JUNE 28, 2010
LANDMARKS AND HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES

The Landmarks and Historic District Commission (LHDC) of the City of Florissant met at the Florissant City Hall on Monday June 28, 2010 in the second floor conference room at 6:30 p.m., with Howard Nimmons presiding.

On roll call the following members were present: Rob Hoffman, Edward Keil, Joe Schulte, Kent Miller &. Howard Nimmons, Gary Meyer arrived at 6:45. Also in attendance were Cynthia Treiber, Recording Clerk and Philip Lum, Building Commissioner of Florissant., Andrew Podleski, Florissant City Council Official and Rosemary Davison, from Historic Florissant Inc.  A quorum being present, the Chair declared the Landmarks and Historic District Commission (LHDC) was in session for the transaction of business.

INTRODUCTION AND WELCOME

Mr. Nimmons introduced Andrew Podleski and Rosemary Davison and welcomed them to the meeting.

OLD BUSINESS

NEW BUSINESS

APPROVAL OF 5/24/10  MINUTES

Mr. Nimmons stated that he would like to amend the minutes to change the date from November 5, 2007 to May 24, 2010.  Mr. Schulte made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Seconded by Mr. Miller, all members concurred. minutes were approved as amended.

MISCELANEOUS BUSINESS

Discussion of the application for a Certificates of appropriateness at #1 St Ferdinand to allow for an Archaeological dig.

Mr. Nimmons stated that the next order of business would be the discussion of the Application of a Certificate of Appropriateness for #1 St. Ferdinand. Mr. Lum stated that he had contacted Washington University and UMSL regarding the dig site. Mr. Lum stated that according to Dr. David Browman from Washington University no one from the University would be interested in assisting with the site. However, Dr. Patti Wright a Ph. D. Professor from UMSL was interested in participating with the site. Mr. Hoffman stated that he felt that Dr. Browman could not speak for everyone at Washington University.

Further discussion was held regarding Dr. Wright’s intentions and possible grant opportunities. Dr. Wright would have future access to in-house grants and could write grants for a project at the site.  She is looking for field work for graduate students, but her need is only during the Fall.   Mr. Lum stated that Dr. Wright would like specific information and ask City staff to arrange a meeting with Mr. Bray from the Shrine. Mr. Lum stated that the City Staff would assist however ultimately it would be the responsibility of a representative from the Shrine to present an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to the Commission and that nobody currently has any funding to close the site, write a Plan for the Shrine or to write a Plan for the city concerning how to approach archaeology.

Mr. Nimmons stated that felt in order to have the dig site closed by the winter that a plan of action should be presented sometime this summer. Mr. Hoffman stated that with rains like such as the other night could possibly be more damaging to the site than winter.  Mr. Lum stated that the Commission may be interested in appointing a sub committee to oversee the project. Mr. Schulte stated that they should let the Shrine submit their application for a certificate of Appropriateness and then address the issues.

Further discussion was held regarding possible findings from the dig site and who would be assisting with the digs. Mr. Hoffman stated that it was his understanding that some of Dr. Wright’s assistants may have some type of museum education and would be able to assist in documenting items that had been discovered at the site and were being displayed on the second floor.

Mr. Nimmons expressed his concern regarding the urgency in closing the site before winter, and suggested that staff review the status of the progress at the next meeting. Mr. Nimmons asked if there were any further discussion, being none Mr. Schulte made a motion to continue this item to the following meeting. Seconded by Mr. Miller all Commission members concurred the item was continued to the following meeting.

 

Discussion of Route 66.

Mr. Nimmons stated that the next order of business was the discussion of Route 66. Mr. Lum suggested to the Commission that Route 66 be considered a Landmark Contributing Resource. Mr. Schulte reviewed the previously submitted History and stated that he felt that designating Route 66 as a Contributing Resource would benefit the City. Mr. Nimmons stated that in order to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness, the Commission would need to address the required Criteria for Consideration that would allow Route 66 to be designated as a Landmark Contributing Resource.

Mr. Schulte distributed the magazine ‘Missouri U.S 66 – Show Me Route 66’, and expressed his opinion that by designating Dunn Rd. which was the by pass of Route 66 as a Contributing Resource, would mean that it would be advertised in this magazine which would benefit the City of Florissant.  Mr. Schulte stated that where the old Times Beach was had been developed as a State Park with a restaurant and museum. Mr. Schulte stated that  with this Park being a part of Route 66 it was advertised in this magazine and currently there had been over 200,000 people sign the book visiting the site.

Mr. Nimmons asked if by designating Dunn Road a Contributing Resource, would there be grants available to the buildings along the route. Mr. Lum stated that only a section of the route was in the City of Florissant Limits, however the buildings that existed when Route 66 By-pass was active would be eligible for Federal Funding opportunities. Mr. Schulte stated that the Grandview shopping Center would be a part of the route and passed out pictures of what the shopping Center looked like in 1960. Further discussion was held regarding the properties along the route that may benefit from the designation such as, the Gettemeyer House, Historic Florissant Inc. and possibly the small shopping center between Florissant Rd. and Washington. Mr. Schulte stated that businesses along the Route 66 had benefitted with the exposure in different magazines as being along the route. Mr. Meyer stated that the Commission should review the positive and negative aspects to designating Dunn Rd as a Contributing Resource.

Further discussion was held with the Commission concurring that they would like to address the issues to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness to designate Dunn Rd as a Landmark Contributing Resource. Mr. Nimmons asked Mr. Schulte if he would be willing to address the required information and present them to the Commission for review in order to proceed with the nomination for a certificate of appropriateness, Mr. Schulte agreed. Mr. Miller made a motion to continue this item to the next meeting, seconded by Mr. Meyer. All Commission members concurred the item was continued to the following meeting.

 

Discussion of Landmark Properties.

Mr. Nimmons stated that the next order of business was the discussion of Landmark Properties.  Mr. Lum stated that he had presented to the Commission the list of historic properties that had been submitted to the State in the annual report as a Landmark.  Mr. Lum stated that the Commission may want to review the list to see if there were any corrections to be made. Mr. Nimmons stated that in the black cabinet were all the files on the Historic  and Landmark properties with the last correspondence to home owners to re-designate as a Landmark being in 2002. Mr. Nimmons stated that he felt that since 2002 there may have been changes in the ownership of some of the properties, therefore, it may be beneficial to send out another letter to home owners regarding re-designating their property as a Landmark.

Mr. Hoffman stated that it was his understanding that one of the responsibilities of the Commission was the preservation of the historic properties in Florissant. Mr. Hoffman stated that less than half of the Landmark properties were re-designated and that the Commission may want to re-visit creative ideas to encourage home owners to designate their property as a Landmark. Mr. Hoffman cited Section 405.445, the powers and duties to which all Commissioners were responsible and that the Commission’s interests should be about Preservation.  Mr. Meyer stated that one of the reasons that property owners were not interested in re-designating their homes as a Landmark was difficulty in getting anything they wanted to do to their home approved with an adversarial Commission. Mr. Schulte stated that out of the letters that were sent in 2003, forty properties were re-designated, twenty three denied to re-designate and no response from twenty five property owners.

Vigorous discussion and argument ensued regarding the Commission addressing some concerns of properties designated as a Landmarks and entertaining options to encourage property owners to designate their property as a Landmark. Mr. Schulte stated that he did not want to force anyone to designate their property as a Landmark but asked Mr. Hoffman to be the first to re-designate his property.  Mr. Hoffman said it was in his plan someday to re-designate.  Mr. Meyer apologized for being late, said that he now sees the type of adversarial attitude that he did not agree with, stated that he had been a member of the Commission for five years and wished to no longer be a part of the Commission. Mr. Meyer apologized for having to leave early and stated that he would submit his formal resignation.

Mr. Hoffman emphasized the Commission’s powers and duties again and stated that he felt the Commission should adhere to their responsibilities. Further discussion was held regarding items that did not comply with the Old Town Guidelines and had been presented to the Commission such as signs from the last meeting and were resolved.  Mr. Lum stated that signs were regulated and if they did not meet the criteria they would have to seek a variance from the Commission. Mr. Hoffman stated that he would like the Commission to discuss different ideas to encourage property owners to designate their property as a Landmark. Mr. Nimmons made a motion to continue the discussion of Landmark Properties to the following meeting. Seconded by Mr. Keil, all parties concurred.

ANNOUNCEMENTS / COMMENTS

Mr. Nimmons asked if anyone had any further business. Being none, Mr. Nimmons made a motion to adjourn. Seconded by Mr. Keil, all members concurred, meeting was adjourned.

 

 

Respectfully submitted:

 

Cynthia A. Treiber,
Recording Clerk