My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2011 02 07
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2011 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2011 02 07
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:24 PM
Creation date
5/31/2011 1:12:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2011 02 07
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />February 7, 2011 <br />Page 3 of 7 <br /> <br />Stewart asked how much control the HPC should have on the document. <br />McCartney stated this project is primarily for internal discussion, especially since the <br />City is not the owner of the property and because there is not an application attributed <br />with this request. <br />Stewart stated the HSA should not only be a fact finding project for the structure but it <br />should also include adaptive reuse. <br />Lewis stated this is a sensitive project. She added HPC could be available for <br />comments if needed. <br />Tofte stated this project should also consider other projects going on in town so there is <br />cohesiveness. <br />Stewart recommended staff talk to the contractor to give HPC an idea of the <br />deliverables to make sure there is a marketing component. He also asked if it made <br />sense for HPC to review a copy of the draft. <br />McCartney stated this document will not have a public presentation. He recommended <br />the HPC nominate someone to have a chance to review the document. <br />Stewart volunteered to be the one to review the document. <br />Lewis asked if staff was confident FasTracks would not affect this structure. <br />McCartney stated RTD has already provided a construction plan for FasTracks and the <br />plans do not impact the structure. <br />Update/Discussion/Action – Jefferson Place Survey <br />McCartney presented the attached memo. <br />Stewart asked when the delivery date is for the survey. <br />McCartney stated most likely 6 weeks. He stated he would double check with the <br />consultant and bring an update at next meeting. <br />Updates/Discussions/Action – Cemetery Application <br />Koertje reiterated the information staff needs to collect for this request: <br /> <br /> Ownership of each plot <br /> <br /> Percentage of abandoned plots <br /> <br /> Percentage of City ownership <br /> <br /> Letter to owners regarding the districting and if they are interested in joining a <br />district <br /> <br /> Creation of an ownership agreement <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.