While it was not an agenda item comment came at the conclusion of the agenda. Following is a recap of HPB reaction.
The chair acknowledged the group receipt of an email from city staff yesterday afternoon. He expressed concern for their lack of respect to the board as well as the public by not presenting the moratorium announcement in person to the board and by giving the public only 5-days notice of public hearing for City Council. He also objected to the characterization of the preservation board as what is thwarting economic development in the city.
A majority of board members also spoke out against the ordinance. A summary of speaking points were;
· Considering the boundaries of downtown, roughly N. Orange south to SODO and Rosalind Ave to OBT, it’s unbelievable to think the 5 blocks that constitutes the Downtown Historic District, (DHD), is what is holding back development investment.
· In the past the preservation board has approved demolition in the DHD, notably the Orchid Garden Ballroom, (formerly the Presidential Ballroom), 3 years ago for the construction of a high rise. To date nothing has been done and an empty lot sits. Also, the north edge of the Kia Center is in the DHD.
· The existing preservation ordinance allows for Council to overturn any advisory board action, including HPB, which Mayor Dyer did recently after his first election. Council overturned the HPB recommendation for the historic McCrory/Woolworth Building on Orange Ave which resulted in the “same night demolition”. The resulting new high rise, The Plaza, currently has vacant stores and theater.
· 55West high rise was approved by the HPB on Church Street. Currently there is a perception of the surroundings as unsafe.
· Main Street Districts throughout the city have revitalized once underperforming areas and have created places using existing buildings without demolition that are now nationally recognized destinations
· If developers can’t fill the current vacancies at today’s rates what makes city officials think new building with higher rates will make it more successful
· Currently there are empty lots in and surrounding the DHD that can accommodate new development, such as the empty parking lots along I-4
· Several board members acknowledged their pro-development position but agreed that the proposed ordinance is not the correct method to encourage growth
· One member questioned the catalyst pushing the moratorium to which the preservation officer refused to reply on speculation
· Another concern was the speed from the announcement to the scheduled presentation seems extremely fast which creates a sense of “being sneaky”
· One board member asked the preservation officer how many projects in the past 5 years were denied by the HPB. Her reply was zero denials and 2 exploratory proposals that never applied.
· The chair entertained the idea of a board response to the proposed ordinance. The city attorney interrupted claiming the board has no jurisdiction as there is currently no board action posted to be voted on. She said that they as individuals could speak at City Council to express any opposition. There was push back from board members who countered ‘the board has the right to express their opinion’.
The motion was made stating ‘The Historic Preservation Board feels that the proposed ordinance is not the best way to promote growth and that the current preservation ordinance is functioning efficiently’. The motion passed unanimously.
Several board members said they will be in attendance of the City Council’s 1st reading on June 8th.