2009-11-12-CPC-min (4PM) - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

explaining that insurance companies simply do not want to cover the cost of historic renovations. Ms. McLeish added that the insurance issues would take a long time to resolve, including the insurance claims against the contractor responsible for starting the fire which destroyed the building. She said they did not have the time to wait out this process and had to move ahead with the renovations. Mr. Adler brought up the issue of funding a private historic structure, as opposed to a public one. He noted that it would be hard to explain to taxpayers that the CPC had funded the restoration of a private condominium complex, albeit an historic structure. This prompted the question as to whether such an appropriation would encourage similar requests from private homeowners of historic buildings. Mr. Robins, the consultant hired by the Homeowners Association, reminded the CPC that the request was for the difference between the “repair” costs and what a Town body, the HDC, may require to restore the building to its historic exterior. He noted that this restoration would benefit the Town by preserving an historic structure. Ms. Manz framed the request, saying that the CPC would have to decide if the building was significant enough to the Town’s history to make preserving it a public benefit. Discussion then turned to the second phase of the Homeowners Association request - restoration of the windows. This request was for $220,000 which represented the difference between the replacement/repair of the destroyed windows compared to the replacement of all of the windows with energy efficient durable windows that still met the HDC requirements with respect to appearance. There was a general discussion of this project, which the Committee saw as distinctly different from the roof project. They pointed out that the Homeowners Association could choose to just replace the damaged windows, and not seek additional funding for the cost of installing all new windows. Ms. McLeish addressed this point, stating that it made sense from a cost standpoint to do the work all at one time, and explained that the present windows are extremely energy inefficient, even with the addition of storm windows. Mr. McSweeney asked if work had been commenced on the site to which Ms. McLeish replied that the demolition work was complete, and that masonry work was next on the list. After the completion of the masonry job, the reconstruction of the roof will begin. Ms. Shaw summarized the options before the CPC, stating that there were three options to consider for the roofing project, and two alternatives to assess for the window work. She said she appreciated the separation of the two jobs, since she saw them as two dissimilar projects. She added that the roof work seemed more integral to the building. 3