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 4 of 5 <br /> <br />Stewart suggested the development of a handout to address windows and <br />energy efficiency. Stewart also recommended a world wide web link the <br />Commission could include on the HOC website. <br />Tussey then asked if siding would be included for grant funding. <br />Stewart asked if the original siding was underneath the exterior siding. Tussey <br />stated he assumed it was. <br />Muckle discussed her knowledge of siding and stated the process is not as <br />expensive as you would imagine. <br />Update/Discussion/Action – Downtown Design Guidelines and Old Town <br />Overlay Regulations <br />Stewart remarked about the subcommittee meeting which was held on <br />September 2, 2009. Stewarts commented on the following: <br /> <br /> Design Guidelines are well written and similar to other design guidelines <br />found in other communities. <br /> <br /> There was not any discussion about residential design standards – will <br />bring up at next meeting (September 30, 2009). <br /> <br /> To make design standards more effective, the City may need to enact an <br />architectural review board. <br /> <br /> Confusion between standards and guidelines and the process that <br />governs this document. <br /> <br /> Contibuting versus non-contributing. <br />Williams stated he would like HPC to have more of an involvement in the <br />development review process. <br />Tofte stated the issue regarding architectural review and HPC was discussed <br />with Council years ago and the Council did not want to move forward with an <br />architectural review board. Planning Commission has been afforded that task. <br />McCartney expressed how HOC has been a valuable asset as referral agents. <br />Muckle stated she would not want to be charged with reviewing new <br />construction, only when it involves historic structures. <br />The next subcommittee meeting is September 30, 2009 in the City Council <br />chambers. <br />Update/Discussion/Action – HPF Budget <br />McCartney asked the Commission if they had any modifications to the proposed <br />HPF budgetary line items that were included in the packet. <br />The Commission recommended to change the wording on the notes column to <br />read “may” instead of “must” for the 50% residential allocation for incentives. <br />The Commission approved the budget unanimously. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.