Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />July 20, 2009 <br />Page 5 of 9 <br /> <br />Johnson stated he believed the structure actually would not qualify for <br />landmarking due to all of the historical materials that have already been <br />removed. <br />Koertje stated this structure may or may not qualify. <br />Whiteman asked staff if the City could allow for partial demos. Whiteman also <br />asked if the staff would be monitoring the demolition phases. <br />McCartney stated a partial demo could be released and stated staff would be on <br />site during the partial demo. <br />Williams asked the Commission if they felt the building would still be considered <br />a contributing structure if all of the historical elements are removed. <br />Stewart stated this was not a landmark hearing. Stewart stated he would <br />recommend a stay on the structure with a partial demo release to allow a soft <br />strip to determine the significance of the structure. <br />Lewis agreed. <br />Whiteman reminded the Commission and Johnson the stay would be for 6 <br />months. <br />Koertje stated the stay could be terminated at any time if it were to be brought <br />back. <br />Muckle recommended Johnson should perform the soft strip and come back to <br />the next HPC meeting (in August) to give a report. <br />Commission Discussion: <br />Stewart stated he recommends releasing a partial demo permit to demo those <br />elements that are less than 50 years old. <br />Lewis agreed the Commission should grant a conditional release. <br />Koertje recommended the Commission should apply the landmarking criteria to <br />see if the building has integrity. <br />Whiteman read the landmarking criteria. <br />Koertje followed up with his understanding of the landmarking criteria. He stated <br />the original house is in its original location, but there aren’t many historical <br />materials remaining. It has a strong social history but there aren’t any <br />archaeological considerations. <br />Lewis agreed with Koertje’s determination. <br />Muckle stated she had trouble with the lack or architectural integrity, but also <br />stated that there wasn’t enough evidence to make the call. Muckle stated she <br />was impressed with the applicants being so open, but believed the structure <br />would not be considered for local landmarking if it were relocated. City Council <br />makes the final determination. <br />Williams asked staff if the applicants could receive a variance on setbacks if the <br />historical structure were left in place. <br /> <br />