My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2009 04 20
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2009 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2009 04 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:23 PM
Creation date
6/12/2009 10:19:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2009 04 20
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
<br />Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />April 20, 2009 <br />Page 3 of 7 <br /> <br />Ramsey said he had given no real thought to that because he didn't think it would be <br />compatible given the roof lines of the existing home. He would rather scrape and start <br />from scratch on the lot. <br /> <br />Tofte asked if there were other homes on the block that had been demolished. <br /> <br />Ramsey said there were not, however all of the surrounding homes have had significant <br />remodels and most have second story additions. <br /> <br />Lewis asked Ramsey if he was familiar with the zoning incentives that give a <br />square footage and floor area ratio for rear additions. <br /> <br /> <br />Ramsey said he was aware of them and in fact had taken advantage of them on <br />project near this one but doesn't feel that they would work well on tHl~' site given the <br />shape of the existing home and placement of the home on the lot. <br /> <br />Stewart asked Ramsey if he had determined the costs of a new building ersus saving <br />the old one with an addition. <br /> <br />Ramsey replied he has not. He is starting work on <br />get for the sales price. <br /> <br /> <br />hat he thinks he can <br /> <br />Whiteman stated that the windows and posts in th <br />has been replaced. He asked if the framing was still <br /> <br />ook to be new and the siding <br />inal. <br /> <br />Ramsey stated that the fayade has changed with the doors and windows slightly moved, <br />so that part of the framing has been ed. <br /> <br /> <br />Whiteman asked for any public com <br /> <br />Tim Seeber, 821 McKinle <br />but is concerned about th <br />on the character of Old To <br /> <br /> <br />ue, stated he agrees the original home is in poor shape, <br />f new homes in the area and the affect they are having <br /> <br />Seeing no addit" <br /> <br /> <br />lic comments, Whiteman asked for Commission comments. <br /> <br />for the public hearing based on the age of the home noting that <br />those of that time peri d are fast disappearing. This home is typical of those residents in <br />the early 20th Century and the character of the area. He noted that the rear of the lot is <br />large and an addition on the rear that takes advantage of the zoning incentives would <br />keep the fayade and character of the home. <br /> <br />Lewis noted the site is in reasonable condition, but does not have great integrity. She <br />added that the loss of the these smaller homes in Old Town are having a great impact <br />on character, but also noted that perhaps this site is not the best example of the small <br />old homes in Old Town either. <br /> <br />Stewart agreed with Lewis' comments. He added that the simple style homes are being <br />lost and the building could be a contributing building in an historic district. Stewart <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.