Laserfiche WebLink
Table 2. Summary of staff analysis of extraordinary circumstances requests. <br />Extraordinary circumstances relating to building size, <br />Requests condition, architectural details, or other unique <br />condition? <br />Structural Requests: <br />Demolition <br />Foundation <br />Floor Framing <br />Wall & Roof Framing <br />Insulation & Drywall <br />Structure Move <br />Roofing & Waterproofing <br />Staff finds that the structural requests qualify for extraordinary <br />circumstances based on size given the scope covering the <br />house and the garage and the condition necessitating full <br />foundation replacement on both structures. <br />Restoration & Preservation <br />Requests: <br />Envelope —Exterior Walls <br />Windows &Doors <br />Staff finds that the restoration and preservation requests <br />qualify for extraordinary circumstances based on size given <br />the scope covering the house and garage and the presence <br />of existing architectural details that require preservation to <br />be maintained. <br />Roofing and Waterproofing <br />Staff finds that this request qualifies for extraordinary <br />circumstances based on size given the scope covering the <br />house and garage. <br />Staff finds that these requests do not qualify for extraordinary <br />circumstances. Site grading and drainage on a property is a <br />Not Recommended: common grant request item that is not affected by the size or <br />Site Grading & Drainage condition of the historic structures. On the request for <br />Exterior Appendages "exterior appendages" and "exterior details," staff finds does <br />Exterior Details not qualify for extraordinary circumstances given that the <br />work does not restore missing architectural details or <br />preserve unique details beyond a typical project. <br />Staff evaluated the extraordinary circumstances requirement by evaluating whether the requests <br />related to building size, condition, architectural details, or other unique condition. In this <br />evaluation, staff weighed whether the requested scope of work was extraordinary or atypical in <br />comparison to other projects. Two main factors influenced staff's recommendations of <br />extraordinary circumstances: one, that the scope of the work covering the house and the garage <br />met the criterion that "size" can considered an extraordinary circumstance; and two, that the <br />condition of the structures necessitated large-scale structural and restoration/preservation work. <br />Staff based this analysis in part on the assumption that the garage is a contributing structure to <br />the historic significance of the property. <br />Note that the applicant arrived at the amounts requested under extraordinary circumstances <br />based on whether the costs were greater than a typical project. See application narrative for <br />more information (Attachment 4). <br />Staff is recommending a lower grant amount than requested because staff finds that the <br />following categories do not meet extraordinary circumstances: site grading and drainage, <br />exterior appendances, and exterior details (see Table 2). <br />