Everybody to this historic preservation commission meeting.

This is uh Thursday, September 10th, 2020.

Hearings before the Storic Preservation Commission are quasi-judicial in nature.

This is a design review process to determine if the proposed project is congruent with historic aspects and special character of the historic district or landmark.

Decisions of the commission are based on the record of these proceedings, the Wilmington Design Guidelines for Historic Districts and Landmarks, and the Secretary of Interiors standards for rehabilitation.

Evidence submitted to the commission for review becomes part of the record.

Appeals of commission's decisions are to the Wilmington Board of Adjustment and then dispute your court and are based on the record.

Appeals must be filed within 30 days of the date of the commission's action.

Public comment is heard during the public comment portion of the agenda item.

Those who want to address the commissioners are sworn as witnesses.

The chair recognizes those who want to address the commission during the public hearing.

Comments should be directed to the commission to ensure all comments are properly recorded.

Please come to the podium to address the commission, state your name and address, and speak clearly.

All right, I'd like to request that all cell phones be turned off or in silence mode, please.

And remind commissioners if you if you've received or been made aware of any outside evidence related to any of these matter the matters in this meeting, please recuse yourself.

And I'd like our commissioners to please introduce themselves right now, starting with uh Joan.

Joan Keston, Christopher Yermal.

Ashley Wilson.

All right.

Go ahead, Michael.

Michael Smith, Stephen Salke, Ron Wilson, Marion Kaiser.

Great, and I'm Rob Romero, and we've also got Melissa Huffman, City Assistant, City Attorney.

Jeff Walton staff, Christine Hughes staff, and Ron Sandterfield.

Let's see.

And we'd like to uh swear in the witnesses, if we can.

Amy, how are we doing that?

If everyone who wishes to speak on any item could please stand and raise your right hand.

You affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Thank you.

Thank you, Amy.

And before we start, I want to give some recognition to Tom Mitchell, who passed away on August 18, 2020, at the age of 84.

He was HBC chair back in the 90s, or maybe early on.

So apparently he was a great gentleman.

And we'll miss him in the city.

All right.

Starting.

Are you starting, Christine?

Ron, starting.

Ron Chattlefield will start for us.

Good evening, Chairman Romero and members of the historic preservation commission.

I'm here tonight to present uh to the commission a few changes regarding historic preservation that are being proposed in the rewrite of the land development code.

Staff is currently uh working on preparing.

These changes are listed as part of Article 7, administrative provisions.

Uh Article 7 was made available to the public on the city's webpage on June 16th, following a presentation to city council on June 15th.

And staff also had a work session with our planning commission on August 5th.

Prior to that meeting, staff received several comments uh from citizens and historical foundation representatives regarding the proposed changes that will be presented uh during this meeting.

First item that I want to bring to your attention is regarding stays of demolition.

Staff does understand that stays of demolition is our important tool used by preservation commissions to save buildings and properties that are identified for demolition.

Staff is also charged with making sure that the proposed code that we are prepared.

Excuse me, that we're preparing uh isn't compliant with the North Carolina General Statutes.

So regarding 90 day stays of demolition, um current code would say that national the properties proposed for demolition that are located in national register but not in a local district, um, would be reviewed for uh demolition by this board.

We are eliminating that as uh in the new code because, in our opinion, in our review of the statutes, that is we are not authorized by statutes to provide that uh to have to have that regulation in our code.

Um, it is in our current code, and it is something the staff is no longer enforcing at this time because we do not believe we have the enabling legislation to uh require that review.

Per the general statutes, historic preservation commissions may not deny the demolition of a design, excuse me, of a designated landmark or a building within a local historic district.

And those local historic districts, as all of you know, are HD or historic district HDMU, which is also known as historic district mixed use, or uh the HDR historic residential or our historic district overlay that applies.

I believe there's one residential area, kind of the northern part of town, northeastern part of downtown, and then also um the southern part of our central business district.

However, uh, while you cannot deny a demolition, the effective date may be delayed for up to 365 days as a maximum of 365 days.

Initially, staff had um proposed in the draft language that our certificate of appropriateness for the demolition of a building would have no expiration date.

Uh, therefore, that once the state expired, the property owner could demolish the building without going back through this commission.

However, based on comments that were provide those comments that I mentioned that we had received uh prior to the planning commission uh by those citizens and stakeholders, as well as additional research feedback from other cities in North Carolina regarding how they handle certificates of appropriateness for demolitions and further staff discussions.