HRAB 01-19-93 Meeting MinutesSummary of 1/19/93 Meeting
Attendance
Members: Ray Ewing
Mary Jane Light
Judith Swiger
Lee Taylor
John Venskoske
Staff. Ron Lilley
Others: Maral Kalbian, Arch. Hist.
Todd Shenk, Ping Cmsn Liaison
Agenda items:
1. Preparation for the Joint Work Session
Staff reminded the members that the Work Session originally scheduled for
January 25th had to be rescheduled to February 22nd.
Members discussed what should be presented and the order of presentation for
the Work Session. In general, it was agreed that Ray Ewing would open the
presentation with introductions of HRAB members and a summary of the purpose
of this Joint Work Session. The purpose would include: 1) bringing everyone up
to date on what the HRAB is about, and 2) getting input from Supervisors on
how the HRAB proposes to pursue their work.
An incomplete outline was developed as follows:
I. Introductions (Ray Ewing)
II. Review of Agenda (Ray Ewing)
III. Presentation/Discussion (Ray Ewing)
A. Update on work of HRAB
1. Recapitulation of the HRAB responsibilities as outlined in the
Comprehensive Plan
2. Brief summary of what the HRAB has worked on thus far
- Historic Area Overlay ordinance
- Plaque Program ordinance
- Caleb Heights development review
- ongoing review
B. Discussion/Presentation items
1. Inventory and Education efforts
- Rural Landmarks Survey presentation (approx 45 mins)
- Thoughts on the need for education and how to use the
presentation for education
2. Preservation Philosophy
3. Preservation Proposals
- informational meeting on National Register
- using the Landmarks Survey for development review
- comprehensive approach
Todd Shenk pointed out that it should be made clear that the Rural Landmarks
Survey and its conclusions are based on certain established criteria and that those
criteria should be highlighted.
Members agreed that staff and Ray Ewing could complete the outline before the
next HRAB meeting and present it at that meeting.
2. Group review of Significant Properties
Members agreed to meet during the afternoon on both February 10th and 11th,
with the afternoon of the 12th as an overflow time, if necessary, in order to review
the 360 or so most significant properties shown in the Rural Landmarks Survey.
Staff was asked to provide copies of the report to members before that meeting in
order to have a chance to become somewhat familiar with it beforehand.