes to the bylaws and the code need to be considered. She stated if the board feels it should be doing more, then it needs to be strong enough to do so. 03:43:02 PM (00:19:29) Cyndy Andrus noted the people she hears from at the commission meetings are people not interested in being on this board, and that begs the question of why this venue does not work for them. She then asked if there is a greater opportunity to work outside this board structure, particularly in an advocacy role. 03:44:24 PM (00:20:51) Responding to questions, Chris Saunders stated boards can be better advocates outside the government, noting it is easy to be nimble and responsive when working on the private advocacy side. One of the debates that staff has had internally is the role of this board and whether it is better on a lay body with an education outreach role or regulatory with professional training and more technical in nature. He noted that is an important split and changes who is appointed. He noted that in either instance, the general thrust is consistent – stewardship of the historic assets. 03:47:47 PM (00:24:14) Michael Walner noted that when he was at MSU, they interviewed, surveyed and did quantitative analysis; and the piece that was missing was education. He suggested that helping citizens understand historic preservation and regulations may give this board a task or a purpose. 03:48:56 PM (00:25:23) Pat Jacobs stated that more groups are becoming involved in preservation advocacy and history as well as educating the public, which reflects a rise in preservation interests again. She thinks the strength of this board might come with the appointment of a combination of professionals and residents of historic districts, noting the result could be more respect for the board’s input. She then reiterated her philosophy that this board does not get to consider historic preservation issues because of its current composition and apparent lack of direction. 03:51:30 PM (00:27:57) Cyndy Andrus noted DRB is comprised of mostly professionals, and their review parameters are very narrow. She acknowledged that changing the composition of this board to look at the architectural components of historic preservation projects may be worth considering. 03:52:40 PM (00:29:07) Chris Saunders noted Planning Staff looks at 80 to 100 site developments a year; and DRB engages in about a dozen. He stated the code specifies the threshold at which their review is triggered, although the Community Development Director and the Commission have the ability to solicit their input as desired. 03:54:21 PM (00:30:48) Michael Walner stated he feels a retreat is needed first, after which the board may address the other issues that have been identified. 03:54:53 PM (00:31:20) Cyndy Andrus stated that even if this body became a regulatory one, its decisions would be advisory to the Commission. 03:56:22 PM (00:32:49) Michael Walner suggested a retreat in February during the normal meeting time with carry over to March as necessary. 03:56:59 PM (00:33:26) Pat Jacobs stated she will be gone much of January and February, and suggested that the retreat be delayed until the new staff member is hired. She noted that one topic to be considered is how this board would work with that new staff person. 03:58:26 PM (00:34:53) Michael Walner voiced an interest in setting a time for a retreat and ensuring that it happens. 03:59:04 PM (00:35:31) Pat Jacobs stated it is important to have people appointed to this board who are interested in participating, noting that some of the recent appointees have resigned immediately while others have chosen not to attend meetings. She recognized the reducing the number of people on the board seemed to make sense, an a seven-member board seems to be a good size as long as people are willing to participate. 04:00:30 PM (00:36:57) Vicki York stated she is much more discouraged and questioned whether it is worth her time to come to meetings. 04:00:42 PM (00:37:09) Michael Walner noted autonomy, mastery and purpose are three key elements for any organization, and he hears struggles about a purpose. He feels the board should determine its purpose. 04:01:45 PM (00:38:12) Cyndy Andrus reviewed the process for getting people on the board, noting it is important for people to understand the purpose of the board and its purview before being appointed. 04:03:13 PM (00:39:40) Michael Walner asked if the board needs to have a meeting next month or if it wants to identify a date for a retreat. 04:03:33 PM (00:40:00) Chris Saunders stated the board has regularly scheduled monthly meetings, but the Chair can choose to cancel the meeting if there is no business for that meeting. He noted the next regular meeting date is Valentine’s Day, but the board can move to a different date if it so chooses. 04:05:22 PM (00:41:49) Pat Jacobs suggested setting agenda t the next meeting, noting she would be willing to provide written input. 04:05:36 PM (00:42:03) Michael Walner suggested that the meeting be moved to February 28, noting he will contact all of the board members to see if that date works for them. 04:05:59 PM (00:42:26) Chris Saunders noted that staff continues to work on the revisions to the zone code, and there may be substantive information regarding those changes, including ADUs, by that meeting. 04:06:14 PM (00:42:41) Michael Walner suggested scheduling a retreat for April; those board members present agreed. 04:07:03 PM (00:43:30) Vicki York stated she feels a mixture of professionals and people having a strong interest in historic preservation is important, noting she is not in favor of a board that is totally comprised of professionals. 04:08:08 PM (00:44:35) Michael Walner voiced agreement, stating he feels the board should be a dynamic group of individuals. 04:08:54 PM (00:45:21) Responding to Pat Jacobs, Chris Saunders stated the current composition of the board includes three professionals, from a variety of fields, some residents of historic districts and some at-large members. He noted that sometimes a person will qualify in more than one category, so they can be moved around do a different category to meet that composition. 04:10:27 PM (00:46:54) Michael Walner noted that if the next meeting is held on February 28, the March meeting could be cancelled and the retreat held in April. 04:11:15 PM (00:47:42) Vicki York suggested that a clear understanding of this board’s purpose and duties is needed before any changes are considered. She would like to hear from the Community Development Director as the first step in that process. F. 04:15:05 PM (00:51:32) FYI/Discussion. Chris Saunders stated the City and Downtown Bozeman Partnership have collaborated for an update on an inventory of properties in B-3 area, and that information is now being reviewed by the State. He then reported that the Commission is looking at the demolition code amendments, with final action scheduled for late February. He then provided updates on the demotion of two historic properties. The house at the corner of West College Street and South 6th Avenue is being torn down, with a replacement house that fits the neighborhood scale to be constructed on the site. The City had invoked a two-year stay on demolition of the house at the corner of South Willson Avenue and West Curtiss Street. That house has been neglected for the past two years and the two-year stay will expire in February, so he anticipates it will be removed shortly thereafter. As of this date, no proposal for that site has been submitted. 1. 04:18:02 PM (00:54:29) Board questions and general discussion. Pat Jacobs noted three workshops or informational meetings on short-term rentals have been scheduled. She then asked about the project on the old Pizza Hut site; Chris Saunders noted it is adjacent to, but not in, a historic district. He stated the property does lie within the neighborhood conservation overlay, and the proposed development includes locating the building close to West Babcock Street with parking behid it to provide a greater buffer for the residences to the south. G. 04:21:01 PM (00:57:28) Adjournment. There being no further business to come before the board, the meeting was adjourned.