Laserfiche WebLink
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />June 19, 2012 <br />Page 9 of 20 <br />Planning Director Russ stated Council unanimously approved the landmark application <br />for 1131 Jefferson on September 21, 2010. A total of $15,539 in grant funds have been <br />approved and distributed for this property. A structural assessment was also completed <br />on this house in the amount of $1,900. <br />The applicant, Janice Hoffman, is requesting approval of a Preservation and <br />Restoration Grant to restructure the building's undersized roof. On February 7, 2011 <br />the applicant submitted a grant request to the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) <br />to perform site improvements and roof modifications. This application was based on the <br />discovery by the contractor for the project that the roof was "slumping" in the middle <br />which meant there were some structural issues with the roof. <br />Prior to the passage of Resolution No. 2, Series 2012 which outlines the incentives for <br />both residential and commercial historic properties and following the structural <br />assessment, staff presented to the HPC on November 21, 2011 three (3) contractor <br />bids amounting to approximately $50,000 to reinforce the undersized roof. The HPC <br />concluded this amount was too high for a single grant request and requested staff work <br />with architects from the HPC to find a more cost appropriate solution. <br />Architects Peter Stewart and Steve Poppitz volunteered for the project. The two worked <br />with the contractor, Clark Street Buildings, the applicant had chosen to use, and the <br />team devised a new solution which eliminated the need to tie the new rafters to an <br />improved foundation and eliminated the need for asbestos abatement. As a result, the <br />cost for the project was significantly decreased. Subsequently, Clark Street Builders <br />provided a revised cost estimate for the project decreasing the cost from $50,000 to <br />$12,800. <br />The HPC discussed the evidence of extraordinary circumstances. In this application <br />staff and the HPC believe the "extraordinary circumstance" is demonstrated by the fact <br />the span of the roof structure is wider than most houses found in downtown. It is true <br />most roof structures were constructed under sized (with 2" X 4" rafters), but most <br />structures do not have a roof span width of 16 feet. It is this additional span of this roof <br />structure which makes the engineering costs greater than a house of a lesser span. <br />The HPC acknowledged Resolution No. 2, Series 2012 matching requirement; but, they <br />noted this grant request had been continued since 2011, prior to the approval of the <br />resolution. The HPC felt the delay on this grant request was caused by the <br />authorization and execution of a structural assessment. <br />As a result, the HPC believed all items on the scope of work should be covered by the <br />HPF without the applicant's 100% match requirement for grant monies exceeding the <br />$21,900 guideline total for individual residential landmark. The HPC recommended <br />approval of $12,800 plus a 20% contingency ($2,560) for a total grant amount of <br />$15,360. The request was approved. <br />21 <br />