My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2019 01 14
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2019 01 14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:21 PM
Creation date
1/16/2019 2:32:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCPKT 2019 01 14
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
152
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 />December 17, 2018 <br />Page 10 of 18 <br />The next steps after this meeting are for staff and the subcommittee to draft a resolution <br />with the City Attorney and for staff to bring the final resolution back to HPC for approval, <br />followed by first and second readings in Council. <br />Fahey asked to hear from commissioners Dickinson and Cyndi Thomas, since they had <br />gone through the HPF process. <br />Haley suggested that the Commission go through the discussions questions in <br />sequence. <br />Discussion Question la <br />What are the maximum grant amounts for HSAs? <br />Haley explained some of the subcommittee findings on the HSA. She stated that the <br />architects were approved so the City knew they were trustworthy and that staff and the <br />Commission would need to be more active about making sure the HSAs were up to par. <br />Chuck Thomas added that the $5,000 amount was a compromise based on the ranges <br />of the amounts in the architects' survey staff conducted. <br />Cyndi Thomas stated that she thought $5,000 was reasonable. Dickinson agreed. <br />Ulm stated that the higher grant amounts would create more rigorous assessments to <br />catch more of the structural issues ahead of time. <br />Dickinson noted that his assessment missed that his house was missing a foundation. <br />He thought the increase would help address those kinds of issues. <br />Zuccaro clarified that staff was recommending bumping up the commercial assessment <br />amount as well based on the survey responses and to align with the State Historic <br />Preservation Program. <br />Chuck Thomas stated that the subcommittee had not discussed that amount, but he did <br />not have any objection to it. <br />Haley asked if anyone had any objections to the $10,000 amount for commercial <br />assessments. None voiced. <br />Discussion Question lb <br />What are the maximum grant amounts for flexible/focused grants? <br />Haley and Chuck Thomas stated that as a subcommittee they could not figure out a <br />reason for the distinction. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.