Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />April 16, 2012 <br />Page 3 of 9 <br /> <br />Stewart - what would be the funding request for the construction of the addition? <br />Hartronft - we didn't really separate everything out because it is all intertwined. We <br />have broken down the differences between utility costs and construction. <br />Comments <br />Lewis - I think question 2 is the toughest - can there be multiple incentives given to this <br />property such as incentives for the new construction - I believe it would if the new <br />structure were landmarked as well. <br />Koertje - my initial thought is council intended the incentives to be used singularly. <br />However, in looking further it appears there is a chance the new structure could qualify <br />for funding. Council is going to be a harder sell than the HPC. A stronger tactic might <br />be to use the extenuating circumstances - this is an iconic structure and it needs to be <br />preserved. Structural necessities and ADA might comply for extra ordinary. <br />Stewart - I tend to agree. I think the incentives were intended to be used singularly. <br />This structure could qualify for extenuating circumstances. This structure brings a lot of <br />care to the plate and would be highly sought after as a landmark. This structure already <br />looks good so the care needed is more for preservation than restoration. It should <br />qualify for maximum amount. <br />Koertje - assuming it qualified under the criteria. <br />Stewart - the biggest goal is to be able to show the money would be used primarily for <br />preservation and not for creation of more square footage. For the sprinkler system is <br />highly beneficial for any historical building. The matching funds question - there has <br />been proven funds dedicated to this project, so I could see it being used as long as the <br />line items are quantified. The proposal looks great - I like the way the addition is made <br />to look separate from the historical, but I could almost imagine a two story. <br />Koertje - for the new construction to qualify it would have to meet a certain criteria and <br />height might be one of the criteria. <br />Lewis - it would be great to hear council’s thoughts before we see this come through as <br />a landmark request. Overall the project is very commendable - the public would have <br />great enthusiasm over this project. A fire sprinkler would be a great idea due to the <br />historic timber. However if you are wanting to keep the preservation effort to the degree <br />in which you have AND you want to bring the structure up to code it would be <br />challenging but it would be a great way to sell this project. We would prefer you to have <br />the funding to do this right. <br />Stewart - Council did ask us to bring back clarification on some of the commercial <br />incentive issues so this would be a perfect time to do so. <br />Public Comment- <br /> <br />