Laserfiche WebLink
CH: Yes. <br />CH: And I hope that you all had a chance to drive by it. I have some color photos here that show <br />the house a little bit better. <br />LP: When you present this, do you use color pictures or black and white? <br />CH: Color. <br />JS: This is already in a local district, why does it need special attention? <br />CH.- The owners have requested that the Commission consider it to be a landmark. It meets the <br />three criteria that we have for a property to be considered for landmark status. It's up to the <br />Commission to decide whether it's worthy to be a landmark. <br />JS: Are there other designated landmarks in this district? <br />CH.- I believe there are some, yes. <br />LP: As with anything, I'm sure that there are some that we would consider even more worthy, but <br />given where this is, and that the owners are this interested in it, I have no problem land marking <br />it. Especially given the wonderful district that it's in, their interest, and it does meet the criteria. <br />And there are other places that meet the criteria, and the owners don't want them land marked... <br />CH: I spoke to the chairman of the landmarks committee, which is Todd, to verify that he wanted <br />this put on the agenda for this evening and he said to go ahead and put it on here. We can either <br />send it back to the committee for further research, or move it on to the second reading. <br />JU. • What's his recommendation? <br />CH. He didn't give me one I didn't even know that he wasn't going to be here tonight. <br />JU. Oh, ok. I don't have any problem with it. <br />LP: I have no problem. I'd like a motion. <br />JU: So moved. <br />MJC.- Is this the first or the second reading? <br />LP This was the first reading. <br />CH: There's really no need for a motion. (Discussion ensues) <br />MC. We still have next month to do anything about it. <br />LP: Jerry, your motion is that we accept the first reading of 853 Forest and you move that it be <br />moved forward to the next meeting for a second reading? All in favor? (Ayes heard) All <br />opposed? (Silence) The motion carries. <br />Moved: JU Second: LP Vote: 7-0 Unanimous <br />MC.- I would like some clarification, do we have any history of the building at any time that it's <br />been in ourfiles? <br />CH: No, you have what we've got. <br />MC. Ok, that answers that then. <br />CH. And we checked to see if it was designed by a notable architect and we could find no <br />notation of an architect. We can go back to the owners and ask them if they have anything in <br />their abstract, of even if they have their abstract... <br />JU.- They would have an abstract... <br />CH.- We would hope. <br />JU: Yeah, you're right, we would hope. How long have they owned the home? <br />CH. I don't know. <br />MJC. Do we have a list of all of the previous owners? <br />CH. That's not really ... see, we've got some history, but when we went down to the Main Street <br />Cornelius O'Brien Conference in Madison we discussed that genealogy alone is not enough to <br />establish the historic nature of a house. It's got to have some architectural features to it. The <br />fact that it's a stick style, and that it's a cross gable, and that it's been well maintained and <br />according to our survey card it's also been unaltered. <br />JS: (unintelligible due to shuffling paper) <br />CH. I think that stayed in the Happ family for a number of decades. <br />JS: When was this card done? <br />CH: Either in '79 or '80. <br />2 <br />