Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />October 18, 2010 <br />Page 3 of 8 <br /> <br />Scott Eichorn, applicant, gave presentation. <br />Muckle stated she was concerned regarding the location of the windows. She stated <br />the HPF should only be used for projects which are visible. <br />Eichorn reviewed the locations of the windows. <br />Stewart asked some specific questions as to the condition and age of the windows. <br />Muckle and Tofte stated this was an excellent application. <br />Koertje stated he wasn’t sure that the HPF required visibility. <br />Muckle referenced and showed where in the LMC this requirement was mentioned. <br />Public Comment <br />Burt Brucker stated applicant’s should be allowed to restore entire structure, not just <br />visible areas <br />Eric Tussey stated his interpretation of visible would be for exterior uses only, not <br />interior uses. <br />Janice Hoffman stated the back of his property would be visible from the alley. <br />Commission Comments <br />Lewis stated it was a great application. Exactly what the HPF was intended for. <br />Stewart stated he was in support of this request and stated the rear windows, if deemed <br />not visible, could be covered by $5,000 incentive grant. <br />Tofte stated her support. <br />Koertje stated he was concerned about the cost. <br />Tofte stated the HPC usually likes to see 3 different bids. <br />Eichorn stated he had received other bids and they were higher. <br />Muckle stated her support and complimented the applicant on his hard work. <br />McCartney corrected the total figure that was provided in the staff report. The final <br />figure is $21,481 which includes a 20% contingency of $3,580. <br />Lewis stated she wasn’t too concerned about contingency. <br />Koertje made a motion to approve the request, based on Alteration Certificate Criteria <br />and forward to City Council with a 20% contingency. <br /> <br />