My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2008 06 16
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2008 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2008 06 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:22 PM
Creation date
10/6/2008 2:10:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2008 06 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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 />June 16, 2008 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />Muth asked if the option to bypass the subcommittee was still needed now that the Pre- <br />Filing Conference language has been added. The original intent of this was to allow the <br />applicant to have a discussion with the full commission, but that is now an option without <br />filing a demolition permit. If an applicant is ready to file a permit, than it is unlikely they <br />would need to bypass the subcommittee process. <br />McMenamin noted that the subcommittee process is useful for the members of the <br />committee. The on-site discussion is particularly useful. <br />Lewis added that the subcommittee makes a recommendation to the full HPC in the <br />case of a public hearing, and that that process is very helpful. <br />Whiteman noted that from his perspective the language is not needed. When the <br />applicant is truly ready to file a permit they can go through the formal process. The Pre- <br />Filing Conference is supposed to be less formal. <br />Whiteman asked if there should be a subcommittee process for aPre-Filing Conference. <br />McMenamin noted that a subcommittee recommendation may be helpful to the <br />discussion. <br />Muckle thought that if the object of aPre-Filing Conference is to be an informal <br />discussion, then adding an additional process here might make it too formal. <br />Muth added that as the Pre-Filing Conference is entirely voluntary and non-binding, the <br />addition of the formal process may make some people assume that this replaces the <br />demolition review. <br />Members decided not to add a subcommittee review process to the Pre-Filing <br />Conference and that the request to bypass the subcommittee review process should be <br />removed as it isn't needed any longer with the addition of the Pre-Filing Conference <br />option. Muth will remove the language about bypassing the subcommittee process when <br />it goes to the City Council. <br />Lewis asked if there was a motion regarding the amendments. <br />Muckle moved that the HPC make a recommendation of approval of the amendments as <br />written with the removal of the section allowing the bypassing of the subcommittee <br />review process. Menza seconded the motion. All in favor. <br />Discussion/Direction/Action - 2008 Preservation Awards <br />Lewis noted for the new members that the awards were a public relations idea that was <br />created in 2007. The response to the awards was very positive. <br />Whiteman asked if the homes need to be landmarked to be award winners or if the HPC <br />encourages them to landmark. <br />Lewis stated that the need not be landmarked to win, but the HPC does encourage them <br />to landmark. One of the 2007 winners did landmark his home this year. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.