Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning And Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic preservation plan: commission backs expanded MIG scope, votes to recommend city pay up to $23,468
Summary
The Historic Preservation Commission recommended that the city advance a preservation plan with consultant MIG, endorsing optional outreach items that raise the city's potential share to $23,468 while separating a larger historic-context task for later consideration or separate funding.
The Historic Preservation Commission voted to recommend that City Council move forward with a consultant scope from MIG that includes additional outreach and public-facing materials, creating a possible city contribution of $23,468 if external grant funds are not secured.
Planning staff summarized MIG's seven-phase proposal for a historic preservation plan: background research and an existing conditions report (phase 1); a 30% draft with onsite engagement (phase 2); a 70% draft and additional engagement (phase 3); final draft, adoption hearings and a final plan (phases 4–6); and ongoing staff coordination (phase 7). The base proposal totaled $34,928. Staff proposed three optional additions: a second on‑site consultant visit to boost public outreach and youth engagement, a plan-marketing brochure, and a small website effort. Those additions raise the total optional cost by about $9,540.
The department told commissioners it would seek additional funds from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for the context statement and other tasks, but staff recommended approving the base scope plus the three public-engagement additions and deferring the more expensive historic-context statement for separate negotiation or 2026 consideration.
Commissioner discussion focused on whether a second on-site visit could be replaced with virtual engagement, the importance of a historic-context statement for National Register nominations, and the desirability of keeping a modest contingency for future tasks. A motion to endorse the scope that included the outreach items (the “orange highlighted” items in meeting materials) and to separate the historic-context task was moved, seconded, and approved by voice/hand vote.
The approval authorizes staff to recommend to City Council that the scope proceed with the recommended additions. Planning staff said the department would seek SHPO support for the context statement but that, absent outside funding, the city could be responsible for the $23,468 share.
Ending — Implementation: Staff will transmit the recommendation to City Council, pursue SHPO funding for the historic-context work, and return with final contract terms and a timeline if council approves.
