My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2009 09 21 APPROVED
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 09 21 APPROVED
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:24 PM
Creation date
7/19/2010 10:44:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2009 09 21 APPROVED
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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 />September 21, 2009 <br />Page 2 of 5 <br /> <br />Koertje asked for a motion to continue this public hearing until October 19, 2009. <br />Muckle suggested a motion to continue the public hearing until October 19, 2009. <br />Tofte seconded the motion. It was unanimously approved. <br />Update/Discussion/Action - Programming of Historic Preservation Fund, <br />next steps <br />Koertje introduced this item to the public. <br />Connie Lawrence, owner of 561 Lincoln Avenue, stood and addressed the <br />Commission. Lawrence gave an update of the soft strip of the residence. <br />McCartney displayed photos of the project site by using PowerPoint on the over <br />head projectors. Lawrence used these photos in her description of how they <br />were progressing with the soft strip. Lawrence mentioned the following regarding <br />the project: <br /> <br /> The house was built without a foundation and the structural elements that <br />were sitting on the ground had become rotted. <br /> <br /> The architectural integrity had been compromised so much that the <br />structure would not survive any relocation. <br /> <br /> The whole west side of the historical house was missing because an <br />addition had been placed on the west side of the historical house, thereby <br />removing the original back wall. <br />Lawrence asked the Commission if the house could be completely demolished <br />based on the above findings. She noted that all efforts were made to preserve <br />the structure but there aren’t many historical elements remaining that can be <br />preserved. <br />Muckle asked Lawrence if there was much historical siding remaining under the <br />existing siding. <br />Lawrence answered there was approximately 50% of the historical siding <br />remaining. <br />McCartney stated the historical siding was being used as a structural element <br />being that there wasn’t any sheathing to provide the lateral strength for the <br />structure. <br />Lewis stated she believed the applicant did a good job exploring for the historical <br />elements. Lewis continued to state the structure is difficult to work with without a <br />foundation. Lewis also noted there was not much evidence of the historical <br />windows (openings). <br />Muckle asked if there was any original flooring remaining. <br />Lawrence stated that she wasn’t sure and she would ask her demo contractor. <br />Lawrence did state they are trying to reuse as many of the materials as possible <br />in the rebuild. <br />Lawrence noted that newspaper was found on the inside walls that dated back to <br />1893. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.