My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2010 12 13 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 12 13 APPROVED
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:24 PM
Creation date
2/2/2011 9:36:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2010 12 13 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 />December 13, 2010 <br />Page 4 of 6 <br /> <br />McCartney stated only if the codes have changed during the time of the extension. <br />Stewart stated the following: <br /> <br /> 3 years time extension is not appropriate for all projects. Time allowance should <br />be changed to 6 to 12 months. <br /> <br /> I like the idea of being able to review what the building is being replaced with. <br />Muckle agreed with Stewart and added the following: <br /> <br /> Permit should not run with land, only with owner. Non transferrable. <br /> <br /> Include a denial process in the flow chart. <br /> <br /> Curious how stay process is handled. <br />Stewart stated he agreed with Muckle regarding the permit should not be transferrable. <br />Koertje agreed the permit should not run with the land. <br />Lewis stated her primary worry was the time period extension. <br />Koertje stated there should be a process which allows a minor demolition to stop at <br />Subcommittee review. <br />McCartney stated this element is currently being considered. <br />Stewart added a minor demolition should be permitted as long as it follows the <br />Secretary of Interior standards. <br />Koertje recommended the HPC have a study session with the City Attorney regarding <br />this issue. <br />Update/Discussion/Action – 1131 Jefferson Avenue – Grant Update <br />Janice Hoffman, owner of 1131 Jefferson Avenue, gave an update of the work being <br />performed on her house. The HPC had asked Ms. Hoffman to come to this meeting to <br />give an update on the construction of the carport. <br />McCartney stated Mike Jones, Chief Building Inspector, had visited 1131 Jefferson <br />Avenue and stated the carport complies with building codes. <br />Updates/Discussions/Action – Plaques <br />Stewart discussed the following topics: <br /> <br /> Spoke to 5 different companies <br /> <br /> Described the various types of plaques on the market <br /> <br /> Should each plaque include name of house, year built and year designated. <br />Koertje asked the Commission if they thought the plaque should be redesigned. <br />Public Comment <br />Janie Hoffman stated the year built should be a primary element of the plaque. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.