Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2017 07 17

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes June 19, 2017 Page 4 of 12 Koertje says that gives me pause because the purpose of new construction grants is to limit massing and scale. Was there consideration to doing something bigger, so the purpose of this grant is to limit what might otherwise be done? Trice says as far as I know, there was no consideration in doing anything much larger. There was consideration of having a more sensitive building because it will be separated from the historic structure. Dickinson says was there a correction on the ADA accessibility, because I think that is where we got caught up last month. Can you help me understand what changed and what is different? Trice says last month, they had the math incorrect on the form, so there were discrepancies and misunderstanding about the 100% match. The numbers are now correct. It is not the content of what was in those, but a clarification to meet requirements. Chuck Thomas says the old ADA was not in compliance for a variety of reasons, at least the grade and turning radius width necessary for wheelchairs. That is why the ADA permits were priced at that cost. This is not an insignificant number. 4 Trice says there was a question about whether the Cent& for the Arts receives more funding in the future. It would have to come back under the extraordinary circumstances component to do additional work on the building, or pursue other grant funds. They are able to come back. Applicant Presentation: Anthony Nemec, Dunakilly, 1979 W. Littleton Boule I have no presentation but can answer estions. Commission Questions of Applicant: Chuck Thomas says our questions rela restoration of the wall? , Colorado 80120 ilding. Can you speak to the Nemec says I have done a thorough revie the ®''din•, taken photos, and gone through the actual structure. You can go through a door and lo • at the face of the building. It will take a lot of move it without damaging the Center for the Arts. The roofing and coping are tied in. It is difficult to make an assessment without removing the building. Chuck Thomas asks if you think there may be structural issues with the north -facing wall once demolition is complete. Nemec says it is hard to say. Trice says at the last meeting, we appointed a subcommittee to help and review any alteration certificates related to the north wall. Dickinson and Ulm are on the subcommittee. Koertje says the request is for $202,000 that exceeds the limits under the extraordinary circumstances provision. Are those being matched? Trice says the whole grant is being matched. Cyndi Thomas says maybe we are fine because there is a match. Can we fund contractor overhead and profit and insurance bonding as part of grant funding? Koertje says technically, the grant covers restoration and preservation activities. Chuck Thomas says you might have an issue of a grant without matching funds, but since it is being matched 100%, you can allocate one source to an appropriate action versus another. Closed Public Hearing and Discussion by Commission: Dickinson says the total project is still in the $2 million range. It is not as if the whole project is $740,000. They are not asking for 50% of the whole project. I think it will be fine the way the money gets allocated. Trice says it depends on the grant type. For the preservation/restoration grant, we do review those more carefully. For the new construction grant, it is a lump sum.