The meeting commenced with a focus on the legal underpinnings of variance requests for properties under the jurisdiction of the Historic Preservation Board, as presented by Deputy City Attorney Ernie Mueller. Mueller’s presentation was comprehensive, outlining the criteria that must be met for a variance to be justified. According to Mueller, a variance is only warranted when a property’s conditions are unique and do not generally apply to other properties. He cited examples from case law to illustrate the application of these criteria and stressed that the applicant must provide substantial evidence to support the claim of hardship. Mueller also highlighted the nine variance criteria set forth in the city’s Land Development Code, which include the need for exceptional conditions specific to the property and the variance’s potential impact on the public welfare.

Mueller emphasized that the board’s role is to adhere strictly to the evidence presented and that subjective opinions or assumptions would not be considered competent evidence. The board must ensure that any granted variance does not confer a special privilege and maintains the intent of the city’s Land Development Code and comprehensive plan. Mueller further clarified that variances should not be used as a workaround for widespread issues which would be better addressed by amending the code itself. He noted that the granting of a variance must be the minimum adjustment necessary for the reasonable use of the property.

Following the presentation, the board considered the burden of proof required from applicants seeking variances. The board members were reminded that it is the applicant’s responsibility to present sufficient evidence, and that the board could grant a continuance if additional information was needed. The conversation shifted to incentives for historic property designations. The board deliberated on the merits of waiving application fees, which currently do not exist, and discussed the need to establish a fee schedule in the future. They also explored financial incentives such as tax exemptions and the possibility of adding a photo display of enrolled properties on their website.

Another topic was the introduction of bronze markers for historic landmarks, which stirred a debate among the board members. While some saw the provision of free markers as a meaningful incentive, others raised concerns about the potential costs to the city. The idea of these markers was to align them aesthetically with the new city flag, thereby creating a cohesive visual representation of the city’s historic landmarks.

The board also contemplated the inclusion of a budget for historic preservation in the city clerk’s budget, recognizing the need for financial planning to support the proposed incentives. They agreed to set an agenda for the next meeting to focus on the board’s website and outreach efforts, with the goal of engaging the public in discussions around the benefits of historic designation and the certified local government designation.