Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19880628HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES City Council Chambers 1st Floor City Hall June 28, 1988 2:30 p.m. Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Georgeann Waggaman, Nick Pasquarella, Zoe Compton, Charles Cunniffe and Augie Reno present. Excused were Joe Krabacher and Charlie Knight. Patricia O'Bryan resigned from the Board. MOTION: Georgeann made the motion to approve the minutes of June 14, 1988. Bill second. All approved. Motion carries. COMMITTEE MEMBER AI~) STAFF COMMENTS Augie: City Council approved the ARA kiosk on the Cooper St. mall and the building structure is leaning on its side and I don't know that it contributes to the rest of the historic district. It will be there all summer and it did not come before us for review. Bill: Will staff look into this as the City should have come before the Board for approval. Georgeann: I do think it is a good enough feature to have there for the visitors and we don't want to discontinue operation. Roxanne: The direction is at the next meeting we would like to see a presentation. PUBLIC COMMENTS Bill: Later on in our agenda we are going to be discussing the comprehensive plan and I have a client and a project in the west end that has been requested to put in a sidewalk on their property where no sidewalks in the total west end occur. I have asked them to come and speak to address that specific issue. I am finding out that the City has passed an ordinance that requires sidewalks in certain areas of the west end. Roxanne: That is an old ord. that the Engineering Dept. gave me information on and my issue with them is that we have some historic irrigation ditches running through 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th St. all that direction. How does that fit with the sidewalk plan and have they taken that into consideration. Frank Peters: How can we stop it. There is nothing about the west end with even hedges and even streets. Everyone walks on the streets of the west end and it is safe to do so. I can't believe the City would consider doing something like that as concerned as they are on the one hand about the feeling of the HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 west end and the atmosphere and appearance. I encourage you to do everything you can do to not let the City do the sidewalks. Bill: Frank Peters owns the house at 334 W. Hallam. The cottonwood trees are all at different alignments and that would mean that the sidewalk would have to meander around and it would just not be appropriate in the west end. Frank: We are proponents of keeping the ditches also. Marta Chaikovska: Most people at the west end have planted large flower beds right along the property line. Nick: What would you feel like if someone wanted to put in a sidewalk. Frank: I would encourage him not to do it. Marta: Sidewalks are never maintained properly. Nick: My concern is that some people don't like people driving up and parking on their lawn and they put in a sidewalk and it stops that from happening. Frank: A curb would do that. Nick: The City has to do the curb and the owner would have to put in the sidewalk and he feels he is building a barrier to keep people from driving up on his lawn. Frank: I would be a proponent of the curb and not the sidewalk as a barrier. Georgeann: For the west end and even the east end sidewalks are too urban for the feeling we want to get. Nick: We built 60 feet of it on Cooper Street and 30 feet of it on Original St. and it begins and ends right there. Doing away with sidewalks you have to think about the people that put sidewalks in when they "had" to put them in. Frank: The fact that there are a few is not a reason to compel everyone to have one. Bill: In certain instances we might want to recommend to the Eng. Dept. that it is more compatible not to have the sidewalk. Julie Wyckoff: My situation is the corner of First and Hopkins and I was told that I had to put in this five foot sidewalk and I'm in a condition where it goes to nothing. I'm on a corner and HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 the other three corners are landscaped right to the curb and look lovely. This will force my landscaping back to be crowded with my houses. Ed, Aspen Leaf Jewelers: I am requesting to be added to the agenda. I am proposing a 7 ft. by 3 ft. convexed awning to go over the entry way across the building. MOTION: Augie made the motion to add the Aspen Leaf Jewelers awning review as new business to the agenda. Nick second. All approved. Motion carries. MONITORING PROJECTS Roxanne: Georgeann have you had a chance to monitor the sculpture garden. Georgeann: I looked at it on Saturday and it looks into conformance to me but I will actually have to sit down and go through my notes. FINAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW-134 W. HOPKINS Roxanne: The applicant is requesting final development review for this project which is the renovation of the current house that exists on lot K at 134 W. Hopkins. Julie Wyckoff is the owner of that property. The proposal is to add a four foot addition onto the back of that house and Welton will be addressing that. That was not in the conceptual. To move the house that is presently located at 120 N. Spring to this site at lot L renovate it and add a two story addition. Roger Kerr is the architect on that one. The project has received the historic landmark designation June 13th. HPC has to review and possibly approve the project. If approved HPC needs to make sure that your findings include the area and bulk variations as well as the setback for Lot L property. There will be some partial demolition going on Lot K existing house to add on the 4 ft. addition. Some issues that staff has is regarding the timing of the removal of the 120 N. Spring house onto lot L. We understand that the 700 E. Main project which is the threatening development will be ready to move in 2 to 3 weeks. I understand from Roger that they will not be ready for about six weeks. My recommendation is that those two people get together and begin a dialogue to make sure their timing doesn't cause a problem otherwise the entire project will be shot. A spruce tree will be relocated and the site plan in your packet reflects that it will be removed from Lot L site and they show it to be located into a right away. If so it is still the adjacent property owners responsibility to maintain that tree. That might be something that needs to be addressed along with the sidewalk issue. Staff HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 finds that the plans for renovation of the addition are necessary to create the needed floor area. The addition goes back 14 ft. along the top and 4 ft. from the ground level; it is compatible; it allows for a real porch for entry into a mud room area at the rear of the house and will have a balcony on the very top that is simple. The roofing material for the existing house is a black asphalt shingle. Staff recommends that they possibly might want to look at another roof material but understanding this is probably an economic issue as well. Probably wood shingles were original to the home and that may want to be considered as a softening element to the entire project. At the conceptual development review stage HPC was concerned about a variety of issues that included the dormers of the new house 120 N. Spring and the plans have reflected all of the changes that were placed upon at conceptual. There originally was shown to be one large dormer and now there are two smaller ones. On lot L the front yard setback has been moved back to 13 ft. The structures are 8'3" apart which is in keeping with what HPC had originally wanted. Their total site coverage is very close to the 40% that HPC had requested. It is now 43.6% a slight increase. The issue of the height of the addition to lot L was discussed at conceptual. Staff finds that the height is compatible. It is not as high as some of the ones that we have been seeing lately. The average height is 16'6" and it is under the height requirements. We recommend final development approval for the entire project finding that the rear setback variation be included in the motion and area and bulk variation; finding that both those variations would be more compatible in character to the historic landmark. Welton: From the rear of the house the kitchen was an addition done sometime after it was constructed and is done in two phases, the actual kitchen and the mudroom. The foundation doesn't exist under this part of the house and the foundation under the rest of the house is brick and sandstone. We had a structural engineer report and the foundations are in good condition for the original house. There are no foundations for the additions in the rear. The house is in good condition except that in the 40's when they covered the existing wood siding it is deteriorating badly. They covered it with asphalt composite shingles and the roofing which is sheet felt nailed down. It is a typical victorian cottage. The proposal is to tear down the shed in the back, provide a good foundation to it and do a 1 1/2 story addition on the back that carries along the same roof pitch and same height as the rest of the roof. The materials will be returned to what they were originally which is wood clap board with detailed work underneath the bay windows, and square cut shingles in the gable ends. We will enlarge the window to provide emergency egress from the bedroom which is a code requirement. A revision to the shed dormers we will duplicate 4 HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 the eave detail where the fascia goes and turns back a foot then comes back in again. On the rear because the Carley half of the proposal has a court yard design that is open to the west rather than block their courtyard out with a two story high addition we concentrated this bedroom to the west side of the addition with a flat roof basically over the mudroom portion so that their views are not impacted. Roxanne: Regarding the original shed dormers at one time staff felt that they were not original to the house but it has been determined that they are original. In staffs opinion the gable dormers are very architecturally pleasing. Welton: Presently those shed dormers have windows in them that have pins in the sides and the way you open the window is to take it out of the frame. Roxanne: What is the condition of the siding as I have mentioned in the memo that it would be nice if you could restore whatever possible. Welton: There is not much to salvage but we will know better when we start with demolition. Chances are that there is no way of restoring it. We probably would resheath the house with plywood to give it additional structural support then duplicate the wood. Roxanne: What is the width of the clapboard siding. Welton: Whatever was there before 5 inch or 6 inch. Georgeann: I have been in that house and it seems to be that the floors twist etc. but you feel that they are solid enough that you won't be faced with massive changes that you aren't expecting. Welton: You never know and most of our work is concentrated on the upper portion of the house. There is no work at all on the lower level of this house with the exception of an opening between the kitchen and diningroom. Georgeann: I feel this is a good direction to go in. Bill: Does staff feel comfortable with not having a letter addressing the structural integrity of the house. Roxanne: That was a requirement from HPC in conceptual and the structural letter we received was from Roger Kerr on 120 N. Spring. We did not get one on this house and you may want to make that a condition of approval. HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 Welton: I can provide a letter. Julie Wyckoff: They are requesting a sidewalk all the way to the alley on up toward Main St. There is no connection sidewalk. Zoe: Why are they doing that. Julie: Because it is a condominium and it falls into the 1970's ordinance. The sidewalk will have considerable impact. Roxanne: We can write a letter to the Eng. Dept. and do some recommendations. Regarding the parking I don't know if they will require that it be paved and the spruce tree's roots will be right under the paved area so we might want to address that also. Welton: For the parking I would like to do strips of concrete about 20" wide with grass in between them. Julie: No one has ever mentioned concrete. Zoe: You can do blocks. Georgeann: Are there any sidewalks on the other corners. Julie: There are no sidewalks on the corners. House there is a sidewalk midblock. At the Holiday Augie: you. Isn't there a boardwalk sidewalk in the building behind Bill: I think it is from the property line up to their building. Georgeann: We also have a lot of lodging area and a lot of people walking down town. the lodging district be better. in this particular Would sidewalks in Bill: We have an applicant before us that the Eng. Dept. is requesting a sidewalk to be put in where no adjacent sidewalks exist in the area. The Board might find that it is more compatible not to have the sidewalk. What is the process that we use to address that issue and possibly get the Eng. Dept. to waive that compliance. Bill Drueding: It just sounds arbitrary. Bill: We could make a recommendation at this point that we will try to waive that and I will direct staff to inform us of what the process would be. HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 Nick: The people that had to put sidewalks in should have the opportunity to come to us and say they would like to take them out. We should be very cautious as we approach this. Georgeann: On the other side of the west end it is mostly single family dwellings. When you start thinking about a lodge, condo etc. you get a different feeling. We are brought up with this question now because it is single family homes, if we were looking at this same area as a multi family structure I don't think we would hesitate to have them put sidewalks in but then we do end up with a checkerboard pattern that way. Bill: Lets not confuse this application with the discussion on sidewalks in general. I might recommend to the Board to make their recommendation with specifics to this project in their approval and then we can address the sidewalk situation in general later. Bill: We will go to Roger Kerr's project on lot L. Do you have any changes that we should be aware of. Roger: window. encroach What has The only change was the possibility of adding a kitchen It would add interest to the elevation but would into the yard space to accomplish that about six inches. been submitted is what we want to go ahead with. Roxanne: The timing of the moving is important and they will be ready to move 700 E. Main quicker than you are ready to move. Roger: I think we can do that and I feel the Bldg. Dept. will be willing to work with us on a fast track situation. Nick: The moving of the north Spring St. bldg. is lifting it up, moving it over and putting it down. Will it be taken apart. Roger: That is the intention. Roxanne: What about an agreement with the moving company regarding the safe moving of the house intact. Bill: This is the first time that we allowed a house to be moved. Roger: Thomas House movers have been working in this area for many years and I've seen him move houses and I have no concerns about it. The structural engineer has no concerns. Augie: If the building doesn't get move as Nick and the applicants talked about then they would not be complying with -,- HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 what we approved and wouldn't have approval to put the new structure there anyway. Julie: You mean if this particular red house doesn't make it 9 blocks this entire project is down the tubes. Nick: Lot L anyway. Roxanne: The entire parcel has been designated, condominiumized to allow that particular house to move to that particular site. Julie: I thought our application was a one story dwelling to be moved onto the east lot and I didn't understand that it hinged on this particular house. Roger: We didn't know which house we were going to put on there and this one was are goal but we didn't have a commitment at that time. It could be that you would want an historic structure approved by you but there aren't many of those around. Georgeann: If you had another house of another configuration you would have to figure out how it would fit on that lot. Roxanne: Then maybe the designation process if it wasn't a historic home that was going to be added onto Lot L the designation could be rescinded. There are a lot of issues here. Bill: I believe it is the consensus of this board that we gave approval based on that house being moved over. For the records I thought that house was being moved over. Julie: It is my misunderstanding. MOTION: Bill: I would entertain a motion that outlines recommendation of approval as shown on page 7 of our memo dated June 28, 1988 from the Planning staff with the additional conditions that state: 1. A structural response letter addressing changes to Lot K as requested by staff to meet condition D. of the conceptual approval be submitted by Welton. I might also recommend that one of the conditions be that HPC recommends to City Council and the Eng. Dept. to waive compliance of this project with providing a sidewalk as requested by the Eng. Dept. Georgeann: I so move. Zoe second. who opposed. Ail approved except Augie Augie: I'm opposed to the last issue. I would rather see that as a second issue or separate motion with the project separated because the improvement district is there primarily as a safety 8 HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 reason. Sidewalks occur and projects develop over the years so the City doesn't have to put those sidewalks in and the developer does. Having something brought up to us that I wasn't involved with over the west end you might have thought about it more. I haven't given it much thought so I couldn't support that at this time. Roxanne: His point is well taken making it a separate motion out of the approval of this. AMENDED MOTIONs Georgeann: I would take that part of the motion back. Zoe second. All approved. Motion carries. Bill: We will amend the motion to remove the second condition. (Bolded section of motion was not approved) Roxanne: Regarding the sidewalk issue I feel it needs to be studied by staff in order to give you the proper information. Possibly Chuck Roth from the Eng. Dept. should come to the next meeting to discuss this. Zoe: Actually it boils down that historical structures shouldn't have it. Welton: It specifically is a requirement of the Eng. Dept. of larger condominiumizations, multi family. There area two kinds of condominiumizations this and ones similar to the Gant. Zoe: This is the first time a project like this has been presented to HPC so it is again more individual than anything that we had in terms of "real" condominiums right down to the landscaping. You have done a nice job and this would set a good precedent so it needs special attention and support from us as a Board in order to see that it comes out as attractive as you plan. Bill: As chairman I will direct Roxanne to get in touch with the Eng. Dept. and have a report for the next meeting so we can act on this as soon as possible. Roxanne: Nick is monitoring the project. HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 334 W. HALIJ%M Bill stepped down. Georgeann chairperson. Frank Peters and Marta Chaikovska, owners. Roxanne: At the last meeting Trish Harris had presented the entire plans which final approval was given and she verbally presented the fact that there was a possibility they might want to increase the size of the basement for storage and possibly lift the carriage house up and move it. That developed into an entire conversation about the encroachment of the parking situation into the right-of-way and all of that and if they are going to move it maybe we should look at an entire new plan for reciting the structure. Frank: We were concerned that there was a misunderstanding. At the last meeting we did say our thinking was that a basement was more appropriate in that structure and she came in and said we were going to put a basement in but she was free wheeling as to how. We don't want to move the house at all but it is impossible we are told to do anything with the foundation, to under pin, to put a 4 ft. foundation wall in or to put a regular 8 or 9 ft. basement wall in without lifting it. The minutes I read stated if it is going to be moved or lifted then we have to come back to HPC. It is the view of the architectural firm, engineering firm, excavator and the general contractor that you won't be able to do anything with that house if you don't lift it somewhat. We are not going to move it one inch north, south, east or west but it has to be raised and supported in place which something is done to the foundation. To raise it we have to build a plywood match box all around it to make sure nothing happens to it when it is raised. Then we have to have a house mover from Glenwood come in and raise it before we can even touch it. The additional cost after doing all that to go ahead a build a basement for all the mechanical, washer and dryer was small in comparison to what we already have in it. That is why we said we will do the basement. We are saying we might have to lift it as high as three to four feet for three weeks then put it right down where it was and it will never move during the process and we were hoping you wouldn't have an objection to that. Marta: It is a safety issue as well. Frank: When the house was built the existing support is internal not on the outside bearing walls. HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 Frank: We just need some movement on item #3 that says we can raise it. Georgeann: You are not bringing it any further out of the ground or having anything visually on the outside changing. Frank: Absolutely not. Georgeann: Instead of 4 ft. and a washer and dryer. ft. foundations you are asking for 8 Frank: Visually if you walk by you will wonder if we put a basement in the house. At the last meeting lifting and moving because one clause instead of two separate ideas. Bill D: It was presented that it could be picked up, moved over, the foundation poured and moved back. My idea was if you can pick it up and move it then you don't need variances. Georgeann: From our point of view all we have to do is make a motion allowing them to lift their building up for the purpose of putting in a foundation or basement and the detailing is left up to them. Augie: You might want to require a letter from the structural engineer and an implementation plan describing what you are going to do to protect the building. Georgeann: You are saying not just the letter from Ted saying you can't do underpinning but a letter saying what should be done and how it will be done. Frank: If you give us approval to lift it up and put a basement/foundation in you need confirmation from the structural engineers, one that it can be done and that is the way to do it and how it is to be done. MOTION: Augie made the motion approve the addition of a basement underneath the carriage house at 334 W. Hallam noting that the building will be allowed to be lifted up in the air to put the basement in and that we need a letter from the structural engineer stating that this is indeed the way that should happen and also an implementation plan on how you are going to assure the safety of damage to that building in that moving process and no visible changes to the way the building is now. It must be put back in the same location and site. Nick second. All approved. Motion carries. Roxanne: Joe Krabacher is the monitor. HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 Frank: We are also involved in the sidewalk issue. I want to encourage HPC to get involved in this and it can have a long range dramatic impact especially on the west end. You have water flowing through town the same way it did 100 years ago. ASPEN LEAF JEWELERS-120 S. GALENA/SOUTEERLAND FALLIN Bill: This is an application for an awning. Roxanne: Kathy has noted there was an awning approved on the other side of that same building. Ed from Aspen Awning: They were going to put awnings on the front of Godiva Chocolate and they are not going to do that, instead they put up gold signage. The only awning on this building will be this one. Georgeann: Should we get something from Godiva that discontinues that awning use. We have a year time period. Ed: This is a permanent frame awning. Bill D.: You will need an encroachment license from the Eng. Dept. as this would protrude over city property. If it was collapsible we would waive that encroachment license. Roxanne: This appears to be straight forward. Ed: It is an 8 ft. convex awning covering a double entry doorway 3 ft. out and 3 ft. up. This is going to be a rigid valance awning which means there will not be a floppy valance. It will be 7'9" above the ground which is right at the break of the window. There is an extra window there and the awning will be set at the top. It is a 1" square tubing which will be permanent and 22" spacing ribs for snow load. It is charcoal gray material. The Aspen Leaf will be located right in the middle of the building. Bill: You might check but I believe the city requires that it be 8 ft. above the sidewalk. Zoe: Awnings on that building would be attractive and the color is a good selection. If this approved it should be under the condition that whoever is in this building and if they want an awning it has to be that awning and that color they would get. This is they way we handled this before. Ed: The landlord is in approval to that they all be the same. 12 HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 Bill: The landlord should send a letter to HPC that he approves what Ed is recommending. I like the awnings and the sign but I don't think they both are going to go together. A study should be done on what they are going to do, whether they are going to incorporate the signage. You are going to have one awning over one shop and you don't have it over the other shops. Zoe: Since the building is the configuration the way it is I agree that you have awnings or not. Charles: We dealt with that on the Aspen Grove bldg. and the problem is you have individual tenants that want to pay for the awning but you don't have a developer that wants to pay for an awning. Zoe: Some people didn't want an awning at all. Bill: What was our precedent. Charles: We allowed it but it had to be consistent on the whole building. The second floor came in for approval of a different awning and it was approved but the second floor was thought to be different than the first. Zoe: Some people chose not to have an awning but if they chose one it had to be consistent. Georgeann: I think we have to live with that and maybe it adds to the variety in places. Charles: It breaks down the scale to individual shop fronts which could be uncomfortable as opposed to having the whole building being the same. MOTION: Georgeann made the motion that we approve the gray curved awning as presented on 120 S. Galena on the condition that he gets his encroachment license approval and on the condition that a letter is received by Roxanne in the Planning Dept. from the owner agreeing that they approve this awning and that this will be the precedent setting awning for any other awnings on that building, style and color. Zoe second. All approved. Motion carries. Roxanne: That letter should be received by the Planning Office prior to going up. Bill D.: You aren't approving any signage. The signage will be up to how much they are allotted. 13 HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 Hill: Roxanne you might make an additional copy of this application and the letter and attach it to the file for that building so that if anything comes up on that building Bill D. can review that. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION SUMMARY Roxanne: Regarding the Marolt barn site the design workshop will be making a presentation very shortly to Council. That 70 acre site is involving a whole lot of things such as employee housing, parks etc. Our issue was support of the Historical Society's project only connected with the barn. We discovered that it was not rated and not designated so we cannot formally deal with it or make formal recommendations and they do not have to come before us for any design review therefore we have requested that the City begin their own application for designating the structure. I will find out this week if the building is eligible for the national register which Sally Pierce believes is which would give it a rating of at least 5 and therefore it would be subject to our review etc. and also subject that the City Council could grant to the Historical Society a $2,000 designation grant which could go into part of their funds for the restoration plan of the outside. In reference to the state Hwy. both alignments affect historic structures. We had talked about the rating and in the comprehensive plan and ordinances it says we should review our inventory at least every five years. There are important structures that have not received any rating at all and one is the Castle Creek power station which would be affected by an alignment of the hwy. I would like feed back from you especially on City owned property which was never rated. Charles: We were concerned about what the extent of the historic district should be. Georgeann: I thought if anything happened to it it should be reported to us, Castle Creek and the Aspen Meadows. Roxanne: The Marolt site would be affected by one alignment and the Castle Creek site is another one. I would be willing to start the process and include them in the inventory. Charles: Wasn't the list of designations ratified by City Council. Bill: Yes they did and that list should be available. Under the powers and duties of our committee in the zoning code it 14 HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 states that we do periodical evaluation of the inventory of historic sites and structures. Then we would recommend to P&Z that it be added to the inventory and P&Z makes a recommendation to Council and they pass a resolution that it be added to the inventory. We would have to have public notice. Roxanne: I am working on our CLG contract and we get funding from there. Half my position is funded thru the state. We are requesting funds from the state. Along with that is my report which is on the proposed districts. There requirement was to look at the feasibility of formalizing the proposed district that have been under consideration for about 8 years. There are three proposed districts from 1980 that were never formalized. Alan Richman said he feels it is not feasible at this time politically. Bill: Under our comprehensive plan one of our priorities is to study the historic district expansion. Georgeann: I think we lost everything when we tried to overlay the whole city and that is what we are rebounding from. I think we should not push for an infill district as it is asking for too much. I don't even think we should push for the green district. We should push for the community church district. All the buildings along Triangle Park have to go before us. Zoe: The east side of town ends on Hunter St. what about that area. Georgeann: We should concentrate on the community church district and one block wider in every direction in the commercial core. Charles: You will have a lot of opposition if you try to go east. There are so many projects going up now. Roxanne: The community church district has incredible integrity and we will loose whatever chance we might have for a national multiple resource area district nomination which I am working on for next year without that district. Bill: As chairman I recommend that staff write a position paper that we would like to recommend to P&Z that we look at creating two new districts those being the community church district and the lake avenue district. I would also like to recommend that the community church district line be redrawn as previously submitted to go to the alley. When a line is drawn to the middle of the street you aren't protecting the houses and buildings that are across the street. 15 HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 states that we do periodical evaluation of the inventory of historic sites and structures. Then we would recommend to P&Z that it be added to the inventory and P&Z makes a recommendation to Council and they pass a resolution that it be added to the inventory. We would have to have public notice. I am working on our CLG contract and we get funding from there. Half my position is funded thru the state. We are requesting funds from the state. Along with that is my report which is on the proposed districts. There requirement was to look at the feasibility of formalizing the proposed district that have been under consideration for about 8 years. There are three proposed districts from 1980 that were never formalized. Alan Richman said it is not feasible at this time politically. Bill: Under our comprehensive plan one of our priorities is to study the historic district expansion. Georgeann: I think we lost everything when we tried to overlay the whole city and that is what we are rebounding from. I think we should not push for an infill district as it is asking for too much. I don't even think we should push for the green district. We should push for the community church district. All the buildings along Triangle Park have to go before us. Zoe: The east side of town ends on Hunter St. what about that area. Georgeann: We should concentrate on the community church district and one block wider in every direction in the commercial core. Charles: You will have a lot of opposition if you try to go east. There are so many projects going up now. Roxanne: The community church district has incredible integrity and we will loose whatever chance we might have for a national multiple resource area district nomination which I am working on for next year without that district. Bill: As chairman I recommend that staff write a position paper that we would like to recommend to P&Z that we look at creating two new districts those being the community church district and the lake avenue district. I would also like to recommend that the community church district line be redrawn as previously submitted to go to the alley. When a line is drawn to the middle of the street you aren't protecting the houses and buildings that are across the street, 15 HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 Zoe: In your letter it should state as to why it is so important as soon the elementary school will be gone and then not. Roxanne: I see districts as protecting property values. We have not had a district formalized for 13 years. Bill: The question is over zoning not over whether it is an historic district to land values in the area because the zone allows for more FAR and increased height and that does gives the ability for somebody to build out and build a larger project which does increase their value. Bill: If you can find historic structures that need to be preserved and compatibility protected outside of the district that we have now then you have a reason to grasp for more area. adjourned 4:30 pm. Kathy Strickland, Deputy City Clerk 16 -. HPC.MINUTES JUNE 28, 1988 FINAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW-134 W. HOPKINS . .3 334 W. HALLAM · 10 ASPEN LEAF JEWELERS-120 S. GALENA/SOUTHERLAND FALLIN . . 12