Laserfiche WebLink
<br />HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES 3 APRIL 20, 2017 <br /> <br />WORK STUDY CALENDAR <br /> <br />2. DISCUSSION REGARDING VIEW CORRIDORS AS THEY PERTAIN TO HISTORIC <br />STRUCTURES. <br /> <br />Planning Manager Neal provided an overview of the Mills Act Agreement requirements. <br />Stated that staff has interpreted “view of corridor” as character defining features visible <br />from the street right-of-way; asked the Commission for their definition “view of corridor.” <br />After lengthy discussion, the Commission agreed that “view of corridor” shall mean: <br /> <br /> A view corridor enabling the general public to see the Historic Property from the <br />public right of-way shall be maintained and Owner shall not be permitted to block <br />the view to the property with any new structure such as walls, fences, <br />shrubbery/landscape, so as to prevent the viewing of the historic landmark to the <br />public. <br /> <br />Commission further agreed that: <br /> A violation of the Mills Act Agreement shall occur if the individual defining <br />characteristics of the property listed in the agreement are blocked. <br /> The view may be diminished but not completely blocked. <br /> The term “view corridor” should be changed to “view shed.” <br /> <br />The following public comments were received: <br /> Evangeline Gawronski spoke about code enforcement issues; provided her <br />definition of “view of corridor.” <br /> Bobbi Keenan inquired about the consequences of Mills Act Agreement violations; <br />opined that City should not allow fence height to exceed 36 inches. <br /> <br /> <br />COMMENTS <br /> <br />3. STAFF MEMBER COMMENTS <br /> <br />Planning Manager Neal: <br /> Discussed the possibility of changing the Historic Resources meeting dates; Bylaws <br />would need to be changed in order to do so. <br /> <br /> <br />4. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS <br /> <br />B-3