Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBHPCMinutes_2015_01_22Brookings Historic Preservation Commission January 22, 2015 Minutes (amended) A meeting of the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission was held on Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. in City Hall. Members present: Leah Brink, Mary Bibby, Dennis Willert, Les Rowland, Janet Merriman, Janet Gritzner and Tom Agostini. Shari Thornes, City Clerk, was also present. Chairperson Rowland called the meeting to order. Discussion regarding SDSU’s street vacation plan was added to the agenda. A motion was made by Bibby, seconded by Brink, to approve the agenda. All present voted yes, motion carried. A motion was made by Bibby, seconded by Brink, to approve the minutes. All present voted yes; motion carried. Next meeting was scheduled for Thursday, February 19th at 4:00 p.m. Discussion and possible action on an 11.1 Review Case Report for 502 9th Avenue. The owners have applied to construct a 4’ x 11’ 1 ½ story addition on the front façade of the house for a kitchen expansion. The addition will be incorporated to the left of the front entry. The height and pitch of the entry dormer will be altered by raising it to the level of the roof ridge. All original siding will be removed and replaced with LP engineered wood siding. The “Ethel Van Cleve House,” built 1943, is a contributing structure in the Central Residential Historic District. It’s a fairly simple house. The proposal would essentially remove all character defining features, which are the windows, entrance roof pitch, siding and façade. The perceived impact is that it would damage or destroy the historic significance of the structure. Rowland and Thornes met with the applicant at their property on 9/30/14 to review the project and to recommend alternatives that would meet the Standards, eliminate the need for a full review and case report and enable the owners to start the project this fall. Those recommendations included window restoration rather than replacement, paint preparation and paint rather than removal and installation of LP siding, and modification to the addition design to retain the center entrance. At the December meeting, the Commission determined there was insufficient information in case report to provide comment and BHPC requested additional information from the applicant on alternatives to the addition and siding and voted to table action. Since the last meeting, Rowland provided the owner with a proposed design that would be retain the original entrance and would strengthen his proposal be more likely to be approved. Rowland noted that it didn’t matter that there were other houses with similar designs and entries to Miller’s design proposal. From the Historic Preservation Commission’s perspective, they are looking for the distinct character of each house in the district. He noted there is a way to provide for an addition while still retaining the home’s original form and character-defining features of horizontal fascia and a pronounced entry. Mr. Miller appeared before Commission indicating he was not willing to modify his proposal of the addition design or siding removal. He had contacted local contractors and businesses was unable to secure a long-term warranty on painting the original siding. It was determined that the addition couldn’t be constructed to the north due to electrical services and the garage or to the east due to the interior layout. The Commission asked if he would be willing to compromise and recess the addition by 6” to give clear definition to the entry. Miller said he was told it would cost more to recess rather than be flush due to roofline and structure supporting wall. Rowland disagreed. Miller said he wasn’t interested in the addition if he could not install new siding. (Agostini arrived) ACTION: A motion was made by Bibby, seconded by Willert, to disagree with the case report and recommend a recessed front façade of at least 4” on the west side and original siding be maintained, citing Standards 2, 5 and 6 for siding and Standard 9 and 10 for the character of the main entrance. Standard #2: The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. Standard #5: Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. Standard #6: Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. “Standard #9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.” “Standard #10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.” All present voted yes; motion carried. DISCUSSION ON 2015-16 GOALS & OBJECTIVES AND PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION ON 2015-16 FUNDING APPLICATION. Members discussed possible projects/topics for 2015/16 and provided staff with suggestions on proposed grant projects for consideration in the next funding cycle. The 2015/16 National Park Service funding cycle is from June 2015 to May 31, 2016, with extension options until 9/1/16. The funding application will be due in March 2015. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW. The City Planning Commission is holding a series of special meetings to review the current 2020 Comprehensive Plan. They have invited the BHPC to send representative(s) to a meeting to provide information and answer questions related to the historic resources in Brookings. Potential dates are: February 5 & 19, March 5 & 19, April 2. The Commission requested March 5th and Rowland, Brink and Thornes will attend. PROJECT/ ISSUE UPDATES & FINAL REPORTS: Public Education Committee Report. The Committee circulated a draft mailing to be mailed to property owners. 11.1 Review Process. At the last meeting, the Commission discussed the pros and cons of entering into a MOU with the State of South Dakota to perform 11.1 reviews. The Commission requested a month to consider all the issues before making a final decision. Issues to consider include: o Benefits and cons of a MOU verses continuing with the current process. o Number of potential projects. 2012 & 213 permits in the district:  2012 – 13 Building Permits  2012 – 1 demolition permit  2013 – 6 Building Permits o Standard meeting dates and times will be required o Time of meetings would have to be at 4 p.m. or later to accommodate applicants. o Frequency of meetings o City Clerk staff time and availability. o Subcommittees were discussed to review projects and meet with applicants; however, since the last meeting Thornes has gotten feedback from other preservation staff strongly advising against this practice. o Adoption of a strict meeting protocols and process would be necessary and consistency in applying the standards when making the decisions. o A streamlined application process that could be handled by anyone providing a building permit. o Determining which projects types to review o Defining an appeal process. o Defining the final decision maker. o Authorizing city staff to determine if projects are reviewable. o Develop a training process and schedule with SHPO. ACTION: A motion was made by Brink, seconded by Merriman, to not pursue MOU model at this time and maintain status quo for current process for 11.1. All present voted yes; motion carried. 2015 Public Education Workshop. The BHPC has received $1,000 to host a series of workshops on the Federal Income Tax Credit, State Property Tax Moratorium and Secretary’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The Commission suggested a fall workshop. Thornes will contact SHPO staff. Proposed Legislation. SD Representative Scott Munsterman is sponsoring the proposed legislative change to 1-19B-3, pertaining to the composition of preservation commissions. Legislative Research Council is drafting the bill. He has asked that the Commission line up individuals across the state to provide testimony at the committee level. 1-19B-3, pertaining to composition of preservation commission--Residence--Terms of office. The Historic Preservation Commission shall consist of not less than five nor more than ten members, who shall be appointed by the governing body with due regard to proper representation of such fields as history, architecture, urban planning, archaeology, paleontology, and law. All members of the commission shall reside within the jurisdiction of the county or municipality establishing the commission and shall serve for terms not to exceed three years, being eligible for reappointment as shall be specified by the governing body. Residency requirements shall be as specified by the governing body. Mayor Reed also supports the proposal and requested the South Dakota Municipal League’s backing. Mayor Reed serves on the SDML Board and the proposed bill was discussed that their December board meeting. Commission members will be asked to contact other jurisdictions with historic preservation commissions asking for their support and secure individuals to speak on behalf of this bill. PRESERVATION PARTNERS: State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). SHPO Reviewed Draft BHPC Publicity mailing. They will work with BHPC to select the 2015 CLG conference date and incentives workshop. Thornes will contact CLG chairs for input on the date and agenda topics. SHPO featured Brookings’ Bob Yapp Workshops on our HPC website. They are also highlighting this project in their 5-year plan. • February 1 - Deadline for Deadwood Fund Grant • May 29-30 - SDSHS Annual History Conference in Pierre w/ SDSHS Board Meeting • June 9-11th – SHPO Archaeology Camp for Kids • July 7-9 – SHPO Section 106 Training in Pierre w/ the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation Downtown Brookings Inc. (DBI). DBI asked if the BHPC would be interested in sponsoring a speaker at this year’s History & Garden Festival on May 1-2. The Commission reviewed their list of projects and other planned workshops and felt the timing wouldn’t work this year. SDSU Street Vacation Request. Rowland had a phone conversation with Chad Kuecker, Confluence, regarding the masterplan for the alumni center expansion. They have been checking into getting a traffic study and will do so if necessary; however, the cost is quite expensive, approximately $28,000. Kuecker wondered if SDSU agreed to keep Harvey Dunn Street open whether the Commission would still require the study. SDSU would rather spend the funds on the project rather than a study. Rowland requested informal input from the Commission. Some members were still interested in a traffic study to determine the impact on the property owners to the west. Thornes will check with the City Engineer to determine if they have the capability of obtaining traffic counts. Meeting adjourned at 6:21 p.m. Submitted by Shari Thornes