Laserfiche WebLink
138 1. Historic Districts <br />139 None. <br />140 <br />141 2. Local Landmarks 1St Reading <br />142 None. <br />143 <br />144 3. Standards and Maintenance <br />145 None. <br />146 <br />147 E. Staff Reports <br />148 1.CofA Staff Approvals (none) <br />149 2. Legal (none) <br />150 3. Miscellaneous Activities & Grants (none) <br />151 <br />152 111. OLD BUSINESS <br />153 A. 14297 S.R. 23 — petition to rescind LL status <br />154 <br />155 RHONDA SAUNDERS: The staff did receive a modified version of the petition <br />156 which requests removal of landmark status from all of the land except approximately one <br />157 acre around and including the house which would retain its landmark status. The staff <br />158 concurs that a compromise is in order regarding this property, however, the staff does not <br />159 agree with the proposed acreage. The staff feels that approximately two acres should <br />160 retain the landmark status, this would encompass the house and all of the wooded land <br />161 around it. By retaining the wooded area surrounding the house, it would ensure a buffer <br />162 between the farmhouse and the new subdivision. The staff also feels that under no <br />163 circumstances should the landmark designation be removed from the house. If the owner <br />164 agrees with the staffs recommendation they will then need to have both parcels of land <br />165 surveyed and issue the complete legal descriptions of said parcels to the Commission <br />166 before the Commission can start proceedings to decertify the remaining acreage. <br />167 <br />168 DAVID ECKRICH: I am David Eckrich with Adams Road Development. We <br />169 would like to keep the land down to the one -acre parcel. We too wish to protect the area <br />170 around it, the only reason we asked that the designation be removed from all of the <br />171 acreage is because we wanted to free up all of the land and then we would have reinstated <br />172 landmark status for just the house. Our first casual contact with the Commission did not <br />173 give us the kind of feed back we were hoping for so we decided to take the first step and <br />174 remove everything and then put the house back. <br />175 <br />176 RHONDA SAUNDERS: I just informed Mr. Eckrich before the meeting started that <br />177 the staff would be recommending two acres, not just one. Therefore, he has not had <br />178 much time to consult with Mrs. Risler or to even take in the new development. <br />179 <br />180 CATHERINE HOSTETLER: The reason for the staffs recommendation to retain <br />181 two acres was to serve as a buffer between the new development and the historic <br />182 property. <br />183 <br />4 <br />