My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2008 11 17
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 11 17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:23 PM
Creation date
2/4/2009 10:44:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2008 11 17
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 />November 17, 2008 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />qualify for landmarking but add to the character of town, and 3. new construction that will <br />comply with stricter guidelines to better complement historic character. <br />Erik Hartronft, 817 Lincoln Avenue, suggested that the City consider buying properties, <br />rehabilitating them and then selling then with conservation easements attached to the <br />buildings. <br />Muckle asked if the money will be bonded. <br />Muth stated that there is no decision yet on if the money will be bonded <br />Whiteman suggested this might be a good time to ask the City Council to add more teeth <br />to the ordinance, specifically asking for nonconsensual landmarking ability. He added <br />the new funds could be used to better incentivize preservation and increase the tools <br />available to the HPC. <br />Koertje suggested prioritizing the use of the funds as well as creating a lisp of important <br />historic resources in town. <br />Hartronft asked if the funds could be used to leverage additional money from the State <br />Historic Fund (SHF). <br />Muckle suggested that the money needs to be used wisely and we shouldn't go to the <br />SHF unless the project is really good. <br />Hartronft noted that the program needs to be structured so that the HPC can move <br />quickly with incentives should the right project present itself. <br />Muckle suggested that establishing a grant fund should be a priority so that money is <br />available for possible projects. <br />Hartronft asked Muth why new "historic" design guidelines for the downtown commercial <br />district are listed as anvitem. He asked why the existing ones were not sufficient. <br />Muth noted that the ballot language included "Incentives for new buildings and <br />developments in Old Town to meet additional guidelines to maintain and complement <br />the historic character of Old Town." So it is the additional guidelines that need to be <br />developed. <br />Muth suggested that surveying is a key component of the program. The baseline <br />information gathered in the surveys will be the basis for how buildings are categorized <br />(landmarkable, contributing, non-contributing, etc.) <br />Koertje asked why staff suggested starting with the commercial district for surveying. <br />Muth stated that is only one suggestion and it is based on the fact that there are so <br />many commercial buildings on the market at this time. Eventually every building in Old <br />Town that is over 50 years old will need to be surveyed. It can be all at once or in <br />sections. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.