The world is full of contractors who claim they know how to restore historic homes and they're willing to charge you an exorbitant amount of money to prove they don't know what they're talking about. Now the commission proposes to tell us how to do it. Can there be a bigger waste of time than to listen to them? If you haven't done it, you don't have a valid opinion on how it can be done.
The people who live in the historic district, who have invested in homes in that district, are the best able and most willing people to preserve the neighborhood. The commission's input so far has been counter-productive. The new proposal is unconstitutional and the people who can afford to restore historical homes can afford to sue the city to strike down this ridiculous power grab. Butt out!

I live on the hill. I notice that most of the members of the historical commission do not.

I assure you that I, like a lot of people who live in this area, are here because we like the older homes and want to preserve the neighborhood. We are here because working on older homes is an interest. The decision of how to improve and maintain our homes is best left to us. I am adamantly opposed to the historical commission's proposal to "put teeth" into the ordinance and basically grant powers to this non-elected group of people.

In the recent article in the Gazette even people on the commission say that the current system works. At tonight's meeting of the historical commission the rest of the panel confirmed that assertion. On the commission's website, the duties of the panel are to provide advice to the council on historic matters. It should remain that way. They are not a governing body; no one on that panel is elected and therefore, accountable for any of their decisions.

Keep it as is. Do not add unnecessary regulation. It's a poor way to govern.

It is clear that this proposal is a response to the debacle that is the Lovejoy House (Former YWCA across from the Courthouse). However, this is a slippery slope, and falls to the whims of whomever happens to be on the Historic Preservation Commission at the time, who may or may not be trained in historic preservation. The current make-up of the commission has almost NO members that live/own a home in the courthouse hill district, which I find troubling. I also agree that if they want to say what can and cannot be done, then they need to be able to help fund their desires.

They don't build them like they used too! Anyone out there ever here this before? Thank God they don't. Old structures are just that...old. Yes they are beautiful when in pristine condition, but at todays prices especially for "politically" correct replacement parts how does a home owner keep up with not only the costs, but the constant maintenance that a new structure doesn't always require. Don't get me wrong, I live in a large older home that is thankfully just next to the Historic distric line, and whenever I have to repair or perform maintenance (which is constantly) I make sure that I do it right. The problem is the ner-do-wells try to make sure that anyone in the historic district has to answer to them, but where are they when the time comes to scrape paint, repair trim, replace things, etc. I don't see them handing out any help or money, but they're always willing to tell an owner what they can or can't do to their own property. Mind your own business. I wouldn't doubt that half of the committe members live in unkempt "historic" homes and the other half only wish they did! If this is the case, then fix them or buy one yourself. Then we have the city ordinance that gives them this "power". The city itself doesn't even take care of it's own historic buildings. Sometimes easier to tear them down or patch them as cheaply as they can. I also don't see them handing out any low interest loans for people to fix their properties correctly. How about all these dictators pitch in and fix up the Tallman House. I think it needs some work. Wait a minute...they can't because they are too busy looking over color charts for some poor homeowner to choose from.

Many studies have shown that historic preservation overlay districts are good for property values and attract buyers. It can be a good deal, too, because of the tax credits that are available for renovation and rehabilitation. For the most part, owners are happy with the restrictions and the process -- it's just a handful who run into frustration or openly flout the rules, such as the owner of the old YWCA.

Everyone likes to have a say...especially if it's someone else s' money.

This is a tough issue. Personally I LOVE the look, feel, and character of historic architecture. I definitely think that the city should revamp its rules. However, they shouldn't be so tough as to deter someone from buying in the historic neighborhoods. We need people to come in and perserve them to the best of their abilities--and sometimes this may mean changes to the appearance. I think it's worse when historic achitecture becomes so deteriorated/neglected that it is no longer salvagable and everything is lost versus a few details here and there.

But can they still raise chickens?