Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />January 10, 2011 <br />Page 4 of 7 <br />Koertje asked if there were any questions regarding the conservation easement. <br />Lewis asked what the conservation easement covers and what would the applicant be <br />able to modify. <br />McCartney read from the draft conservation easement. <br />Lewis asked if the conservation easement had a time limit. <br />McCartney stated no. <br />Tofte asked for more clarification on the conservation easement. <br />Koertje explained how Ballot measure 2A allowed for conservation easements. <br />Lewis asked if a conservation easement could be used for a defining element, like a <br />window. <br />Tofte asked if the appearance of the façade was all that was being protected. <br />Koertje answered yes. But it was more character based. <br />Speier stated it sounded like the Commission was seeking architectural control. <br />Koertje explained it’s like approving a design which will remain in place forever. <br />Fasick asked if the City could require upkeep. <br />McCartney answered in the affirmative; it is stated in the conservation easement <br />language. <br />Tofte asked if the City would be paying for that upkeep. <br />McCartney stated no. The language states the owner is responsible for maintenance. <br />Tofte asked what funds are currently available in the HPF budget. <br />McCartney stated there is approximately $600,000. <br />Tofte express a concern of the HPC setting a precedence. <br />McCartney stated he understood the concern, and reminded the Commission <br />submittals are reviewed on a case by case basis and not precedence. <br />Tofte asked the applicant if he didn’t receive funding, what elements he would leave out. <br />Blanchard stated he would not do the tin. He then added he was unaware the <br />conservation easement did not have a time limit. <br />