HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-05-28 Historic District Board SummaryHISTORIC DISTRICT BOARD
May 28, 1996- 7:00 p.m.
~~AGENDA~~
Kenai Council Chambers
Chair Dorothy Gray
1. ROLL CALL:
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
March 26, 1 996
PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD:
a. Rachel Clark--Proposed Shkituk' Village Interpretive Site Plan
5. HISTORIC BOARD REVIEW:
6. NEW BUSINESS:
7. OLD BUSINESS:
a. Preservation Plan, Part 2
b. Review of Sign Code
c. Shkituk' Village
8. REPORTS:
9~
INFORMATION:
a~
Sign Grant Information Letters
Challenger Learning Center Information
The Alaska Association For Historic Preservation Newsletter
NAPC Information
Preservation Advocate News
Heritage Newsletter
Bittner Letter & Governor Knowles Proclamation
10. BOARD QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS:
1 1. ADJOURNMENT:
1,. ROLL CALL:
Members Present:
Others Present:
HISTORIC DISTRICT BOARD
May 28, 1996
Minutes
Dorothy Gray, Alan Boraas, Ethel Clausen, Michael
Huhndorf, Kim Booth, Rebecca Gabriel-Godek, Bill Kluge
Administrative Assistant Marilyn Kebschull, Engineering
Technician Rachel Clark
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Chairperson Gray stated she would like to postpone work on the Preservation Plan
Part 2 to the next meeting because the city received notice that the survey will not
be done for another couple of weeks. The survey is a large part of the Preservation
Plan. Gray asked if anyone disagreed with moving this to the next meeting. No
one disagreed.
AGENDA APPROVED WITH NOTED CHANGE.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
March 26, 1 996
Gray asked if there were additions or changes to the minutes of March 26, 1 996.
Booth advised she had not had an opportunity to read the minutes. Godek stated
she thought she had been absent at the last meeting and Gray advised these
minutes were from the March meeting and that in April a quorum had not been
established.
MINUTES APPROVED AS WRITTEN.
4. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD:
a. Rachel Clark--Proposed Shkituk' Village Interpretive Site Plan
Clark advised she is preparing a master plan for the Daubenspeck area and part of
what the council wanted was an area to be designated for use for the Shkituk'
Village Interpretive Site. Clark stated she had researched the location of that site to
the best of her ability. Clark advised she had reviewed two U.S. surveys dated
1 891 and 1 906 and mapped those out on an autocad drawing that she has of the
city. Clark stated it looked like the surveys were reasonably close to the Russian
Mission plot and noted if anything else, they were along the western edge. Clark
stated that since the city doesn't own that spot she thought that the area identified
as area 8 on the supplied map as outlined in yellow would probably be the most
appropriate spot to designate for that site. Clark asked if the board had comments
on this proposal.
Note' Huhndorf arrived at 7'06 p.m.
Boraas asked if Clark had copies of the survey and asked to look at them. Gray
clarified Clark was talking about area 8 adjacent to the Russian Mission plot.
Boraas asked Clark how she determined the Shkituk' area and Clark shared the
survey information noting the survey said, "It is known as the old cemetery ground
but at present is not used for such a purpose. Quite a large settlement existed
formerly in the immediate vicinity near the eastern boundary. Most of the natives
having died, the village was deserted and only ruins of former houses exist. The
survey was made in the presence of Reverend Bartnovsky who pointed out the
corners of the tract to me." Gray asked Clark what she had just read from and
Clark stated it was part of the U.S. Survey No. 1 92 completed in 1 906. Huhndorf
asked where Clark had gotten the surveys. Clark stated that Phil Bryson had
provided them adding he was doing some research into the site location also.
Clark stated she knew there had been different ideas about where the original
village actually was located. Clark noted that from the city's perspective, the city
has a limited amount of land actually in city possession and area 8 is probably as
close as the city can come to the site.
BREAK FOR DISCUSSION ON SURVEY AND TO ALLOW CLARK TO SHOW THE
BOARD HOW SHE HAD DETERMINED THE SITE.
Note' Kluge arrived at 7'18 p.m.
Booth asked Clark to explain the proposed Spur View Drive extension. Clark
advised if section 6 of the Daubenspeck property is developed as anticipated noting
the city already has a lease application, the city would want access that runs
through the property. Clark advised the city will keep section 7 for it's own use
and it would be beneficial to have two access points. Clark advised there is a
gravel road through section 4. Clark stated if the Daubenspeck property was
deeded like this, that access would be cut off at the corner.
Booth asked what kind of leases the city is entertaining for the Daubenspeck
property. Clark stated it would be up for lease or sale and that would be up to the
Townsite Historic District Board
Minutes
Page 2
May 28, 1996
purchaser. Clark stated she thought the lease was a standard 100 year lease.
Clark stated that for sale it would be for open bid but the person who initiated the
sale has the option of meeting the top bid if they so choose.
Huhndorf asked if there was a chance that they could obtain information on the
individual property owners concerning the site and intentions for properties that
would effect Shkituk'. Huhndorf stated he knew the city owned some of the
property and he thought there were some private property owners in the area.
Clark stated the city owns everything including technically owning the FAA
complex but the government has the right to use it forever. Clark added that the
Russian Mission is not the city's. Clark stated one piece was owned by Northern
Pacific Processors. Clark stated that the title to the Daubenspeck property states it
is supposed to be dedicated for outdoor recreation so there are some concerns
whether it can actually be leased or sold. Clark added she believed that had been
cleared up. Huhndorf asked if it would be possible to get a copy of proposals for
each piece of property and what it will be used for. Clark advised that is part of
what she is developing now adding she believed the intent of the council is to
develop commercially area 6, 4, and possibly area 5 if the government will let the
city do so. Clark added that would necessitate moving the FAA complex so that
may be sometime in the future. Clark advised that if everything was developed
commercially she didn't know if this board would be in that process and asked
Kebschull if she knew. Kebschull advised she thought they would be included in
decisions about the Shkituk' but other than that it would go through P&Z.
Boraas asked Clark to restate the location of Shkituk' Site and pointed to the map
which Clark confirmed as the correct site. Discussion on the map.
Kluge asked Boraas if there was a survey of the grounds or anything in the works.
Kluge continued asking who would be responsible fOr a survey. Boraas advised the
property owner has to authorize a survey. Kluge asked if it has historic
significance, doesn't the government come into play. Boraas advised if state or
federal funds are involved it does. Clark commented like the Mission Street project.
Kluge asked if the city operates on a sharing basis with funds derived from federal
or state agencies. Boraas stated he thought funds had to be specifically earmarked
for a project involving any money from the state then the State Antiquities Act
would apply and the Federal Antiquities Act would then apply. Boraas stated that
act basically says you can't intentionally destroy anything of historic value. Boraas
clarified if it is purely city land and city money, the act would not apply.
Kluge asked Clark what was proposed for section 7. Clark advised the city will
keep that property. There are some storage Quonset huts there and some
Townsite Historic District Board
Minutes
Page 3
May 28, 1996
environmental concerns. Kluge asked what time frame are they talking about with
the use of this site. Boraas advised it is unclear how long it was used in the distant
past. It is probably as old as 1000 AD until it was abandoned sometime after 1900
and before 1 906. Boraas noted that on the 1900 census, eight families lived in the
area and called it Old Kenai. On the census they referred to Fort Kenai as the Old
Town area.
Kluge asked what it would take to acquire state funding for an exploratory
archeological survey? Boraas advised there is no funding available that he is aware
of. Kluge commented it would be a shame if they let portions of this site for
commercial development prior to a survey being done. Kluge added if there are
archeological finds on this site it would be interesting exhibit material. Boraas
stated that material that Ken Jordan who lived in that area took out of his garden
was cooper hammers and copper artifacts of the prehistoric era that are very
distinct from post 1000 AD Kluge noted then that this is documented information.
Kluge stated he would personally like to see this board pursue action to initiate a
survey.
Clark asked if they had any idea of what price range they were talking about.
Boraas stated he was guessing but to complete a ground survey could be from
$2000 to $5000. Huhndorf asked how long it would take and Boraas stated about
3 weeks. Kluge asked how the survey was done. Boraas stated a grid is made and
then spots are randomly selected. Kluge asked about depth of digs. Boraas stated
a lot is done with soil auger samples adding that sometimes you can even find
houses that way. Huhndorf asked how far down and Boraas stated to sterile sand.
Gray stated a lot of ground has been pushed up onto the Russian Mission property.
Kluge asked if you would just want to sift through the pile and Boraas stated
possibly.
Clark advised the board if that is their intention they could choose to make a
recommendation to council if the board doesn't have funding sources of their own.
Kluge asked if this was FAA property? Clark stated that was the Daubenspeck
property and that section 4 a grant had been accepted on, section five is in limbo.
Kluge asked about section 7. Clark advised that is part of the Daubenspeck
property noting that sections 6, 7, and 8 were the original Daubenspeck property.
Bill Godek asked if it is $2500 or less if you have to get council approval. Kluge
asked if someone had that much in discretionary funds. Clark stated she wouldn't
make that recommendation.
Kluge stated he was unaware of the antiquity that is involved at the site. Kluge
added he thought this was fairly current from the early 1 900's. Boraas noted that
Townsite Historic District Board
M~utes
Page 4
May 28, 1996
was the main village of Kenai before the Russians came. Kluge stated he felt from
the board's standpoint that possible artifacts should significant for exhibit purposes
not only here but other places. Kluge asked if artifacts could be displayed locally.
Boraas stated if federal or state, funds are involved, artifacts need to be designated
to a accredited museum. Boraas stated typically items are loaned from one
museum to another. Kluge asked what if city money was used and Boraas stated
there is no designation. Kluge asked if there were finds and city funds were used
what would happen and Boraas stated the city would own them. Boraas stated the
city should have a policy. Kluge stated he felt the city should be aware that there
is a value to these artifacts not just historical but monetary value for exhibit
purposes. Boraas stated you want to stay away from placing a monetary value on
them because you run the danger of encouraging looting. Kluge stated he
understood that but was coming from the standpoint of selling a survey to the city
and that there is a possibility of coming up with some unique artifacts. Boraas
commented that the value is educational.
Huhndorf asked if there was a possibility of getting construction plans or blueprints
of what was done in 1 940. Huhndorf added that he liked the idea but if there was
a record of what was fill it would be helpful. Kluge stated they would just say the
commander would come out to the job and say push all that overburden there, and
build this building here. Bill Godek asked if the artifacts, even though they are on
city property, wouldn't they be tribal property. Huhndorf stated that applies to
federal lands and they have jurisdiction over human remains. Huhndorf stated that
private land isn't included and it is an honor system. There is no legal binding now
if it isn't on federal land.
Godek stated it was her understanding from Mayor Williams that the city was going
to do some kind of a survey on the land to check for buried oil drums, etc. Godek
asked if they could find archeological things too or does this survey need to be
done before that. Clark stated that to the best of her knowledge prior to the
commercial sale of that property it would require an environmental assessment.
Clark added they would not be looking for archeological remains. Godek stated she
remembers him saying it would be done this summer. Clark stated there has been
no directive to staff to proceed with an RFP. Kluge stated that one approach to
this might be that we would like some money from the city to do an archeological
survey and while doing so will keep eyes open for contamination.
Clark advised that if this is something the board wants to proceed with they could
go two ways. One way would be a recommendation from the board to put it in the
master plan which means the council will read the master plan, but it won't be a
separate item. Or, they could make a draft recommendation to council to proceed
Townsite Historic District Board
Minutes
Page 5
May 28, 1996
with an archeological study. Booth asked if Clark felt it would get buried in the
master plan and it won't get the attention if the board went the other direction.
Clark stated that she would word it that prior to the development of any of that
property or surrounding property, areas 6, 7, and 8, that a strong recommendation
that an archeological survey be done. That way if they are ready to proceed with
commercial development, they will be ready to respond and at least look at first.
Gray asked if they should ask that an archeological survey be performed for the
purpose of locating the village site and retrieving any artifacts. Kluge stated he
didn't think they could do much retrieval for $2,000. Boraas stated a full scale
excavation is dependent on what you find in the survey. Boraas stated you might
find nothing and then it doesn't warrant any further work or you may find quite a
bit and that would necessitate a season of work. Kluge commented that it would
be a good process for the city to go through to identify what is there.
Kluge stated the first thing council will want to know is where the funds will come
from and asked Booth what the visitor center had for funds. Booth stated the city
cut their budget and other fund raising sources are not doing well. Booth added
that doesn't mean that they couldn't work in concert with looking into a grant.
Booth noted they are building their budget now and she will keep this in the back of
her mind. Booth stated that their Cultural Council, a sub-board of the regular
Convention Bureau Board, could very well take something like this on as a possible
fund raiser. Booth noted they are not talking about a huge some and money, noting
that the Cultural Council needs to raise funds for the center, but if this is the oldest
known site of Kenai, Booth stated she felt it falls under their responsibility.
Huhndorf, noting he was speaking for himself, would like to suggest that he go to
Salamantof and also to Kenai Native Association to see if they wanted to donate
funds to help pay for the survey. Huhndorf reiterated he didn't want to speak for
the native associations but would like to give them the opportunity to participate in
the survey. Kluge commented that perhaps they should estimate a figure of $4000
and attempt to get a matching contribution from a native corporation and have the
city match it.
Kluge commented that documentation from the survey could be included in the
interpretive signage for the site. They could include information as to where the
grid was done and what was found. Gray asked if someone would like to make a
motion to bring it to council's attention. Kluge asked Boraas if he thought with
$4000 they could do an adequate survey of that area and have enough funds left
to do a report that could be incorporated into signage. Boraas stated he was
thinking that that he could perform the survey for that price but was not certain
that an archeologist coming from Anchorage or Fairbanks could do it for that much
as they would have to do quite a bit more research to prepare. Kluge asked Boraas
Townsite Historic District Board
Minutes
Page 6
May 28, 1996
if he or the college would be interested in performing that survey? Boraas stated
he would be interested but needed to consider if being on the board precludes him
from the survey. Kluge stated he didn't think it would as long as he abstained from
voting. Boraas stated he will abstain.
Huhndorf asked how much property the grid would cover. Clark advised the
southern portion of 6 and 7 and 8. Clark advised she didn't know if they would be
allowed to go into 9 or not. Gray stated they church has already granted their
permission to include the Russian Mission property in an interpretive site. Gray
commented that the only issue would be if graves were recovered they would have
to be repatriated. Boraas stated he had mentioned this a year ago but thinks that
part of the story is the fact that the FAA came in as a federal agency in the last
1940's and bulldozed the area. Boraas stated people need to know that.
Kluge commented that he felt this would be interesting material for an interpretive
gazebo at the site. Huhndorf noted that one of the things discussed early on in
working with the elders that they prefer only a small path with a three panel sign in
deference to getting sophisticated with a gazebo, etc. Kluge asked if they were
talking about building a parking area. Kluge stated he was thinking that something
like that would be kept in the parking area. Huhndorf stated that in terms of the
wishes of the tribe he would have to go back to them as they are speaking of their
culture and their history. Huhndorf stated he didn't think a gazebo had been in the
plans. Boraas stated that the nature of how to portray the information is a different
issue and first there is a need to find out what is there, is it artifacts, is it maps,
etc. Then that information is taken and developed the way you want to portray it
and where you want to portray it in museums or the visitor center. Boraas
reiterated the most important issue is to find out what is there so the people
making decisions about that land knowing what is there.
Gray asked if someone would like to make a motion to make a proposal to the city
as Clark had suggested requesting that funds be set aside so that this area could be
surveyed archeologically. Gray asked if they would want to put a dollar amount in
the motion.
KLUGE MOVED TO REQUEST ASSISTANCE FROM THE CITY COUNCIL IN THE
AMOUNT OF $2000 IN MATCHING FUNDS TO PERFORM AN ARCHEOLOGICAL
SURVEY AND REPORT THE FINDINGS FOR PARTS OF SITES 6, 7, AND 8.
HUHNDORF SECONDED THE MOTION.
Kluge commented that council should be made aware that the board will be looking
for matching funds and when that is in place council will be advised. Clark stated
Townsite Historic District Board
Minutes
Page 7
May 28, 1996
that if council chose to do this they would earmark money up to $2000 to be used
for stated purpose upon notification that the board has the other half.
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUS. NOTE THAT BORAAS ABSTAINED.
5. HISTORIC BOARD REVIEW'
6. NEW BUSINESS'
1
OLD BUSINESS'
a. Review of Sign Code
Huhndorf stated it is his understanding that they are merely attempting to have an
advisory position or is the board proposing they have some authority over signage?
Clark advised that Kebschull had submitted to the City Attorney what the board
had proposed. Clark stated the attorney did not think it was legally defensible
because it is not objective and too subjective. Clark stated it needs to follow more
along the lines adding La Shot's recommendation, of page 14-43 of the KMC for
signs in the residential zone, or by designating square footage. Clark stated the
board's recommendation was not specific enough if they challenged it in court.
Gray stated there seems to be a lot of parts to the sign code. Gray stated she
would like to suggest, since it was her understanding that the Planning and Zoning
Commission is going redo the entire sign code, that the board just take a portion of
the code. Gray stated perhaps they concentrate on one facet like size and write
down what they feel should be appropriate. Gray stated that at the last meeting
that Kluge had stated he could research examples of historically accurate signs that
could be put into the code to show people examples.
Kluge asked if anyone in the administration is working on a sample ordinance for
the sign code. Kluge stated he thought he remembered La Shot saying he would
pursue investigation on an ordinance for historic signage that could be incorporated.
Kluge added he thought that P&Z had put it back to the administration. Clark
stated that P&Z recommended that staff come back with a sample ordinance.
Kluge stated he was curious if administration had done anything. Clark stated that
no ordinance had gone through. Kluge stated he thought the administration was
going to massage what they had submitted to make it more legal. Kebschull stated
it was her feeling that La Shot felt it should be done with the board's input.
Kebschull added that the sign ordinance covers everything and the board needs to
pick out that they want to apply to the TSH district. Kebschull added that the
attorney had been concerned about the subjective proposal and the wording.
Townsite Historic District Board
Minutes
Page 8
May 28, 1996
Kebschull stated that the board may have to ask the attorney about'wording noting
that it is not clear if the board can delineate wording contained in a sign. Kebschull
commented that from her perspective from the information received to this point,
that the recommendation is the board start with basic information such as size,
location, things that are very clear and objective. From there, if the board wanted
to delineate what could be placed on the signs they may need to get more legal
advice.
Kluge stated he didn't think, when reading their proposal, he doesn't think it is out
of line with their intent, but it might need some massaging from the legality
standpoint. Kluge stated he didn't think it is out of context with what they would
like to see in Old Town. Kluge stated he felt size as noted in scale with one's
building, is a way of defining size. Kluge stated he didn't feel they had to say it
had to be a maximum of 20 square foot. Clark stated she felt the issue was that
everybody is subject to this board and there is nothing that is across the lines.
Kebschull noted that what applies to one has to apply to all. Kluge stated that in
conjunction with the existing sign ordinance, it already stipulates maximum size.
Kebschull noted that they are asking for a specific sign ordinance for TSH zone.
Kebschull asked if they were going to take the existing ordinance and add to it?
Kluge stated he felt that the attorney and administration needed to help them.
Kluge stated it could be that this augments the existing sign ordinance which
already has stipulations about size. Kebschull stated she thought that the board
was not happy with eight foot signs. Kluge stated it depends on the size of the
building and if you have a hotel that is a big building maybe it substantiates a larger
sign. Gray stated the ordinance, she thought, stated the maximum square footage
of any building is 5000 square feet. Kebschull advised that the way the current
sign code reads that someone with a 5000 square foot building could paint the
whole side of their building as a sign and that would not be considered a sign.
Kluge stated the sign ordinance doesn't allow that size sign and Kebschull advised
that is not a sign. Kebschull advised those are the kind of things the board has to
decide.
Kluge responded that those are the kinds of things that they are talking about
addressing in their ordinance such as the issue that came up with Mapco about
painting the sign on the side of the building. Kebschull offered the suggestion that
they may want to look at their proposal and instead of having it in paragraph form
to have an enumerated list from the third paragraph and list the standards.
Kebschull reiterated that they will not be able to pass a sign code without specific
standards.
Townsite Historic District Board
Minutes
Page 9
May 28, 1996
Gray suggested due to the time that they start with the size issue tonight. Kluge
stated he thought they could come up with a maximum size but thought it would
still need to be in scale with the structure and sited examples. Kebschull asked
Kluge what the scale would be and Gray added what would the ratio be? Boraas
stated the wording could read the maximum size or not to exceed a certain
percentage of the building size. Discussion on what the current code size is.
Kebschull advised it is listed in the code on page 14-43, No. 2 and stated no more
than 32 square feet in area. Kluge asked if there was an allowance for larger on
particular types of projects or with shared occupancy. Kebschull advised that is
correct. Booth asked if there was someplace to look in a historical district what
size is designated or the signage code. Kluge noted they had looked at Juneau's
code. Booth questioned if they had specified size. Kluge stated he thought it was
referred to as in scale with the building. Booth stated that is her question, how do
you define in scale with the building? Booth asked if there is a percentage written
somewhere that they can accept. Clark commented that you could come up with a
percentage. Boraas commented that they are talking about the sign ordinance of
32 square feet with the exception being very small buildings. Kebschull noted that
is the residential size and drew attention to page 14-44 under E1 Commercial signs
it is up to 81 square feet and added that this is the section of the code TSH is
under at this time. Kebschull added that with more than one business combined on
the premises it is 1 54 square feet. Kluge asked if they could exclude signage
painted on the side of the building and if so it should be in there. Kebschull stated
those are the things that the board may want to ask the attorney.
Clark recommended that for this meeting they come up with a list of questions for
administration such as what is the reasonable percentage for the average 32 square
foot sign on the average building. What is that number? Gray asked Clark if she
could come up with that figure and she stated she could do that. Clark continued
stating they could ask the attorney if they could exclude painting an entire side of
the building. Kebschull commented that Councilman Bannock had noted that signs
within windows are not considered signs and that had been a concern. Clark asked
if there were any other specific questions.
Huhndorf stated he felt they needed the majority of a meeting to discuss the sign
issue adding that he would personally be willing to wait and come up with
questions. Gray stated they could get started with those two questions that Clark
had written down. Kebschull asked Gray to restate the questions. 1. To come up
with a number of what is a reasonable percentage for the average 32 foot sign on
the average size building. 2. Ask the city attorney if they can disallow painting the
entire side of a building with some sort of advertisement.
Townsite Historic District Board
Minutes
Page 10
May 28, 1996
Kebschull asked if they wanted to ask about wording on signs which was their
original intent to clarify historical accuracy. Huhndorf stated if there is a way to
ask the limitations of what you can do noting the attorney had cited a case
concerning political freedom of speech. Kluge noted the attorney's memorandum
stated two primary concerns. Kluge stated he would like to see from the attorney
what needs to be set forth in the way of standards for a review that is defendable
and what they are not allowed to limit as far as content on signs. Gray stated the
easiest way to do this would be to respond to the attorney's memo and ask if he
can tell the board what is allowable.
8. REPORTS:
9. INFORMATION:
a. Sign Grant Information Letters
b. Challenger Learning Center Information
c. The Alaska Association For Historic Preservation Newsletter
d. NAPC Information
e. Preservation Advocate News
f. Heritage Newsletter
g. Bittner Letter & Governor Knowles Proclamation
10. BOARD QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS:
Gray asked if anyone wanted anything special on the agenda for the next meeting.
Huhndorf asked if they could address the Challenger Learning Center.
Gray asked if members knew they would not be at a meeting to let her know in
advance.
1 1. ADJOURNMENT:
Meeting adjourned at approximately 8'30 p.m.
Respffctfully Submitted:
/
/
Administrative Assistant
Townsite Historic District Board
Minutes
Page 11
May 28, 1996