My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2015 03 16
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2015 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2015 03 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:18 PM
Creation date
3/27/2015 10:02:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCPKT 2015 03 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
106
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 9, 2015 <br />Page 3 of 10 <br />Jean Morgan, 1131 Spruce Street, thanked the board for fielding this issue tonight. She <br />stated she agrees signs should be handled in a case by case basis and is happy there <br />is a policy which now clarifies these issues. The disappointment stems from how she <br />was handled in the Planning Department when she initially brought up this issue. She is <br />also disappointed the item has taken so long to be on the agenda and does not <br />appreciate being put off for this long. She stated never wants to be treated like this <br />again. <br />Russ stated items for the agenda take board consent, as in all boards and <br />commissions. <br />Watson stated the item is on this agenda because the board and staff have time to <br />prepare for this discussion. He stated he personally did not want it on the January <br />agenda because the agenda had a number of items. <br />Russ stated it depends on the topic and depends on the availability of the personal <br />needed to discuss the topic. He was unsure as to whether the board asked to have this <br />on the agenda in the past and it never made it, but agrees with Watson about having a <br />time and place to discuss a specific item. <br />Stewart stated we should try better to get items on the agenda if they are being <br />requested. <br />Watson asked if an item gets placed on the agenda and resources are available how <br />the board handles it. <br />Russ stated we can always continue an item on an agenda if we are not prepared to <br />discuss it. <br />Watson stated that helps for future clarification. <br />Koertje acknowledged Morgan's advocacy and stated he did not remember needing a <br />vote on items for the agenda. <br />Trice stated it would help if there was more of a board discussion on items for the next <br />agenda. <br />Watson agreed there could be more formal discussion on items to be placed on the <br />agenda. <br />Russ stated the City Manager weighs in on items on the agenda in regards of staff time <br />and Trice determines if there is availability for the item on the agenda. <br />Morgan stated she understands what is being discussed but she would appreciate <br />better outreach if an item has been requested and whether or not it is going to be on the <br />next agenda. <br />Watson asked Russ what would Council do in this situation. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.