My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2015 09 23
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 09 23
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:19 PM
Creation date
10/12/2015 9:06:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCPKT 2015 09 23
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
130
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 />August 17, 2015 <br />Page 11 of 11 <br />Watson stated there is always the chance that a review goes bad during an <br />administrative review and the commission will get bad press. <br />Fasick agreed with Haley and said we can do better at our reviews. <br />Stewart stated the public relations component is probably the biggest concern. <br />So he understands the possibility of issues with having an administrative only <br />process. He sees how a change in materials, potential loss of historic fabric, <br />could require a review by the commission. If they are all handled administratively <br />then we would never see the change in materials. <br />Haley stated she doesn't think we will lose that many roofs. <br />Russ stated either scenario is a 4 month, temporary act. He said in either <br />scenario staff will not administer either of the options alone. <br />Watson asked the commission who supports Option 1. <br />Fahey and Stewart voted in favor. <br />Watson asked the commission who supports Option 1. <br />Watson, Fasick, Haley and Stewart voted in favor. <br />Russ stated staff will begin to work on the amendments immediately. <br />Items from Commission Members <br />Fahey stated we need someone else to work the Farmers Market on the 19th. She <br />then asked if there have been any landmarks resulting from the Farmers Market <br />outreach. <br />Trice stated not yet. <br />Discussion Items for future meetings — Draft Preservation Master Plan <br />Trice stated she has HSA updates. <br />Adjourn <br />Stewart made a motion to adjourn. Fahey seconded the motions. Meeting <br />adjourned at 9:10 p.m. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.