Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic preservation commission reviews third‑party survey plan, flags two vacant city properties
Summary
The Gig Harbor Historic Preservation Committee heard a staff update on a planned third‑party historic‑structure survey (estimated $15,000–$35,000), discussed two vacant city properties including the Soundview House and a nearby historic home, and asked that the city notify the commission before any final disposition decisions are made.
GIG HARBOR — The Historic Preservation Committee on Tuesday discussed the status of a planned third‑party historic‑structure survey and pressed staff for more information about two vacant city properties that may be reused or altered.
“I’m moving to add those two,” Committee Chair Guy Hopin said during an early procedural motion to include discussion of two buildings under other business. Staff said the city intends to hire an outside firm to complete a historic‑structure survey and that typical pricing ranges from about $15,000 to $35,000 for that work. “The historic structure survey is just gonna pretty much indicate what its current condition is,” Eric, a city presenter, said.
Committee members said they want transparency on cost, on which firms were considered and on the city’s plan for ongoing maintenance if it keeps either property. One commissioner asked whether city maintenance crews are clearing gutters that have allowed water to intrude into the building; Eric said he would check but confirmed water intrusion had been noted previously and that the city was maintaining the property to city standards.
The committee also discussed potential future uses. Some members said the Masonic Lodge and related sites had been discussed previously as potential locations for a senior center, while others said the city needs detailed proposals that include capital and ongoing operations costs before committing to reuse. “We have some proposals that are coming forward which have proposed some relatively large additions,” Eric said, urging proponents to articulate how a reuse would be paid for and operated over time.
Members asked for the city’s historic‑property inventory; staff said an inventory exists, with draft updates dating back to about 2009–2012, and that the file will be provided to commissioners. The commission resolved to ask the council to keep the commission informed and to provide the commission an opportunity to offer feedback before the council makes final decisions about the two properties.
The meeting closed with a routine motion to adjourn.
