My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2010 10 18 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 10 18 APPROVED
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:24 PM
Creation date
2/28/2011 9:09:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2010 10 18 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 />October 18, 2010 <br />Page 7 of 8 <br /> <br />Update/Discussion/Action – Demolition Application Process – Amendment to <br />LMC <br />Koertje recommended to continue this item until November 15, 2010 meeting due to late <br />hour (9:45 p.m.). The Commission agreed with this request. <br />Update/Discussion/Action – Plaque Prices <br />The Commission discussed the options and prices between a laminate plaque or a <br />bronze plaque. <br />Eric Tussey stated he believed the plaque prices were very expensive and believed the <br />HPF could be used for other, more important purposes. <br />John Leary stated he did not understand the need for such an expensive product. He <br />had planned on paying for his own plaque. He continued he would prefer to see an all <br />bronze plaque. <br />Muckle added all of the plaques in Boulder are bronze. <br />Jessica Fasick stated she did not like the laminate product. She continued the <br />proposed design had too much on there and text would be too hard to read from <br />sidewalk. <br />Stewart stated there should be a less complicated design. <br />Tussey recommended the plaque include a web address where further information <br />could be found online. <br />Stewart liked the idea of having additional information to be included in a walking tour or <br />brochure. He continued he didn’t see the need to rush on this project. He stated there <br />should be more background survey work to ask thoughts of others. <br />Lewis stated the Commission should consider a more economical approach. <br />Stewart stated he would volunteer to assist in figuring out additional options. <br />Update/Discussion/Action – Commercial Incentives <br />Koertje stated the next steps for the Commercial Incentives would be a roadshow to <br />DBA, BRaD and the Chamber of Commerce. <br />Lewis asked for clarification on the incentive. <br />John Leary stated he thought it would be a good idea to have a joint agreement with the <br />existing grant process. <br />Stewart stated he saw urgency in getting this process going. <br />Koertje stated he would volunteer to help Stewart to get this process rolling. <br />Stewart agreed. <br />Committee Reports - none <br />th <br />Update on Demolition Requests – 1326 South 96 Street <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.