Bluffdale Historic Preservation Commission

BLUFFDALE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA February 7, 2019 Notice is hereby given that the Bluffdale City Historic Preservation Commission will hold a public meeting Thursday February 7, 2019 at 6:30 PM at the Bluffdale City Hall located at 2222 West 14400 South. Notice is further given that access to this meeting by members of the Historic Preservation Commission may be by electronic means via telephonic conference call. The agenda for this meeting is listed below. Please note that the meeting start time is approximate and subject to change. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION BUSINESS MEETING 6:30 PM 1. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Approval of January 10, 2019 meeting minutes Discussion Items 3. Historic Preservation Commission Business (planning session for upcoming items, follow up, etc.) 4. Adjournment Dated: February 1, 2019 Caitlyn Miller Senior Planner, City of Bluffdale In compliance with the American Disabilities Act, individuals needing assistance or other services or accommodation for this meeting should contact Bluffdale City at least 24 hours in advance of this meeting at (801)-254-2200. TTY 7-1-1. *Contact Caitlyn Miller at (801)-254-2200 *422 if you desire to give the Invocation.  DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY BLUFFDALE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, January 10, 2019 1 Present: Chair Hales, Chair 2 Robin Thraen, Vice Chair 3 Andrea Hales, Secretary 4 Kory Luker 5 John Roberts 6 Arlene Parry 7 Rhonda Pilcher 8 Ross Jones 9 10 Staff: Caitlyn Miller, Associate City Planner 11 12 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION BUSINESS MEETING 13 14 Chair Hales called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. All Historical Preservation Commission Members 15 were present with the exception of Mel and Sheila Spencer. 16 17 1. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. 18 19 Rhonda Plicher offered the Invocation. Kory Luker led the Pledge. 20 21 2. Approval of November 29, 2018 Meeting Minutes. 22 23 The minutes were reviewed and modified. It was noted that Mark and Andrea Hales no longer live in 24 Parry Farms. Their new address is 1651 West 14600 South. 25 26 Kory Luker moved to approve the minutes of November 29, 2018, as amended. The motion was 27 seconded by __________. Vote on motion: Chair Hales-Aye, Robin Thraen-Aye, Kory Luker- 28 Aye, Rhonda Pilcher-Aye, Arlene Parry-Aye, John Roberts-Aye, Ross Jones-Aye, Andrea Hales- 29 Aye. The motion passed unanimously. 30 31 Discussion Items 32 33 3. Discussion of Historic Preservation Project Ideas. 34 35 Chair Hales asked if there were any project ideas to be discussed since the November meeting. 36 37 Associate City Planner, Caitlyn Miller, reported that at the first meeting there was discussion of 38 potentially brainstorming historic preservation projects that could be facilitated within the City of 1  DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY BLUFFDALE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, January 10, 2019 1 Bluffdale. The City has reestablished its Certified Local Government (“CLG”) status with the Utah 2 State Historic Preservation Office so they are now eligible to receive grant monies. She informed the 3 Commission that the CLG grants require a dollar-for-dollar match. In addition, the Historic Preservation 4 Commission’s budget for this fiscal year is $500. The funds will be available until June 30, 2019. 5 6 Potential projects were identified. Ross Jones stated that there are five and perhaps more, structures that 7 are important to preserve. He asked if there are any other foundations along the river or any other 8 specific artifacts that need to be preserved. 9 10 Commissioner Jones identified the structures as follows: 11 12 • His home located at 1342 West 14650 South; 13 • Chair Hales’ home; 14 • Robin Thraen’s home, which is the Old Lewis House located at 14570 South 1690 West; and 15 • An old school house located at 14459 South 1690 West. Commissioner Thraen had already 16 spoken to the owners of the old school house and identified them as Jan and Lyle Wilde. 17 18 Robin Thraen asked if prior survey of the historic sites was conducted. She stated that at a previous 19 meeting there was discussion about someone having a list. Ms. Miller stated that there was a list in the 20 master file that is maintained by the State Historic Preservation Office. She was happy to distribute it to 21 the Commission Members. She noted that 30 to 32 percent of the buildings surveyed have been 22 demolished since the survey was conducted. 23 24 Ms. Miller reported that production of the minutes is outsourced and asked that each member of the 25 Commission identify themselves when speaking. 26 27 Ms. Miller addressed the file from the State’s Historic Preservation Office and stated that it did not 28 include diagrams or photographs. The file contained only a nondescript list of building features, 29 materials, and the general location of each. 30 2  DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY BLUFFDALE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, January 10, 2019 1 Ross Jones stated that a complex survey was done 20 to 25 years ago. He offered to provide a copy to 2 staff or the Commission. Ms. Miller asked that he bring it to her at his convenience at which time she 3 would scan and distribute it to the Commission Members. 4 5 Ross Jones reported that there is an old adobe structure located at approximately 1450 West 14600 6 South. He estimated it would cost $400 to $1,000 to preserve it. He mentioned that the inside was 7 damaged due to drugs and vandalism. Ten or 15 years ago it could have been preserved but may now be 8 too far gone. Boyd Mousley, a descendant of Lewis Mousley, previously owned Commissioner Jones’ 9 home and has a lot of information on the area. Commissioner Jones stated that Mr. Mousely knows the 10 location of the foundation of the old Cannon Residence. He did not know whether it should be 11 preserved but stated that it is along the Jordan River around 1300 West. 12 13 Robin Thraen asked if the goal was to identify the homes that everyone is aware of or just those that are 14 in need. She suggested that a list of both be prepared. Ms. Miller stated that the list was provided to 15 Bluffdale by the State as part of the master file that contains all of the structures that have been surveyed 16 as historic structures. They are not necessarily assigned in any particular order. Ms. Miller reported that 17 the 1994 survey also provides the date of construction and confirmed that this is the most recent list 18 available. 19 20 Commissioner Jones suggested they update the priorities regarding the attention and needs of each 21 structure. Commissioner Thraen commented that it would be beneficial to find photos. Chair Hales 22 suggested they remove the demolished structures from the list. Ms. Miller commented that more 23 structures have been demolished since the list was created. After removing the demolished structures, 24 each could be labeled as eligible significant, eligible contributing, or ineligible/noncontributing, after 25 which the status of reach could be reevaluated. 26 27 Ms. Miller described the difference between eligible significant, eligible contributing, and 28 ineligible/noncontributing. She stated that for a home to be considered eligible to be listed on the 29 National Register of Historic Places, a few criteria must be met. First and foremost, it must be at least 30 50 years old. Over time, buildings are altered, and additions are built onto homes, so the designation of 31 a contributing home eludes to the fact that it is still historic, but some changes have been made. 3  DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY BLUFFDALE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, January 10, 2019 1 However, the changes that have been made do not outweigh its historic significance. An eligible 2 significant building has less alterations and is more obviously historic. A building that was originally 3 constructed with adobe brick where the exterior has been pulled off and replaced with vinyl siding 4 would make it noncontributing because it has been altered to the point that you can no longer tell that it 5 is a historic structure. 6 7 Ms. Miller asked if the Commission would like to conduct an updated survey it is an eligible grant 8 activity. She noted that in addition to CLG grants requiring a dollar-for-dollar match, a city can only 9 have one grant in place at a time. If they wish to apply for a grant to conduct the survey this year, they 10 would not be eligible to receive funding until 2021. The grant cycle runs every 16 months and each 11 CLG can only have one active grant. Robin Thraen asked why they would want to spend money on a 12 survey. Ms. Miller explained that it would depend on the extent of the survey being conducted. The 13 National Parks Service, which is over the National Register of Historic Places, has set criteria pertaining 14 to who is considered a licensed professional who can conduct the survey. If someone is not available in 15 the community who meets those requirements, an outside consultant could be sought. 16 17 Commissioner Thraen suggested the list be created, divided up, and a visual taken of the various 18 locations. It was determined that there are 162 line items on the list. A few are listed as demolished on 19 the survey and a few since then have been demolished so the number of structures is less than 162. 20 Commissioner Thraen asked that they divide the structures among the Commission Members to the next 21 meeting’s agenda. 22 23 Ms. Miller explained that the list can also be filtered by the different types of structures identified. 24 Commissioner Thraen suggested they not only consider the age of the structure but also who lived there 25 or the significance of the structure. Chair Hales asked what value the Commission would put on who 26 lived in the structure. Commissioner Thraen would not want a home to be overlooked because of its 27 condition and not recognized because of a historically significant person who once lived there. 28 29 Commissioner Jones suggested they divide the list up among the Commission and specify what they 30 consider to be the beginning point of the discussion. They could also identify significant findings. 4  DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY BLUFFDALE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, January 10, 2019 1 Ms. Miller stated that if they need a printed copy, one could be obtained. Commissioner Jones offered 2 to provide the file to Ms. Miller to distribute. 3 4 Ms. Miller was asked to filter the list by ‘significant’ structures. It was noted that 17 structures were 5 listed as demolished, 46 were eligible contributing, 41 were eligible significant, 45 were identified as 6 ineligible/noncontributing, and two were undetermined. Ms. Miller suggested the Commission keep in 7 mind that some structures have since been demolished so further reductions to the list may be required. 8 She offered to conduct research to further update the list. Procedural issues were discussed. 9 10 Ms. Miller reported that the Commission Members’ grant applications for with the upcoming cycle are 11 due February 8, which is the day following the February meeting. It was clarified that the Commission’s 12 annual budget is $500. The grant amount is a dollar-for-dollar match meaning they would receive $500. 13 Ms. Miller stated that typically the funds typically involve expenditures for education, pamphlets, etc. 14 She stated that the City has been working with the Sons of the Utah Pioneers on the monument and 15 statue relocation and she did not know if those costs had been covered or if additional funds were still 16 needed. She offered to follow up and report back to the Commission. 17 18 Commissioner Thraen asked if they could make application by the February 8 deadline and use any 19 funds received for the statue relocation. Ms. Miller explained that as part of the grant application, they 20 must list specifically what project the grant money will go toward. If there is a project the Commission 21 wants to pursue immediately, she would be willing to fill out the grant application form and send it to 22 the State Historic Preservation Office for their consideration. If the Commission prefers to wait and 23 have a longer list of potential projects, they could find other sources of funding and wait until the next 24 grant cycle. 25 26 Commissioner Thraen asked if the visual survey the Commission agreed to do could fall under the 27 umbrella of “preservation planning”. Ms. Miller explained that it could, and that one of her goals for 28 tonight’s meeting was to obtain a list of ideas from the Commission that she could provide to list to 29 Alena Franco, the City’s contact at the State Historic Preservation Office. They can then confirm which 30 potential projects are eligible for funding. Chair Hales asked if the Commission meet on February 7 if 31 they could they still submit the grant application in by February 8. Ms. Miller would try to make the 5  DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY BLUFFDALE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, January 10, 2019 1 deadline but was not confident in the tight time frame. She stated that if there is a project they would 2 like to move forward on immediately, they could begin filling out the grant application for that project 3 now. 4 5 Chair Hales asked if Ms. Miller had any projects in mind for the Commission to consider for this current 6 grant cycle. She did not have any specific ideas but stated that the City Council is interested in hearing 7 ideas for projects. Ms. Miller stated that at a previous meeting there was discussion about establishing 8 an artifact repository. 9 10 It was noted that the artifact repository and perhaps a books and reference library area would be a 11 worthwhile use of grant monies. The amount of money offered would fit a project of this scale. It was 12 further clarified that it could include a case or shelf in the City Building where they could place 13 historical artifacts. The City already owns some and residents may also be willing to contribute. The 14 case or shelf could be used to rotate out artifacts. There are also books about the history of the City that 15 the Commission could make available to the public. 16 17 Another idea was to create flyers to make the owners of historical homes aware that there are funds 18 available to them. Chair Hales commented that there are limited funds. It was clarified that the flyers 19 would let them know that residents can apply for the opportunity to note that their building is significant. 20 It was proposed that the funds be used to make a list of significant buildings available to the general 21 populous. 22 23 Chair Hales asked about the book previously mentioned pertaining to the history of Bluffdale and 24 whether the copyrights have expired. The possibility of scanning it and making it available online was 25 mentioned. He also proposed the idea of including these structures on a map of the City along with the 26 location and history of each. The website could also allow people to add their own stories to the 27 associated building. Ms. Miller stated that it is something the Commission could look into. 28 29 Ms. Miller listed four potential projects including updating the survey, a repository or reference library, 30 printing and distributing informative flyers, and a digital database. She would be happy to take the list 31 to Ms. Franco and see which projects are potentially eligible for CLG funding. She would report back to 6  DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY BLUFFDALE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, January 10, 2019 1 the Commission about which projects are eligible. At that point the Commission could give further 2 direction. 3 4 Chair Hales asked if the Commission would like to have Ms. Miller submit all four ideas to Ms. Franco 5 or if there was one issue they would prefer to focus on. It was suggested that all four be presented for 6 consideration since certain projects may be ineligible for funding. Commissioner Thraen clarified that 7 the Commission will determine which projects move forward. 8 9 Chair Hales clarified that Ms. Miller would submit the ideas to Ms. Franco in order to save time in the 10 grant application process. If the Commission is not given funding, they could potentially apply again in 11 2020. Ms. Miller stated that all grant applications are typically funded if they involve eligible projects. 12 She stated that if desired, the Commission could wait for the next grant cycle to apply to allow more 13 time to look into additional sources of funding for projects. 14 15 Chair Hales inquired about the $500 from the City Council and whether it will roll over or is a surplus 16 that must be spent. Ms. Miller assumed it would roll over but would confirm that that is the case. Chair 17 Hales asked if the money will accumulate every year to build up a nest egg to fund a larger project. He 18 stated that if they had a bigger project, they could approach the City Council and propose the idea for 19 extra funding. Ms. Miller explained that the grant requires a dollar-for-dollar match. She stated that 20 additional funding sources and options were being considered. 21 22 A question was raised about whether there are historic items other than buildings and structures that 23 need to be preserved. It was noted that oral histories could be recorded or updated and the materials 24 being compiled could be in one place so that the history is not lost. It was proposed as a future concept 25 that perhaps Old West Days be set as a time for people to tell their stories and then digitize them. Chair 26 Hales stated that perhaps the project could include obtaining a camera, microphone and other digital 27 equipment to record stories. Ms. Miller indicated that these types of items could potentially be eligible 28 for grant funding. 29 30 Rhonda Pilcher shared an example of a piece of history that should be preserved. She reported that her 31 grandparents built a home on 14400 South and added an addition on to it by obtaining a structure from 7  DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY BLUFFDALE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, January 10, 2019 1 the train station. As the soldiers from World War II went through the train station, they would sign the 2 wall. When this addition was added on the back of their home, the signatures were covered, but they are 3 still there. Chair Hales considered that to be something that should be digitized and thought it could 4 potentially be done by volunteers. Ms. Pilcher commented that there may be other similar stories that 5 the Commission is not aware of. Commissioner Thraen stated that a good place to ask for information 6 of this sort would be the newsletter. Ms. Miller agreed to present all of the ideas to Ms. Franco and 7 report back to the Commission. 8 9 4. Historic Preservation Commission Business (Planning Session for Upcoming Items, Follow 10 Up, Etc.). 11 12 Chair Hales reported that there is an upcoming meeting on February 7, 2019 at 6:30 p.m. Ms. Miller 13 stated that if the Commission would like to meet earlier than February 7, that would also be a possibility. 14 The ordinance does not specify a minimum or maximum amount of time between meetings. 15 16 Commissioner Thraen asked that the Commission review the ordinance to see if any changes need to be 17 made. She personally had several questions about the ordinance. Ms. Miller said that the City was 18 looking to move forward with the amendments because they did not know if an updated ordinance 19 would be necessary to reestablish the City’s CLG status. In the end, they were not necessary and it was 20 determined that the existing ordinance was acceptable to the State Historic Preservation Office. It was 21 not a pressing issue so the Commission would be able to take more time to review it. In response to a 22 question raised, Ms. Miller stated that the proposed revisions and deletions had been incorporated into 23 the document. 24 25 Commissioner Thraen had concerns about some items that were proposed to be removed and wanted to 26 discuss them further. Andrea Hales suggested that a working document be distributed among the 27 Commission that the collective group can work on. Timing issues were discussed. A determination was 28 made to wait to discuss the details at a future meeting. 29 30 It was noted that the original ordinance contained subjective language that is difficult to defend. It was 31 suggested that it instead contain more clear cut language. Commissioner Thraen was concerned about 32 issues such as issuing permits to demolish. The previous version allowed time to survey and take photos 8  DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY BLUFFDALE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, January 10, 2019 1 of significant items but had been removed from the ordinance. She suggested that a specific amount of 2 time be given so as not to hold up a construction project. 3 4 Procedural issues were discussed. Chair Hales stated that by the next meeting they should have 5 information back from Ms. Franco about what is and is not an eligible project. He also stated that they 6 would make a decision via email about which projects to proceed with. Ms. Miller would check with 7 Ms. Franco about which projects are eligible for CLG funding and report back via email to the 8 Commission. At that point the Commission can decide if they would like to proceed with the current 9 grant cycle or if they would prefer to wait until 2020. 10 11 Chair Hales asked the Commission which of the four proposed ideas the Commission would prefer to 12 move forward. The first choice of the Commission was to proceed with the repository. The second 13 choice was a digital database. 14 15 Ross Jones offered to provide the survey document to Ms. Miller to digitize for safekeeping and 16 distribution to the Commission. This was to be done prior to the next meeting. 17 18 5. Adjournment. 19 20 The Historic Preservation Commission Meeting adjourned at approximately 7:30 p.m. 21 22 23 24 __________________________________ 25 Caitlyn Miller 26 Senior Planner 27 28 Approved: _________________________ 9