Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2023 11 27

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Page 3 of 6 constructed in 1948. It was on city -owned land, and had been used as storage since 1980s when it was moved from its original site on Main Street. The structure's current location was under PUD review for redevelopment. A purchase agreement for its current site had been signed by all parties, and required historic preservation steps and off -ramps for the City and applicant if the building relocation was not successful. The proposed assessment would include analysis of the viability of moving the structure. Staff Findings: Staff found that it met the Probable Cause criteria. They also found that the original structure and windows were in need of rehabilitation and restoration. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommended approval of the assessment grant. Commissioner Questions of Staff. Anderson asked whether there had been a previous assessment on the building when it was moved in the 1980s. Brackett Hogstad said that there was no record of one being completed. Dalia asked whether the off -ramp for the purchaser was for if the building could not be moved. Brackett Hogstad said that the off -ramps had been worked out with staff and then approved by Council, and that they covered multiple scenarios. These included if it was not viable to move the structure, and if it was no longer viable for the applicant's intended use. Dalia asked whether there was an assessment of the likelihood of the application continuing after the historic structure assessment was completed. Brackett Hogstad said that the HSA would evaluate whether the structure could be moved, and whether it could be rehabilitated. She added that this assessment was a requirement for requesting a landmark or grants. Dalia clarified that he wanted to know whether the assessment would consider the viability of the structure for use by the applicant. Brackett Hogstad deferred to the applicant, but noted staff's support for the application, and said that there was inherent risk in moving a structure. Applicant Presentation: Andy Johnson, DAJ Design, resident, covered a brief history of the building and its significance. He explained the applicant's plans for the development, and where they intended to move the structure to. He said that the applicant wanted to use it as a special event space. Johnson said that they wanted to maintain the character and style of the building whilst repurposing its use. They similarly wanted to utilize the interior of the building as well. Johnson added that they had made enquiries with a building mover who had a high degree of confidence that it could be moved successfully. He said the main complication could come from asbestos in the building.