Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Building Mitigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tumwater commission unanimously asks state to assess historic highway building and propose mitigation
Summary
Commissioner David McHenry moved and the commission unanimously approved a request that staff ask DOT and the state historic preservation office to assess eligibility of an old highway department building for state or national registers and to identify mitigation steps if demolition proceeds.
Get email alerts on the Historic Building Mitigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Tumwater Historic Preservation Commission voted unanimously on Nov. 20 to ask staff to contact the Washington State Department of Transportation (DOT) and the State Historic Preservation Office to determine whether an old DOT/highway department building is eligible for the state or national register of historic places and, if demolition is unavoidable, to recommend historic‑preservation mitigation steps.
The motion was made by David (first referenced in the record as David McHenry) and was seconded on the floor. The motion text recorded in the meeting asked staff to inquire separately with the DOT historic‑preservation official and the state archaeology and historic preservation office about the building’s eligibility for the state or national registers and, if the building is slated for demolition, to identify steps for mitigation (for example, preserving characteristic stone typography from the façade as a monument or other interpretive element).
The commission’s discussion leading to the motion noted that DOT staff have said some buildings on the site are planned for demolition and that the structure in question is contaminated and in poor interior condition. City staff and the presenter noted the site is being evaluated for potential community‑center or mixed‑use redevelopment, and that DOT is responsible for environmental cleanup in the transfer scenarios described in the meeting.
Commissioners emphasized preserving key architectural features if the structure cannot be saved. The motion passed by unanimous voice vote; no roll‑call tally was recorded in the meeting minutes included in the record.
Next steps recorded in the meeting: staff will prepare the letter or inquiry to DOT and the State Historic Preservation Office and the commission intends to receive the agencies’ responses as part of follow‑up preservation planning.

