My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2013 05 20
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2013 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2013 05 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:09:16 PM
Creation date
5/29/2013 11:33:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCPKT 2013 05 20
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />March 18, 2013 <br />Page 4 of 9 <br /> <br />La Grave asked why the other applicant was not invited to attend, then asked about the <br />letter received by the other applicant. <br />DeJong gave a reasoning why he proceeded with only one applicant. <br />Watson asked for clarification on what the two RFP’s were. <br />DeJong stated the Old Town Group is requesting to bring the building to an adaptive <br />reuse based on assistance from the City. <br />Watson asked what is the hard benefit to the city. <br />DeJong stated it would be the sales tax generated from this property being brought <br />back into use – both the NAPA building and the Grain Elevator. He then gave the <br />financial statistics of the proposal. <br />Watson asked if there was an analysis done for the other group. <br />DeJong stated there will not be any sales tax generated because the other group is not <br />recommending an adaptive reuse. <br />Discussion ensued as to the potential benefits of the building if it were not reused and <br />just sat vacant. <br />La Grave asked if the conservation easement would be in place before the transfer of <br />ownership. <br />DeJong answered in the affirmative. <br />Watson stated he has an issue with giving the building away after paying for the <br />purchase and rehabilitation of the building. <br />Stewart asked if money might be available from the LRC. <br />DeJong stated it certainly could. <br />Stewart stated some of the struggle we are looking at is this appears to be a <br />redevelopment project, not a preservation process. <br />La Grave asked why we need a development partner. <br />DeJong stated City Council has stated they do not want long term ownership and want <br />this structure to be reused. <br />La Grave asked if the only way to do this would be to gift the property. <br />DeJong stated there might be other options such as leasing or putting the property up <br />for sale.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.