Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-11-15 MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Historic District Commission was held on
November 15, 2007 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113
W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
ACTION TAKEN
Dickson Street Historic District Design Standards Discussion only
White Hangar Local Ordinance District Report Forwarded
Historic District Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 2
MEMBERS PRESENT
Vince Chadick
Cheri Coley
Tim Cooper
Rob Merry -Ship
Ethel Goodstein-Murphee
Karon Reese
STAFF PRESENT
Kristina Jones, Long Range Planning
Karen Minkel, Long Range Planning
MEMBERS ABSENT
Leslie Belden
STAFF ABSENT
2
Historic District Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 3
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair Goodstein-Murphree at
5:37 p.m.
I. Announcements
A. Karen Minkel, Senior Long Range Planner, announced that beginning in
January, minutes would only include actions taken rather than a summary
of discussions. DVD copies of the meetings would be kept for reference
by staff, officials or the public. City Council approved this method in
order to save staff time.
B. Minkel also requested that the Commission move the White Hangar report
to the beginning of the meeting because she would have to leave early but
wanted to answer any of the Commission's questions.
II. Approval of the Minutes
MOTION to approve the minutes of October 11, 2007: Cheri Coley
SECOND: Vince Chadick
VOTE: The vote was unanimous to approve the minutes from the October 11,
2007 meeting, 6-0-0.
III. Change to the Order of the Agenda
MOTION to discuss new business before old business: Cheri Coley
SECOND: Vince Chadick
VOTE: The vote was unanimous to discuss new business before old business,
6-0-0.
New Business
IV. Review of Air Museum Local Ordinance District Report
Minkel first explained the process described in Arkansas State Code for establishing a
local ordinance district. The Historic District Commission (HDC) must first prepare a
report that is submitted to the Planning Commission and the Arkansas Historic
Preservation Program Office. These bodies have 60 days to suggest changes or approve
the report. HDC must then hold a public hearing, which must be advertised in the local
paper once a week for three consecutive weeks before the hearing. After the public
hearing, the HDC may make changes to the proposed district and then can submit the
proposed ordinance to the City Council for final approval. Minkel then summarized the
staff report for White Hangar, which is now the Arkansas Air Museum. The structure is
one of only two dozen or so World War II -era aircraft hangars. While the structure is on
the Arkansas Registry of Historic Places, it does not qualify for the National Registry
because of the modifications that have been made to the exterior. The benefits of a local
3
Historic District Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 4
ordinance district would include protection and preservation of the structure as well as
opportunities for preservation and restoration grant funds.
Commissioner Chadick asked if there was any opposition to the proposed local
ordinance district from the museum.
Minkel responded that both the Airport Board and Air Museum Director were in favor of
the proposal.
MOTION to submit the report to the Planning Commission: Vince Chadick
SECOND: Rob Merry -Ship
Chair Goodstein-Murphree stated that she would like the report to include the
nomination form for the Arkansas State Register.
Commissioner Chadick restated his motion with Commissioner Goodstein-Murphree's
amendment.
MOTION to submit the report to the Planning Commission with the inclusion
of the nomination form for the Arkansas State Register: Vince Chadick
SECOND: Rob Merry -Ship
VOTE: The vote was unanimous to submit the report to the Planning
Commission, 6-0-0.
Old Business
V. Dickson Street Historic District Design Standards
Chair Goodstein-Murphree said that the minutes from the previous meeting showed the
depth and complexity of developing design standards for a Dickson Street district. She
shared an outline that included elements of potential design standards and said that the
first page represented information that the commission agreed was significant. These
included preserving the commercial vernacular, the streetscape, trees and alterations of
existing buildings. She commented that when she looked at the goals, she could not find a
lockstep translation into a series of guidelines. However, the efficacy of the ordinance
would be based on having clear standards. The outline was modeled after El Dorado,
which had a tone of using best practices rather than punishments.
Minkel reminded the commission that it would need to make a decision about
applicability.
Chair Goodstein-Murphree added that the commission would need to discuss: 1)
degree of restoration; 2) adaptive re -use; and 3) demolition.
Commissioner Chadick asked about the consideration given to contributing versus non-
contributing buildings.
11
Historic District Commission
November 15, 2007
Page S
Chair Goodstein-Murphree said that she would like to see a copy of the actual National
Register nomination form, which would have a tidy summary of the historic significance
and would be to the commission's benefit.
Commissioner Chadick said that he thought the guide to preservation resources in the
outline was a perfect addition.
Minkel reminded the commission that the map of the National Register district indicated
contributing addresses with red dots.
Commissioner Chadick asked if the idea would be to exempt non-contributing buildings
from improvements.
Chair Goodstein-Murphree gave examples of dealing with broken glass or other public
safety issues as exempted improvements. She separated these issues from a discussion on
contributing versus non-contributing buildings. She asked if work on non-contributing
structures were exempt, could you end up with something that would be deleterious to the
district. Her personal feeling was that exempting structures would be letting the horse out
of the stable, but she was waiting to hear someone play devil's advocate.
Commissioner Chadick added that contributing buildings owners might give pushback
if they felt they were being held to a higher standard.
Commissioner Coley said she thought everyone needed to be held to the same standard.
Commissioner Reese said that she thought the Three Sisters building was an example.
She would hate to see it torn down because it was exempted. The old strip shopping
center would theoretically be exempted, but it was a funky structure that contributed to
the character of Dickson Street.
Commissioner Cooper responded that it might contribute to the character but the
developer probably wouldn't like the commission dictating what he could or could not do
with the property.
Commissioner Chadick said that maybe what the commissioners were talking about was
a minimum standard where the commission would not control the outcome but there
would have to be a dialogue with the developer where the commission would get to say,
"Have you thought about this?"
Chair Goodstein-Murphree responded that some districts operate as advisory rather
than regulatory bodies. They might want to consider the commission's role with non-
contributing structures as advisory but regulatory with contributing structures. With
regards to encouraging appropriate development, she suggested that tax incentives might
be a vehicle for this. She thought that demolition is where these incentives could be
utilized since it is generally thought of as a sticky subject. She then stated that the role of
the Historic District Commission is to encourage the maintenance, and preservation of a
Historic District Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 6
contributing structure. Then again posed the question that if a structure is non-
contributing, what do we do?
Commissioner Chadick asked how we move this forward.
Chair Goodstein-Murphree responded that we give staff the information, they write it
and then the commission marks it up.
Commissioner Chadick stated that he wants written standards that would apply
generally to contributing or non-contributing structures. He is not yet ready to vote one
way or another regarding non-contributing structures. Staff should draft a set of general
standards.
Chair Goodstein-Murphree referred to previous discussion of existing building
standards and said that the commission has discussed big picture goals and ideas that can
transform into a framework for exterior guidelines. We can also look at the Secretary of
the Interior Standards to use as a guideline.
Commissioner Chaddick suggested that this body could both maintain and encourage
incentives as well as be an advisory board. He thought that the commission should be a
"you should" body, not a "no you can't" body and asked how they might support
incentives.
Commissioner Merry -Ship referred to the Ad Valorem Tax Exemptions Programs
handout as a model of good incentives and a role model for the group.
Chair Goodstein-Murphree asked staff to research the information with Kit Williams
and get a sense of whether the ordinance will get support.
Commissioner Reese wanted to know how staff would actually go through the process
of developing guidelines. Would staff be going through the Secretary of the Interior
Standards line by line?
Chair Goodstein-Murphree replied that the theme of the Secretary of the Interior
Standards is "do no harm", and that work should be compatible with, and extend the life
of the building. Staff would develop guidelines in the same spirit.
Commissioner Chadick requested that staff provide city regulations on the demolition
process or any other discussion on demolition and also if there are any federal regulations
in regards to it.
Chair Goodstein-Murphree Issued directives for staff.
1: Staff should begin to articulate guidelines for exteriors, and guidelines for additions, so
that they might be able to visit how to look at regulations for contributing versus non-
contributing structures.
0
Historic District Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 7
2: Look at current city regulations pertaining to demolition and get that to the
commission.
3: Visit where we would stand to look at specific incentives regarding Ad Valorem
Taxes.
She referred to Argenta in North Little Rock where a small investment from the city can
go a long way toward rebuilding and rehabilitating.
MEETING ADJOURNED: 6:47 P.M.
7