Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />March 17, 2025 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />Staff Recommendation: <br />Staff recommended approval of Resolution 4, Series 2025, Resolution 5, Series 2025, <br />and Resolution 6, Series 2025, with a total grant amount of $4,250. <br />Commissioner Questions of Staff. <br />Wilt asked whether the chimney was a part of the original house. <br />Cline -Gibson said that plans found as part of the HSA suggested that it was original. <br />Applicant Presentation: <br />Victoria Malcolm, resident, said that the chimney damage was caused by a poorly <br />designed guttering system. <br />Public Comment: <br />None were heard. <br />Commissioner Discussion: <br />Wilt wondered whether the replacement chimney could be subject to the same conditions <br />that caused the current chimney to fail. He asked whether the applicant planned to do <br />more beyond the chimney replacement. <br />Malcolm said that she planned to do more once she could afford it, such as replacing the <br />windows. <br />Haley suggested that replacement of the flashing would be a part of the chimney <br />replacement. <br />Beauchamp noted that they could come back to request further grant funding at a later <br />date. <br />Anderson wondered whether they could make it a condition that a cricket be a part of the <br />restoration to help avoid future water damage. <br />Haley felt that the fact that the original family still lived there counteracted the changes <br />made in the 1980s, and, given the social significance, it merited landmarking. <br />Motion to approve Resolution 4, Series 2025 was moved by Whidden and seconded by <br />Anderson. The motion was adopted by a vote of 5 to 0. <br />Motion to approve Resolution 5, Series 2025 was moved by Whidden and seconded by <br />Wilt. The motion was adopted by a vote of 5 to 0. <br />Motion to approve Resolution 6, Series 2025, up to an amount of $5,750, with a condition <br />that water diversion be included, was moved by Anderson and seconded by Whidden. <br />The motion was adopted by a vote of 5 to 0. <br />b) 945 Caledonia Street — Demolition Review <br />Staff Findings: <br />Cline -Gibson introduced the presentation for the demolition review. She noted that there <br />had been many changes made to the exterior of the property. It was approximately 116- <br />