2003-05-08 Historic Preservation Commission MinutesHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES
MAY 8, 2003
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The meeting of the Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission was called to order at 3:30 p.m. in the 3' Floor Fourtner
Room of City Hall, 121 — 5t1i Avenue North.
PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT
Greg Arnold, Vice Chair Darrell Marmion, Chair Star Campbell, Assistant Planner
Stephen Waite Ed Baker
Chuck LeWarne
Michael Plunkett
Barbara Kindness (arrived at 4:07)
2. READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There was not a quorum of voting members present to approve the minutes of March 20, 2003 and April 10, 2003.
3. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
Commissioner LeWarne requested that a discussion regarding "communication strategies" be added as part of Item 8. The
remainder of the agenda was approved as presented.
4. REQUESTS FROM THE AUDIENCE
There was no one in the audience who desired to address the Commission during this portion of the meeting.
5. GUEST SPEAKER
Commissioner LeWarne introduced Julie Koler, King County Planning Department Historic Preservation Officer. He said
that he met Ms. Koler about twelve years ago when he became interested in historic preservation. He said she is very
knowledge, practical and down to earth in her profession, and is very highly respected throughout the State and probably the
nation. He said that a few months ago, he spoke with Ms. Koler about the Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission, and
she offered to speak with them.
Ms. Koler said that she is immensely impressed with what the Commission has already done —especially in obtaining CLG
status and establishing the foundation structures they will need to support their program. Now it is just a matter of getting a
plan in place. They have already started this process, as well, by submitting a well -written CLG grant application to obtain
funding for a historic inventory. She added that identifying the historic sites in the City is important because it would be
difficult for the Commission to make plans before they know exactly what they have. This can only be accomplished
through an initial windshield survey and research, coupled with the development of a set of context statements to facilitate
evaluation of the buildings as they are identified.
Ms. Koler said that unincorporated King County has a very different resource base, but this is not so in many of the City's
that King County staff works with. There are comparable cities to Edmonds that King County staff is working closely with
now such as Kirkland, Auburn and Redmond. The first thing they do, along with conducting a windshield survey and the
historic resource survey, is develop a context statement. A windshield survey involves a knowledgeable person
(archaeological/historical) driving every street in the City, denoting on a map those buildings or areas that are at least 50
years or older and meet the initial criteria for potential designation.
Ms. Koler said it is important that the Commissioners are well -trained before they start the process of designating properties
as historical. She suggested that the Commission invite Jack Williams to provide a training session on property evaluation
and physical integrity. She added that physical integrity is the most difficult issue Commissioners deal with when evaluating
properties, but it is the first thing that a person out in the field looks at when they drive by. She said a good way to
determine physical integrity is to ask if the person who was associated with the house historically would feel at home if they
were to come back today. Or has the structure changed so much that there is no longer a comfortable connection to the
property.
Ms. Koler said that the first thing a community needs to do in a preservation planning process is assess their resources, and
this is done through the establishment of a historic resource inventory. The Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission has
a capable staff, but getting the plan in place and the initial inventory completed is the first step. She said she would even put
this ahead of worrying too much about publicity, at this point, because their communication plan will be based, in part, on
what the goals are. She said the Commission may end up being very surprised at what they find.
Ms. Koler explained that the historic resource inventory and the context statement should go hand -in -hand. The context
statement is an overview history of the community and provides the context for evaluating the properties. Ms. Koler said that
she completed a historic resource inventory for the City of Anacortes a number of years ago, and was surprised to find a link
to their Chinese heritage that previously existed. She said she would anticipate Edmonds would have a very comparable
history to Anacortes, and the kinds resources they will be looking for may not be easily identified by the initial windshield
survey. Again, Ms. Koler said that once the context statement and historic resource inventory are in place, the Commission
can begin to develop a preservation plan. Identifying incentives and enhancements and developing a publicity plan would all
be based on the resources.
Commissioner Waite pointed out that the context statement can either be broad or more specific. Ms. Koler agreed that a
context statement could be as narrow or broad as the Commission would like. But, typically, for the preliminary historic
resource inventory work, it should be a broad -based geographical overview that touches on all of the themes in local history.
Ms. Campbell reminded the Commission that the creation of a context statement was included as a project in the grant
application. If grant funding is obtained, the Commission will be able to work with a consultant to develop an appropriate
context statement.
Ms. Koler referred to the State historic register database. Ms. Campbell said that the Commission has discussed using the
same inventory form as the State so they will already be in the correct format for the State database.
Council Member Plunkett inquired as to how a context statement would be used by the Commission. Ms. Koler said the
intent is that the consultant would be able to use the historic resource inventory and the context statement as tools when doing
preliminary assessment of the resources based on the criteria that has already been established by ordinance. She said the
context statement should include enough information for the evaluator to be able to review and place a priority on each
situation. The context statement could also be used as an important tool for publicity and communications.
Ms. Koler advised that King County's historic preservation ordinance is different than that of the City of Edmonds because
property owner consent is not required. If a city contracts with the County to provide services, they have to adopt the King
County ordinance by reference. She said that King County found early on that because property owner consent was not
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
May 8, 2003 Page 2
required, they needed to have an incentive or benefit that was just as big or bigger. Over the last ten years, their program has
focused a great deal of attention on developing incentives to encourage property owners to want to participate. They have
developed an incredible incentive program that is unlike any other in the western United States. She encourages the
individual cities to develop incentive programs, as well.
At the request of Commissioner Waite, Ms. Koler clarified that anyone in King County can nominate a building for local
landmark designation without the property owner's consent. She said that one incentive King County offers is special
valuation. This is a State program that can be implemented locally to allow property owners to deduct certain approved costs
of rehabilitation from their property taxes so they are not penalized for any upgrades they make to a building.
Vice Chair Arnold inquired if the incentives offered by King County have been published. Ms. Koler said they can be found
on the County's web site, and in an electronic format. She said she would email the information to Ms. Campbell to forward
to the individual Commissioners.
Ms. Campbell inquired if King County has adopted a special building code that is more friendly to rehabilitation efforts. Ms.
Koler answered that King County chose not to adopt the historic building code because, in some respects, it was more
restrictive than just the general code. The King County Building Officials worked hard to develop a building code that
provides education about what the County's goals are and what the Comprehensive Plan says about historic preservation. As
a result, unincorporated King County has been able to apply a great deal of flexibility. She said that unless there is a health
and safety issue, they would go with the standards and flexibility for designated building. She summarized that rather than
adopting any special code revisions, they have developed working relationships with local jurisdictions in King County to
provide education regarding historic preservation. She concluded that whatever the City of Edmonds can do to make it easier
for property owners to get through the system would be appropriate.
Commissioner Waite asked Ms. Koler what she feels are the individual property owners' greatest desires as far as incentives.
Ms. Koler said this all depends on the property in question. For instance, people who own waterfront property on Vashon
Island are very interested in the tax programs such as special valuation. Another incentive offered by King County is state
enabling legislation, and she would assume the City of Edmonds would have this ability, as well, through their current use
taxation and CUT program. While this program is primarily focused on open space, if a property owner agrees to preserve
resource value so that it is open space wildlife habitat or, in King County's case, a landmark property or archaeological site,
the County's program allows them to lower the assessed value of the land by up to half if the property owner agrees to
preserve the building as per the standards of the ordinance. She noted that as land values have gone up, this type of incentive
has become more popular. Owners of properties with lower value are more interested in grant programs. She said King
County opted to use its hotel/motel dollars for cultural purposes. Just recently, a landmark grant program was established.
They give out between $60,000 and $100,000 in small grants annually through this program.
Commissioner LeWarne advised that if the Commission wants to offer an incentive associated with the hotel/motel tax, they
would have to go before the City Council on an annual basis. Ms. Koler noted that each jurisdiction's hotel/motel tax
committee operates differently. Council Member Plunkett agreed with Commissioner LeWarne that the way the City's
program is set up, the Commission would have to request this funding every year. LeWarne suggested that perhaps they
could request a certain percentage every year.
Ms. Koler said another significant incentive is the low -interest loan program. In 1992 the King County Commission
approached the King County Council with a request for funding. The Council approved a bond that provided $500,000 to be
used as a low -interest loan fund. With this program, King County partners with four different banks in the community, and
they take care all of the administrative aspects of the loan. The Commission's only responsibility is to review the
applications for applicability with the standards and decide how much of the money they are willing to loan out. While they
haven't run the numbers for the actual leverage of the $500,000 fund, they are significant. Ms. Koler said one of King
County's long-term goals is to increase the principal up to $2 million. After that, the King County Commission wants to turn
the money over to the local public development authority to develop a revolving loan program. This loan program could be
used to purchase and rehabilitate properties and then turn around and sell them.
Ms. Koler said that King County pays for a plaque program to identify the historic sites within the County. They are
considering the option of establishing another incentive right now in partnership with Historic Seattle. This program is
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
May 8, 2003 Page 3
similar to what was established by the Vancouver Washington Historical Society as a partnership between the local historical
society, the local Landmarks Commission and Sherwin Williams Paint. The goal of the program is to identify registered
properties. A professional paint consultant conducts a paint analysis to establish what the original colors of the house were.
He then comes back to the property owner and the Commission with a pallet of colors that would be acceptable based on the
analysis. Sherwin Williams then donates the paint and the local commission pays for a good portion of the labor involved.
This program has been successful in Vancouver, and is a great community awareness program.
Commissioner Kindness arrived at the meeting at 4:07 p.m.
Commissioner Kindness inquired who does the actual painting of the structures. Ms. Koler answered that in Vancouver, the
property owners can choose to do the work or they can hire someone else. King County has not made this decision yet.
Commissioner LeWarne inquired if there are other examples where corporations have become involved in historic
preservation. Ms. Koler said that while she is sure that other corporations are involved in historic preservation, she has not,
personally, been involved with this type of program. She said she believes there are numerous opportunities for developing
partnerships, particularly if a jurisdiction has money they can commit to the program, as well.
Commissioner LeWarne recalled that when creating their ordinance, the Commission decided to wait and deal with historic
district designations rather than deciding ahead of time in the ordinance. He said there was some concern that designating
historic districts might hurt the passage of the ordinance. Ms. Koler said King County has spent a significant amount of time
doing publicity in an attempt to raise their visibility, but it is still an uphill battle to convince people that there is history
worth saving in the community.
Vice Chair Arnold asked that Ms. Koler talk about what the Commission should try to accomplish down the road in terms of
promotion and communication to the community. Ms. Koler said that King County hasn't gotten far enough with their
program to develop a good communications plan, but this is something that needs to be done. She said a significant part of a
communications program is visibility. There are a lot of things the Commission could do around their historic resource
inventory process that they should ask their consultant to consider. She said that the City of Anacortes worked with
television and radio stations in the area while the fieldwork was being done. They featured a weekly mystery site, and they
ended up gathering a significant amount of information on some sites. This was a great way to get the word out about the
goals of the project. Ms. Koler suggested that the Commission start by think of their general planning process and how they
can build things into it early on.
Ms. Koler said that King County just contracted with the City of Redmond to establish a program, and their city council is
very interested in "putting their money where their mouth is." Even before they do their historic resource inventory, they are
going to designate all of the city -owned buildings that are eligible. They will work with the local papers to report this to the
public, hoping that owners of other historic properties will follow suit.
Council Member Plunkett said the other aspect of a communications plan is to develop public support, which maintains and
creates the political support. Ms. Koler agreed. Council Member Plunkett added that general public communication is
important early in the process. That is why the Commission chose not to establish districts yet. They felt they needed to
build community support first in order to obtain the political support necessary. He suggested that this should be one of the
goals of a communications plan.
Ms. Koler agreed. She said that a huge amount of her time is spent obtaining constituent support. She noted that King
County has been reducing its budget significantly, yet their office received no budget cuts because they were able to work
with a broad base, grass roots, constituent group countywide that they have nurtured over the last 20 years. This group went
to the County Council asking that no cuts be made to the historic preservation staff. She said they were able to establish the
constituent network through a monthly newsletter. All of their property owners receive the newsletter, as do all the local
historical societies. She encouraged the Commission to begin to think of tools that are at least similar to a newsletter that
would serve the same purpose. She said that King County has a resource base that enable them to maintain an annual contact
with all of their historic property owners. She also encouraged the City to work with other local groups such as the Arts
Commission.
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
May 8, 2003 Page 4
Ms. Koler announced that this week is Historic Preservation Week, and she encouraged the Commission to consider the
possibility of doing something special in Edmonds next year. She said the King County Commission is sponsoring a series
of lectures on archaeology. They are holding an open house to kick off their new web site. They are also working with the
local tribe and partnering with community groups, as well. Ms. Campbell suggested that opportunities for the Commission to
partner with the Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Business Owners Association, etc. should be considered.
Ms. Koler suggested that a power point presentation could be put together by staff to describe the goals of the program and
provide photographs of some of the obvious historic buildings in town. This presentation could be presented to other
community groups in Edmonds as an awareness effort. Ms. Campbell said that because the City of Edmonds does not
provide a staff member whose sole responsibility is historic preservation, the individual Commissioners are required to do
most of the historic preservation work on their own. Staff functions as administrative support, but anything more is almost
out of the question. Ms. Koler noted that most historic preservation programs in other jurisdictions are in the same situation.
Commissioner Waite said that in other parts of the country, municipalities are the instigators of preservation and they see
great long-term benefits. He questioned what the City could do to come to the forefront and promote historic preservation.
Ms. Koler encouraged the Commissioners to attend the conference that is being sponsored by the American Planning
Association and Washington Trust for Historic Preservation on October 13 and 14, 2003. This conference will be on
planning and historic preservation and how they can equal economic development. She said she would be moderating a
panel that will focus on some of the success stories around the State, one of which is North Bend. While King County
provides the preservation services, the City of North Bend has done a number of things that have made all the difference.
They have worked with their building code officials and established a fagade improvement program. They sold their historic
preservation program to property owners based on economic development, but the City of North Bend was very active in the
process.
Ms. Koler said she knows a man who has written a series of articles about the economic impacts of preservation on the East
Coast. He has just recently moved to Seattle and is a great speaker. She said she would send his name to the Commission,
and she encouraged them to invite him or people like him to future meetings. Ms. Campbell suggested that perhaps it would
be appropriate to invite him to the next historic preservation open house.
Council Member Plunkett said he was contacted by a newspaper reporter who was writing a story about The Edmonds
Alliance for Economic Development. It appeared, in talking to the reporter, that there is a premise that economic
development and historic preservation are at two opposite ends of the pole. He said it is important for the Commission to
learn more about how economic development and historic preservation can go together, then they need to figure out how to
present this to the community.
Council Member Plunkett advised that, right now, the City has a consortium of groups working on economic development.
However, the City Council will be considering the option of moving towards having an economic development staff person.
If they get to that point, they need to make sure that historic preservation is part of the program.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
There were no public hearings scheduled on the agenda.
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
There was no unfinished business scheduled on the agenda.
8. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
a. Administrative Subcommittee Report
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
May 8, 2003 Page 5
Council Member Plunkett said the Administrative Subcommittee was tasked with getting a letter from a legislator in regards
to support for their CLG grant application. He said Senator Chin has forwarded his letter to the appropriate people on the
State level. However, he said he has not received a copy of the letter.
Council Member Plunkett requested that staff provide an update on the CLG grant application. Ms. Campbell said she has
not received any new information yet. She said she does not believe they will know anything else until mid June.
Commissioner LeWarne said Ms. Koler provided him with names of a few possible consultants to help the Commission with
their historic resource inventory. Both worked in her office, and she spoke very highly of them. Ms. Campbell requested
that Commissioner LeWarne forward this information to staff.
b. Communications Subcommittee Report
Commissioner Kindness referred to the proof for the Commission's new letterhead that was provided in the Commission
packets. Ms. Campbell said the logo could be either smaller or larger, if that is the Commission's desire. She said it is about
the same size as the City's letterhead. The Commissioners concurred that the names could be smaller and in a different
typeface. Commissioner LeWarne suggested that the staff s email address and name should also be included on the
letterhead. Commissioner Kindness suggested that the area code be put in parenthesis to set it off from the remainder of the
address. The Commission agreed that it would be appropriate to put each Commissioners' professional designation next their
name.
Commissioner Kindness reported that she and Chair Marmion met to put together a skeleton design for a Commission
brochure. She said she would bring the design to the next meeting. She explained that their intent was to make the brochure
more whimsical. She said she visualizes the use of cartoon drawings to show people how to go through the designation
process. She suggested that they ask Brian Hanchett, a political cartoonist, to do the drawings for the brochure.
Vice Chair Arnold said that as a marketing and communications consultant, one of the first things he usually does with
clients is identify goals and objectives. He suggested that the Commission identify what it is they are trying to accomplish.
He referred to the input form he provided to each of the Commissioners. He pointed out that some of the issues discussed at
the meeting would fit into the grid provided. He briefly reviewed the grid with the Commissioners and urged them to
identify specific goals they want to accomplish. Once this is done, the strategies and the content of publicity will become
clear. He asked that the Commissioners each spend some time reviewing the document he prepared and then provide input
prior to the next meeting.
Commissioner Kindness said that she and Chair Marmion used this same type of process when creating the skeleton
brochure. In order for them to organize it so that it is meaningful, they had to identify what people want to know, who they
are trying to reach, and what the Commission wants to tell them.
Council Member Plunkett suggested that perhaps they don't need to wait for another meeting to work through the matrix. He
said the Commission's goal is two fold —community and property owners. Vice Chair Arnold disagreed. He said the
Commission's goal is the preservation of property. To make this happen, the Commission could choose to use
communications. But communications is not a goal.
Council Member Plunkett said that the goal of the Commission is to encourage property owners to get involved. Vice Chair
Arnold suggested that they need to be more specific in their goals. The goal is to get owners of historical properties to
register them, and to get owners of non -historic properties within Edmonds to support the programs that are needed to
encourage historic preservation. Council Member Plunkett said the goal is to encourage property owners to support the
historic preservation program. The other goal is that they want the community to support the program, as well. He said the
next step would be to identify strategies to implement the goals.
Council Member Plunkett said that to accomplish the goal of the Commission, they need the property owners and community
to buy into the program. The strategy would then be to communicate with both the community and the property owners. The
Commission agreed. Vice Chair Arnold said that the first step is to identify exactly what the Commission wants to
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
May 8, 2003 Page 6
communicate to the property owners and the community. Council Member Plunkett said the Incentives Subcommittee is
working to develop a package of incentives and benefits to the community. While these packages are not ready to release to
the public, they can let the community know that the Commission exists. Vice Chair Arnold cautioned that if the
Commission merely notifies the community that they exist, they could end up leaving themselves open for both good and bad
press. The good press would let the public know that the Commission exists. But the Commission could end up being
interpreted as another group that wants to shut down economic development.
In an attempt to make some progress on this issue, Council Member Plunkett recalled that the Commission just established
some goals. Vice Chair Arnold agreed, but added that they have not established a strategy at this time. However, he felt that
the Commission now has a clear understanding of what they need to do to establish a strategy. He said that he would send
the document he created out to the Commission again, along with a summary of their discussion. He asked that the
Commissioners review the document and start to think about what they need to do to develop a strategy.
Vice Chair Arnold said the Commission could end up spending all their time analyzing issues and never making any
progress. On the other hand, they could spend all their time doing projects without ever completing an analysis. He said he
would attempt to guide the Commission to a happy medium.
Commissioner Waite recalled Ms. Koler's suggestion that the Commission develop a context statement after the historic
resource inventory is completed. He suggested that a context statement would go hand in hand with the goals and strategies
the Commission will create. Vice Chair Arnold agreed, and said that if they want to get the community excited about historic
preservation, they need to have a context statement. He said that once a context statement and goals and strategies have been
identified, the Commission would be able to make more progress. Council Member Plunkett noted that, thus far, the
Commission has not done anything to generate community support. While they have done some good things, they have not
become more visible to the community. Vice Chair Arnold said he believes they are getting to the point where they can start
reaching out to the community.
C. Historic Register Subcommittee Report
Neither Commissioner Baker nor Chair Marmion were present to provide a report from the Historic Register Subcommittee.
Ms. Campbell said she vaguely recalls receiving an email from Mr. Baker informing her that he would not be present at the
May meeting, and she apologized for not getting this information to the Commission sooner.
Ms. Campbell recalled that she and Commissioner Baker were supposed to meet together to look at the nomination review
process, but they were unable to do so.
d. Incentives Subcommittee Report
Commissioner Waite reported that the Planning Board would be meeting at the end of May. He said he plans to attend the
meeting and address the Board regarding non -conforming uses and possible changes to the Edmonds Community
Development Code. This issue was presented to the City Council a few weeks ago. He advised that a letter from the
Commission has already been sent to the Board for their consideration.
Commissioner Waite reported that he contacted the City Building Official and inquired if the City would accept different
building codes as alternatives to the current code in relation to preservation issues. He was informed that these changes could
take a significant amount of time to implement. He said he has not received a response from the Building Official yet. Ms.
Campbell said that staff is working on a response to Commissioner Waite's question.
Commissioner Waite said he contacted a representative of the Port Townsend Historic Preservation Commission on two
occasions. He also spoke to staff from the Port Townsend Planning Department. The topic for their May meeting will be
their demolition ordinance. He said he does not know anything about the implications of this type of ordinance, but he would
research it and provide comments to the Commission in the future. He said he would continue to search for ideas from other
municipalities. Council Member Plunkett suggested that the Incentives Subcommittee pay particular attention to the local
programs, ordinances and incentives that are currently being implemented by King County. Some of them might be
applicable to the City of Edmonds, as well.
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
May 8, 2003 Page 7
9. NEW BUSINESS
There were no new business items scheduled on the agenda.
10. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
The staff did not provide any administrative reports.
11. REVIEW OF NEXT MEETING PROPOSED AGENDA
Council Member Plunkett suggested that a review of the market and communications plan be scheduled as an agenda item on
June 13t''. The Commission agreed that this could be one of the main items of discussion. In addition, the Commission
agreed that they would also review the draft brochure that was prepared by the Communications Subcommittee. Council
Member Plunkett suggested that the Incentives Subcommittee could report on their presentation to the Planning Board
regarding changes to the Edmonds Community Development Code to address non -conforming uses. The Incentives
Subcommittee would also provide additional information regarding the incentives that are currently offered by King County.
The Administrative Subcommittee should be prepared to report regarding the CLG grant application. Ms. Campbell said she
would meet with the Historic Register Subcommittee regarding the nomination review process. This issue will likely be on
the agenda of June 131, as well.
Council Member Plunkett recalled that Ms. Koler made reference to criteria to evaluate buildings. Perhaps staff could
communicate to the Historic Register Subcommittee that they might want to have some additional discussion with her to
review this concept. He said it seemed, from her presentation, that this would be very important. Commissioner LeWarne
said that some of this criteria can be found in the Commission's ordinance. If not in their ordinance, there is a whole list of
criteria in the State Guidelines. Ms. Campbell said she would review the ordinance and highlight the criteria before the next
meeting.
Commissioner LeWarne recalled that Ms. Koler spoke very strongly about the Commission creating a historical context.
Some of the context was identified in comments he has made to the City Council regarding the history of Edmonds. These
comments could be used to create a statement.
12. HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAIR COMMENTS
Vice Chair Arnold provided no additional comments during this portion of the meeting.
13. HISTORIC PRESERVATION MEMBER COMMENTS
Commissioner LeWarne said that almost annually, the Edmonds/South Snohomish County Historical Society places a plaque
at a site of historic significance in the community. Always before, it has been in Edmonds. But this year the site that is now
Edmonds Community College plus other government entities in the area has been selected. It was originally the site of the
Globe Wireless Radio Station, which was a relay station established regionally by the Dollar Steam Ship Company for
communications with Asia. It later took on Alaska communications and even played a part in World War II. A plaque will
be placed on this site at the entrance to Alderwood Hall (entrance to the campus). A program will be held at the College Cafe
on May 18, 2003 at 2:00 p.m. The Commissioners are all invited to attend.
Commissioner Kindness said that she is the program chair for her church, Lake Forest Park Presbyterian Church. Since this
is National Historic Preservation Week, she has asked Commissioner LeWarne to speak at her church on what the
Commission is doing, as well as his role with the Edmonds/South Snohomish County Historical Society.
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
May 8, 2003 Page 8
14. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
COMMISSIONER LEWARNE MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF APRIL 10, 2003 BE APPROVED WITH SOME
MINOR TYPOGRAPHICAL CORRECTIONS. COMMISSIONER WAITE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COMMISSIONER LEWARNE MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF MARCH 20, 2003 BE APPROVED AS
PRESENTED. COMMISSIONER KINDNESS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
15. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to address, the Commission adjourned at 5:15 p.m.
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
May 8, 2003 Page 9