Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />15 March 2021 <br />Page 6 of 8 <br />Zuccaro noted that every time we put a layer on the process it was a disincentive, but if it was <br />really a concern an architect could give a cost proposal but it was hard for staff to then start <br />questioning the architects after the fact. <br />Klemme asked about the assessments staff has received. <br />Zuccaro replied that staff had seen some that had copy and pasted and just barely met the <br />requirements and there were others that had done a good job. He stated that one way to do it <br />would be to have a shorter list of approved architects but some people wanted to work with their <br />own architects. <br />Klemme asked about the $4,000 amount. <br />Haley replied that there had been a survey of professionals and that the language was "up to" <br />$4,000, and she did not think anyone in the survey thought that was what it always cost, but that <br />that would cover it. She noted that there were properties that might need federal experts and <br />they had wanted to be able to cover the property owner to have sufficient resources. They had <br />talked about the structural engineer at that time but hadn't required them. She thought that the <br />homes had structural issues due to their ages. She noted that they had been worried that <br />people would just charge the $4,000, and she observed that costs had gone up and that might <br />affect general assessment costs. It was hard because all the structures were different sizes and <br />at different levels of condition. <br />Klemme stated that she was all for requiring a structural engineer. <br />Dunlap stated that the Commission had seen a breakdown of the assessments and it could very <br />easily accommodate a structural engineer. He remembered that there had been a couple of cost <br />breakdowns and that it had worked at $900. He was concerned about people automatically <br />charged $4,000. <br />Zuccaro replied that he didn't know if people always charged the full amount. He offered that it <br />might be possible to say "you're approved up to a certain amount" and then give more if a <br />structural engineer were involved. He thought that would be manageable. He noted that <br />sometimes you just have to trust the applicants. <br />Klemme observed that the more work that comes on staff the more it cost the City, too, and it <br />needed to be manageable for staff. She liked Director Zuccaro's idea and suggesting adding <br />that if you think you have "extraordinary circumstances" you need a structural engineer. <br />Zuccaro noted that there were probably architects that were good at picking out structural <br />issues. He had seen some structural engineers that knew so much detail on what can be saved <br />and what can't and a really good structural engineer was invaluable. <br />Haley thought that figuring out the average cost for a structural engineer would be an easy thing <br />to do. She liked the idea of the tiers. Maybe $2,000 or something for the assessment, with <br />another tier if you had a structural engineer, and maybe another if someone more specialized <br />was needed. <br />6 <br />