02/10/2003 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

loan is specified that it needs to be done according to a particular set of standards which are drawn up by the Secretary of the Interior because of the historic nature of the buildings that are being rehabilitated. The other loan would be generally applicable to any structure within the city. It would be those which meet the criteria which are 50 years of age or more and resident occupied, or residential buildings that are occupied either for profit or whatever. Mrs. Lord said it certainly fits within the board's charge as a Commission to preserve and protect the historic district. We are asking people to adhere to a certain set of standards and these are the same standards. That may give us more leverage. Mrs. O'Rourke said what we ask for is sometimes more costly to the owners. She mentioned the Beckrests as an example. She said they went along with the Board's recommendation but it was more expensive for them. Mr. Lang said the Board does not know if it was more expensive. They were not provided that information. Mr. Dailey asked if anyone knows what percentage of hoines in North Olmsted were built 1953 and prior. Mr. Corell said he would guess half of them. Mrs. Lord said the building boom started in the 60's. There was further discussion among board members about homes in the area. Mr. Lang said in answer to Mr. Dailey, we're estimating approximately 50% of the homes but it may not be quite that high. There are an awful lot of older homes in the community that would be eligible for either one of two kinds of funding. While it would be desirous to have them rehabilitated into their historic state exteriorly, then maybe they could get a loan to do the interior, or some other kinds of funds. He said he knows there has been a push on by the community to persuade homeowners to adequately take care of their properties and this is an excellent way to go about doing that. What we will do is, this is now entered into the minutes and we will bring it up at a future tiine in order to pursue this through the appropriate committees of Council so that it can be at least prepared for in budget submission for the year 2004. We are operating on the assumption that the county will offer the program again so that we have our ducks in a row if they come through. Mr. Barker then mentioned appropriation hearings are starting next week for 2003, but it would still be a good time to look at this even though we are in financial straits right now. (Note: The heccter was bl,o-o?ing too loudly arrd comments cozrld rrot be made out cleccrly.) Mr. Lang said discussion can start this year to familiarize members of Council with the program and see what happens. Mr. Barker brought up the memos from the Law Department pertaining to the Commission's standing regarding the charter change. He said there was a committee meeting last week and there was a lot of discussion about the charter change and how there are a few members whose commission has expired. Their commissions did expire but they are still on the Landmarks Commission until things are hatched out with finding 2 qualified people for the charter amendment change. He said they are supposed to be involved in the process and if the board took it upon itself to find those 2 people and submit their names to the Administration and Council, it would work to everyone's benefit. The Clerk of Council was supposed to put out an announcement to all the Boards and Commissions looking for people who fit a certain criteria. He said he thinks through Mr. Dubelko's memo, the board should look at soine kind of application. He brought it up at the committee meeting that there have been people before Landinarks in the last couple of years, and they may have a few people that would meet that criteria. He also offered that if the proper people caine along at the proper time that any one of the current members would be willing to resign to have that person replace them, so the Commission can be by charter. Mrs. Lord said one of the things that was discussed and probably needs more discussion is what it means by "professional" and the other categories. They are very specific. It mentions architect, planner, and historian. Mr. Barker confirmed it inentions architecture, architectural history, archeology, and planning. He added there is mention of preservation related professions. Mrs. Lord said what that means is critical to the board and in asking people if they are interested. They have talked for over a year about the gentleman that lives on the corner of Revere and Butternut. She asked if he fits into those categories. She said her concern is that they need to make a decision or have a decision made for them. She does not think they can make an assumption that someone who has what the board considers to be very strong credentials meets the definition. Mrs. Davis asked who is going to be the judge. Mr. Lang interjected and said he suspects that individuals would be at least invited to submit a resume to the Commission. Mr. Barker said it could go to the Administration. Mrs. Lord said the board is not to decide, it can help try to locate people. She said 3