Joint Session Historic Preservation Commission & City Council – August 2022
Note: The following is the output of transcribing from a video recording. Although the transcription, which was done with software, is largely accurate, in some cases it is incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or [software] transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the meeting, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
Read along below or follow along here: https://otter.ai/u/27xlH2fulsn6TBfmw3_ni_2adVs
Unknown Speaker 0:00
Stay warm you can excuse it
Unknown Speaker 0:37
and take responsibility. But let’s get started to join me about historical Nation. I’m going to turn it over. Does everybody know everyone’s here? Should we just go around and
Unknown Speaker 0:57
score? Are we? Yes. All right. Fantastic. City and I primarily advise Public Works, Planning and Development Services and
Unknown Speaker 1:11
I’m also planning on one of your special counsel particularly tired to assist you guys. Presentation for good Sunday. I’m Glenda wagon on the planning director. Jodie Marsh assistant city manager to motor symptoms. And Enrico City Council. Cancer don’t care. Internship all the way up
Unknown Speaker 1:41
to cater job roles City Council.
Unknown Speaker 1:44
Sam cedar assistant city manager planning this one right here. Councilmember Susilo preparing.
Unknown Speaker 2:00
Great, we’re just getting started. Are you just the public’s just oh your help you. So I’m just going to turn it over to them,
Unknown Speaker 2:16
then I’m going to shift into a task.
Unknown Speaker 2:22
So good evening,
Unknown Speaker 2:22
Mayor, council members and members of the historic preservation city such as myself, I work for the city. Nice City office. And so I’m sitting in for Eugene tonight he is in France, like you guys. But tonight, we are going to be discussing the topics that are going to be shown on slide two. This is our agenda for tonight. And we are going to be quickly recapping some of the background is that both members of the Historic Preservation Committee and council members may have heard previously, in the past month or so. And then we’re going to move on to larger or substantive issues that you can see in sections two through six. So the topics that are going to be presented to you tonight are those that are primarily focused on some areas of concern that have been highlighted by our outside counsel, Austin from talking Parker as well as our committee members from the Historic Preservation Committee, and staff. And so with regard to just a brief, quick history of the project HPC, our staff members started working on revising the code amendments taking a look at some areas of concern last year, and then in Auckland Park was on boarded. And what we’re going to see tonight is what are the primary areas of concern. And as I mentioned, we’ve discussed them before. And so the options presented to you today are going to be legally defensible options. They are going to be our recommended course of action as far as what we are going to suggest as far as political events. And so right now, as I mentioned, we looked at legally defensible options that we did not have aI Alpha policy issues. But you know, we welcome we absolutely welcome feedback on those policy issues so we can more and we can bring our code more in line with those legal concerns that we might bring up in any direction that we receive from City Council tonight. So it’s our intention to try and get through some of most of these topics and obtain direction on where city staff members and city attorney’s offices can go here. But if we don’t get them all, you know, we are more than welcome. We’re wasn’t happy to come back another day back to follow up on some of these. We’ll turn it over to
Unknown Speaker 4:39
see. Alright, so we’ll start with a brief overview of the legal framework in the US for historic preservation. You have it at each level of government in the US. So it started in 1966 with the passage of the National Preservation Act, and what that did was create the national register and State Historic Preservation offices which are Are colloquially referred to as shadows. So at the state level, you have the shadows that administer the National Historic Preservation Program. And a lot of what they do is actually in this last point here, it’s that section one of six review, which is to ensure that historic resources are taking too, into account anytime there’s federal funding being spent. So I say all of that is way of background. But of course, today, we’re going to be talking about is the local level, the long months Historic Preservation code. And this is really where a lot of the work for local or for historic preservation is done. It’s on the local level. So again, taking a step back before we dive into some of the substance tonight, so why have a local historic preservation code? Generally, of course, it’s to protect historic buildings to protect historically significant areas in a community. But what you’ll also see with most historic preservation codes is let’s talk about these two bullet points. And we took these straight from the current code, and they have to do with enhancement of property values they have to do with the financial gain that can be benefited from historically preserving buildings. More on that and actually think that this is actually a picture of downtown Longmont. Oh, okay. So let’s start with designation criteria. So we say designation in the context of historic preservation, what we really mean is how you get getting to historic preservation, how you get into Historic Preservation regulations, it’s another word of saying rezoning. And each one of these issues, we’ll talk about some of the current language, and then we’ll talk about, again, our proposed language. And that’s just one alternative. And again, what we’re proposing here is based on what we believe is the most legally defensible Avenue, there’s certainly a whole lot of avenues to go. But are I was really toward just a legal issue element. So in the current criteria, there’s a little bit of a question of how the criteria is actually applied. And you’ll see that in the underlying language, the and or language, you don’t have to get into the nuts and bolts of it. But all that to say, is that we propose to clarify this to make it clear that to get in to historic preservation, you not only have to have an age requirement, we also have to have a requirement that the property be historically significant in some manner. And so we go into some specifics on what historical significance actually means. And you have to check at least one of those boxes along with the age requirement to get in to be designated. And we’ve also clarified that this process will run similar to your current rezoning process. With the exception of planning commission, you have the historic preservation commission, hearing the issue first and how to view the one ultimately deciding on the issue. We’ve also added some requirements for nonconceptual designation. nonconceptual designation is, when a property owner isn’t bringing the application forward themselves, the property owner isn’t the one saying I want to be a part of the historic preservation district, someone else’s. And so in those situations, there’s a current percentage of property owners that must be sign on to the application or to be able to be put forward for the application to be accepted. And so we have proposed proposed is to elevate that percentage slightly. That’s it for this one, we’ll talk about the HPO. And what that means in just a moment. So today, you will now you do but before this process, we didn’t have this map. We weren’t. We had a list of designated properties. But we didn’t have the maps as a part of this process. Stuff is an excellent job of mapping out all of the historically designated properties as it stands today. So those red dots are the actual properties, which is a landmark for historic preservation purposes. And those green blue and purplish, reddish color are your historic districts.
Unknown Speaker 9:07
Those are national district. So
Unknown Speaker 9:09
national districts that’s that’s a lizard. Yeah. So going back to that federal process under the historic preservation code, the state was the one to administer this process and create those districts through the federal regulations rather than the local regulations, those shaded areas in purple. Okay, so we just talked about the actual criteria, how you’re eligible to get in, but we want to talk a little bit about the actual mechanics of the process. So as I just stated previously, there was no mapping exercise associated with designation. It was just a list of parcels, staffs done a great job of mapping those parcels. And what we’re proposing to do is actually create a new district, which would be a historic preservation overlay district or HBO. And the reason we’re choosing out to go about it this way, it’s certainly not the only way to do it. We think it’ll alleviate some of the notice concerns and some of the concerns around how Historic Preservation can act a little bit differently than your typical zoning mechanisms. Even though most property owners probably don’t have a excellent idea of that distinction, if they’re looking for what regulations apply to the property, they’re probably going to go to the zoning map, look at their zoning district and then look at the regulations for that zoning district. That seems to make the most sense for most folks. But wouldn’t they wouldn’t see as if they were designated in that process, we’re proposing to change that and integrate the historic preservation regulations into the current LDC your land development code. And with that would be this district, it would be in your list of overlay districts. That means it’s superimposed on the baseline district, we’re not doing any rezoning. It’s a mapping exercises of what you saw on that previous slide, it would come into the zoning map. So what you saw on that previous slide would come into the zoning map, there would be designated as a historic preservation overlay district, any future designation, but also be considered a part of that HPL. That’s all I would say about that. And again, we can come back to any of this. I know, I’m kind of zooming through all of this. But we really want to have a lot of time to talk with you guys today and discuss the general parameters of these big issues. So we have this slide here, just to show you how it could work. In practice, if we created this historic preservation overlay, and it would look just like your carrier Lake overlay, it would be superimposed on the zoning map and you would see it on the zoning map. So it would show up here, which is like a historic area, you’d be able to see whether you’re not you have this work preservation regulations attached to your property.
Unknown Speaker 11:55
Okay, the red line doesn’t show up very well. Is the red line. That’s the only Diego Where’s where? Where’s the area you’re talking
Unknown Speaker 12:08
about? So it’s not actually mapped yet I just show you this slide to show that it works. This is how it would be mapped. It would be on the zoning map, it would show up as a district in the legend. Just under that Terry like overlay, you can see it HPO cert preservation overlay. And once you go through that mapping exercise, this is where you see it. So today you don’t
Unknown Speaker 12:30
I don’t see the carry legal either,
Unknown Speaker 12:32
which I should, right. It’s not. Yeah, was a confusing, right? That was a confusing way to say that we’re proposing to integrate this work preservation regulations into your land development code, you’ll be able to see on the zoning map whether or not you’re in that historic preservation overlay. So all in one place, it’s your basic zoning district and those standards, and you’d see any overlay apply to you as well, and those standards. And now I’ll turn it over to Dylan, and we’ll talk about some of the implications of this designation process.
Unknown Speaker 13:15
Right. Yeah, and I think this is probably the bulk of what that historic preservation commission wants to discuss. But as Austin mentioned, as we tighten up the criteria, and we require that HP o in order to enforce Historic Preservation requirements, we have some conflicts with the way we’ve been doing it since close to the beginning of time. And the first one is really has to do with demolitions, we have a criteria, basically, it has to be 50 years old. And it has to meet one of a couple of different criteria. And then if somebody comes in to do either a partial or a full demolition of their structure, member of staff sits down with a council member and reviews that application and decides whether it’s approved or not approved, probably should fall under the purview of the HPC to some degree. But that’s not the way it’s set up. Now. The other conflict is they’re not designated properties. So as Austin and posse mentioned, we want a legally defensible code. And that would mean we’d go through the process of the historic preservation overlay to put it in place, and then the demolition regulations would apply. There is some points where I won’t say flexibility yet, but there’s other ways to look at that. One way is in order to and I think the HPC would say there’s some beautiful buildings that hadn’t been designated certainly couldn’t be if the landowner would agree to it. And then there could be a level of preservation involved. So staff could make a concerted effort to identify those openings and reach out to the landowner and compel them. Maybe that’s too strong of a word, but provide carrots to hopefully get them to either designated as landmark or come in as a district. There may be another way that if you look at the scale of legal defensibility, with the HBO being at the highest end, what I just described would probably be really close because you’re not forcing anybody to do anything. You’re just giving them carrots to come in, would be if we did a code amendment, and we tightened up the criteria, and we said, Okay, if you’re 75 years old, and you meet these criteria, and you’re within the original town state of Longmont. Potentially, we could then control demolitions to a certain end there, we have to do a whole lot more work. But there is on that scale, there are some opportunities, creation of new districts and landmarks, I think Austin mentioned and it’s really what we’re doing now, except now we’re calling the zoning process. HPC is reviewing it, they’re making a recommendation City Council’s adopting an ordinance. And in this case, staff we had put it on the map. So somebody would know that their properties designated and all those red dots you saw on the map before, they would automatically become HPO districts, because we’ve gone through that process, they’ve been notified. So we can all immediately incorporate them into the ordinance. So it’s really no different than what we’re doing other than we’re calling it a zoning process. And we’re doing the notification. And we’re putting it on the map. We’ve talked about new design guidelines and staff brought that forward and council approved a budget to adopt design guidelines, as we’ve designated it now, that would only apply to the HBO areas. But we know the like historic East Side neighborhood has some concerns about
Unknown Speaker 17:22
incompatible structures or architecture. There would be another way, again, following kind of the same scale for reviewing demolitions where staff could reach out and hopefully compel somebody to join a district or join a landmark. Or we can adopt an overall section in our code, perhaps like the industrial design guidelines that we presented to you last week, it’s these are conceptual design guidelines that apply to every industrial building would be the same way here perhaps within the original town site, or whatever that criteria is a little bit off the scale of legal defensibility. But in the realm of possibilities, so there’s some possibilities. For that nonconceptual designations, it’s kind of a loose process right now, basically, staff can meet with HPC and, and decide, maybe we should designate this property, you make a recommendation to city council, and then City Council decides whether we build through a formal process to do that. I think what we’re talking about now, which I think would be the better way is we follow that process, and we require some additional levels, whether I think we’re saying if it’s a district, there should be 50% of the people within that district that agree, we should designate this as a historic district. So in one way or the other 50% are maybe not are coming along. Maybe not kicking and screaming, but there, we don’t have to get full consent. But again, it’s up to the city council to agree. Removal of designations, this is something also in the code where somebody can petition staff, and I believe it does go to HPC. And it could be for economic reasons, it could be that a portion of the structure is burnt. And it could be for a number of reasons. They want to remove that designation. And what I think we’re going to propose is tightening up those standards of when somebody can remove themselves from their landmark or their district designation. And one of the reasons we have talked about is if there’s a good reason Using for attainable and affordable housing. So kicking back to Austin, who’s been asked to look in some of these gray areas,
Unknown Speaker 20:11
and fun, that’s a good segue into this conversation, we know it’s a really big one. And so I guess I’ll say at the forefront, it feels that you guys just don’t have the necessary information. Tonight, we’re happy to come back with more options, we’re happy to come back with a separate presentation just on this issue, to explore how we can balance the affordable and attainable housing goals with the historic preservation goals. Like I said at the outset, you know, I think part of what’s embedded in historic preservation is the preservation of land. And as a part of that, you typically get benefits economically, it typically means you have higher land value. So if you’re in a historically designated district, your price of land just got higher. And so I think that’s something just fair to say, and I think most historic preservation folks would agree on that part, maybe not, I’d like to hear their thoughts. But all of that to say this is these goals, I think can absolutely be balanced. We’re throwing a couple of options out there tonight, just for discussion purposes, this is by no means all of the options out there. But really, we want to hear from all of you. How best to strike this balance how how this balance would be best strike for the city. So this is just for discussion purposes. And we can come back to this, but we’ve shown some examples there on the slide, just for discussion purposes. But before we get there, I think we can go ahead and finish up the rest of the talk on the procedures related to historic preservation. And at the end, we’ll come back to all of these topics and discuss whatever you all would like to discuss. So the certificate of appropriateness process is something unique to historic preservation. And what it does is a process that is required for historically designated structures before that structure, or that designated property does typically any sort of exterior exterior work. So it’s another procedural step that you have to follow at your designated property. And the reason for that is to ensure that the exterior change isn’t aligned with the character of the historic district or landmark. So right now, there’s one process for students definitive of appropriateness and a separate process for demolitions. And I think Glen did a great job of describing the current demolition process. What we’re proposing is to separate the certificate of appropriateness process out into two processes one major and one minor, the major would absorb the demolition permit. And so you would be required to get a major certificate of appropriateness if you were seeking a demolition of a designated structure that would require HPC hearings and city council hearings. And the minor certificate of appropriateness would be a streamlined process for more minor alterations through designated property. And we can get into some examples of what that looks like. But it’s will be very flushed out. I think last time, I incorrectly stated you could just replace a window with a minor certificate of appropriateness. But that’s actually not true, even as we’ve discussed it, it would have to be the replacement of a window either with a sort of replica or a window that is has no historic value. So one that’s already been replaced in the last 10 years saying, it’s just an example of how that’s more fleshed out. So it’s very specific criteria that allows you to get a streamline certificate of appropriateness. So you can get that work done to your historic structure. And then maintenance requirements. This is something we heard quite a bit about when we first started this conversation with historic preservation. And I was not even a part of it. But we read all the drafts from historic preservation, and there was some concern that some properties might do something called demolition by neglect, meaning you would let your property becomes so dilapidated, that it would be then eligible for a permit for demolition. And so we’ve gone through this or gone about this in a couple of different ways. We’re proposing to instead, add maintenance requirements that would act as your baseline. So all designated properties would have to be maintained in a similar manner to which when the property was initially designated, and then we’ve added criteria to that major CA certificate of appropriateness to ensure that properties that were intentionally neglected wouldn’t be eligible for that demolition, they wouldn’t be eligible to obtain that ca and instead, they’re be forced to maintain their property to
Unknown Speaker 24:53
habitable standards as it was before. So that’s the maintenance requirements. And this is the last thing I’ll say and I’ve been talking to lot and then we’ll kind of go through an overview of everything we talked about and focus on. Whatever you all would like to talk about. This was another issue raised by the historic preservation commission some time ago. Right now, on the left, you have the injected and equitable relief available for violations of the historic preservation code. Again, we’re trying to align this with the LDC. So what we’ve done is brought in enforcement violations that are currently available under the land development code, and then added to that would be specific to historic preservation. And those would entail folks that are really trying to cheat the designation process or cheat the certificate of appropriateness process by assessing penalties in the way of not allowing building permits for a certain time period. If that property owner did some alteration, or demolish their property, without getting that correct approval, then they wouldn’t be eligible for that building permit for some period of time. So essentially, delaying the construction. Those are just options. Certainly nothing has been decided nothing discussed. It’s been decided, We’re just excited to talk about these issues with all of you, and feel that it’s kind of easier to talk about them when you have some sort of proposal in front of you. So all that to say, we’re happy to hear all of your thoughts, questions, comments. Again, this is these are the main slides or main issues we discussed today. Just in way of background.
Unknown Speaker 26:26
A question about HPL, you guys said, several points that was really going to apply to that original one when miles were appealed. Is there a process have additional areas of the city added out there?
Unknown Speaker 26:41
Great question. So let me clarify dual act just like any other overlay district. So no matter where you are in the city, if you meet the criteria for designation, and you go about the approval process, city council approves after an HPC hearing, then you are eligible to be designated in the HBO. So we use the town original town site as kind of an example as those properties that are probably the most likely to be designated but not to say that there’s others now.
Unknown Speaker 27:11
Just a quick follow up on that. So would the HDL include, in essence, the original town site as a whole or Oh, you’re talking about
Unknown Speaker 27:24
nonprofit recurring says
Unknown Speaker 27:27
into that HBO?
Unknown Speaker 27:29
Right. So all of the properties that have already been designated locally, you could just grant in through an ordinance approved by the town council, no additional process, you could just bring them into this ordinance and map them on the zoning map. Any future designation would have to go through the designation process we talked about there has to meet the criteria and be approved by essentially retiring
Unknown Speaker 27:49
HBO to a landmark essentially.
Unknown Speaker 27:55
Not necessarily. So it can be a landmark or it could be a district. It’s really more of a mapping zoning exercise than it is a substantive change.
Unknown Speaker 28:04
But you’re right. We don’t have any district. We don’t have any local districts today.
Unknown Speaker 28:13
I would also like to gently add in your nice overlay of federal, state, local. A lot of us to register stuff has been locked out. I’m not aware of any specific property that is not either designated locally or federally. That’s not that’s separate. Mr. Register, we want to make sure that we weren’t capturing all of that. So that’s information that’s easy.
Unknown Speaker 28:47
You go back to the slide with not that one that the one in Florida last year. Okay. So you said we don’t have any districts right now. But on that map, you’ve got three areas that say they are districts, are they or aren’t they? And what’s the because I don’t think we’ve really defined what a district is. And there’s a second piece of there’s a second usage of the word district that was me. And I think it was what you were getting at. But really, are those three bright colored ones districts are not
Unknown Speaker 29:26
not local districts. Okay. They’re designated under the state regulations.
Unknown Speaker 29:32
So those are state districts and and the local overlay district that you are proposing is not contiguous in any way, but rather it’s a little squares drawn around every single.on the map because I don’t think you said that.
Unknown Speaker 29:55
Right? Yes, the only the landmarks are would get h to immediately, okay would be up to go into the process for future districts. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 30:07
So just to clarify that. So we do have three national register districts, those would be contiguous blocks. So they would
Unknown Speaker 30:18
now like to go through the designation process in the local ordinance.
Unknown Speaker 30:24
Unknown Speaker 30:25
could we recommend doing very similar to what the state does, and that if something is listed at the national or state level that we automatically listed as a city so that we don’t have to do it as
Unknown Speaker 30:37
a process, you can automatically do it, you’d have to go through your designation process, but that’s part of the benefit of the HBO is that if you wanted to map these exact state blobs, district districts, you could use the HBO to do that and get those exact lines, the same agreement into your local ordinance, you’d have to have hearings that have to be a notice period.
Unknown Speaker 31:02
And what status does that give to the homes that are in a state district, but not are not alone, not landmark, and therefore not in the proposed overlay district? Because the residents of those homes will have different opinions on whether they want to be in the system. Right? And what what are their rights and not in and constraints. Maybe that’s you guys probably already know that, except that I don’t know whether the overlay district would cause a change in that.
Unknown Speaker 31:44
Well, the main advantage is through grants. Add tax credits, right. So if somebody wanted to upgrade their facade, they potentially could get tax credits and, and grants through the state. So it’s primarily a carrot system to maintain it. And the city as well has, we allow building permits to be reduced, and those fees be reduced for a landmark or for a change to a landmark?
Unknown Speaker 32:19
So going back to incorporating these. So there is a very long process, and a really large amount of review that goes into a national register district. At the state when we go through that entire process. When I say we automatically make it a state registered as well, we take it to our board and say, hey, the Review Board, Hebron, Washington involved in treating the patient the National Register, we recommend a cut on the city register. And then they are there’s not additional service. If we can do that at the local level, I’d recommend that because I think that saves a lot of staff time other folks times instead of 42 hearings that about
Unknown Speaker 33:09
the time I just want to clarify you should you have to, you have to go through a hearing process. But you’re saying you’d have to go through a hearing process based on what the new code not. I mean, the City Council could adopt whatever it wants, so that this idea seems to be a more efficient and appropriate way to do it. They can just adopt that. And then future changes would have to go through a hearing process. But there’s nothing super cold now. But
Unknown Speaker 33:44
I don’t let me just go with it. With regard to our city code,
Unknown Speaker 33:48
one of the one of the recommendations that we’re making is to bring this historic preservation into our land development code. And our land development code currently does have a public hearing process in place. And so certain applications require public hearing and notice, and then others don’t think the handle administratively by our director. And so in this instance, you know, if we wanted to cut down on local hearings, we would have to make sure that there are exceptions written into the land development code to allow for that. So currently, as it’s written,
Unknown Speaker 34:17
City Council’s decision, just to clarify that this could all be part of a massive piece of work which includes a one time fixed reminded all COVID is one time changeover process. And that doesn’t mean that it should be outside all the time. But just for those that wonder, I want to go back to that continue to slide because you said I was expecting you got to the end so you can come back to that. Are you coming back later? Day or?
Unknown Speaker 34:52
I just thought back to it now? Yeah, absolutely. I’d love to. I just went as far as it’s interesting Are you that you’d like to discuss it but want to make sure it’s your meeting not
Unknown Speaker 35:02
well, this is the I think this was a very big deal. And I’d be interested in what your thoughts were three points in
Unknown Speaker 35:12
depth. So people can, yeah, I can talk about these just for a couple minutes just to explain what these options are a deficit is just a couple of options. But you could do things that support attainable housing like allow ad use without additional approval. So basically saying that even though you’re designated property, we’re not going to enforce the design standards or any additional standards on the development of an edu. And so it’d be an exception to the general rule, essentially, that a new construction in a designated district would typically require a different process, but that you could bring that out and have it as an exception. You can also allow for the conversion, if you took it a step further, a designated property your property upside,
Unknown Speaker 36:04
oh, no, you can finish answering, I just was getting in line.
Unknown Speaker 36:13
So you can allow for the conversion of a property into something a little bit more dense, like some sort of what if certain standards are met to preserve the exterior of the structure. So if you’re just working at the interior, and changing the density, and going from a single family dwelling used to something of higher density, could allow for some procedural streamline, essentially, for those types of conversions. And then this would be obviously a lot. A lot more on the side of attainable and affordable housing. But you could allow a complete off ramp from historic preservation properties properties that are designated if that property owner enters into a development agreement and agrees to for instance, deed restrict the new construction for affordable and attainable housing. Those are some options I’ve seen and other communities. But there’s, there’s quite a lot more out there. But it gives you a flavor of how you go about it.
Unknown Speaker 37:15
So these bullet points about eight to use the first to apply very easily in certain cases, and are very difficult to apply in other cases. So if you’ve got a yard and you can build a canoe in your backyard, you can’t see it from the front. There shouldn’t be any issues with putting a neat and adu back there because it doesn’t change the character of the neighborhood. But a second story on the garage over a garage can be an adu. And a basement entrance can mean a thing or two clicks conversion. I don’t know how to tell those two apart. And, you know, again, adding a second story over part of the part of the building. If you call it an adu is that it was there are some examples of this, you know, in the historic West Side where they’ve added a second storey on the back half of the building and completely changed the look of the house. So how, what are you thinking in terms of how that would be applied? Because you know, I’m a big proponent of increasing density, but you can make a mess?
Unknown Speaker 38:40
Well, I think the future design guidelines will help ease of it. I think that would go a long ways. And in some cases, they could be so specific that it’d be something even done on a staff level and not necessarily read an HPC.
Unknown Speaker 39:00
So both point number three, we already had pushback on this from the historical east side, that a new building, regardless of its affordable, attainable housing does not preserve the integrity of the neighborhood. So I would like to put the section on the second bullet point that says that aim to preserve the exterior structure, something similar in the third bullet point that the exterior structure must, I don’t know, reflect the historical value of an immigrant, otherwise, you will destroy the district. Right? So I think that’s important. And to Marsha’s point on the first bullet point. If we just put that in the code in the adu the addition of an adu per our code No doesn’t have any kind of, I guess requirements for what that looks like. But I do think in a historical district regardless, it still has to fit in with the historical values in it. Otherwise, it could be a bar. I mean, or just? No, I mean, the look of
Unknown Speaker 40:25
the party could be technically. Well, let
Unknown Speaker 40:29
me say that it could just be
Unknown Speaker 40:31
something very different than what was there before. Going through the standards, I think they would, which we’ve been.
Unknown Speaker 40:44
So I’m here as an HPC. Commissioner, but I wear another hat where I really advocate for affordable housing. And I think the first one and the last one, they’re terrible ideas in this context. You know, I think if because, especially because right now, what you’re proposing is that the HDO is just landmark progress, which, on the other note, I don’t know that we’re is enough. But if we’re talking about you have a landmark property, and then you should go in front of the HPC. If you want to alter that property, here, it doesn’t mean you can’t do anything, you or you should go through the you should go through the HPC. It’s the whole point of having a sort presentation commission. Because because it’s not just residential design guidelines, it’s a whole bunch of other criteria that set up by the Secretary of Interior, or we have a whole federal, there’s a reason why they’re professionals on your your agency, because it’s more complicated. And then allowing, you know, the few sort of properties do we have a landmark out, do not be a landmark just to provide housing just seems like we’re there are other ways. So I would push back very hard on that.
Unknown Speaker 42:02
I would also really like us to avoid any, like language or messaging that somehow historic preservation and affordable housing are mutually exclusive. And I think that as a community, we can find ways to meet both without, without sacrificing Historic Preservation so far.
Unknown Speaker 42:29
And I think that’s a point like we would love your guys’s expertise on announcing some either processes or standards that is there.
Unknown Speaker 42:41
Also say that what you’re proposing as part of the overlay is this HBO feels like a is a good way to clean up what we have now and bring it into land use code. So it’s all in one place. But it’s also pretty much a lateral move in terms of protecting neighborhoods. And the light City Council understand, at least from what we have heard, and you’ve probably heard something from the side as well, is that a lot of the concern, and I know it was one commissioners not here sent me a long email, expressing his concerns are partly for commission which COVID as well, is a concern about the these small scale regional town setting neighborhoods and the size and scale of those. And there are properties that might be worthy of a designation that aren’t designated if they’re eligible for just being demolished or you know, greater density and height. And at some point, do you want to protect the neighborhoods, the smaller original towns and neighborhoods in terms of their scale? In a way that’s a little broader than just identifying what we already have, and saying this rolling, rolling as HBO, if you’re already landlines, that’s not going to be enough. It’s not like I know the public as ordinary things is looking for just for.
Unknown Speaker 44:19
So maybe, for me, a clarification of what a historic district is, versus if you’re saying is only certain homes within an area rather than the whole area. This this is where I’m a little confused. When you go back to that red, blue and No, one more there. So each of those dots is a designated district you said locally, but isn’t isn’t one home
Unknown Speaker 44:52
to typically so how can one will be a district so it would be in a district like I is a part of the zoning map. Okay, and so it’s more nomenclature than anything. So I think the confusing part is that calling it the historic preservation district. And then you have historic districts in that, yes. And so so the historic preservation overlay district could be one individual property, like all of those red dots would be, as proposed a part of this sort of preservation overlay district, even though none are a historic district unto themselves, although you do have groupings of them that you can probably make a neighborhood out of or close to,
Unknown Speaker 45:35
I guess my frustration, and this might go to your point, in a way is that if those homes are in a neighborhood, and they have historic designation, like the three that are group during the green, but the homes around them do not have any use or designation, will they be able to build an adu to the specification to the developer, or to the specifications of the CA or whatever, that that’s where I’m a bit confused. So because if we’re preserving historic neighborhoods, then that’s where I’m a little confused. The district should be perhaps the neighborhood,
Unknown Speaker 46:20
not just a follow up in the nurse point. Your legend over there refers to those dots as historic landmarks. Not Historic District. Yeah, okay. And then the district is everything in blue, for instance, is the downtown historic district that’s, I know, that’s, that’s what exists
Unknown Speaker 46:43
on the state level. So yeah, the state, yes.
Unknown Speaker 46:50
The red dots are individual houses or buildings that we in Milan have said, this individual house and also sees the name blah, blah, blah,
Unknown Speaker 47:03
we should because the state doesn’t
Unknown Speaker 47:07
show. So the pink blob, the blue, and the green blob are buildings that are related to each other. And so the they’re on the national and state register as that doesn’t mean that every single building in those blobs is on the national or state register. But it means that that area, has been identified as having a historic relationship that is important as it was deemed a district and a bunch of the buildings and houses within it are listed. Now everything is because you have to have followed our consent, and not everybody within industrial wants to be on the National Register. So those are the things that I was recommending, to kind of keep everything tidy that as a city, we might want to go ahead and also automatically is probable designations.
Unknown Speaker 48:07
In glim, this goes to the question that I asked you, and you only answered the first half of the because I was really asking about the houses that are with in a national district but are not let designated as landmarks. And what constrains them, what constraints are they under, even though they never have applied? Just because they’re in that National district?
Unknown Speaker 48:36
Additionally, constraints on
Unknown Speaker 48:37
planning, regular and regular plan, but yeah,
Unknown Speaker 48:41
but not for the historic district just for the zone that they’re in like
Unknown Speaker 48:48
you’re just missing out on tax credits, and grants basically.
Unknown Speaker 48:53
So on certain expenses to maintain the property.
Unknown Speaker 48:57
Right, which is what I would say one of the things you mentioned was a 50% buy in to be the district, you’re suggesting that the city council can do it. But that isn’t that
Unknown Speaker 49:09
isn’t No. So what I’m suggesting is that those individual blobs have already been through the whole public process where people have had the ability to opt in or not. So and then it’s gone through the National Review Board. That’s a state board, and then going through the approval process from Washington. And so I would think that all those public aspects have been met. And so only the ones that were even if they’re within the blog, only the homeowners who had agreed to be part of the national or state district would then automatically we wouldn’t I’m I’m not a proponent of that for scope. I forget word
Unknown Speaker 49:52
of the forceful
Unknown Speaker 50:00
And then I would suggest to, at the very beginning, when you’re talking about current kind of designated versus
Unknown Speaker 50:07
proposed in seemed like you’re making it harder to be designated. I
Unknown Speaker 50:11
don’t think that’s what we want it.
Unknown Speaker 50:14
In the case of nonconceptual designations, yes, yes. Which, which is almost always in every district. And so if you go back to
Unknown Speaker 50:24
not ever agree with that, but for essential, I don’t want to make it harder, I want easier I want to throw in more parents, which that process
Unknown Speaker 50:33
is almost like a direct carryover. The process of a concessional designation is pretty much a carryover. But the nonconsensual process is much more difficult. But to be clear, almost always a district. So if you made like a new blob, somewhere over here, you almost always have some property owners that do not want to be a part of that district forcing it into the non consensual process. Does that make sense?
Unknown Speaker 51:05
I don’t I mean, what would
Unknown Speaker 51:07
make sense? Yeah,
Unknown Speaker 51:08
cuz we require
Unknown Speaker 51:10
50%. So for just one says, No, you’re forced into that other process, the non conceptual process.
Unknown Speaker 51:18
But that’s to make it into a district, perhaps designate your home. Redistricting happens all the time to homeowners, but to designate a home that elevates what needs to be done to their homes to the point where you’re really affecting property values versus when there’s some effective planning and zoning changes, zoning rules, the district, it sounds like you’d be happy to create that district over there. But until you designate your home as being special for that district HPC is mostly out of it.
Unknown Speaker 51:58
If it was a local district, you would be in anything would come to you within that district. Now, what a lot of cities do is they do a real detailed survey. And they say this is a contributing structure. This is an important landmark, potentially. But this is not contributing, it’s maybe been changed over a period of time. So you have more latitude to do things with that non contributing, and you would look much careful much more carefully.
Unknown Speaker 52:27
Yeah, I’m sure that I would go back to this not conceptual education. I think to me,
Unknown Speaker 52:38
yeah. I will just oh, that I am probably the least familiar with historic preservation challenges. And so Chiquita, so as I’m sitting here, I’m trying to understand as I listen to conversation, one of the problems we’re trying to solve, because that was that’s not real explicit to explicit to you, not to me. So I think I’ve heard legal defensibility is a problem we’re trying to solve. That we need demolition approval process and responsibilities redefined. So it’s not a council member in the chair. Affordable additional affordable, attainable housing is a problem for the city we need to solve whether we do it here or not. But what you’re suggesting is that this may present the possible impossibility from the solution that we have, we don’t have maintenance requirements as problems. Or there were problems. Europeans that now but it will be helpful when maybe I need a tutorial session on here the other problems. I’ve heard solutions, creating new districts and landmarks applying new designation guidelines tighter nonconsensual designation process with whatever that percentage is removal of designations, potentially as a solution in the creation and maintenance requirements. What I what I don’t know, still, I saw reference to goals. I don’t see the goal statement. You said balancing goals. I don’t know what they are. I didn’t see your goals. There’s a goal to be helpful to have articulated as a goal. I don’t know if enforcement is a problem or a solution in this case. So it’d be helpful to know if it’s a problem or solution in the West that balance. I’m not certain if it’d be really helpful for somebody to kind of lay out if these are the options and these are the solutions. Here are the new problems we can anticipate because we’re hearing some reference to that we’ve got to be prepared to identify and have solutions, strategies or options. So So would be helpful for me as a neophyte not to counsel, but Historic Preservation to have some of those details. I don’t know all yielders should keep them throw the questions or, you know, as another neophyte in the room.
Unknown Speaker 54:56
I totally agree with everything that you’re asking. Some of the same notes that you took down back to what you were saying. It makes a lot of sense. Referencing the problems that we don’t see, you know, it makes sense to go ahead and that that area, that national area has already been designated as an historic district. Why couldn’t we just transition those automatically approved those areas? Are those landmarks, right? I think I want to make sure that I have a clear understanding as to the local that H, pos overlay ones in the areas that we see them dispersed. So once they decide, okay, so they’re that HBOs? What happens if we then want to have a district over there? So what happens then? Right. And back to Marsha San asking about the neighborhoods, if you have five in one area? That’s not part of the national? What is the area come to you on and say, We want to be a district, part of the national district or have so that because they want the entire neighborhood to be that historical district, you know, have that characteristic? So I guess that’s my, one of my concerns, including with what Tim was saying, as well. I was just wondering, because there were some areas that have more than one or two and, and then so what happens, then, you know, moving forward, and then you also mentioned the land code, right? So what does that look like when everything is switched over? Within land development code? What are some of those challenges? as well?
Unknown Speaker 57:02
Well, it would be a whole new set of regulations, that would be in addition to all the other regulations in land development code, urine, a designated property, that means there’s these requirements, ours, demolition, going through historic preservation to get a certificate of appropriateness, we all those rules, then kick in.
Unknown Speaker 57:21
But those are rules that exist. And if you want, and clicked, right, there are gorgeous,
Unknown Speaker 57:28
Unknown Speaker 57:30
New, this isn’t all. Not this is just
Unknown Speaker 57:34
saying, just so.
Unknown Speaker 57:42
Back to the idea of goals, obviously, you’re referring to this slide. So these goals, and
Unknown Speaker 57:49
if there’s eight that you currently list.
Unknown Speaker 57:54
I know who you is, because he’s. So he’s read like goals. Okay, protect the historic character of the city. I don’t think anyone would disagree with that one.
Unknown Speaker 58:13
The enhancement of property values and staples. Let’s just stop with the enhancement of property values. You know, I get complaints about things the city does regularly, that say, I want you to do this, because it’s going to decrease my property values. And what I say to them is, you know, changes in city policy are for the greater good of the city. And your investment in your property is just that an investment and it’s not the job of the city to protect your property values. If it says that, then people are going to argue with me about
Unknown Speaker 59:04
property values work or real estate appraiser,
Unknown Speaker 59:07
yes. How they really don’t have any, any way of advancing or decreasing property values.
Unknown Speaker 59:21
And again, this was taken from the current code, these things were changed. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, I don’t know if some of the Spirit preservation commissioners want to speak to maybe some of the arguments that could be for these purposes.
Unknown Speaker 59:41
based on my experiences with districts, it’s probably stems from the fact that many times what really doesn’t export restrictions or preservation codes were in response to neighborhood to crop, disinvestment and overlay workers and because we’re present ration was used as a ordinances, or use or have been used as a tool to help halt and stem neighborhood decline, a lot of that decline has to do with inappropriate conversions of homes to local family structure. But I personally had a house that I did some damage to in that regard. It goes back to a lot of the historic purposes, the fact that our zoning codes didn’t always respect that older neighbors and developed at a different time and were functionally illegal under under more suburban zoning code. So that’s really where the property value comes up. It’s really a store perspective of historic preservation, if that makes any sense. But it really comes back to the fact that these were neighborhoods that were declined. And they were trying to protect properties from being demolished. So that’s just context. That’s a good context. And it means that we shouldn’t be worried that because it’s not to preserve the property values, it’s to enable the homeowner to preserve the historic character of their own province, which they may not, wouldn’t be able to afford to do. If there were not special projects, and so now, but that is a scary phrase.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:28
It’s it’s common, in fact, zoning to the software preamble and zoning, it’s there to protect property values, but it makes me cringe a little
Unknown Speaker 1:01:37
bit, too, we should consider everywhere.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:44
I think the second part, the stabilization of historic towns is really where it is that that’s the important part. That’s what we’re here. So in a worst case scenario, under the current proposal, you can imagine anything that’s not a red dot, could get theoretically raised with whatever structure built without any purview of the historic preservation commission, even being aware of it, it will all be regulated by the language school. And so that, I think, on behalf of at least myself, and from what I’ve heard, and then maybe one other Commissioner, I don’t think that’s, that’s what not what we were seeking, when we started this process of, Hey, we should really take a look at this demolition code. We were seeking some, some level of protection for these neighborhoods as a whole that doesn’t, doesn’t elevate to the standard of a landmark. But I’m asking you for every home in this in these neighborhoods, to have to meet these landmark criteria where they are, you know, where they have to really just really, because those folks are opting to put further restrictions on themselves, or for their own benefit is they love the house. They love the server’s Ovation because they want to get tax credits. They’re opting for higher restrictions. But we’re our feeling is there ought to be another scope or lesser, but still more than Now tear that protects the neighborhood as a whole.
Unknown Speaker 1:03:20
Which was my question about the District versus your individual dots. And that third bullet point and you’re asking for them to have absolutely no ad use in the historic designated homes within that for that third bullet point doesn’t work because those designated homes right. Now go back to the one you were on those goals
Unknown Speaker 1:03:54
Unknown Speaker 1:03:58
to the drivers.
Unknown Speaker 1:04:01
There you go. They would not be able to increase the economic and financial benefits of having an adu on their home. And they my fear is that if unless that is the outset of one of the things that they need to know before they go into the process, chances are they may not want to go into the process or once they’re in and find out they cannot put an adu onto their own living back out of it saying
Unknown Speaker 1:04:34
because I’ve made a response. Yes, yes, please. I think the concern that I’ve heard was that, not that you couldn’t do it, but you could do it automatically. So there’s the currently something like that requires process HPC. And the question is what and there are several bright lines, which none. I think to Tim’s point for that Red clear bright lines and waters. But there are certain things that only require staff and then they can be done certain things we require City Council, which means the City Council getting input from the hdc. Could be done. But but the the the bullet points that you could show were that some things can be done automatically without HBC involvement with that sort of counseling. And I think those, those are where we need a much longer discussion where we get a clear set of where the bright lines are. I wanted a scenario
Unknown Speaker 1:05:44
where the industry was literally only the landmarks. Only going to provide this to the landmarks. And I would have been I would say, we absolutely have to have, then I would object, right? Because if we’re talking about landmarks, if we’re talking about neighborhoods, then I think it goes back to to just letting the HPC reviewers. We have an example of this a couple of years ago where somebody came in and wanted to put an adu over the garage. And, and it was a historic structure. And they wanted to blow it to smithereens. We said no. And we said this is what you ought to do is to get get get complacent all together. So we’re architecting for somebody that knows this and come back. And I did. Because that was appropriate. So we we kind of guided the process. And then the homeowner got a view. But but the neighborhood got more appropriate
Unknown Speaker 1:06:38
Unknown Speaker 1:06:39
thank you for clarifying. And I totally misunderstood what you said.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:47
Because there’s landmarks already.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:50
Neighborhood isn’t just
Unknown Speaker 1:06:54
a conversation. So
Unknown Speaker 1:06:56
this, so clarifying for me again, does the overlay protect the neighborhood? No. Yeah, no,
Unknown Speaker 1:07:06
not as proposed. So all it does, I think it was said, Well, it’s a lateral move. It’s a lateral move to bring your historic preservation regulations into your land development code, which means it needs to walk and act like a zoning district. And so that’s a lot of what that discussion is just those red dots being essentially just mapped on the zoning map. But those districts, which again, is a state process, they haven’t gone through any local process will remain the same under the state regulations. But they are currently not touched by local regulation.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:43
And I would just say conjecture would be that if we were to try to bring in an entire neighborhood section with a bunch of properties that are not historic landmarks, but almost immediately, to my mind require a non conceptual designation process. That’s exactly right. And I think part of the conversation is where we want to set that bench yet right. 50% or higher, right, maybe possibly dependent? Because I would say that separate from what I’m sure he’s PCs are from Canada, that is sort of beside him or association, I’ve had meetings with with those representatives as well. And they’re looking at a much more neighborhood based concept with specific design standards. Right. I think that’s, you know, where I think this kind of disconnect areas is a little bit
Unknown Speaker 1:08:32
that area is shown on here as well. It’s the lighter pink, right, that surrounds
Unknown Speaker 1:08:37
lead, as we see little dots in all the other neighborhoods. Yes, I’ve been a registered north. You see stuff below Third Avenue there. And as we see the the green West Side Historic District exceeds the original town site. For instance, I’m into multiple different neighborhoods, if you were born our borders, orchard and historical aside, so
Unknown Speaker 1:08:59
don’t we already kind of have a non consensual zone and that one mile original block, like everybody within that block, so might do something? Not that block, but that square least square think you have to come into HPC but then the rest of the city is kind of left in this not even a
Unknown Speaker 1:09:22
direct part demolition job or whatever here is if you’re in the original townside You’re supposed to come HUC
Unknown Speaker 1:09:30
for demolition, demolition. You’re taking that
Unknown Speaker 1:09:34
out, but now in your proposal, so we’re losing some tea. I just want to stress that I think we’re losing more than we’re gaining.
Unknown Speaker 1:09:43
I mean, I think you’re right, as far as the demolition process goes.
Unknown Speaker 1:09:48
Does this does the state have slash federal consortium that defines the blue the pink and the green? dually motor During your enforcement at all, or do they just get grants. So if you’re in that area
Unknown Speaker 1:10:04
there, our designation is our elite, there’s really no enforcement, you can put your house on the National Register today. And you could pull those up tomorrow. However, you would not get all of those wonderful grants and other things. It changes if you wanted to go in for federal grants. So even today, I was dealing with private homes in the Marshall fire, that are looking for headphones. So we are we are having to look at historic preservation issues, to ensure things are compliant. So that’s where things get sticky as if you want federal monies in your store commonly that fall.
Unknown Speaker 1:10:51
Probably prescription state statement that you came to all those at home. And this
Unknown Speaker 1:11:01
is a local
Unknown Speaker 1:11:04
question, excuse us, and I think we’re all ears. When you talk about moving that out, then what’s absolutely pleased to second accomplish this.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:18
I think we’d like to, I mean, it sounds like from what we’ve heard tonight that there is definitely a desire to for that blue square, maybe just those properties is what I’m hearing that the HBC wants to hear. Those properties are proposed for demolition, even if they’re not designated Is that am I getting that right?
Unknown Speaker 1:11:45
Right. But we wanted to expand that into other parts, not the entire city, right? Because like I live just outside of that blue square. And it’s, it’s an old neighborhood. It’s not officially historic, designated yet, but we’re seeing weird demolitions and weird pop tops and things that’ll get out of hand really quickly.
Unknown Speaker 1:12:08
So I think we have our marching orders. As far as that goes, I guess I would just say, for some legal issues that were brought to our attention with that process. And that’s why that process was ultimately change. But I think knowing that that is the policy direction. You want to see, we can propose something that hopefully it’s too close.
Unknown Speaker 1:12:31
So, real quick, the proposal for non conventional is 50%. Is that the proposal? Yeah. Because I know it councils conversation in our executive session was slightly different. I think you’re holding it to a slightly higher standard. I remember from our conversation, we’re talking something a little bit 16 above, I think
Unknown Speaker 1:12:53
that really stayed on for two hours. But again, that doesn’t mean you know, lifting individual homes, they opt out, out down. Do something different.
Unknown Speaker 1:13:08
I mean, that’s something we want to hear for sure. Tonight. You know what number people seem to be most comfortable with?
Unknown Speaker 1:13:15
So can I make requests? You heard policy directions, where you get? Could you summarize and whatnot, you would you summarize the policy direction and get it back to us? I’d like to know what you heard. And what direction do you think you’re taking? Yeah,
Unknown Speaker 1:13:32
I’m not sure I have heard it. Yeah, no,
Unknown Speaker 1:13:34
I don’t think we have either. I think I just understand that’s what we’re here for tonight. We want to hear those those conversations. If it’s a higher percentage than 50%, we’d love to talk
Unknown Speaker 1:13:43
about it. We want to make sure our agency counsel had the opportunity to exchange ideas, rather than do this in separate meetings continually. So I think this is kind of our first inroad into the folks who are the professionals doing the work at HPC have been in the process. What I’ve
Unknown Speaker 1:14:03
heard was, I’m sorry, no, no, that’s okay. Well, because what I’ve heard is we’re not all clear on the definitions, it’s hard to make policy
Unknown Speaker 1:14:11
we, like I didn’t understand the District versus the landmarks and what that meant. So for me, this is more of a clarification of, of our policy now. And the discussion of where do we want to go with it? So she didn’t know.
Unknown Speaker 1:14:33
Right? I just wanted to say that, you know, come from over waters to answer some of your questions and kind of leave everyone together with regard to what the problem is that we’re trying to solve. There are multiple there probably multiple more problems that are hidden, you know, hearing the committee, you know, we’re coming to the realization that they’re a little through a lot of little, you know, potholes that we can get stuck into. So, demolition, yes. Looking at the process the demolition, currently, we he proposed a major certificate of appropriateness, as far as the affordable, attainable housing, you know, like, so it’s very large problem with probably larger solution. And I’m not sure that we can solve that today with regard to how it relates to historic preservation. But what we’d like to do is, you know, I can assist Glenn and putting together some of the, quote unquote, concerns in the area that we have, you know, maybe not as clearly highlighted tonight, but we can do that pilot, summarize those, and then go through and, like, often provided today give some proposed solution. So you know, whether it’s 5050 51%, whether it’s 60%, you know, we can kind of point those, point those out, and maybe some of the issues with it, for example, you know, wanting to bring in automatically bring in some of those national registers with the blue, into our local into our local historic, bringing in historically, locally historic what we can, one of the things that we need to look into is whether or not they’re state statutes that require that we need to go still go through the public process, even though they went through it at the federal level. And so there are little nuances like that, that we would need to look into. And so you know, there, there are, unfortunately, a lot of questions that are still lingering. But you know, this is, every single question comes with additional, you know, information and every single, every single little thing that we hear, I mean, there’s more problems, or more concern, you know, areas certain opportunities, there you go. And so what we’d like to do is the way that our code is currently written, it’s not as clear as it should be, the definitions aren’t as clear as it should be sometimes, you know, some of the criteria with a 50 year old, you know, it’s, it’s something that we can maybe add a little bit more flexibility out a little bit more. Just give ourselves a little bit more flexibility, what to do, how to do it, especially if affordable, attainable, comes into play. And so, you know, what we can work on is putting together that statement that summarization of policy goals, quote, unquote, maybe what we’ve discussed today, but I think it’s going to be more areas of concern, not necessarily policy issues that we’ve heard that areas of concern where we can, from there go to some of the policy directions that staff is looking for, we do have some ideas as to proposed language for the code amendments, is that something that you would like to see as well,
Unknown Speaker 1:17:21
or onward, especially in the rest of you to chime in? Especially when you’re talking about looking at the neighborhood, the structure and the history of the neighborhood? So some code, some code language on that, so that they would have to go for any kind of development within that neighborhood? Have it okay. Rather than just having to do because it is not a landmark building, but to preserve the neighborhood that needs to go before.
Unknown Speaker 1:18:02
So possibly happened this year to some of the newer design guidelines that was mentioned. Yes.
Unknown Speaker 1:18:09
Right. On every, every.
Unknown Speaker 1:18:13
So thank you, Joe. I think that what has happened here is that there’s seems to have been an effort to put everything in the same category. And what I think your your analysis should be categorization by use case, so something about the current code now, it treats devolution differently than it treats everything else, and that is working. So you don’t want to undo that. But but it seems like you have three use cases or three categories of, of buildings, the buildings that are eligible for demolition, you have to have buildings that can be modified versus have to go through a process just to be modified. And then you have buildings that don’t have any special designation at all. And in, I don’t think it’s appropriate to put those together because you’re either going to miss an alert, or you’re going to drive everybody crazy with with having reviews, so whether you want to expand the mustard review on demolition, square foot or not, that’s an appropriate square and demolition is the only use case in it. On the other hand, in the UK, if you want to do the overlay district, whether the overlay district includes the national districts as well as the historic landmarks to try to put them in one thing. Well, again, you need to you need to go and look at what the use cases are. If I am in a The left side Historic District. And I want to build an adu when I’m not in historic landmark. Do we care enough about the character of the neighborhood that we’re going to review nor adu application? No. So Hanna, for example, would say yes, absolutely after review that a lot of the homeowners would say no, if I wanted that kind of review, I would have applied to be a historic landmark. So I think there’s some, some use case analysis that needs to to still be done before this goes to code.
Unknown Speaker 1:20:39
But I agree with that. But to your point about the west side. Yeah. That ad use and pop ups are occurring that are not in line with the historic value of the neighborhood. So we do need to define that is a district that we are looking at to look at, to have the ad use go to the historic preservation commission first, or is it just a neighborhood? That’s a big ask. It’s a big ask for the district. It’s a big ask. So I don’t know how you write code for that, to be quite honest. That’s your job.
Unknown Speaker 1:21:34
back I think what you’re talking to really is not that uncommon, where a lot of cities have design guidelines for individual home and AV review that actually don’t have anything to do with historic preservation or city council. But there’s specific design deadlines that are acquired in their time of building permit or prior. So I think that is perhaps a gap in some of our regulations that we do want to fill Grignon historic into that this conversation, at least in my mind, is helping me think through how we might do that more broadly. In addition to the historic specific, I do think those types of alterations and moves are occurring in other departments, where people might like to see simulation of continuity of design, right,
Unknown Speaker 1:22:23
to talk about repeating whatever the besides materials for pitches, those kinds of things that that’s
Unknown Speaker 1:22:31
Yeah, I think some of the broad design guidelines and again, I my neighborhood in London is very different than the historic besides that, like those two wouldn’t be. You wouldn’t use the same design elements. But I think you could certainly use similar elements by neighborhood, which is a big lift. But it’s not uncommon. I think we’ve all some of us worked in other cities that you’ve had that that’s a pretty common occurrence. So when,
Unknown Speaker 1:22:57
when a home wants to put on an adu does planning and zoning, though, then if we go through this process that this home is in historic overlay district, you would know that yeah, so that you would know, different standards here different design standards because of where they are, rather than. Okay, that’s
Unknown Speaker 1:23:22
an easy one. Is that original?
Unknown Speaker 1:23:25
Yes, absolutely. Okay, we have nothing else, we
Unknown Speaker 1:23:30
have a meeting in six minutes. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 1:23:39
Just a closing summary of what you shouldn’t be expecting
Unknown Speaker 1:23:41
before. But I think what we’re going to come back with is a little bit more specific language. Or we could certainly this is ideal to have both of us here. It’s hard to coordinate. But I look to the ideal. Come with more specific guidelines and love working in Salt Lake.
Unknown Speaker 1:24:06
City council news receiver because I realize each guessing a little bit better. I think next year is actually easier.
Unknown Speaker 1:24:19
Yep. And we’re getting more focused at those things. So that’s good.
Unknown Speaker 1:24:23
go so far as getting I think you’re getting a lot of ideas and a lot of follow up content thing. What timeline when we stop our next meeting,
Unknown Speaker 1:24:37
we will look at your calendars. We are committed that will guide our timeline.
Unknown Speaker 1:24:44
Harold needs to put on the agenda here. Our executive sessions sale. You know I really like this because as counsel when the residents come out about historic preservation issues on their neighbor load on your house I was like I don’t know so this has been great so
Unknown Speaker 1:25:08
we have some idea
Transcribed by https://otter.ai