My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2010 10 18
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2010 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2010 10 18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2024 12:51:47 PM
Creation date
10/26/2010 2:34:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCPKT 2010 10 18
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />September 20, 2010 <br />Page 9 of 11 <br />Koertje added the ballot referendum was created to include City Council review. <br />Spear stated the HPC should provide more marketing materials regarding the grant <br />process. <br />Stewart asked if the gutters are original to the house. <br />Spear stated no. <br />Stewart asked what the profile of the gutters were. <br />Spear answered they were half rounds. <br />Lewis has stated she used the same company and they didn’t do good at first, but they <br />returned to make the correction. <br />Koertje asked for a motion. <br />Muckle made a motion to approve the grant request. <br />Stewart asked staff if a 20% contingency could be added to the request. <br />McCartney answered in the affirmative. <br />Commission directed staff to include a 20% contingency in the request to City Council. <br />Tofte seconded the motion. The motion carried 5 - 0. <br />Update/Discussion/Action – Assessment Grant – Grain Elevator <br />McCartney presented the memo included in the packet and the PowerPoint <br />presentation. He explained the owner has given the City permission to do a structural <br />assessment on the Grain Elevator. He also explained the determination by Sam Light, <br />City Attorney, on how the Grain Elevator is eligible for grant funds even though it is not <br />a locally landmarked structure. <br />Koertje stated he agreed with the City Attorney and was in favor of the grant for the <br />assessment. <br />Lewis asked if this was going to be a Request for Proposals (RFP) or a Request for <br />Qualifications (RFQ). <br />McCartney stated this was going to be an RFP. <br />Lewis stated the need for a qualified candidate. <br />Stewart recommended the contractor should work with state historical office on state <br />standards for structural assessments. He also recommended for staff to move forward <br />on the state assessment grant. <br />Public Comment <br />Erik Harntroft asked the commission to not short change the proposal. He stated most <br />assessments needed more than the $30,000 being requested. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.