Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBHPCMinutes_2009_07_02Brookings Historic Preservation Commission July 2, 2009 A meeting of the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission was held on Thursday, July 2, 2009 at 4:00 p.m. in City Hall. Members present: Pam Merchant, Jerry McCollough, Janet Gritzner, Dennis Willert, Pat Powers, Joanita Kant and Mary Bibby. Shari Thornes, City Clerk, was also present. Chairperson Willert called the meeting to order at 4:04 p.m. Adoption of agenda. A motion was made by McCollough, seconded by Bibby, to approve the agenda as amended. All present voted yes; motion carried. Minutes. A motion was made by McCollough, seconded by Kant, to approve the June minutes as printed. All present voted yes; motion carried. Schedule next monthly meeting. Tentative date – August 6th at 4:00 p.m. Thornes noted that a special meeting on the Local Register project may be needed. Central Residential Historic District—National Register District: County Commission Expansion Plans. Bibby attended the June 23rd County Commission meeting. The Commission approved the supplemental budget expenditure of $260,000 to purchase the two properties on 4th Street. The question was asked if the money could be used for anything else should the referendum be passed and the answer was no. That action is referable. A special election is scheduled for August 11th. Request for Information from Brookings County Administrative Facility Task Force Request. Chairman Willert received the following request for information in writing from Al Heuton: June 4, 2009 Dennis Willert, Chairman Brookings Historical Preservation Commission % City of Brookings 311 3rd Avenue Brookings, SD 57006 RE: County Administrative Facility Task Force Request Dear Mr. Willert: The purpose of this letter is to two fold. First, the Administrative Facility Task Force would like to provide the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission with information regarding our role and method of operation; and second, to request the assistance of the Commission in our efforts to define appropriate potential locations for future county administrative facilities in the Central Business District area, in the event that new construction becomes the preferred alternative of the County Commissioners. The Administrative Facility Task Force is comprised of two members of each of the following organizations - Brookings County Commission, City of Brookings, Downtown Brookings, Inc., and Brookings Economic Development Corporation. Primary staff for each entity also attends the meetings. I was chosen by the group to facilitate the effort. The role of the task force was determined to be: 1. To explore potential locations for a county administrative facility, or a joint county/city facility, including future law enforcement facility needs. 2. To consider the impact of county/city administrative facility locations on the Central Business District. 3. To present findings of the task force to the County Commissioners and City Council. The consensus of the task force members is that the task force is performing in a fact finding capacity. The task force has not been charged with the role of selecting priorities, determining facility design or architectural features, nor is it functioning in a decision making capacity related to land acquisition. All information and discussions of the task force will be disclosed to the Brookings County Commission and Brookings City Council for their consideration and eventual distribution to the public. To assist the task force in this fact finding effort we are requesting the assistance of the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission with the collection of information and the provision of certain opinions regarding property within the study area, as follows: 1. Can you provide an address list, or map, identifying structures and sites located within the area depicted upon the attached map that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places? 2. Can you provide a list, or map, of contributing properties and the criteria utilized in Brookings to arrive at the selections? 3. For those properties that are not listed on the National Register, or have not been determined to be contributing, which structures, in the Historic Preservation Commission's opinion, would create the least negative impact upon the district if relocated or demolished? Please rank them from the least negative to most negative impact on scale of 1 to 5. As the task force hopes to provide a report to the County Commissioners in a timely manner, it would be extremely helpful if this information could be provided by mid to late July. Any assistance you might be able to provide would be very much appreciated. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding this request. We would also appreciate being informed as soon as possible of the Historic Preservation Commission's willingness and ability to assist with collection of the requested data. Thank you for your timely consideration of this request and interest in ensuring a positive outcome for the Central Business District and the Brookings Community. Sincerely, AI Heuton, Facilitator 605-697-8103 al@brookingssd.us The Commission members reviewed a draft response letter prepared by staff. ACTION: A motion was made by McCollough, seconded by Bibby, to appro ve the following letter of response. Discussion: McCollough said he is offended at the process and feels more than two public employees meeting to discuss public issues constitutes an open meeting. He also considers the signing of nondisclosure agreements that will result in spending public funds is violation of open meeting practices. AMENDMENT: A motion was made by McCollough, seconded by Bibby, to amend the draft letter inserting suggestions made by the State Historic Preservation Office pertaining to contributing and non contributing; however, retaining the statement regarding reversibility. ORIGINAL LANGUAGE: “Your letter and email also asked questions regarding contributing versus non- contributing status. The Brookings Historic Preservation Commission is particularly concerned about these comments and their emphasis. The Brookings Historic Preservation Commission’s overarching responsibility is to preserve, promote and develop the historical resources of the City. In the case of these districts, the Commission’s goal is to protect the character of each district as a whole, which doesn’t mean just the contributing properties. We must emphasize that non-contributing doesn’t mean that a building doesn’t have historical value. These structures may still contribute to the feel and setting of the district as a whole due to scale, size and design. When the Brookings Historical Preservation Commission evaluates an impact on a district, it doesn’t just look at contributing buildings. If a non-contributing structure is removed and replaced with a parking lot or new building, that action has the potential to negatively impact the district more so than just leaving a non- contributing building in its place. Non-contributing buildings often are of the same scale and age and provide continuity to the building rhythm and convey a sense of historic environment. These features and their relationships should be examined not only within the exact boundaries of the property, but also between the property and its surroundings. This is particularly important for districts. Another factor is reversibility. Non-contributing structures in a district can become contributing due to age, removal of an inappropriate feature, or restoration of a key architectural element. A few commercial buildings are currently under this consideration and most recently, a house in the Central District was officially designated as contributing after an extensive renovation. However, once a building is removed, it is lost forever.” AMENDED LANGUAGE: “Your letter and email also asked questions regarding contributing versus non- contributing status. The Brookings Historic Preservation Commission is particularly concerned about these comments and their emphasis. The Brookings Historic Preservation Commission’s overarching responsibility is to preserve, promote and develop the historical resources of the City. In the case of these districts, the Commission’s goal is to protect the character of each district as a whole. Properties deemed non-contributing within a historic district are generally outside the district’s period of significance or have been substantially altered since the period of significance. However, when the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission evaluates an impact on a district, it doesn’t just look at contributing buildings. While non-contributing buildings do not contribute to the significance of the district, replacing a non-contributing building with a new office building or parking lot could be more of an intrusion than leaving the non-contributing building in place. For example, a parking lot or new office building is an intrusive replacement for a non-contributing residence which is of the same residential character as the contributing buildings in the residential historic district. Non-contributing buildings often are of the same scale, size, setback, design and age as the contributing properties and provide continuity to the building rhythm within the historic district. These features and their relationships should be examined not only within the exact boundaries of the property, but also between the property and its surroundings. This is particularly important for districts. Another factor is reversibility. Non-contributing structures in a district can become contributing due to age, removal of an inappropriate feature, or restoration of a key architectural element. A few commercial buildings are currently under this consideration and most recently, a house in the Central District was officially designated as contributing after an extension renovation. However, once a building is demolished it is lost forever.” A second amendment was made by McCollough, seconded by Merchant, to strike the following section: “Another alternative would be the adaptive reuse of another existing structure, such as the former bank building. However, if new construction is the preferred alternative, the Commission recommends the Task Force consider areas outside the district boundaries, perhaps on the periphery of Brookings.” ACTION: On the amendments as presented, all present voted yes; motion carried on the amendments. On the final motion as amended, all present voted yes; motion carried. The following letter will be provided to Mr. Heuton and copies provided to the City Manager. Al Heuton, Executive Director Brookings Economic Development Corporation Brookings Chamber of Commerce PO Box 431 Brookings, SD 57006 RE: County Administrative Task Force Request for Information Dear Mr. Heuton: Thank you for the request for information and the opportunity to be included in these discussions. As you are aware, the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission is a commission of city government whose purpose is to promote the inspiration, pleasure and enrichment of the citizens of Brookings and to identify, document, preserve, promote and develop the historical resources of the city. The powers and responsibilities of the Commission are set forth in SDCL 1-19B and City Ordinance 09-03. As a unit of government, this item was placed on the Commission’s published agenda and was discussed at the regularly scheduled July 2, 2009 monthly meeting, which was the next regular meeting following your written request. The area as described in your June 4th letter and map involves three of the four National Register Districts within the City of Brookings: the Brookings Commercial Historic District (listed April 19, 1988) in its entity and portions of the Central Residential Historic District (listed June 4, 1994 and amended in 2001 to add Central Elementary and the 1921 former Middle School) and the University Residential Historic District (listed February 12, 1999). The fourth district, Sexauer Seed District, was listed November 8, 2001 and is comprised of 10 agricultural elevator structures adjacent to the railroad tracks and immediately south of the Commercial District. Note that there are several individually listed National Register properties in Brookings, some of which are not associated with a District. A complete list is enclosed. The district boundary and address list information that you specifically requested is widely available and is part of public record in the City’s official zoning maps and comprehensive planning documents including the Brookings Historic Preservation Plan, which was adopted by the City Council in on March 12, 2001. A copy of the Plan is enclosed in this packet. The Plan was also adopted as part of the City of Brookings Vision 2020 Comprehensive Plan on February 11, 2001. Note that the boundaries for the National Register Districts in Brookings are as set by the verbal boundary description and the UTMs in the original nominations. However, individual property designations may have changed due to errors noted in the original listing, modifications to the structure making it eligible as contributing or ineligible, or the loss of a structure due to moving or demolition. If you have questions about a specific property, please contact the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission or the State Historic Preservation Office. The National Register is the official Federal list of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture. National Register properties have significance to the prehistory or history of their community, State, or the Nation. The Register is administered by the National Park Service. Nominations for listing historic properties come from State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs) and, for properties owned or controlled by the United States Government, Federal Preservation Officers (FPOs). Properties are also determined eligible for listing at the request of SHPOs and Federal agencies. While SHPOs and FPOs nominate properties for National Register listing, private individuals and organizations, local governments, and American Indian tribes often initiate the process and prepare the necessary documentation. A professional review board in each State considers each property proposed for listing and makes a recommendation on its eligibility. Communities having a certified local historic preservation program, called Certified Local Governments (CLGs), also make recommendations to the SHPO on the eligibility of properties within their community. The Brookings Historic Preservation Commission is a Certified Local Government. The designation and evaluation process used for listing properties and districts on the National Register of Historic Places is determined on a Federal level. In response to your question regarding what criteria was utilized to arrive at those selections, the criteria for evaluation is defined by the National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior, and not by a local or state preservation organization. The National Register Criteria for Evaluation define the scope of the National Register of Historic Places; they identify the range of resources and kinds of significance that will qualify properties for listing in the National Register. The Criteria are written broadly to recognize the wide variety of historic properties associated with our prehistory and history. II. NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION Criteria for Evaluation: The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that pos sess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and: A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B. That are associated with the lives of significant persons in or past; or C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Criteria Considerations: Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the National Register. However, such properties will qualify if they are integral parts of districts that do meet the criteria or if they fall within the following categories: a. A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or historical importance; or b. A building or structure removed from its original location but which is primarily significant for architectural value, or which is the surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person or event; or c. A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building associated with his or her productive life; or d. A cemetery that derives its primary importance from graves of persons of transcendent importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or from association with historic events; or e. A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same association has survived; or f. A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance; or g. A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance. Residents and owners in these neighborhoods initiate and request the surveys of the community and of the neighborhoods as potential districts. The Historic Preservation Commission facilitates that process working with the State Historic Preservation Office in hiring a National Register consultant with appropriate National Park Service qualifications to prepare a nomination. The basis for the decision about whether a property or area has sufficient historic significance to qualify for the National Register of Historic Places is not solely based on the opinion a local preservation commission or its members. The Commission will make recommendation; however, as outlined above, the State Historic Preservation Office and State Historical Society Board of Trustees must concur before a nomination is even sent to the Park Service. At the national level, the Park Service has rejected nominations or modified those nominations. Your letter and email also asked questions regarding contributing versus non-contributing status. The Brookings Historic Preservation Commission is particularly concerned about these comments and their emphasis. The Brookings Historic Preservation Commission’s overarching responsibility is to preserve, promote and develop the historical resources of the City. In the case of these districts, the Commission’s goal is to protect the character of each district as a whole. Properties deemed non-contributing within a historic district are generally outside the district’s period of significance or have been substantially altered since the period of significance. However, when the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission evaluates an impact on a district, it doesn’t just look at contributing buildings. While non- contributing buildings do not contribute to the significance of the district, replacing a non- contributing building with a new office building or parking lot could be more of an intrusion than leaving the non-contributing building in place. For example, a parking lot or new office building is an intrusive replacement for a non-contributing residence which is of the same residential character as the contributing buildings in the residential historic district. Non-contributing buildings often are of the same scale, size, setback, design and age as the contributing properties and provide continuity to the building rhythm within the historic district. These features and their relationships should be examined not only within the exact boundaries of the property, but also between the property and its surroundings. This is particularly important for districts. Another factor is reversibility. Non-contributing structures in a district can become contributing due to age, removal of an inappropriate feature, or restoration of a key architectural element. A few commercial buildings are currently under this consideration and most recently, a house in the Central District was officially designated as contributing after an extension renovation. However, once a building is demolished it is lost forever. In a separate correspondence, the question was asked about updated surveys of the Brookings Commercial Historic District. The community had a National Register of Historic Places Survey done 1985 and 1986 as one of the requirements of becoming a National Park Service “Certified Local Government.” The Brookings Commercial Historic District was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1988. The project the Commission and State are currently working has not been completed. To date, a consultant was hired to conduct a reconnaissance level re-survey of the 60 building Brookings Commercial Historic District and the District periphery/environs to evaluate possible boundary adjustments and update contributing and non-contributing status. The Commission had a preliminary review of the findings in February 2009. Many questions were raised, but a second meeting with SHPO hasn’t been scheduled yet. Any changes to the District must be taken through Park Service process, which takes time. The boundaries stand as currently listed from 1988. The Brookings Historic Preservation Commission is charged with the protection, promotion and development of all the city’s historic resources. It is not within the Commission’s scope and we believe it is contrary to the Commission’s mission to provide a ranking or placement of value of one property over another. Again, the Commission’s goal is to protect the character of the districts as a whole and not a piecemeal approach. With respect to potential county and/or city expansion locations, on January 10, 2008, the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission unanimously adopted the following resolution regarding the Brookings County expansion plans which urged the reuse of the 1921 building for County offices. The BHPC still stands by that resolution. Resolution Regarding the Proposed Brookings County Expansion Plans WHEREAS, the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission is statutorily charged with the responsibility to preserve, promote and develop the historical resources of the City, and WHEREAS, the Brookings County Courthouse and Courthouse Square are historically important to the development of Brookings in that its monumental architecture represents the seat of County government and the green space surrounding the structure is meant to highlight its importance, and WHEREAS, the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission strongly urges the Brookings County Commission to preserve the historic lines around the Brookings County Courthouse and not encroach further into the Historic Courthouse Square green space or adjacent Central Residential Historic District, and WHEREAS, the BHPC further urges the County Commission to recognize and be sensitive to the other uses that are proposed in that area to include the new South Dakota Children’s Museum and Science Center, renovation of the historic Carnegie Library, the visual connection to the downtown, and other new development and that they take similar steps to maintain the historic integrity of the Courthouse and its environs, and WHEREAS, the BHPC asks that the County reconsider the reuse of the “1921 Building” as a more historically appealing and viable option. The majority of the County Commission have cited that the 1921 Building is “too big.” However, the County’s space study identifies only the needs for 10 years, which may fall short. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission urges that the County consider their space needs beyond 10 years and potential opportunities for coordinating with other existing and future governmental entities to share that space as a governmental center.” CC: Brookings City Council, Brookings City Manager, Downtown Brookings, Inc., State Historic Preservation Office, Dale Larson, South Dakota Children’s Museum & Science Center, a nd Local Media The 1921 Building’s national significance is detailed in following excerpt of the 2001 Save America’s Treasure Grant Application: “The 1921 Brookings High School building, later the State's first Middle School (1968), was designated a Save America's Treasures Official Project in 2000. Cited as representative of the broad pattern of American public school development during the early 20th Century, its design reflects the evolving influence of the Chicago School, as regional architects introduced the uniquely American Prairie Style to the rapidly developing, progressive young communities of the Great Plains. Designed by C.E. Bell, Tyrie & Chapman, Architects, Minneapolis, Minnesota, the exemplary 50,000-square-foot variegated brown brick structure included innovative design features typical of the most successful new buildings, including interior light courts, perimeter arrangement of classrooms, and broad bays of windows providing desirable natural light and ventilation throughout the building. Bell, in association with various practitioners, including noted Prairie Style architect Dwight Bentley, built numerous fine schools across the region. Educated in Philadelphia, Bell was also widely known throughout the Northern Plains for his many landmark Classical Revival buildings. Beginning in 1884 with the construction of the Post Office in Council Bluffs, Iowa, Bell, a younger brother of Miflin Bell, then Supervising Architect of the Treasury, went on to design the Montana State Capitol (1898), the South Dakota State Capitol (1905-10), and at least ten County Courthouses in four states. A skilled and prolific architect, Bell was the 20th practitioner to be registered by the State of Minnesota.” Another alternative would be the adaptive reuse of another existing structure. When a community the size of Brookings has so many outstanding historic resources that are widely appreciated by its residents, it is understandable why the Commission and your task force would be concerned about encroachments and intrusions into the commercial, public and residential neighborhoods. We appreciate your commitment to protecting the integrity of our historic neighborhoods. Sincerely, Dennis Willert, Chair Brookings Historic Preservation Commission cc/enc: Jeffrey Weldon, Brookings City Manager Enclosure Summary 1) Historic Preservation Plan 1999, City of Brookings, Adopted March 12, 2001 2) Brookings Preservation Ordinance, Adopted April 25, 2003 3) National Register of Historic Places Listing for City of Brookings Update on the SDCL 11.1 Review for project at 506 Third Street. No report. Loss – Garage at 810 5th Street. Thornes informed the Commission of a contributing garage that was moved out of the Central Residential Historic District. According to City ordinances, a permit is not needed to move a structure out of town. Thornes raised concern about this issue in the past and the City Attorney agreed that this may be a misinterpretation of the ordinance and indeed a permit is required. This issue needs to reviewed. This Old House Magazine feature on Brookings Central Residential District. The Brookings Central Residential District was featured by This Old House magazine. The following release was issued to local media. June 26, 2009 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For more information contact: Brookings Historic Preservation Commission Shari Thornes, City Clerk, 692-6281 Brookings Central Residential Historic District Featured by “This Old House Magazine” in BEST OLD HOUSE NEIGHBORHOODS 2009 - MIDWEST By: KEITH PANDOLFI, NATALIE RODRIGUEZ, CHAEUN PARK, AND DANA SCHULTZ (Photo courtesy of Ryley Dunn) “Unique, tight-knit neighborhoods are precisely what we looked for in selecting the winners of our second annual Best Old House Neighborhoods contest—places that might not be on your radar but deserve to be. Like last year, we relied on our good friends at PreservationDirectory.com to help us contact thousands of neighborhood groups, real estate agents, and preservation societies to get their takes on the best places to track down, fix up, and fall head over heels for older homes. The Brookings Central District was selected as one of the 12 greatest places to buy an old house in the Midwest, from Indiana to Minnesota.” The Central Residential Historic District, Brookings, South Dakota “Located near the Big Sioux River and home to South Dakota State University, Brookings offers culture, intellectual stimulation, and small-town beauty Great Plains-style. The city's Central Residential Historic District, a lush and leafy suburb listed on the National Register of Historic Places, is one of its most cherished thanks to its proximity to parks and good schools, while downtown restaurants, book stores, and antiques shops are just a five-minute walk away. This is a serene and safe place to raise kids, especially since an old elementary school in the neighborhood is being converted into a children's' museum, complete with a surrounding park that will house interactive indoor and outdoor exhibits and demonstrations. The Houses Homes here look like fairy-tale versions of classic American architectural styles. The Craftsmans have exaggerated overhanging eaves and extra chunky millwork, while the Queen Annes are elaborately wrapped in gingerbread and include dramatic features such as turrets and sprawling wrap-around porches. Homes start out at around $150,000 and run up to $350,000. Why Buy Now? The conversion of the neighborhood's Central Elementary School into a children's museum and park will undoubtedly draw more families here. (Next year, younger children now attending Central will go to two elementary schools a few minutes away and those in fourth and fifth grade will go to the brand-new Camelot Intermediate School). Real estate values in this part of the country have suffered little during the current economic downturn. Since families tend to stay here for good, most o f the houses are extremely well-maintained. Seeing as the neighborhood is on the National Register, unattractive updates and alterations of its housing stock are unlikely.” To view the Brookings feature and other winning neighborhoods, please go to the following website: www.thisoldhouse.com. Commercial District –National Register District 1) DBI Report. Willert reported that DBI will be installing flags and banners on the poles. 2) Schedule meeting with SHPO regarding District Survey. A follow-up meeting is needed to work through the questions raised in the district survey. Thornes will schedule a time when SHPO staff can attend in person or conference call. University Residential District – National Register District 1) Ramey House. The house is listed for sale with a local realtor. South Dakota State University o Inquiry regarding verification of historic district boundaries . Thornes was contacted by a SDSU staff person requesting verification on historic d istrict boundaries. National Register of Historic Places Nomination Status Reports: o 202 5th Street. Gritzner met with the property owners to gather preliminary material for the Nomination submission to the State. o SDSU Horse Barn. At the June meeting the Commission made a motion to strongly urge the State Historic Preservation Office to nominate the SDSU Horse Barn to the State Register of Historic Places immediately and to proceed with a National Register of Historic Places nomination for submission to the State Historical Society Board of Trustees at their next available date. Thornes received the following response from the State Preservation Office indicating they would not do the nomination. June 11, 2009 Shari Thornes PO Box 270 Brookings, SD 57006 RE: SDSU Horse Barn Thank you for contacting the South Dakota State Historic Preservation Office regarding the SDSU Horse Barn. I understand from your email that the barn may be threatened for demolition. Public property can be nominated by anyone without owner consenting to the nomination. (See 36 CFR 60.11 for the National Register, and ARSD 24:52:06:03 and 04 for the State Register [enclosed]). However, I recommend the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission approach SDSU and try to get their consent to list the SDSU Horse Barn on the State Register and/or National Register. Listing it without their consent may cause them to be less willing to hold dialog with preservation advocates in future situations pertaining to SDSU properties. While my office has prepared State and National Register forms for public property in the past, we generally only do this when the public entity that owns the property supports the nomination. If the BHPC wishes to prepare a State Register form for the barn (or hire a consultant to do so), the SHPO will consider it. We will review the nomination you prepare, provide editorial comments, and take it through the process. If you wish to follow up with a National Register nomination, we will do the same. We are attaching digital copies of the State and National Register forms, so they are available when you decide your course of action. Please let us know how you plan to proceed. Thank you, Jason Haug Director of Historic Preservation Gritzner volunteered to write the nomination for the SDSU Horse Barn. Thornes will forward all sample documents provided by the State. Reports: o Report on Preservation Leadership Training Conference (Gritzner). Gritzner attended the week-long Preservation Leadership Training conference in Deadwood, SD from June 20-27, otherwise referred to as “preservation bootcamp.” She gave the following report of her experiences: Report on Preservation Leadership Training Deadwood, SD June 20-27 Participant – Janet Gritziner, member of Brookings Historic Preservation Commission successively completed Preservation Leadership Training. Program ran for seven days including the opening reception on Saturday, June 20 th. Sundays activities included opening remarks, introduction to group projects, overview of activities in Deadwood, presentation by Steve McCathly, tour of Deadwood area and project sites, culminated with reception at Lucky Nugget (one of project sites). Three projects (6 groups): Fairmont Hotel, Lucky Nugget & C,B&Q Engine House Monday began with interviews, a day-long training on Community Leadership, team project time in evening. Tuesday began again with interviews and short session on politics on preservation and longer one on human resources. Team project time followed. Wednesday started with interviews, followed by morning session on strategic planning, the afternoon session was on financial resources, and the evening devoted to team check ins and work on project. Thursday was last day of interviews, morning session was on legal tools, and afternoon session on economics of preservation. Evening was dress rehearsal for presentation. Friday morning was devoted to a Hands-On Design Workshop. Afternoon session was on sustainability of preservation. Evening spent with team presentations and graduation dinner. Saturday – departure. o Report on University Week for Women Porch Tour on July 9th (McCollough). McCollough will lead the tour of women on July 9th. Laurie Carruthers from the City Clerk’s office is taking care of all the arrangements since Thornes will be on vacation. BHPC members volunteered for various tasks. o Report on Preserve Brookings Annual Meeting (June 8th). Gritzner attended the annual meeting. Stephen VanBuren spoke on documenting relevant structures i n the County in a survey and GIS map. They are interested in applying for grant funding. She expressed concern that the group appears to be focused on information gathering rather than advocacy efforts. Thornes noted that there are funds available to provide non-profit boards with additional training. She suggested Esther Hall through the “Better Boards” workshop series or regional preservation expert Mary Gates as a good trainer. o Update on Local District Process Project. Thornes is gathering sample information from the National listservs and from Frank Gilbert, National Trust Attorney. She will present the draft documents at a future meeting. o Funding Reports. 1) 2009/2010 National Park Service Grant (attendance at National Trust Conference) – The BHPC received the full grant request of $5,860. The supplemental funds will be used to send two representatives to the National Trust Conference in Nashville. Early bird registration deadline is July 31st. Bibby was the only member who committed to attended at the time of the grant application. Thornes also plans to attend. 2) 2010 City Funding – No updates. Calendar July 9, 2009 Porch Tour – University Week for Women @ 10:30 am Oct. 13-17, 2009 National Trust for Historic Preservation Annual Conf – Nashville, TN July28-Aug 1, 2010 National Alliance of Preservation Commissions – Forum 2010 – Grand Rapids, MI Oct. 26-30, 2010 National Trust for Historic Preservation Annual Conf – Austin, TX Upcoming Agenda Items: Review of draft ordinance requiring permit to move any structure out of an historic district. Review of Draft Local District Process Materials. Discussion regarding definition of “environs” as constituted in SDCL 11.1. Meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Submitted by Shari Thornes