HomeMy Public PortalAbout2022-04-07 minutesCity of Jefferson
Historic Preservation Code Revision Committee Minutes
Regular Meeting – Thursday, April 7, 2022
Boone/Bancroft Room and Virtual WebEx Meeting
Committee Members Present
Glover Brown
Bunnie Trickey Cotten
Debra Greene*
Roger Jungmeyer*
Brad Schaefer
Holly Stitt
Steve Veile
Stacey Young*
*Came in late
Committee Members Absent
Donna Deetz
Cassandra Gould
Doug Record
Council Liaison Present
Laura Ward
Staff Present
Rachel Senzee, Neighborhood Services Supervisor
Karlie Reinkemeyer, Neighborhood Services Specialist
Anne Stratman, Neighborhood Services Specialist
Dawn Kirchner, Neighborhood Services Specialist
Guests Present
Cameron Gerber, News Tribune
Grant Palmer, KRCG
Call to Order
Ms. Cotten called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. without a quorum present. Committee members,
staff and guests introduced themselves. Committee members discussed the need for additional members
since at least two members are no longer living in the area.
Ms. Young arrived at 5:40 p.m., a quorum is now present.
Mr. Jungmeyer arrived at 5:45 p.m. Ms. Greene arrived at 6:16 p.m.
Ms. Young left at 6:42 p.m.
Adoption of Agenda
Ms. Stitt moved and Mr. Brown seconded to adopt the agenda as printed. The motion passed
unanimously.
Approval of Meeting Minutes from March 3, 2022
Ms. Stitt moved and Mr. Veile seconded to adopt the Regular Meeting Minutes of March 3, 2022 as
written. The motion passed unanimously.
Old Business
A. Designation of Local Historic Districts and Local Landmarks
Ms. Senzee explained that the process entails submitting an application and designs standards to the
City in a final draft form before it goes to the Historic Preservation Commission for final review. City staff
would not write the design standards, however they review the design standards to ensure they are
appropriate for a local historic district, they do not conflict with zoning laws and they are in line with the
2
Secretary of Interior’s Standards. Staff will create guidelines to assist applicants step by step through the
application process.
Ms. Stitt moved and Ms. Young seconded to approve the previously proposed changes to this
section. The motion passed unanimously.
Published Notice – Local Landmark.
Ms. Senzee asked whether a public hearing is required since a local landmark is an honorary
designation.
Mr. Veile moved and Ms. Stitt seconded to remove the requirement of a public hearing for a local
landmark. The motion passed unanimously.
Action Upon HPC Recommendations
Ms. Senzee explained that there was some confusion at the last meeting regarding direct costs that
are the responsibility of the applicant related to the publication and provision of notice of the required
public hearing. She explained that direct costs are the hard costs an applicant would be responsible
paying for such as the cost of postage and the cost of advertising a public hearing notice in the
newspaper.
Ms. Cotten commented that requiring an application fee is one thing but having open ended costs
would be confusing.
Ms. Senzee explained that staff will look at the fee schedule in the City Code to establish an
application fee.
Ms. Stitt commented that this is only applicable if an application is denied and the applicant has to
resubmit their application.
Ms. Senzee explained that if the Historic Preservation Commission denies the application the
applicant can withdraw or they can amend and resubmit their application. Instead of collecting a second
application fee, they applicant would pay for the hard costs of postage and advertising.
Ms. Stitt commented that once an application fee is established we can see which option is more
feasible.
Ms. Stitt moved and Ms. Young seconded to table this section until application fees are established.
The motion passed unanimously.
New Business
A. Procedure to Amend or Rescind
Rescinding a Local Historic District or Local Landmark
Ms. Senzee explained that section pertains to the City Council’s ability to initiate the process to
rescind or amend a local historic district or a local landmark. An applicant, as well, can submit an
application to the City Council to remove a local historic district or local landmark.
Ms. Cotten commented that the City Council an rescind or amend a local historic district or local
landmark without this being in the Code.
Ms. Ward commented that a local historic district or a local landmark should only be rescinded by
those that have ownership in a property. The City Council should not initiate rescinding or amending a
Local Historic District or a local landmark.
Mr. Veile moved and Ms. Stitt seconded to remove the highlighted language that allows the City
Council to initiate rescinding or amending a local historic district or a local landmark. Also remove the
3
language in red and underlined that allows the City Council to initiate rescinding or amending a local
historic district or a local landmark without a petition.
After additional discussion, the motion passed unanimously.
Ms. Senzee explained that currently the Code stipulates that a petition signed by no fewer than 50
percent of the existing property owners shall accompany the application.
Committee members stated that the percentage to rescind or amend a local historic district or local
landmark should be higher than 50%. They suggested increasing that percentage to 75 percent.
Mr. Veile moved and Ms. Young moved to increase the percentage to rescind or amend a local
historic district or local landmark to 75 percent. The motion passed unanimously.
B. Procedure to Authorize construction, reconstruction, alterations to, or demolition of structures
2(a)i – Action on proposed alterations, reconstruction, or additions
Ms. Senzee explained that once your design standards are in place and you want to do an alteration,
reconstruction or addition within a local historic district and you come in for your building permit, if your
project clearly fits in with the design standards your permit can be issued administratively by staff. If you
fall within a gray area or are wanting an exception to the rule, the Historic Preservation Commission will
make that determination.
For clarity, committee members suggested moving the following sentences to the beginning of 2(a)i–
Action on proposed alterations, reconstruction, or additions: City staff may administratively approve
applications that clearly meet the design standards of a local historic district. All other applications shall
be sent to the Historic Preservation Commission which shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny
said applications.
Ms. Stitt moved and Ms. Young seconded to move the last two sentences in 2(a)i; to the beginning of
that paragraph. The motion passed unanimously.
2(a)ii-Action on proposed alterations, reconstruction, or additions
Ms. Stitt commented that this paragraph seems like it is the same as the last paragraph.
Ms. Senzee explained that the first paragraph s establishing what goes to the Historic Preservation
Commission and what is administratively approved.
Mr. Veile moved and Ms. Stitt seconded to direct staff to edit this paragraph especially the last
sentence. The motion passed unanimously.
2(a)iii- Action on proposed alterations, reconstruction, or additions
No changes were suggested.
2(a)iv- Action on proposed alterations, reconstruction, or additions
No changes were suggested.
Action on proposed demolition of a structure for preservation of a structure in a district for
preservation.
Mr. Veile suggested tabling this section until the next meeting.
C. Historic Heritage District
Ms. Senzee explained that since we are creating a Historic Heritage District there needs to be a
definition in the Code.
4
Mr. Brown commented that the definition for historic is history passed down through edifices. Heritage
is passed down through tradition of the area. Urban renewal was a systemic way of eliminating a lot of
black communities. Since then edifices were destroyed and 50 years later they cannot form a historic
district because it will not meet the criteria. If we can create a template for this, other minority
communities can replicate what we are doing.
Mr. Veile suggested changing the last part of the definition as follows: relevant to the historical,
cultural or traditional periods of significance which no longer exist.
Ms. Senzee reiterated that a Historic Heritage District is a geographical area of historical, cultural, or
traditional significance for which most of all of the physical attributes (structures, streets, public areas,
archeological, etc.) relevant to the historical, cultural or traditional periods of significance no longer exists.
Mr. Veile moved and Ms. Stitt seconded to amend the Historic Heritage District as noted above. The
motion passed unanimously.
Dates to Remember
The next regular meeting is scheduled for May 5, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. in the Boone/Bancroft Room.
Adjournment
Ms. Stitt moved and Mr. Brown seconded to adjourn the meeting at 6:54 p.m. The motion passed
unanimously.