Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2015 08 17

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes July 20, 2015 Page 10 of 13 Fahey stated she likes the way the document is set up and likes the way the action items are formatted. Stewart asked how the documents can be cross referenced. Watson asked if you could color code the bullet points. Trice stated that was a good suggestion. Stewart stated the requirement of a 100% voluntary historic district was not realistic. He also stated the live -work ordinance did not make sense being included in the preservation master plan. Trice stated there are parking allowances for landmarked structures in the live - work ordinance. Fahey stated you were only allowed to have a live -work structure if it is two residences. Russ stated the live -work allows a single unit. Trice stated staff sees it as a way for people to further use their historic properties. Watson stated in terms of historic districts it is important for historic district to not be used in an aggressive fashion by other residences. Koertje stated he agrees and mentioned the way the code is written it is now historic districts are currently voluntary. Fahey said there already is a percentage required for the establishment of an historic district. Russ stated he thinks promoting the live -work is good, but they should look further outside the City than old town. He added scale is important. He stated all commercial development requires a PUD, but residential do not. He believes incentives are very important for the residential projects. Watson agreed. Russ asked how the rest of the commission felt about a design review committee. Watson stated we would need to be very careful of this because it might create a lot of time for the commission members. He believes it might be very effective for commercial projects and that might be a pilot program. Fahey reminded the commission there are only a few of us trained to do that.