HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-26-10 Historic Preservation Advisory Board Minutes
3
BHPAB Minutes
August 26, 2010
Unadopted Minutes by: Courtney Kramer, Historic Preservation Officer
Members in attendance: Ryan Olson, Jane Klockman, Lesley Gilmore,
Dale Martin, Mark Hufstetler (chair), Lora Dalton, Anne Sherwood
(arrived late), Courtney Kramer (Historic Preservation Officer), Carson
Taylor (Commission Liaison), Tim McHarg (Planning Director).
I.Call to order at 6:28 pm.
II.No minutes to adopt as minutes from the June BHPAB meeting and the July BHPAB/
City Commission joint meeting were not sent to the BHPAB.
III.No ex parte communication reported between BHPAB members and Commissioners.
IV.Introduction of guests:
a.CK introduced Anne Owen and Cole Sherwood, applicants for Tax Abatement for
Historic Preservation for their project in the Cooper Park Historic District at 404
West Curtiss Street.
V.Project Review:
a.Anne Owen explained that refinancing the house lead to the need to redo the
foundation. The rehab project will add a foundation below all of the house,
including the existing remodels and porch additions, but will not expand the
footprint of the building. Anne explains that CK contacted her about the potential
for utilizing the Tax Abatement, and they thought it sounded like a good thing.
b.BHPAB questions:
i.LG asked about the procedure for lifting the house.
1.Cole Sherman responds that they will lift the building in place, dig
out the foundation and additional dirt beneath the building, and set
the structure back down.
ii.
1.CS responded that they might use them for landscaping purposes
iii.LG asked if the window wells will be level with grade?
1.AO responds that the window wells will be level with grade.
Perhaps they could reuse the foundation stones to build the
window wells?
iv.LD asked if the house height will remain the same?
1.
v.MH asked if any other exterior work will happen at this time?
1.AO: only potential repainting due to the nature of the project.
3
2
c.BHPAB Discussion:
i.LG noted that the Standards established in section 3.30.050 C 4 of the Tax
Abatement Ordinance require that If replaced, the exterior of the new
LG
wonders how the BHPAB can work with an applicant to satisfy that
standard?
1.MH suggests some kind of printing or otherwise imitative
application be used to mimic the appearance of the historic stone
foundation while allowing the new foundation to be installed.
d.Motion:
i.LG motions to recommend tax abetment for the property at 404 West
Curtis Street on the condition that where the visible foundation is currently
stone the new foundation shall have the appearance of rough ashlar
foundation stones through whatever means possible, and granting the
Historic Preservation Officer discretion in evaluating the mechanism for
achieving the appearance of rough ashlar stone on the new foundation.
1.DM seconds
2.Motion Passes
e.Discussion examination and justification for BHPAB motion:
i.The BHPAB individually and collectively supports the project strongly.
The building will continue to contribute to the Cooper Park Historic
District after the project is completed. The condition imposed by the
BHPAB is an effort to adhere to, but the condition can be administered
with flexibility on the part of the Historic Preservation Officer given the
economic realities of the project.
ii.In regards to the condition imposed:
1.About one third of the current foundation is of visible stone
2.Tax abatement rules require replacement of the foundation in the
same material, or of evocative appearance in another material such
as imitative stone.
3.If commercially available and of minimal additional expense, the
property owners will be required to replace the publicly-visible
part of the foundation in either stone (façade) or, more likely, in
concrete cast or scribed to resemble rough ashlar.
a.This is subject to research, knowledge and assessment of
the City Planning Staff.
4.Among board members attending the range of feeling regarding
the foundation condition ranged from (apparent) indifference or
low priority on the point to strong feeling for honoring this tax
2
1
abatement requirement and keeping precedence in anticipation of
future applications that will be more difficult.
VI.
a.Feedback from the July commission meeting:
i.Minute taking and communicating information seemed to be the most
important specific issue. MH noted that the organization structure of the
minutes needs to ensure that the minutes are prepared and complete and
reflect the intellectual and academic nuances of a conversation.
Henceforth Dale has volunteered to prepare a conclusion of bullet points
describing and summarizing the discussion. Minutes also need to be
an invitation for a coaching session on taking minutes.
1.RO suggested that 6 months down the road the BHPAB ask the
commission to edit and review the minutes and offer constructive
criticism.
2.CK suggested that a BHPAB member attend the Commission
meeting about items the BHPAB has offered specific advice on.
3.LD notes that this would be good for developing and minting a
relationship with the commission.
4.TMcH suggested the BHPAB include the opposite side of the
argument and include in the minutes why the BHPAB considered
and discarded the other options.
5.CT suggested the BHPAB focus the City Commission comments
on the culture of the comments and additional depth of discussion.
ii.Feedback from members:
1.LD hapy with how friendly and rational the conversation was
2.DM impressed with the specificity of the conversation
3.MH was surprised with how specific the questions were impressed
the it points out all the specific things the BHPAB is responsible
for
4.DM it seemed like they were interested in particular policies
5.CT expected it to go much more like the DRB meeting. Believes
that what the commission needs is a deeper understanding of the
to debunk the myth that the BHPAB wants to save every building.
They want demo by neglect.
The next stem might be a tour of the historic districts, illustrating
the importance of historic preservation and what happens when it
1
0
recent tour with the commission.
6.DM notes the importance of including marginal sites as a way of
communicating the process to explain why places matter.
7.MH asks how something like that gets arranged? Through the
planning department?
8.Ro thought that in the interim the BHPAB can brainstorm sites to
visit.
9.MH believed such a tour could take about 2 hours and should
include existing and potential historic districts. Perhaps planning
this should be delegated to the Education and Outreach committee?
b.MH noted a reminder for attendance of subcommittee and general meetings
c.MH also inquired as to the location of the Historic District signange. We were
promised it AGES ago!
d.Trying to schedule an architectural tour of historic properties for BHAPB
members:
i.Anne has asked Thomas Bitnar about hosting
ii.Jane mentioned the Neutra house on Sourdough
iii.
excellent tour.
iv.The BHPAB will try to schedule an architectural tour for their October
meeting.
VII.Planning and Policy Subcommittee report:
a.Lora Dalton (chair) notes the resubmission of a demolition by neglect ordinance.
The BHPAB met in August and spent time discussion previous interactions with
the commissions on that point. The BHPAB is currently preparing to offer a
proposal in September for Demo by neglect. The Planning and policy group felt
like as public advisory board they need to recognize that the board presents the
policy initiative to the commission as citizens.
b.LD noted that the historic sign ordinance has been tabled given the pressure on
the BHPAB for the Tax Abatement.
c.
VIII.Education and Outreach Subcommittee report:
a.Ryan Olson (Chair) asked that the minutes reflect an official thanking of Ron
Gompertz in his efforts for getting the ad up under the Story und the Stars film
and Bon Ton District Walking Tour.
th
b.Formalization of the October 30 Cemetery Tour
i.Jam Webster will give tour
ii.Dale Martin will give a lecture before hand
0
/
iii.Do we want to run an ad for the Cemetery tour?
c.Preservation Awards
i.Some discussion about the appropriateness of combining the Preservation
Awards with the Beautification Awards. CK notes that staff time has been
drastically reduced, and combining the awards allows Planning
Department staff to properly plan the programs while splitting the
workload. The motion to combine awards passes on a 4-3 vote.
ii.Award nominations are due September 8
iii.The BHPAB will receive nomination packets in mid-September
iv.The BHPAB will do a tour of all of the nominated properties on Sunday,
th
September 19
st
v.The BHPAB will vote on awards on September 21.
vi.The Awards ceremony is planned for the evening of November 5, at the
Beall Park Center
IX.Staff Liaison Report:
a.The Montana History Conference is at the end of September. Attendance of the
Thursday, September 30 Historic Preservation Commission session is a $25
application fee, and the BHPAB has previously agreed to budget $200 for
continuing education of the membership.
i.RO makes the motion to authorize a $25 stipend to reimburse attendees of
the session.
ii.AS seconds
iii.Motion passes
iv.Lora and Jane will attend the September 30 training in Helena.
X.Meeting adjourns at 8:51 pm
Action Items:
CK: chase down June BHPAB minutes and July BHPAB/ Commission minutes
CK: get new contact list/ role call list into binder
CK: Press release noting the first tax abatement project approved through Ordinance
1744
office.
CK: follow up with Debbie Arkel- where are the signs?
CK: ads for the cemetery tour?
CK: 2010-2011 BHPAB budget?
/