Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />July 10, 2006 <br />Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br />to decrease the number of demolitions in Old Town. Koertje agreed that the Council <br />seemed amenable. <br /> <br />Proposed Preservation Zoning Incentives <br />Lewis and Koertje had been gathering information on how other communities had done <br />preservation zoning. Muth noted that of the options, perhaps the best and least <br />ambiguous way to proceed would be to create a new zoning overlay for historic <br />preservation. The goal of such zoning would be to encourage homeowners to save <br />existing structures but give them some leeway from the existing rules for rear additions <br />that do not take away from the original structure. The zoning would allow for such things <br />as more rear lot coverage, higher FAR, and different rear setbacks to encourage <br />preservation. <br /> <br />Lewis recommended dividing up the zoning into three categories: one for landmarked <br />properties, one for nonlandmarked existing structures over 50 years old, and one for <br />replacement buildings built when a home over fifty years old is demolished for new <br />construction. <br /> <br />Muth shared pictures of some additions in Old Town. The Commission used the photos <br />to review some of what is currently in Old Town and discuss what it is that the <br />Commission would like to encourage. <br /> <br />McMenamin noted that if lot coverage is to be encouraged, it should also require that <br />second floor additions be set in from the bottom floor coverage so that rear additions do <br />not become boxes on the back of homes. <br /> <br />Lewis recommended that the incentives be a 5% increase over the existing coverages <br />for landmarked structures and perhaps a smaller increase for saving an existing <br />structure but not landmarking it. Members thought this would be a good place to start <br />discussions. Lewis said that she would use her house as an example of how this could <br />be applied. Childs noted that her house could also be used to run examples. They will do <br />so for the next meeting. <br /> <br />Members asked if lot coverage includes porches and sidewalks. Muth said she would <br />find out. <br /> <br />Share Collected Reference Materials <br />Members shared some of the reference materials that they had collected. Muth noted <br />that links to preservation sites can be added to the City’s web site to help give residents <br />some resources. Muth added that an article could be placed in the City’s newsletter with <br />preservation information. <br /> <br />Subcommittee Reports <br /> <br /> Economic Incentives – discussed as part of earlier item <br /> <br /> Education & Outreach – No report. <br /> <br /> Design Review/Recommendations – Members are planning to have a <br />subcommittee meeting on Saturday, June 22 to do a walking tour of Old Town. <br /> <br /> Surveying/Mapping – No report <br /> <br /> Structures of Merit – No report <br /> <br /> <br />