My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2006 10 16
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2006 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2006 10 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:21 PM
Creation date
11/21/2006 9:29:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2006 10 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
<br />Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />October 16, 2006 <br />Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br />Muth noted that while either option would be possible, she would like to make a <br />determination as to which way to proceed prior to starting any grant application <br />process. <br /> <br />Grain Elevator <br />Muckle reported that she is continuing talks with the owners of the grain elevator and <br />thinks that a public-private partnership of some kind might be forged to save the <br />grain elevator. She noted that the owners are wary of proceeding and she is working <br />with them to help make them feel more comfortable about preserving the property. <br /> <br />Members of the Commission were supportive of Muckle's efforts and are willing to <br />help when needed. <br /> <br />Proposed Preservation Zoning Incentives <br />Lewis had reviewed the proposed incentives usi <br />concluded that the 2.5% preservation bonus <br />enough incentives to really get people inter <br />incentive to a 5% preservation bonus and a <br />percentages really don't offer much of a square <br />that the incentive needs to be large ough to ma <br />demolition. . <br /> <br /> <br />ariety of different sized lots and <br />e 5% landmark bonus were not large <br />he reco mended doubling the <br />n nus as the smaller <br />o some lots. Lewis noted <br />rvation a viable alternative to <br /> <br />. will continue to work on <br />November meeting. <br /> <br />Paul Wood, Plannin <br />Members identifi <br />. How easy/ <br />. Will the Boar <br />v <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ac <br />oota <br />fo or. <br />Are ariance traps? <br />Is there orce that a later owner would lose that square footage bonus <br />if the hous down? <br />How can we sure that the bonus is recorded so that a later owner can't ask for <br />an additional preservation bonus? <br /> <br />r? <br />c Preservation Commission oversee <br />to the ation or landmark bonuses? <br />tions the Commission is proposing appropriate? <br />existing structures within the Old Town Overlay <br />om the front wall of the existing home." <br />shall be no more than 75% of the total square- <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Proposing a Noncontiguous Historic District for Old Town <br />Due to the lack of time, this item was continued to the next meeting. <br /> <br />Subcommittee Reports <br />. Economic Incentives - No report. <br />. Education & Outreach - No report. <br />. Design Review/Recommendations - No report <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.