Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2009 12 07

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 5 of 7 Stewart stated the front porch would be good to save as well. He stated he would agree with a stay on the building. Koerje asked Stewart if he believed the entire structure needed a stay. Stewart answered in the affirmative, stating it would give the Commission more time to decide what could be saved. Lewis added the additions could be removed because they were less than 50 years old. Koertje asked Stewart to comment on his knowledge of the existing rubble foundation and how such a foundation could be stabilized to work for an addition. Stewart explained about the “poured in place” process. Williams stated he was intrigued with preserving the front façade/roofline of the structure and would like the applicant to maintain the front porch and window locations. Commission Action: Koertje called for a motion. Stewart drafted a motion for a 180 day stay of the existing structure. Lewis seconded the motion. After a voice vote of 4 to 0, the stay was passed. Update/Discussion/Action – Grant Program Application Koertje explained how he and Stewart have been modifying the original grant application that Meredyth Muth, previous staff liaison, had created. The Commission discussed the modifications and made the following comments: The application should not be so specific to require percentages. The discussion in the language should state “encourage” not “require”. Historic windows should be dealt with on a case by case basis. New construction – whether or not to fund new construction in the incentive program. Priorities should be in the following order: loans, rebates, and grants. Lewis stated rebates are a different animal and might be confusing. She stated there should be additional language included regarding rebates. Stewart stated rebates should be included in the program. Koertje recommended for staff to speak to the Finance Department to determine the reimbursement process. Koertje also recommended the above changes should be done administratively so that the Commission can get the application on-line prior to the next meeting. The Commissioners agreed. Update/Discussion/Action – Grain Elevator McCartney notified the Commission the Grain Elevator has been red tagged by Mike Jones, the Chief Building Official, because the roofing materials have become loose and pose as a public hazard.