HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-23-2010 Historic Preservation Advisory Board MinutesMinutes for Bozeman Historic Preservation Board (BHPAB) meeting
November 23, 2010
In attendance: Mark Hufstetler (Chair), Lora Dalton, Bruce Brown, Crystal Alegria, Dale Martin, Boone Nolte, Ryan Olson, Jane Klockman, Jared Infanger, Jecyn Bremer, Anne Sherwood (Secretary),
Courtney Kramer (City Liaison). Quorum established.
Guests: Christy Howie, tax abatement applicant
I. Meeting was called to order at 6:40pm.
II. Motion to approve the minutes was made. Minutes were approved by LD and seconded by BN. Minutes were approved unanimously.
III. There was no public comment.
IV. There was no ex parte communication.
V. Introduction of Christy Howie, homeowner.
VI. Project for Tax Abatement: Christy Howie’s home at 516 South Grand Avenue.
CK introduced the project. Suggested tax abatement to owners. Qualifies for COA. Does it qualify for tax abatement?
Christy Howie talked about the project. Trying to return the home to more original character. Not altering the footprint or the foundation. Leaving original windows.
LD asked about “going up.” Not visible from the street but addition will go up in the rear of the home.
MH asked about the awning windows. Are they conflicting with the tax abatement ordinance? MH asks if window replacement must be historically appropriate and match historic materials.
MH asked if replacement windows need to be wood exterior or can they be clad?
MH asked about the roof. Amount of addition creates a substantial alteration to the roofline? Board debated the language of the ordinance and the changes proposed. MH says we need to
establish precedence with this admirable project. CK points out the ordinance is not a perfect document. MH countered we need to follow it regardless of its imperfection. CK added we
could approve this and recommend that staff alter the ordinance. MH retorted that we need to honor it as it is currently written.
CH added that the ordinance is vague in a lot of areas. If you want to approve a project for tax abatement you should send the ordinance back for alterations. Construction schedule is
that building permit application went in today. Would like to have project finished by end of July.
MH asked at what point in construction process does abatement come in? CK added usually in beginning but not much precedence.
MH says this is a project that he likes but is concerned about conforming to the ordinance.
JK asked if we could amend the ordinance easily. CK says no.
MH says we have 3 choices: deny, approve or delay.
AS made a motion to a vote on whether the Howie project meets the criteria for the ordinance as we intend tax abatement to be used.
LD says thoughtful addition. In keeping with the house and neighborhood. Extends current shape and roofline and would recommend having the windows be wood but otherwise, approves of
the project.
JK thinks it’s a very good project. Would wonder why new windows aren’t wood and comes within 95% of what we’ve outlined in the ordinance.
RO voices concerns about the literal interpretation of the ordinance and east elevation and change in roof shape.
JB said ordinance allows for difference in materials but not shape. Should address that. Windows must be historically appropriate and matching historical materials. Asked CK if this
can be continued? CK says anything is possible except planning office is so busy that this won’t get before commission until March at earliest.
DM is agnostic on the project and very leery of homage to original intent of flawed ordinances that we aren’t smart enough to meet or understand and we should have a living constitution.
Why are we trying to put our square peg into the round hole?
JI shares concerns about roof shape.
BN shares concerns but hates holding homeowner to something that we created but is flawed.
BB asked if commission votes or we? We make a recommendation to the commission and they vote on it. Asked why we vote on this now since projects evolve as they occur. Finds process awkward
for number of reasons. Doesn’t think ordinance leaves a lot of wiggle room. Says literally shape of the roof can’t change even though he likes the project and thinks it adds to the neighborhood.
Literally it goes against the ordinance. Said we should wait till the end of the project. Would vote against it if he has to vote now. Thinks that’s a mistake as he likes the project.
MH thinks it’s a nice project. Will be a handsome property when finished. But agrees with BB in that sees some of discussion as attempts to rationalize language in the ordinance. Apologizes
for opening Pandora’s box. Can’t vote in favor of it but would recommend deferring it to set a point when we vote on it in the spring once project is well underway. Have subcommittee
draft a letter to planning director offering replacement text for pages in the ordinance that need it.
CA feels it’s all well and good but doesn’t fit in with what the planning office can handle. CK says policy has been tax abatement must be applied for before building permit to prevent
retroactive tax abatements but sincere that staff has been trying to get new ordinances since August and not going anywhere.
AS says she feels responsible as we wrote this ordinance in 2008. Feels the project is in the spirit of the ordinance.
- For the motion: LD, JK, DM, BN, CA, AS
Opposed to the motion: RO, JB, BB, MH, JI
RO asks what’s the proper way for us to address this? MH is disappointed in the way we interpreted the ordinance. MH says need to recommend to make a formal recommendation to planning
director to not grant tax abatement until occupancy permit is granted.
RO asks how we go about changing policy. CK says must be changed by commission.
RO makes a motion that our professional subcommittee address the tax abatement ordinance in the issues discussed tonight. BN seconds the motion. Unanimously approved.
VII. Chair's Report – MH, Chair
DM asks structural information of the Brewery wall. Commission asked the same question. Staff: what will happen to neighborhood if wall is lost? Applicant: What will it cost to support
the wall?
Subcommittees: Need to reinvigorate subcommittee attendance. Revisited assignments. Professional subcommittee is LD, BN, MH, PR, LG. JB.
December meeting will be cancelled for a holiday party at BB’s instead.
VIII. Policy and Planning Subcommittee
Bonding new construction is in the works. MH was approached by Commissioner Mehl that a majority of commissioners are in favor of a demo by neglect ordinance. CK says she was directed
by her boss not to work on construction bonding and demo by neglect, as city manager does not believe there is support for it in the commission. LD thinks while Northeast neighborhood
is hot, we should move forward with bonding issue.
Need to be photographing signs for sign ordinance.
Next meeting will be on 12/14/10 at 525 South Black at 6:30pm.
IX. Education and Outreach
No meeting last month but successful cemetery tour.
Next meeting will be after the retreat.
X. Staff Liaison:
Applying for Preserve America grant. Grant application drafts for structural analysis of East Willson School and Northern Pacific Passenger Depot.
Commission now requires information to be on the commission’s desk 10 days before the meetings.
Costs 40k/year to heat East Willson School. Roof leaks, water damage on foundation level. Great adaptive reuse possibilities. Value in tax credit comes if you can get the building for
a reasonable amount, then the tax credits have more value.
COA numbers are high because of hail damage.
City has 150k save America’s Treasures grant. Only two applications are for Eagles East wall with its deteriorating brick. Ellen Theater wants to redo the marquee with a recreated 1919
marquee. Trying to steer them to use the money to restore interior plasterwork. Lawyer of property owner wants to use the money to stabilize brothel and Montgomery Ward building. MH
suggested city hall archway should be installed in Optimist Park.
BHPAB retreat: 1/8/11. Time TBA.
Holiday party 12/19/10 at BB’s hopefully.
XI. Meeting adjourned. 8:30pm.