Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Survey Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission discusses updating district survey, tax‑credit implications and long‑range planning
Summary
Members reviewed Chapter 5 of the training manual and discussed updating the Courthouse Hill district survey (1989 nomination), the difference between contributing/non‑contributing designations, and the need for consultant work and possible CLG grant funding to update nominations or create overlays.
The Janesville Historic Preservation Commission spent significant time on July 1 reviewing Chapter 5 of a training manual and discussing whether to update the property survey and contributing/non‑contributing designations in the Courthouse Hill Historic District.
Planning staff explained that the existing district nomination materials and property survey were prepared around the time the district was listed on the National Register; staff cited a 1989 nomination and noted that many properties that were non‑contributing then may have reached the 50‑year threshold and could be re‑evaluated. Staff said updating nomination materials or amending district boundaries would typically require a consultant with historic preservation expertise and that such work is eligible for Certified Local Government (CLG) grant funding. Commissioners were advised that being designated “contributing” can affect eligibility for state and federal historic tax credits and that the designation is not solely a function of age but may also reflect architectural style and integrity.
Commissioners asked for clarity on what the update process would involve, who could initiate changes, and whether the commission could itself reassign contributing status. Staff said that changes to the state/national nomination typically follow a formal amendment process at the state and federal level and that local overlay designation is a separate zoning action undertaken by the city council; overlay expansion or establishment generally requires grassroots support and city council action. The commission discussed producing an updated list (for internal use and outreach) noting properties that have reached the 50‑year threshold and identifying candidates for nomination updates; staff agreed to research the amendment process, grant opportunities, and the relevant definitions for contributing vs. non‑contributing and bring findings to a future meeting.
The commission also discussed adopting an annual planning cycle versus aligning plans to member terms, and members asked staff to consider how an annual calendar could incorporate Historic Preservation Month in May. Commissioners asked staff to prepare materials (an updated list and information on process and potential funding) so they could consider next steps during subsequent meetings.
