Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />June 8, 2020 <br />Page 2 of 5 <br />Selvoski also presented the alteration certificate request. She noted that the house did need <br />work, which included raising the house and installing a new foundation and crawl space. The <br />owners were also proposing a modern addition to the rear. She noted the differentiation <br />between old and new construction in the elevations. Selvoski noted that the Commission had <br />previously reviewed this application and the applicants modified their request based on the <br />feedback they received and are no longer requesting to replace the windows on the front fagade <br />with doors or relocated the existing front door. Therefore, staff recommended approval of the <br />updated request for the alteration certificate. <br />Selvoski presented the grant request for a matching grant in the amount of $117,937 and a <br />finding of extraordinary circumstances. She reminded the Commission that without <br />extraordinary circumstances, the maximum grant amount was $40,000. Selvoski noted that the <br />proposed work was eligible for coverage. Selvoski stated that staff found that the foundation <br />work qualified as extraordinary circumstances but the other work did not, and proposed that the <br />grant be approved in the amount of $98,000. <br />Dunlap clarified that any changes to the door would be to update it to meet current code and <br />also that the cupola shown in the drawings would not be included on the final structure. <br />James Hopperstad presented for the applicant. He confirmed that the front door would be <br />widened to meet ADA requirements. <br />Klemme asked the applicant if the costs associated with the front porch are based on the <br />expansion or the preservation work. The applicant noted that the work needed to be done <br />regardless due to the work being done on the foundation. Jimmy Moore confirmed that the <br />porch costs are based on the preservation work needed to repair/replace what's currently there; <br />costs for expansion were not included. <br />Public Comments: <br />None <br />Discussion: <br />Parris stated that this project is a prime example of what the HPC wants to achieve. <br />Haley stated that with the removal of the proposed changes to the facade of the house, the <br />application meets the alteration certificate criteria. Parris and Klemme both agreed, and noted <br />that the addition is set to rear. <br />Dunlap made a motion to recommend approval of the Landmark Application as presented for <br />925 Jefferson Avenue. Klemme seconded. Passed unanimously by voice vote. <br />Klemme made a motion to recommend approval of the Alteration Certificate as presented for <br />925 Jefferson Avenue. Parris seconded. Passed unanimously by voice vote. <br />Dunlap noted that the additional $58,000 recommended by staff is most appropriate and is in <br />line with what has been previously approved on similar projects. Parris noted that the applicant <br />01A <br />