Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11061990 ~- .. . . . e e MINUTES Historic Preservation Commission November 6, 1990 A special meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Ann Landis, pro-tern president, at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was called for the purpose of meeting with Kate Austin and Greg Griffith from the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Present: Ann Landis, Mike Yawman, Teresa Goldsmith, Liz Smith. Tom Johnson arrived at 7:20 p.m. Guests: Patricia Warren, Jefferson County Historical Society, and Sherry Robison, Main Street Project, Austin and Gr.iffith, SOAHP. Rick Sepler was present just long enough to present information concerning the orban waterfront situation and then left for the CityCouncil meetîng. Minutes were approved as written. Sepler reported that the Waterfront Plan had gone to press and would be available for public consumption November 8. Sepler pointed out that the Plan is only a proposal and encouraged HPC to seriously consider the plan and formulate a response to be presented in person or by letter for the Nov. 19 public hearing. The Joint Waterfront Planning Committee with 100% concensus, has recommended to the Planning Commission and Council that design review be made mandatory in com- pliance for all projects in what is called a special overlay district, which includes all the Water Street historic area; would go to Point Hudson, would extend to the bluff; follow the bluff down and stop a little past the ferry ter- minal at the bluff narrows where the walkway is going down and the street lights start ft the new Stanjard store. Design review would be optional ,for anyone else within the Waterfront Planning area. In an effort to further develop some of the design standards for the entire urban waterfront area, the Planning Department has been developing design guide- lines, so there will be an additional tool other than the Secretary of Interior's standards for rehabilitation and restoration and the 1974 Main Street National Trust document. The Department has also developed other guidelines that would apply specifically to the wetlands area, and some of the new guidelines pertain specifically to the Historic District. Sepler distributed the section of the plan pertianing to the guidelines. He explained that the guidelines as spelled out in the plan are still quite vague, but that the ordinance, tobe øut this Thursday, will be much more specific. Sepler asked that HPC provide feedback to help fine tune the ordinance. In the meantime, the Planning Departmênt will c9ntínue to expand on the gùide- lines as developed to date. He explained that the Department has addressed the Issue of the parking bonus. Mandatory compliance could change the bonus situation. The Planning Department suggests that the bonus would still be a good idea, since it was to and still would encourage and reward good design. The ordinance could be amended at a later date to eliminate the parking bonus, if that action seemed desirable. e e to'. '* Page two - Minutes - Historic Preservation Commission - November 6, 1990 He reported that the Waterfront Committee also looked at the question of . acquisition by the City. The members unanimously agreed upon a right of first ' refusal request for the Legion Hall, since it has been on the market for some time, and initiated a City-County committee to evaluate that space fer public use. Since there is an access easement already around Indian Point, and sensitive development looks likely, nhè Committee felt acquisition was not imperative. They agreed that Thomas Oil should be purchased. P 1 zoning in Fleet Marine does not permit condos...only boatyard or boat retail (or single family resi- dence, church, cemetery - highly unlikely uses). Conditional use could be a motel, but with design review, that could be denied. The Committee proposed a special maritime overlay district, increasing the number of water-dependent or related uses. The Committee felt that Port Townsend did not need urban desjgn interven- tion but that attention should be paid to increased public access to existing amenities, utilizing the idea of a trail system from the waterfront plan and tieing in with the Olympic Discovery Trail. It would continue on through Point Hudson to Point Wilson. Research indicates that liability for accidents on this walkway would be-With the State. The ongoing restoration of the Jackson Bequestt City Dock and the improvements for Memorial Field (new fence), street paving and street trees on Madison are also projects being recommended. Sepler explained that the moratoriam has been extended to Dec. 18. The Planning Department and Joint Waterfront Planning Committee have done their work. Now it's a question of City Council and the City residents having enough time . to study and react, then amend what's been proposed. Another extension is possible. When asked what motivated the Committe's recommendation for mandatory com- pliance, Sepler said 1) the National Trust has strongly urged this, 2) it was again mentioned at the Design Event, and 3) the Committee's research brought out the fact that there are 5 key waterfront sites which, if even one new building were built, would irrevocably change the fragile nature of the District. The Committee felt that economic reality has changed so drastically in the past year and the projects now proposed are so threatening in terms of impact, that mandatory compliance seemed absolutely to be a necessary recommendation. The Committee also discovered that mandatory review for the District would be an economic sta- bilizing agent. HPC decision, Sepler stated, could be appealed to City Council. The question arose as to what Council policy would be - whether HPC would be backed by Council as a matter of course, or whether design decision appeals would become numerous and burdensom to Council - also taking away hPC's credibility. Sepler was asked how always giving parking bonuses would affect the parking situation. He stated that a ,parking study is to be instigRtp.q and that he feels the situation would "square itself away". Landis reminded HPC members that there would be a walking tour of the Dis- trict from 3 to 5 next Tuesday afternoon with Austin and another staff member . from Olympia, Steve Mathison, starting at The Elevated. The walking tour is for the prupose of assisting HPC members in readying themselves for design review. The regular meeting of hPC will be that evening. .. . · · · e e Page three - Minutes - Historic Preservation Commission - November 6, 1990 Landis introduced Kate Austin, whose speciality is comprehensive programs, and Greg Griffith, comprehensive planner and also a member of the design review committee ror the Olympia HPC, having had to deal with special valuation appli- cations recently as well, both from the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Austin stated that their office stands ready to help with questons, as our HPC experiences more decision-making demands and that there are nearby commissions, especially Everett and certain districts in Seattle, whø would be helpful on occasion. Austin stated that HPC is a tool to identify, evaluate and protect the his- toric resources within our jurisdiction and that hPC represents the program and deals with special valuation reports, while staffing assists the Commission. HPC's major responsibility is as a design review board, and Austin cautioned HPC members not to make individual comments or assessments but to produce a "one board" decision. She pointed out that the decisions all establish precedents and that they should be based on solid groundwork, application to criteria. Consistency in decision-making is what is needed. Being solidly predictable is of great help to those involved in the design process. One of the first things to begin doing is to identify all the historic resources, Austin stated. She says the Trust nomination list from 1974 needs to be updated. Anything 50 years and older needs to be listed, significant or not. HPC needs to look at what form the inventory is in presently and make a plan so that we end up with an easily referenced, helpful file complete with photo and information on each property. Griffith reiterated the importance of updating the inventory list and that it be comprehensive, including buildings that are termed "background buildings", seemingly unimportant now. It should be in a form that can be easily shown to applicants to assist them in understanding how you have arrived at your decisions. Each card should include a statement of significance, an objective description of physical appearance and a photo. This inventory activity is an ongoing pro- cess since each year may find buildings that newly qualify for inventory. HPC should not be expected to do this project rapidly, when other responsibilities are more pressing, such as valuation and design review. Austin recommended that we develop a system that is compatible with the state inventory system, which, in turn, is compatible with inventory systems in all other states. A property in Port Townsend might then be easily ascertained, when compared with all others of its type in the US, as being much more signifi- cant than originally thought. She also explained that the State receives money for every identified historic resource. Federal funds are allocated based on how many things are produced. The more accurate, up-to-date records the State office has, the better able they are to make their decisions through the Section 106 process. Copies of our survey information are always sent to the State office. Austin stated that Port Townsend has some significant properties which are not adequately listed. She suggested that potentially, there should be, in addition to the National Register of Historic Places and the State Register, a Port Townsend Register. She pointed out that as the years go by, hPC's jurisdic- tion will undoubtedly extend to properties that will never qualify for listing on the National Register but will be no less significant. lOcal register status usually requires that the design review process then extend to these properties, which then gives HPC clout. Property owners understand before they agree to e e .'.., .. Page four - Minutes - Historic Preservation Commission - November 6, 1990 Register status that mandatory design review comes along with it. She pointed out that owners are but tenants; that the property will outlive them. The more stringent the design criteria, the more historic character will be passed on to succeeding generations. . Austin explained that the scope of what is considered "historic" is being expanded to include rural properties and industrial sites. So the down- town Water Street area, for instance, would not be the only area taken into account. Adjacent areas where pacing changes are considered just as important and design guidelines for them are different. Discussion ensued concerning the relationship of HPC to staff. Austin encouraged HPC to determine exactly what role we choose to play and what the balance of power should look like. Division of responsibility needs to be established so that staff knows what is expected of them and what HPC promises to do, so that staff and HPC work as a team. She stressed the impor- tance of al good working relationship with staff so that the voice will be unified. If there is disagreement on a decision, who needs the education? What's lack- ing? Austin explained that the State Office develops what are called "Resource Protection Planning Process Study Units". They are comprehensive reports on specific themes, such as transportation. These units enlarge the possibilities for significance of a property. Significance is not only architectural. Speaking of inventory, Austin explained that the form should reflect everything HPC wants to know about a property. She explained that an exploded version of the inventory information would be a nomination. The form then becomes a vital record. It was pointed out that the Jefferson County Historical Society and the Main Street files have much info already pertaining to buildings in HPC's jurisdiction, and duplication might not seem like a good idea. However, Austin explained that each set of records comes from different needs and to a certain extent answers different questions and that other organ- izations should not have to conform to the way file forms need to be set up for HPC work and should not have to be responsible for maintenance of those records. . Patricia Warren reported that the Historical Society is planning a county-wide survey of historic properties and suggested that possibly hPC and JCHS could work together. She also pointed out that short term, applicants could be required to provide historic photos, if such exist, with their appli- cations for design review. Landis stated that she believes the Commission shomilid be involved in the survey process so the Commission members would become more familiar with the buildings and their significance so they would be more adept at doing design review. The walk-through next week will be a first step in learning how to look at buildings and survey them for HPC"s purposes. The SOAHP files now include the nomination application info and the other nomination that was done of Victorian houses outside of the District. They also have copies of applications for houses put on the National Register . before a District was established. But they don't have information on specific properties...just the significant District properties and individually nominated properties but nothing on other historic properties in town. ~... ....- . . . e e Page five - Minutes - Historic Preservation Commission - November 6, 1990 Austin suggested that once we know how to set up the files, as valuation applications and design review applications come in, the information on those properties could easily be processed and made part of the survey information. Austin was asked to explain certification. CLG status is a way of qualify- ing a "jurisdiction" (Port Townsend, for instance) to handle some of the activities and paperwork that otherwise fall to the federal and state offices, therefore saving them time and money and giving local authorities more power and expertise. To qualify, the ordinance creating HPC has to conform to certain requirements and a local Register of Historic Places needs to be established. One of the responsibilities of a CLG is to review all local National Register nominations initially, thus lightening the load of the state office. Once an HPC has CLG status, they are then eligible for grant monies through the state office, as well as a lot of technical assistance. If a CLG chooses to do a project, such as survey work, educational activity of some sort such as producing a brochure or a video, or specialized standards development or a rating system to protect historic properties from demolition, application can be made and the CLG can then receive $1500 which is to be matched in contributed labor, cash or city funds for an approved project to be done within a certain period of time. This is an annual opportunity. This is how monies available through the state office are distributed in a controlled, productive, :accountable way. Austin also suggested that CLG"s then also have access to private sector funds through such organizations as the National Trust. It was explained that the "Block Grant Program" allocations are available for historic preservation activites if they will benefit a low or moderate incme neighborhood. These allocations are available to the city - are matchable, federal funds that possibly could be used for survey purposes. Sometimes the State considers matching these federal funds. If we are interested in participating in the certification process, we would have until October of 1991 to become a CLG if we wanted to apply for 1992 funds for a project. It was pointed out that CLG status would mean working with the entire District and would demand maybe more time and energy than we have available right now. Our focus for the moment needs to be with design review and special valuation activities. In reviewing the procedure for valuation review, Austin pointed out that a specific situation cannot be discussed unless the owners are present because that conversation would be considered collusion. Abstract cases may be discussed, however. She pointed out that what is needed si information concerning preser- vation of the historic fabric of the building. This should be documented in before and after photos. The building should then be toured. If it is apparent that historic fabric was destroyed during rehab, then the application is denied, unless the project still can prove that 25% of the expenditures were for approved, qualified preservation activities. It's important that the applica_ tion package is complete or the tax incentive cannot be granted. e e ... -'^' Page six - Minutes - Historic Preservation Commission - November 6, 1990 If an application comes in and part of the work is to be done next year, it must be specifically outlined, if it's to qualify. An agreement is then signed stating the situation and outlining specifically what is still to be done. Sometimes the 24-month period should begin later on in the work schedule in order to beenfit the owner. . Sometimes applicants need assistance getting their packages of application together. This can be done by one HPC member and then the application is discussed with owner present at a regularly scheduled meeting. Since all discussion per- taining to a specific application must be done at public meetings, Austin recommended that there be a review session going over standards' prior to the applicaiton review, especially if a valuation hasn't been done for some time. Decisions set precedent so if HPC makes exceptions, the members must under- stand why. Having complete information is extremely important, and if there is some piece of info lacking which would be necessary to make a safe, correct judge- ment, then that info needs to be requested. It's necessary to have a breakdown of expenditures so HPC is informed as to which monies were spent for-preserva- tion and which were spent for new construction. Austin left much information about valuation procedure, the form to be used, plus lots of info about surveys. Griffith invited HPC members to attend Olympia Heritage meetings on the fourth Wednesday of every month. Meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. . Respectfully submitted, ~'~~J~J\t ~..~ Barbara S. Marseille Secretary .