My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2010 06 21 APPROVED
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2010 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2010 06 21 APPROVED
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:24 PM
Creation date
9/10/2010 8:37:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2010 06 21 APPROVED
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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 />June 21, 2010 <br />Page 5 of 8 <br /> <br />Troy Russ, Director of Planning and Building Safety, gave a presentation stating <br />the process for which staff is taking regarding the requested improvements on <br />701 Main Street. The proposed improvements include: <br /> <br /> Some new windows and doors. <br /> <br /> New siding on one wall. <br /> <br /> Modification of the roll up doors. <br />Russ gave an update as to the recent interpretations the City Attorney, Sam <br />Light, had provided regarding demolition. <br />Stewart stated this should go through a demo review process if there are <br />changes to the front of the building. He also stated he did not believe the <br />building had much architectural integrity. <br />Muckle stated the HPC should do all they can to expedite the demolition request. <br />Russ stated there are some contradictions in the process, most specifically <br />regarding architectural classification versus how to apply the design standards. <br />Chad Sholders, applicant, stated he believed the codes the planners have to use <br />makes their job very difficult. <br />Muckle stated the process should be reviewed and fixed. <br />Sholders asked to have the process expedited. <br />Koertje stated Sholders would have the commitment of the HPC to process this <br />application as soon as possible. <br /> <br />Update/Discussion/Action – Signs <br /> <br />Gavin McMillan presented a PowerPoint regarding the recommended <br />modifications to the sign code. <br /> <br />Wall Sign discussion <br />Stewart stated the street frontage requirement is a good element and he believed <br />the maximum height requirement (to second floor) is good. He stated there could <br />be an issue when a building has a false front – how would staff measure the <br />second floor. <br />Poppitz recommended to add the word “primary face” when speaking of corner <br />lots. <br />Russ stated staff is actually recommending the secondary frontage be allowed a <br />1’ of sign area for every linear foot of building (1 to 1 ratio) and primary frontage <br />receive a 2 to 1 ratio. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.