My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2022 03 21
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2022 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2022 03 21
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/23/2022 12:25:15 PM
Creation date
3/21/2022 4:57:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
3/21/2022
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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 />February 21, 2022 <br />Page 3 of 9 <br />Dunlap asks that since this agenda item was originally for the January meeting, would it <br />be reasonable to add a 30 day stay period in order to look at the options to do a historic <br />assessment. <br />Bauer says yes, if the commissioners wish to add that time, it is possible. <br />Dunlap mentions that because they have not had a discussion with the applicant yet, <br />they might want to wait until they hear from the applicant. <br />Haley mentions that the stay was originally set for February 27, assuming they had the <br />January meeting but because they did not have that meeting, the time frame has not <br />been adjusted accordingly. <br />Bauer says that is correct. <br />Applicant Presentation: <br />Kevin Anderson, ArcWest Architects <br />Anderson says they worked on a design to expand upon the footprint. The lower level <br />of the house has been renovated in the past. This is a first and second floor <br />modification. We are not increasing the footprint of the house and feel the impact is <br />minimal. To speak to the original architecture, this era of house is getting to 70 years <br />old. This was a time period were houses were just not very well built. We would not be <br />opposed to an additional stay on the application. <br />Chad Braun, property owner of 620 Garfield Ave <br />Braun says him and his wife have owned two homes in old town and interacted with <br />this commission before. The current size of the house and because it is poorly <br />insulated, has sparked the desire to make the structure more energy efficient and make <br />these proposed modifications. We are not doing a particularly large renovation. <br />Commissioner Questions of Applicant. - <br />Burg says that staff said when the original report was done, the original property <br />condition was unknown. Is the applicant able to speak to the original property condition? <br />Braun says the state inside the house is good but not outstanding. There are some <br />original features. The only additions on the house are the window wells downstairs. The <br />downstairs also has updated insulation as well as a new boiler. The upstairs has not <br />been renovated at all. In the kitchen and dining area, a wall has been broken out and <br />has remained in a rough condition. He speaks further on the poor insulation and the <br />mold that formed because of poor insulation. He also mentions that they did pour a <br />concrete slab for the front porch of the house. <br />Public Comment: <br />Dr. Dan Berlau, 1201 Lincoln Ave <br />Berlau says he walks by this house every day. He is in full support of the renovations <br />and demolition. He knows the property owners. He has had a positive experience with <br />the Historic Preservation Commission with his own house and spoke to the owners of <br />620 Garfield about going through this process. <br />Discussion bV Commissioners: <br />0 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.