Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-12-16 PACKET 06.A. REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA MEETING ITEM #� DATE 12/16/15 y �' , PREPARED BY: Community Development Jennifer Levitt ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT STAFF AUTHOR � * * * * � � * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST: 1. Hold the public hearing for an ordinance amendment establishing a process to allow removal of properties from the City's Register of Historic Sites and Landmarks. 2. Consider adopting the ordinance amendment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the request. BUDGET IMPL(CATION: $N/A $N/A N/A BUDGETED AMOUNT ACTUAL AMOUNT FUNDING SOURCE ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION: DATE REVIEWED APPROVED DENIED ❑ PLANNING ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ PUBLIC SAFETY ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ PUBLIC WORKS ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ PARKS AND RECREATION ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ HUMAN SERVICES/RIGHTS ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY ❑ ❑ ❑ � HISTORIC PRESERVATION 11/10/15 ❑ � ❑ SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: � MEMO/LETTER: Memo from John M. Burbank dated 12/10/15 ❑ RESOLUTION: � ORDINANCE: Draft ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ❑ OTHER: ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: 1 r /� -�//� City Administrator Date * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * � * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * :� COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER Cottage J Grove �here Pride and P�OsPerity Meet TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Charlene Stevens, City Administrator FROM: John M. Burbank, Senior Planner DATE: December 10, 2015 RE: Historic Registered Properties Ordinance Amendment Background/Proposal Over the course of the last year, several questions related to the City's Local Register of Historic Places and Landmarks have been raised. The first question is what it means to a property owner to have their property listed on the Local Register. In the early 1980s, the City of Cottage Grove was one of the first communities in the state to officially establish a Historic Preservation Program and become a Certified Local Govern- ment (CLG) with the State Historic Preservation Office. Being a CLG enables the City to qualify for state and federal grant funds related to historic preservation. During that early period of historic preservation, the City inventoried over 300 historic properties within the community. Of those sites, 50 properties were included on the Historic Resource Inven- tory based on their significance in history, architecture, engineering, and culture. Of those 50 properties, 17 are listed on the City Register of Historic Places and Landmarks, with 4 of those also being on the National Historic Register. The City Ordinance related to the designation of Historic Sites and Landmarks is detailed below: 9-9-4:DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC S1TES AND LANDMARKS: A, Procedures: The city council, upon the request of the advisory committee on historic preservation, may by resolution designate a historic site, landmark, or historic district. Prior to such designa- tion, the city council shall hold a public hearing, notice of which shall have been published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing;notice of the,hearing shall also be mailed to all owners of properfy which is proposed to be designated as a historic site, landmark or historic district and to all property owners within one hundred meters (100 m) of the boundary of the area to be designated. Every nomination shall be for- warded to the Minnesota Historical Society for review and comment within sixty(60) days of the advisory committee on historic preservation's request. B. Eligibility Criteria:In considering the designation of any area, site,place, district, building or struc- ture in the city as a historic site or landmark, the advisory committee on historic preservation shall consider the following factors with respect to eligibility: 1. Its character, interest, or value as part of the history or cultural heritage of the city, the state or the United States; Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Charlene Stevens Historic Registered Properties Ordinance Amendment December 10, 2015 Page 2 of 6 2. Its association with persons or events that have made a significant contribution to the cultural heritage of the city; 3. Its potential to yield information important in history or prehistory; 4. Its embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of architectural type or style, or elements of design, detail materials or craftsmanship; and 5. Its unique location or singular physical appearance representing an established or familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or community of the City. (1971 Code§ 13A-4) The City does not register properties without the action being initiated by the property owner. Being on the Local and National Registers can make certain projects eligible for tax credits and available grant programs. Having a property listed on the Register impacts a property owner when modifica- tions to the exterior of a structure are proposed. No City historical review is required for internal remodeling projects. The Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation (ACHP) must review all exterior building permits and recommend that the City Council issue a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) prior to any con- struction activity. Several COA's are issued every year in conjunction with registered properties. The City utilizes the Secretary of the Interior's standards for the treatment of historic properties as the basis for reviewing proposed work. Below is a summary of those standards: 1. A properfy will be used as it was historically or be given a new use which reflects the property's restoration period. 2. Materials and features from the restoration period will be retained and preserved. The removal of materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize the period will not be undertaken. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Work needed to stabilize, consolidate and conserve materials and features from the restoration period will be physically and visually compatible, identifiable upon c/ose inspection, and properly documented for future research. 4. Materials, features, spaces, and finishes that characterize otherhistorical periods will be documented prior to their alteration or removal. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize the restoration period will be preserved. 6. Deteriorated features from the restoration period will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. 7. Replacement of missing features from the restoration period will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. A false sense of history will not be created by adding conjectural features, features from other properties, or by combining features that never existed together historically. 8. Chemical orphysical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Charlene Stevens Historic Registered Properties Ordinance Amendment December 10, 2015 Page 3 of 6 9. Archeological resources affected by a project will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 10. Designs that were never executed historically will not be constructed. In relation to the alteration of historically significant properties in Cottage Grove, the City Code reads: 9-9-6:ALTERATIONS TO LANDMARKS OR HISTORIC SITES;REVIEW,• A. Review And Recommendations Generally: The advisory committee on historic preservation shall review and make recommendations to the council concerning proposed alterations to a landmark or an historic site. 8. Building Or Land Use Permit:Every application for a building or land use permit which may result in the alteration of a designated historic site or landmark in the city shall be reviewed by the advisory committee on historic preservation; thereafter, the committee shall make a recommendation and may recommend conditions regarding approval to the city council concerning the proposed permit. No permit will be issued by the city building official unless a certificate of appropriateness has been granted by the city council. This certificate may contain conditions of approval that the council deems reasonable and appropriate. C. Plats, Variances Or Conditional Uses: Every application for a preliminary or final plat, variance or conditional use permit in relation to a designated historic site or landmark in the city shall be re- viewed by the advisory committee on historic preservation, and their recommendation shall be forwarded to the planning commission and to the city council to be considered by the planning commission in making their recommendation to the council. D. Other Building Permits: The advisory committee on historic preservation shall review and make rec- ommendations to the council concerning the issuance of city permits to do any of the following in an historic district in the city: 1. New construction. 2. Move a building. 3. Excavation. 4. Demolition. E. Factors Considered: The advisory committee on historic preservation, upon receipt of the permit application and plans, shall determine if the work to be performed adversely affects the designated historic site or landmark. In determining whether or not there is an adverse effect to the historic site or landmark, the committee shall consider the following factors: 1. Whether the work will significantly alter the appearance of the building or structure so as to remove the features which distinguish the historic site or landmark as a significant cultural resource. 2. Whether the use of the property will destroy, disturb or endanger a known or suspected archaeo- logical feature site. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Charlene Stevens Historic Registered Properties Ordinance Amendment December 10, 2015 Page 4 of 6 F. Standards And Guidelines: The comprehensive cultural resource management plan adopted by the city shall be the authoritative guide to reviewing permits in relation to designated historic sites, land- marks and historic districts. The secretary of the interior's "Standards And Guidelines For Archae- ology And Historic Preservation"shall be the required basis for permit review decisions. This ordinance criteria for registering and managing historic properties has worked sufficiently over the years; however, in reviewing the criteria, there is no established language related to the process for delisting a property that is on the Local or National Register. This fact relates to the second ques- tion that the City has been repeatedly asked recently, which is what the process is for a property owner to get their property removed from the Historic Register. This question is typically from newer owners that were not part of the original registration process. In reviewing this question, it was found that in 1994 the City did remove a property from the Local Register (Resolution No. 1994-226, which is attached). However, there is no detailed record as to the 1994 delisting process. Given the clear and concise procedures for registering a property, it would seem prudent to establish procedures for property owners seeking their due process before the City. Given the silence of the City Code in relation to this topic, The City Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation (ACHP) reviewed the following text amendment language: 9-9-10; DELISTING OF HISTORIC SITES AND LANDMARKS: A. Procedures: The Citv Council. uaon the reauest of a proaertv owner of a aarcel of land that contains a structure orfeature that is desianated as a historic site orlandmark. mav bv resolution remove the subiect propertv from the Citv's Reaister of Historic Sites and Landmarks, or from a historic district. Prior to such action, the request shall be reviewed bv the Advisorv Committee on Historic Preservation. The committee shall make a rec- ommendation on the issuance of a certificate of aaaroariateness to the Citv Council. Prior to approvina the resolution reqardina the removal reauest. the council shall hold a aublic hearina, notice of which shall have been aublished in a newsaaaer of aeneral circulation at least ten (10) davs prior to the date of the hearinq: notice of the hearina shall also be mailed to all aropertv owners within five hundred feet (500 feet) of the boundarv of the area to be desianated. Ev_erv removal reauest shall be forwarded to __ the Minnesota Historical Societv for review and comment within sixtv (60) davs of the advisorv committee on historic areservation's reauest. B. Review Criteria: In considerina the reauest to remove area. site. place, district. buildinq, � or structure from the from the local historic reaister. the advisorv committee on historic preservation and the Citv Council shall consider the followincr factors with resaect to the reauest for removal: 1. Have anv conditions related to the aroaertv's character. interest. or value as aart _ __ - of the historv or cultural heritaae of the citv. the state or the United States chanaed? 2. Is the aropertv eliaible for the National Historic Preservation Reaister? Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Charlene Stevens Historic Registered Properties Ordinance Amendment December 10, 2015 Page 5 of 6 3. Does the inclusion of the aroaertv on the local historic reaister have a demonstra- ble hardshia or cause neqative imaacts in the current aroaertv owner's abilitv to manaae or market the aroaertv? 4. Is the proaertv's association with aersons or events that have made a sianificant contribution to the cultural heritaae of the citv clearlv evident bv the reaistration on the local historic reaister? 5. Will the aroaertv's association with aersons or events that have made a sianificant contribution to the cultural heritaae of the citv be neaativelv imaacted bv the removal from the local historic recrister? 6. Can the aropertv's aotential to vield information imaortant in historv or prehistorv still be obtained documented and distributed before and after the removal of the propertv from the local historic reaister? 7. Are there other examales on the local historic reqister or within the communitv that have similar distinauishina characteristics of architectural tvae or stvle. or elements of desian. detail, materials. or craftsmanshia? 8. Would the removal of the aropertv from the local historic reqister detract from the si nificance of ifs historic aast within the neiahborhood and communitv? 9. Are there oaaortunities for the current propertv owner and the Citv to activelv aro- mote the historv of the proaertv with the site not included in the local Historic Reaister? The ACHP discussed that removing properties from the historic register seems counterintuitive to the Historic Preservation program and its intentions, but that a property owner should have a means in which to bring their request before the ACHP, the City Council, and the general public. The Com- mittee also discussed verification of the criteria and findings that were utilized to register specific properties. It was recognized that times and conditions change and the management of a historic property is ultimately and financially the responsibility of individual private property owners. The ACHP unanimously passed a motion for the City Council to discuss the potential of an ordinance amendment establishing language for the process to remove a site from the City's Register of Historic Sites and Landmarks. The ACHP recognized that if the ordinance were amended, the act of removing a site would still be required to be reviewed by the ACHP and City Council. The ACHP also recommended that if a property were to be delisted for purposes of non-historic treatment or potential demolition, the City should recommend that a property owner take the following steps: • Don't significantly change the historic features of the structure. • Explore options to do an adaptive reuse of the structure. • Work with the City to document the significant historic features of the structure for the City's historic record archives. • Distribute the historic information of the structure and property in an educational manner to the general public. • Utilize demolition as a last resort. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Charlene Stevens Historic Registered Properties Ordinance Amendment December 10, 2015 Page 6 of 6 The State Historic Preservation Office Certified Local Government Coordinator stated that he under- stood the establishment of language addressing the process and procedures for removal of a historic designated property from a public policy perspective, but that it is a not conducive to preservation efforts. He also indicated that depending on the City's future actions relating to historic preservation, our eligibility as a CLG could be jeopardized. The only grants the City has obtained over the last few years has been to attend the annual State Historic Preservation Conference, which is a requirement for a CLG. Most of the other grants require matching fund requirements, and the Division's budget has not allocated for grant matches in many years. Recommendation That the City Council adopt the attached ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. XXX. AN ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING TITLE 9, CHAPTER 9, OF THE COTTAGE GROVE CITY CODE RELATING TO DELISTING OF HISTORIC SITES AND LANDMARKS The City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota, does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDMENT. "The Code of the City of Cottage Grove, County of Washington, State of Minnesota," shall be amended by adding Title 9-9-10 to read as follows: 9-9-10: DELISTING OF HISTORIC SITES AND LANDMARKS: A. Procedures: The Citv Council, upon the reauest of a proaertv owner of a aarcel of land that _ contains a structure or feature that is desianated as a historic site or landmark. mav bv resolution remove the subiect propertv from the Citv's Reaister of Historic Sites and Landmarks, or from a historic district. Prior to such action. the reauest shall be reviewed bv the Advisorv Committee on Historic Preservation. The committee shall make a rec- ommendation on the issuance of a certificate of aapropriateness to the Citv Council. Prior to aaarovina the resolution reaardina the removal reauest. the council shall hold a public hearin , notice of which shall have been aublished in a newsaaper of aeneral circulation at least ten (10) davs prior to the date of the hearina: notice of the hearina shall also be mailed to all aropertv owners within five hundred feet 1500 feet) of the boundarv of the area to be desianated. Everv removal reauest shall be forwarded to the Minnesota Historical Societv for review and comment within sixtv (60) davs of the advisorv committee on historic preservation's request. B. Review Criteria: In considerina the reauest to remove area. site, place, district, buildina, or structure from the from the local historic reaister, the advisorv committee on historic preservation and the Citv Council shall consider the followina factors with resaect to the request for removal: 1. Have anv conditions related to the aropertv's character. interest, or value as aart of the historv or cultural heritaae of the citv, the state or the United States chanaed? 2. Is the proaertv eliaible for the National Historic Preservation Reaister? 3. Does the inclusion of the aropertv on the local historic reaister have a demonstrable hardshiq or cause neaative imaacts in the current aropertv owner's abilitv to manaae _ or market the aroaertv? 4. Is the aropertv's association with aersons or events that have made a sianificant contribution to the cultural heritaae of the citv clearlv evident bv the reaistration on the local historic reaister? 5. Will the aropertv's association with persons or events that have made a sianificant contribution to the cultural heritaae of the citv be neaativelv impacted bv the removal from the local historic reaister? Ordinance No. XXX Page 2 of 2 6. Can the aropertv's potential to vield information imaortant in historv or prehistorv still be obtained documented and distributed before and after the removal of the ropertv from the local historic reaister? 7. Are there other examales on the local historic reaister or within the communitv tf:at have similar distinauishina characteristics of architectural tvae or stvle, or elemei�'rs of desian, detail. materials, or craftsmanshia? 8. Would the removal of the aropertv from the local historic reaister detract from fihe si nificance of its historic past within the neiahborhood and communitv? 9. Are there opaortunities for the current propertv owner and the Citv to activelv promote the historv of the propertv with the site not included in the local Historic Reaister? SECTION 2. SUMMARY PUBLICATION. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 412.191, in the case of a lengthy ordinance, a summary may be published. While a copy of the entire ordinance is available without cost at the office of the City Clerk, the following summary is approved by the City Council and shall be published in lieu of publishing the entire ordinance: This ordinance amendment provides a process for owners of properties on the City's Register of Historic Sites and Landmarks to request removal of their property from the Register. SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall be in full force and efFect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Passed this 16th day of December 2015. Myron Bailey, Mayor Attest: Joe Fischbach, City Clerk Published in the South Washington County Bulletin on [Date].