Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2019 04 29

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes March 18, 2019 Page 5 of 13 anyway, regardless of the cash reward for signing, and that there would be more money available down the line. Klemme noted that applicants put effort and time into the landmarking process. Dickinson added that there were several steps for applicants to go through including probable cause determination, coordinating with staff, and attending meetings of the Historic Preservation Commission and City Council. He noted that a signing bonus could be incorporated into the total $50,000 grant cap. Thomas thought that $10,000 would be too much just for filling out paperwork and that the bulk of the City's money should go toward preservation projects. Parris stated that the Commission had already had this conversation and they had not wanted to just give away free money, which is why they had tied more money directly to the preservation process. She added that there were other incentives other than financials, including the ceremonies for landmarking that were already going on to recognize people who landmarked. The Commission could make that part of the process an even bigger deal in their outreach process. Dickinson asked what the Commission thought if the first unmatched $10,000 of the preservation grants could be given upfront and the applicants could use the money however they wanted instead of getting the first $10,000 in reimbursements. He noted that the Commission could take into account whether the applicant had used the first $10,000 toward their structure when deciding to approve additional grant funds. Klemme stated that she was not comfortable with the idea of giving $10,000 for work that was not specifically related to preservation. She was okay with going back to the $1,000 signing bonus. Dickinson replied that he thought if all it cost to landmark 100 houses was to give them all $10,000 that would be cheap. In that case, the City would have what it wanted, which was landmarked homes. He liked the $10,000 number because it was already in the unmatched language of the grant. Thomas preferred that people not try to game the system in that way. He thought it could be possible to allow flexibility in how people used some amount of the unmatched $10,000, but not the whole amount. He suggested an amendment that $1,000 of the first unmatched $10,000 could be used however the applicant wants. Dunlap noted that the question of the signing bonus was tied to the timeline issue and that the HSA might not catch future issues.