My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2019 10 21
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2019 10 21
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:21 PM
Creation date
10/25/2019 12:38:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
299
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 />September 16, 2019 <br />Page 8 of 9 <br />agents especially appreciated the review process for window updates, which allowed for <br />efficiency updates while preserving the size and shape of the windows. He thought it <br />was a huge success and that it was a good way of articulating the Historic Preservation <br />Fund's incentive process. <br />Dunlap asked about any negative feedback. <br />Selvoski responded that they were remarkably positive and she and Planner Brennan <br />were able to express that landmarking could be an asset to the community and to the <br />homeowner. <br />Dickinson observed that it was a continued education program for many realtors, who <br />were expecting to learn all the things they could not do for landmarked homes. <br />Dunlap noted that the Saving Places Conference last year showed that there were <br />mandatory preservation processes in the country, particularly on the East Coast, <br />whereas Colorado had more of a process of working together to make preservation <br />happen. <br />Klemme asked if the Commission wanted to participate in Art Walks in October and <br />November. She and Commissioner Parris volunteered to attend. Selvoski replied that <br />she would send an email to the Commission. <br />Dickinson stated that he would like to open his home, the Old Louisville Hospital, for <br />staff and the Commission, but recognized there were issues with commissioners <br />meeting together outside of hearings. He suggested a public event and asked for help <br />from staff to figure out the right way to do it. He did not mind if it was a public event for <br />people to come see the house. <br />Zuccaro replied that staff could advertise it as a meeting and meet public notice that <br />way, though it would need to be open to the public and any municipal business needed <br />to be held on public ground. He thought it would be better to do a publicized social <br />gathering and Commissioner Dickinson agreed. <br />DISCUSSION ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETINGS <br />Dunlap requested a discussion to consider requiring a structural engineering <br />assessment in historic structure assessments. He also suggested discussing materials <br />usage and how to communicate materials requirements to the public. <br />Selvoski replied that the program was generally structured to let the applicant present <br />their choices of materials to the Commission, though there was language regarding <br />what the goal of the materials should be. There was no specific materials list. <br />Dunlap did not think materials should be mandated, but he wondered if people wanted <br />guidance for what materials to choose. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.