Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2012 09 17

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes August 20, 2012 Page 4of 10 Koertje stated the assessment and scope of work is great. He added more information regarding the $5,000 incentive and how it differs from the general Restoration and Rehabilitation grant. Watson stated he would rather see the $5,000 used for lighting and other similar items. Stewart stated he looks at it more as a consultant and believes the scope has provided a good justification for the potential of a contingency. He then asked to discuss the need for railings on the front porch. The current railings are twisted metal. Watson stated he would rather not see a railing at all. He did not believe it was appropriate for this type of house. Robert Qualls stated there was a code issue with the current railings and that is why the contractor requested railings. Barlow stated the grade difference is above 30” which the code then requires a railing on a deck 30” above grade. The designs are supposed to be simplistic and meet code, as well as to save money. He stated he was willing to accept other design ideas. Stewart stated he would encourage the contractor to raise the grade to increase the drainage from the foundation and make grade shorter thereby not requiring a railing. Watson asked about the deteriorating capital on thecolumn and what was being requested for the replacement. Barlow stated the base and capital are too far gone to understand what the original design actually was. Watson recommended taking detailed photos of what is there and running alternative designs bystaff. Stewart stated a subcommittee and staff could be designated to review the details of the request for consistency of the building. This would allow the project to remain on track. Watson stated he supports a request for the full $20,000 without tweaking the amount for the contingency. Stewart stated he is supportive of this request with a condition the applicant go through the certificate of appropriateness application and to have the building official walk through the structure to review the roofing system to make sure it is in good working order. This will prohibit the fund being used on something other than the roof. There was more discussion regarding the process of approving this application as a certificate of appropriateness. Koertje recommended to approve this project as presented, including a certificate of appropriateness.