My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2010 07 19 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 07 19 APPROVED
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:24 PM
Creation date
9/10/2010 8:38:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2010 07 19 APPROVED
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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 />July 19, 2010 <br />Page 4 of 6 <br /> <br />Stewart agreed and added the existing carport does not detract from the <br />architectural integrity. He stated the carport could even be removed at a later <br />date and not affect the house. <br />Muckle recommended the house be named Connaroe House, since there <br />already are other structures name Jacoe. <br />McCartney recommended the house could be named “Jacoe-Connaroe House”. <br />Lewis stated liked the idea of having a dual name (Jacoe-Connaroe House). She <br />also agreed with the fact the house was strong in social and architectural <br />integrity. <br />Williams agreed with the other Commissioners statements. <br />Koertje agreed as well. <br />Lewis made a motion to approve the application based on architectural and <br />social significance, it represents style and period of 1932 architecture. She also <br />stated the name should be “Jacoe-Connaroe House”. Stewart seconded the <br />motion. The motion carried 5 – 0. <br />Update/Discussion/Action – Preservation Awards <br /> <br />McCartney presented the attached memo. <br />Koertje opened discussions regarding the recommendations for the 2011 <br />Preservation Awards. <br />After much deliberation over which structures to nominate, the Commission <br />established the following list: <br /> <br /> Preservation Award – 1024 Grant Avenue <br /> <br /> Sensitive Addition – 1008 Jefferson Avenue <br /> <br /> Adaptive Re-use - 921 Main Street <br /> <br /> Historic Feature – Silo (Pine Street) <br /> <br />Update/Discussion/Action – Possible Commercial Incentives <br />Continue to August 16, 2010 meeting. Poppitz was not at meeting to discuss this <br />item. Koertje recommended staff provide information regarding existing <br />Business Improvement Program (BAP), as an example of commercial incentives. <br /> <br />Update/Discussion/Action – Walls Vs. Windows <br />McCartney presented the attached memo. McCartney stated the Planning <br />Director, Troy Russ, had asked to continue this item until August 16, 2010, but <br />McCartney wanted feedback regarding the proposed redlines. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.