Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Draft historic preservation plan presented; commission seeks council support for surveying and grants
Summary
Consultant and planning staff reported a draft 10‑year Pocatello Historic Preservation Plan to the council, summarizing public survey results and recommending surveys, education, partnerships with tribes and potential transformative projects.
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City planning staff and a consultant presented a draft update to the Pocatello Historic Preservation Plan and summarized outreach and recommended actions to the council.
Kirk Huffaker, the consultant, and Jim Anglesey, long‑range planner, said the plan incorporates a public survey (about 100 responses) and focuses on a 10‑year work program for the Historic Preservation Commission. The plan recommends targeted reconnaissance and intensive surveys (for example, the downtown triangle and ISU‑adjacent neighborhoods), updating existing district documentation and identifying National Register‑eligible resources. The consultant emphasized that National Register listing is honorary and does not impose local maintenance requirements; local designation and local review trigger design review requirements.
The plan also recommends education, interpretive signage, and stronger partnerships with the Shoshone‑Bannock Tribes, including potential joint programming and adding tribal representation to preservation efforts. The commission identified aspirational, transformative projects such as stabilizing or reusing the Monarch building, rehabilitating the Yellowstone Hotel, reusing the Greyhound bus depot and assessing relocation of City Hall to the former federal building downtown.
Staff said the state historic preservation office and the commission have reviewed the draft; the document is in public review for a short comment period and staff asked the council for feedback and continued support. Council members expressed general support and asked clarifying questions about National Register implications and review timeline. No council action was required at the work session.

