Local Resources Advisory Board

12/17/2024 - Minutes I. Call to Order Members Present: Sue O’Brien; Matt Shoen, Brian Steinmetz, Britta Tonn City Staff Present: Ravi Venkataraman Call to Order by: Matt Meeting Start Time: 6:03 pm Minutes Recorded by: Ravi II. Changes to the Agenda None. III. Public Comment None. IV. Approve Previous Meeting Minutes Motion by Brian, seconded by Sue, to approve the November 13, 2024 meeting minutes. Voting: unanimous. Motion carried. V. Discussion: Update on the Certified Local Government (CLG) Program Application Ravi provided a brief update on City Council’s review and approval of pursuing the Certified Local Government program application. Ravi said that he he is in conversation with the state historic preservation office about next steps. Brian asked about the timeline for approval. Ravi said that the approval process should take a few weeks. Sue asked about grant opportunities. Ravi said that the program’s grant would pay up to 60% of the project cost. VI. Discussion: Design Review Guidelines Ravi said he hasn’t had too much time to think about design review guidelines since the last meeting, but acknowledged its importance. Ravi explained that parts of this could be done by us, and reviewed Burlington’s guidelines. Ravi asked the board if there was interest in drafting documents. Brian suggested lifting from other documents. Sue said that our guidelines should be visual heavy, considering our context. Brian said that the city should consider different types of buildings and different typologies, and consider the mills in the City when developing guidance. Matt said that he will look through Shelburne’s and Williston’s guidelines to see what they say, and to determine what we need to do for our own guidelines. Sue asked if building inspectors can provide design review guidelines during inspections. Ravi said that he doesn’t think they have the capacity to do design review guidance. Ravi added that code enforcement been good about informing people about the status of the property on the local resources list when they propose any changes to the buildings. Brian said that adherence to design review might slip through the cracks considering that safety is prioritized above  Sue asked if building inspectors can provide design review guidelines during inspections. Ravi said that he doesn’t think they have the capacity to do design review guidance. Ravi added that code enforcement been good about informing people about the status of the property on the local resources list when they propose any changes to the buildings. Brian said that adherence to design review might slip through the cracks considering that safety is prioritized above historic preservation and added that some sort of incentive might be needed to encourage improvements per historic preservation standards. Britta said that design review guidelines are tricky, that a lot of communities defer to the Secretary of the Interior standards, and that considering the Winooski context, we should be careful and mindful of the standards we place. Britta said that we can learn from other communities on how things work and don’t work regarding historic preservation standards. Sue said that St. Albans might be worth looking into. Brian said that we can borrow some things from them considering the socioeconomic context. Britta said that we need to make sure the guidelines are easy to administer with considerations for personal aesthetic choices. Sue asked about the most common building improvement projects. Ravi said that the roof, windows and siding would be goods place to start. VII. Discussion: Strategy for addressing critical endangered resources and updating the local resources list Matt said that an additional survey would be a great use for CLG funding in 2026. Matt added that for now, the board should ask the state about their projects that would inform us about the historic nature of buildings. Britta suggested that they can start compiling properties that have become eligible for the state register, and use the state and national register to fill out the local register. Britta added that through the evaluation of properties by the FAA for soundproofing, property owners are getting formal eligibility determinations, but that using the state or national register eligibility can get complicated. Ravi suggested that if the board is to conduct a review of properties, the board should look comprehensively, be meticulous about which properties it wants to qualify, and engage in conversations with a handful of properties. Ravi recommended that the board should do this at a single point in time, and not do this one at a time, as this would make sure that the board is thoughtful about the process and that the city doesn’t do spot zoning. Brian said that we should try to define what a local historic resource is and that this should be the first question we answer. Britta said that explaining how something becomes a local historic resource should be at the beginning of the guidelines. Britta added that the VHB report has guidelines on how a building/structure would be eligible for the historic register, and design review guidelines. Britta said that they could create a historic district. Brian expressed qualms about creating a historic district because it could price people out for its status. VIII. Discussion: Signage program and other possible initiative programs Sue said that a MOU in the works with the city to take over the sign in front of the Champlain Mill. Sue discussed possible content on the sign. Brian said that once Sue figures out the content, he can design the message. Sue asked for other potential sites for the state green signs. Britta said that for mitigation, the cost of the sign is on the developer, and that if it’s a public education piece supported by the community or a non-profit, the state might pay for half. Britta added that the signs are usually posted to honor a person or event. Matt suggested a sign for Lewis Hine. Brian asked about the  can design the message. Sue asked for other potential sites for the state green signs. Britta said that for mitigation, the cost of the sign is on the developer, and that if it’s a public education piece supported by the community or a non-profit, the state might pay for half. Britta added that the signs are usually posted to honor a person or event. Matt suggested a sign for Lewis Hine. Brian asked about the mills themselves. Matt said that the mills already have plenty of panels, and that those need to be refreshed. IX. Discussion: Communications Ravi reviewed open meeting laws and guidelines. The meeting was interrupted. X. City Updates N/A XI. Other Business N/A XII. Adjourn Meeting End Time: 7:33 pm