The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3-27-14 Historic Preservation Advisory Board MinutesMinutes of the March 27, 2014 meeting Members Present: Lora Dalton (chair), Steve Keuch, Courtney Kramer (staff liaison), Lisa Verwys, Ryan Olson, Matt Kennedy, Mark Hufstetler, Jillian Bowers I. Call to order- meeting was called to order at 6:34 pm II. Approval of prior meeting minutes- Minutes from the February 27 meeting were unanimously approved as presented III. Public comment- none IV. Disclosure of ex parte communication- none V. Introduction of invited guests- Marsha Fulton and Crystal Alegria of the Extreme History Project, City Attorney Anna Saverud VI. Decision Items a. Collaboration with Extreme History Project (EHP) and allocation of $500 in funding to support walking tours i. Crystal Alegria reported on the fall 2013 walking tours that received funding from the board. 8 tours were given in October 2013 (2 cemetery tours and 6 downtown tours). 52 people attended the tours (all locals, no tourists), good turnout especially given the off-season and the lack of a marketing budget. ii. EHP would like to expand the walking tour program beginning in May 2014. 7 walking tours have been developed in collaboration with Derek Strahn and Dale Martin. Tours would occur on a regular basis with up to 6 tour guides. EHP requests $500 in funding support from the BHPAB to support walking tour program. iii. BHPAB has $900 in budget (fiscal year ends June 30, 2014) and no plans in the foreseeable future to use the funds. Motion made (SK) to approve $500 allocation of funds, seconded (MK), and unanimously passed. b. Discussion of the preservation and demolition memo i. Issue 1- definition of historic properties 1. General discussion and agreement that the 1984 survey is outdated with erroneous information and that it should not be used as a basis for definition of historic property, but that it may contain information useful to future surveys. MH- 1984 survey was not prepared to professional standards and may not/would not stand up to legal scrutiny. 2. If a new cultural resources survey (option 2 in memo) were required to define historic properties, it could be funded by community development block grants, surcharges on major COAs (this fund currently has $80,000; $15,000 currently bookmarked for survey work this spring on commercial properties), or from the general fund. Discussion about the difficulties in keeping a survey updated; issues with a survey being a snapshot in time that may no longer be accurate as structures age and change 3. Discussion regarding option 3 (age- 50 years) as definition for historic property. LV- concerned that this leaves younger properties vulnerable. MH- any younger properties that would have qualified as historic have been demolished. MH- personal recommendation would be a combination of options 2 & 3: require evaluation of any property over 50 years old for potential historic property eligibility prior to demolition. JB- concerned about financial burden for evaluation placed on homeowners and concerned that homeowners will invest significant amounts of money prior to finding out that they must have their property evaluated; education should be part of formal recommendation. CK- have required individuals to finance evaluations in the past for structures in conservation overlay district. General discussion regarding need for education of property owners and architects, need for dissemination of information/education through materials distributed by city staff. LD- education could also come from the board’s outreach activities. 4. MH moves to support a proposal to require properties over 50 years old to be evaluated prior to demolition for eligibility to the National Register or potential contributing status to National Register Historic District. Seconded (RO) and passed unanimously. ii. Issue 2- Affirmative Maintenance 1. Discussion begins with understanding that ordinance is written as a broad/basic, that “good condition” refers to weather tight and secure, and that enforcement is TBD and not expected to be common occurrence. 2. MK- How will owners know if they have a historic property if there is not a survey of historic properties? Use of “historic property” may depend on which definition is adopted in issue 1. Discussion regarding substituting “conservation overlay district” for “historic property” in the ordinance, MH- concerns over including phrase “historic character” which is not easily definable and which may no longer exist in a property that is in disrepair. LD- a broader definition may be more workable. Anna Saverud- ordinance must be construed to address specific properties. 3. Additional discussion regarding concerns over how issues of economic disparity will be addressed. 4. BHPAB recommends that the City Commission takes this discussion into consideration. iii. Issue 3- Timing of demolition and redevelopment permits 1. CK- deals with ability to give preliminary yes or no so that there is not incentive to let a property fall into neglect. Chris Saunders- gives higher level of protection for historic properties. LD- issue and recommendations are in line with past BHPAB discussions iv. Issue 4- Clarifying two year stay of demolition 1. Clarification of code necessary to ensure that implied meaning and public interpretation matches. 2. Discussion regarding what occurs during a stay of demolition: time allows for alternate proposals to be made by interested parties; there is no requirement for property owners to let interested parties access the property in order to propose alternate solutions. LD- there is no incentive for property owners to find alternate solutions when they can simply wait out the stay. RO- financial incentive for owners (not cheap to let a property sit unused). Is there a way to encourage property owners to find alternate solutions or engage with the community for alternate proposals? MH- suggests addition to provision: if a demolition has been denied, subsequent requests should be accompanied by a description of efforts made to preserve historic structure. 3. Lack of clarity regarding liability of properties during a stay of demolition. Is the city or the property owner liable for the structure during a stay? VII. Chair’s Report a. Expiring terms i. 7 board member terms expire in June 2014 (Mark Hufstetler, Jillian Bowers, Ryan Olson, Lisa Verwys, Jessie Nunn, Nicole Becker, Lora Dalton). Board members should be thinking about recruitment. ii. RO will not be continuing on the board and will need to pass on committee duties, specifically regarding Historic Preservation Awards. iii. Possibility of reducing the size of the board via bylaw revision. MH and LD will work on this. b. Budget i. After approval of Extreme History Project allocation, there is $400 remaining in the budget. Ideas for use are welcome. ii. Possible use of funds for Bill Grabow oral history. CK will speak with Bill about sitting for an interview and LV will speak with historian Betsy Watry regarding a proposal for conducting the interview. VIII. Committee Reports a. Outreach i. LV, SK, BL met regarding history alliance; sketched out broad plan for a meeting in September. Committee will meet again April 14, 6:30pm at Coldsmoke Coffeehouse to finalize a name and meeting details. As requested, LV will send a reminder to board so other interested members can attend. ii. LD has Pete Brown’s presentation as MP3, CK will work on making it available via the website. If anyone wants a copy, email LD (32mb powerpoint and 69mb recording) IX. Staff Liaison Report a. Received COA application for Willson Auditorium. Recommending that thorough documentation of space occur prior to renovations. Modifications are not appropriate historically. b. Working on Community Development Block Grant to evaluate the Conservation Overlay District as a zoning approach c. Re-surveying 100 properties in the B-3 area. Findings of potentially historic properties will be reported to the board. d. Streetlamps (SAT grant) are ready to be installed. e. Story Mansion appraisal is in, not currently slated as an agenda item for the City Commission X. Meeting adjourned at 9:05 pm. Next meeting set for April 24, 6:30 PM End of Minutes Secretary: Lisa Verwys