Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStory Mansion roof repair and grant application memo.pdf Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: James Goehrung, Director of Facility Services Chuck Winn, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Story Mansion Roof Repair and HB 645 Historic Preservation Grant for the Story Mansion MEETING DATE: November 9, 2009 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action Item RECOMMENDATION: Consider a motion Authorizing the City Manager to sign a House Bill 645 Historic Preservation Grant for Story Mansion BACKGROUND: When the details of House Bill 645 were announced the Friends of the Story Mansion met with staff and Comma-Q Architecture to review possible improvements for the mansion. Insulation of the building and replacement of the roof were recommendations that were made by the Architect. These recommendations would protect the building envelope, continue the renovation plan outlined in the building assessment, and preserve the historic character of the building. INSULATION There is very little insulation in the walls on the main level; none in the second and third story walls; and very little in the ceiling of the third floor. The lack of insulation means increased heating costs. The secondary impact from lack of insulation is ice damming on the roof which leads to roof leaks and premature deterioration of the roofing materials. The renovation of the basement and main level of the mansion have put the building back in use. All levels of the building are now heated with the new boiler system. Under occupancy, building temperatures will be increased on the main level and basement to around 68 degrees. The second and third levels will be kept at around 55 degrees to protect the interior finishes and protect the water from freezing in the heating system. Heat of course rises in the building. With the lack of insulation in the attic area the heat comes in direct contact with the underside of the roof. On a cold day the warm air rising from the building will condense on the underside of the roof. This can lead to deterioration of the roof sheathing and in some cases the accumulation of mold. During the winter when snow is present the heat melts the snow and the resulting water runs down the roof. When this water comes to the eve edge, the unheated areas of the roof soffit lead to the water refreezing. The frozen water forms an ice dam that holds back more water and the dam builds in size. ICE DAMMING The critical zone is the edge of the roof. The escaping heat keeps the run-off in a liquid state, the dam prevents the water from running off the roof. The result is roof leaks. Code requires a roof membrane 2 feet up the roof from where the walls of the building meet the roof to form a protective barrier at this juncture. The exterior renovations that were done with the EDI funds repaired some of the soffit and facia areas of the roof that were damaged by this freeze-thaw cycle. Since the repairs were completed, there is visible damage to the soffit on the north roof, which means the run-off is still a problem. It is possible that the insulation will address some, or all, of this problem. If the water damage continues despite the insulation, then the full cost of the roof replacement will fall on the city if the roof is not included in this grant request. ARCHITECTURAL ASSESSMENT OF THE MANSION When the City of Bozeman purchased the Story Mansion in April of 2003, one of the first actions taken was to commission an Architectural Assessment of the building. This assessment was completed in August of 2003. The items called out in the assessment have been used as a priority plan for all work done on the mansion. Previous work to date has addressed the items listed in the assessment as being in poor or failing condition. A review of the assessment reveals that the city has been quite successful in its efforts in that all of the identified improvements labeled as being in failed or poor condition have been remedied. In an effort to further stabilize the mansion we are now dealing with items that were categorized as being in fair condition in 2003. This progressive maintenance plan illustrates the active role the city is taking in preserving this recognized community asset. The question of waiting for the roof to totally fail before it is replaced, or being proactive and replacing the roof prior to failure as time and resources become available is one for consideration this evening. CURRENT ROOF The condition of the roof in the assessment is listed as fair, with some shingle cupping occurring. According to the assessment, the cedar shake roof was installed in1983. From this report the age of the roof is 25 to 26 years. According to the contractor office at a local lumber yard, 25 to 30 years is the accepted life of this type of roof. The lumber yard representative also said that once the cupping occurs that is a good sign that roof problems are starting to develop. When the cedar shakes were installed the amount of material left to the weather, the reveal, was increased. This is a fairly common cost cutting method. If an extra inch is exposed on each course of shingles the total area of roof covered is increased with fewer shakes. The extra shake exposure and the lack of insulation on the building are the likely reasons that the roof is showing the signs of deterioration that we are now seeing. When wood stays wet for long periods of time, it causes rot and then cracking when it dries out. Replacing the roof at this time would be a proactive measure. We can wait until the roof fails more over the main living areas of the building. Additional water damage would deteriorate the roofing materials and the insulation that we plan to install. Delaying the repairs until obvious leaking and roof failure usually mean deterioration of the roof decking, something that cannot be determined until areas of the roof are stripped. Waiting for the failure would also mean that we could lose our weather window of planning for the replacement at the best time of the year for roofing. Not having to initiate emergency repairs at an inopportune time would result in less cost and a better overall product. SHINGLES VERSES SHAKES When the roof was redone in 1983, the existing cedar shingles were replaced with cedar shakes. In addition to being installed with a wider reveal, the shakes are not as substantial as the shingles and are not in keeping with the historic character of the building. The replacement of the shakes with the more appropriate shingles would be within the historic guidelines this grant is intending to address. Shingles would have less reveal and are less prone to cupping than shakes. The new shingled roof will be placed with the recommended reveal. This project is one that can be quickly initiated once we get quotes from qualified contractors. It will also meet the criteria of the grant in that it will re-establish the historic character of the building with the shingle roof. A new roof will also assure a long-term preservation plan for the building because it will secure the envelope of the building. ROOF REPLACEMENT During the time that the property was vacant heat was kept to a minimum so that just the interior finishes were protected. Staff has been monitoring the roof and it is obvious from just the two or three snow event we have had this year that there is a good deal of snow melt off now that the building is kept at occupancy temperatures. More shakes are showing weather damage on the south and west sides of the building. No obvious leaks have been detected on the area of the roof over the building footprint. Because no additional renovations have occurred on the 3rd floor, a leak would not jeopardize any new remodeling of the lower levels. Should renovation work progress on the 2nd and 3rd floors, a sound roof structure would become even more important. A new roof would need to be added to the cost of renovation so that the added improvements would not be subject to damage. There has already been discussion about the use of the upper floors and the need to find a use that will be able to cover the costs of renovation. By taking care of the costs of the roof at this time, the renovation costs for the upper floors will not need to include roofing costs. Utilizing this source of funds would provide an opportunity to replace the roof prior to full roof failure. When options for the next round of improvements for the mansion were discussed, the criteria were projects that would meet the grant criteria add value to the building, and improve or not change in a negative way the future uses of the building. Based on what we now know about the condition of the roof, based on the research conducted for this grant, the roof will be placed on the Capital Improvements Budget, to be replaced by city funds prior to the expiration of the 30 year life of the roof. As the use of the building evolves from unoccupied to occupied, more use of the mansion means different maintenance practices for the building. The estimated timeline for the tear-off and replacement is 90 days. Some activities can continue in the mansion during this time, but scheduling will need to be considered as this project is scheduled. FISCAL EFFECTS: Should the roof not be included in the grant application or should the roof not be funded under HB645, the costs for the repair of the roof would need to be covered from other sources of funding depending on the roof deterioration manifests itself. The cost estimates shown on the attached preliminary project scope summary prepared by Comma-Q in July of 2009, lists the roofing costs at $141,508.00. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. Attachments: Preliminary Scope Summary from Comma-Q Architecture Report compiled on: November 9, 2009 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Natalie Meyer, Grants/Climate Protection Coordinator Anna Rosenberry, Finance Director Chris Kukulski, City Manager SUBJECT: Authorize City Manager to sign HB645 Historic Preservation Grant application for Story Mansion Improvements. MEETING DATE: November 9, 2009 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action RECOMMENDATION: Authorize City Manager to sign HB645 Historic Preservation Grant application for Story Mansion Improvements totaling $66,000. BACKGROUND: The 2009 Legislature passed HB645. This bill is known as the Montana Reinvestment Act and was the State legislation to implement the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act (ARRA.) HB645 established the Historic Preservation Competitive Grant Program to make "grants to public or private entities for the preservation of historic sites within the State of Montana." Applications for grants up to $250,000 are due by November 16, 2009; there is $3.6 million available for awards. The Department of Commerce expects to receive a high volume of requests, with over 75 applications already received by 10/30/09. Other Recovery Act programs have attempted to distribute benefits throughout Montana, thus we expect the Department of Commerce will favor numerous small grants over a few large grants. Commissioners have made comment as to whether the city should prepare an application for improvements to the Story Mansion. Allyson Bristor, James Goehrung, and Natalie Meyer have been working with CommaQ Architects and other vendors to determine improvements that could be made to the Mansion that would meet the grant criteria and add value to the building, without limiting future uses of the structure or grounds, or requiring contributions from other funding sources. The work program includes our most essential projects to better ensure we submit a competitive application. Based on this, the City's HB645 Grant Application will include the following elements for Story Mansion improvements: Improvement: Estimated Cost: Sprinkler System $ 35,000 Insulation of 2nd and 3rd Floors $ 25,000 Sidewalk Improvements $ 6,000 66 TOTAL REQUEST $ 66,000 After construction, the improvements are expected to decrease maintenance times and conserve water (sprinkler system), enhance pedestrian accessibility and site appearance (sidewalk improvements), and decrease utility costs and extend the life of the current roof (insulation). A number of other improvements were considered: parking lot improvements, stair/elevator addition, structural upgrades to the 3rd level floor, replacement of the roof, and interior renovations. These improvement were either listed "low priorities" by the grantor (parking lot), too costly (stair/elevator and interior renovations), dependant on determination of future uses (3rd level floor shoring), or not of immediate need (roof replacement). Grant Requirements: There is no matching funds requirement. Each eligible applicant may submit only one application for a HB645 Historic Preservation Grant. Grants applications should be limited to one per site. Grant applicants must have legal title to the property or have the written permission of the property owner to carry out the planned historic preservation activities. Property that receives HB645 Historic Preservation Funds may not be sold or transferred for the duration of the grant agreement without the notification and written approval of the Montana Department of Commerce, or the grant funds must be returned. At this point, we anticipate the grant agreement would extend to December 2010, in order to complete the described work. This is not expected to interfere with the Commission's decision to offer the Mansion for sale if public fundraising does not provide $391,222 for reimbursement to the City General Fund by January 1, 2011. Grant recipients must agree to comply with a preservation easement for 5 years that: Ensures the Property Owner will maintain the improvements via continual maintenance and repair of the historic property, and Allows Montana Department of Commerce (and its designees) access to inspect the property at all reasonable times to ascertain compliance with the conditions of the grant agreement. FISCAL EFFECTS: There are no immediate fiscal effects related to this grant application. If awarded, construction could limit rentals of the facility for a brief period of time. The Parks department currently maintains the grounds and would benefit by the sprinkler system being installed; current total maintenance time is estimated to cost $6,450/year with much time spent on watering in the summer months. The Story Mansion Special Revenue Fund budgeted roughly $17,000 for utilities this year. It is anticipated that the insulation will save on heating costs in the building; but, to what extent is unknown because we have not operated the building in its current state and use through winter months. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. Attachments: HB645 Historic Preservation Grant Program Criteria Report compiled on: November 4, 2009 67 GOVERNOR BRIAN SCHWEITZER Home » Commerce » Historic Preservation Grants (Revised September 15, 2009) Overview The 2009 session of the Montana State Legislature passed House Bill 645, sponsored by Representative Jon Sesso of Butte-Silver Bow. The bill, also known as the Montana Reinvestment Act, is the state legislation to implement the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Governor Brian Schweitzer signed the bill into law on May 14, 2009. HB 645 established several programs including the Historic Preservation Competitive Grant Program, which is "for the awarding of grants to public or private entities for the preservation of historic sites within the State of Montana." Quick links to topics below: z Available Funding z Grant Ceiling z Definitions z Eligible Activities z Ineligible Activities z Statutory Ranking Criteria z Public Access z Application Review Process z Application Scoring z General Requirements z Preservation Easement z Applicable State Laws and Regulations z Nondiscrimination z Grant Administration z Submitting Applications {Application Forms z Application Deadline Available Funding HB 645 provided $4 million for Historic Preservation Competitive Grants. From that amount, HB 645 set aside funding for three specific historic preservation projects: Marcus Daly Mansion at Hamilton: $50,000 for Restoration and Preservation St. Mary’s Mission at Stevensville: $40,000 for Restoration and Preservation Traveler’s Rest Historic Site at Lolo: $180,000 for Restoration and Preservation In addition, the Legislature provided that 2.71% of the appropriation ($105,540) may be used by the Montana Department of Commerce (MDOC) for administrative expenses to implement the program. After subtracting the funding for the three projects and program administration, $3,624,460 is available for new historic preservation grants. Grant Ceiling The grant ceiling for HB 645 historic preservation grants will be $250,000. However, given the considerable statewide interest in these grants, relative to the available funding, the Department encourages applicants to apply only for the minimum funding necessary to carry out their proposed Page 1 of 6Historic Preservation Grant Program 11/4/2009http://recovery.mt.gov/commerce/hpg/default.mcpx 68 projects, not to exceed $250,000. Grant requests must be sufficient either by themselves or in combination with other proposed funding sources to complete the proposed activities. Individual grants will be awarded only in amounts appropriate to the scope of the identified problem, the proposed project activities, and the documented needs, resources and administrative capacity of the applicant. The MDOC reserves the right to award an amount that is less than what is requested, in order to fund only a specific portion of the proposed project. Therefore, applicants should identify the cost associated with each portion of the proposed project that could be completed as a stand-alone project. No matching funds are required of applicants; however, if an applicant provides additional funds for a project this will be taken into consideration, consistent with the statutory ranking criteria. This includes evaluating the potential economic benefit and activity, such as job creation, that would result from the project. Each eligible applicant may submit only one application for a HB 645 Historic Preservation Grant. The department will not accept multiple applications that are intended to support the same historic preservation project. A grant application should be limited to eligible preservation activities at one historic site. Definitions HB 645 established the Historic Preservation Competitive Grant Program "for the awarding of grants to public or private entities for the preservation of historic sites within the State of Montana." Under the HB 645 Historic Preservation Competitive Grant Program: "Entity" includes any Montana state, local (city, town, or county), or tribal government or agency, any non-profit organization, or private entity (individual person, partnership, or corporation). Any of these entities may apply for a grant under the Historic Preservation Competitive Grant Program. "Historic site" is defined as "a location of a significant event, occupation, or activity that maintains historical value, including any building, structure, or object originally at that location, whether standing, ruined, or vanished, that upon the application date for a historic preservation grant is at least fifty years old. A historic site shall not include any occupied building, structure, or object currently used primarily as a residence." "Preservation" may include "activities to maintain, preserve, rehabilitate, or reconstruct a historic site to meet modern needs while retaining the historic character and integrity of the site." Eligible Activities Consistent with the definitions above, eligible activities may include activities such as: z modifications to a historic site to meet fire or building codes; z provisions for ADA handicapped accessibility (ramps, elevators, restrooms); z installations of heating, cooling or ventilating systems; z work to stabilize or rebuild a building foundation or structural components; z reconstruction of buildings that no longer exist at a historic site; Provision of parking lots, gift shops, meeting rooms, interpretive displays, display cases, furnishings, and archival storage areas or equipment for a historic site will have a low priority for grant funding, in comparison to the activities described above. Ineligible Activities Consistent with the definitions above, ineligible activities would include activities such as: z The relocation of historic structures to other sites, or z Demolition of historically significant buildings or structures or historic parts of buildings or structures. HB 645 funds may not be used for administrative or overhead costs. The Legislature’s intent was that HB 645 funds be used only for project costs directly related to construction, including Page 2 of 6Historic Preservation Grant Program 11/4/2009http://recovery.mt.gov/commerce/hpg/default.mcpx 69 architectural or engineering design, purchase of equipment or materials, and construction expenses, including labor. Grant recipients must absorb the costs of project administration with their own resources. Statutory Ranking Criteria The five competitive criteria included in HB 645 will be used to determine the merit of each application for historic preservation competitive grants. The funding criteria are: (1) The degree of economic stimulus or economic activity, including job creation and work creation for Montana contractors and service workers; (2) The timing of the project, including the access to matching funds if needed and approval of permits so the work can be completed without delay; (3) The historic or heritage value related to the State of Montana; (4) The successful track record or experience of the organization directing the project; and (5) The expected on-going economic benefit to the State as a result of the project completion. Public Access Historic sites that are or will be accessible to the public on an established and publicized schedule and/or protocol (e.g. guided tours by appointment) will be given a preference for HB 645 Grant funding. This will help assure that public funds invested in Montana's "historic sites" help preserve and protect sites that are available for the enjoyment of Montanans and Montana’s visitors. Application Review Process The MDOC Director will appoint a committee to review qualified applications according to the competitive criteria. The results of the review will be used to determine the relative merit of each application according to the competitive criteria; however, the MDOC Director will make the ultimate decisions on funding. Applicants will be sent a written acknowledgment when the grant application arrives at the MDOC. Incomplete and denied applications will receive written notification of denial from MDOC. Applicants are expected to keep MDOC informed of any developments during the review process that could affect the viability of the proposed project. MDOC may contact the applicant to clarify issues or to verify information contained in the application. When preparing their applications, applicants should describe their projects and respond to the statutory ranking criteria. Because each application must stand or fall according to the intrinsic merits of the written application itself, representatives of the applicants may attend and observe the application evaluation process, but cannot offer comments. The application review committee will assign the applications a ranking order depending upon their evaluation of overall responses to the five HB 645 competitive ranking criteria. The application review committee will submit its written recommendations for grant awards to the MDOC Director for his consideration. The number of grants awarded will be subject to funding availability and the number and amount of each grant request. In the event of tie scores, preference will be given to applicants that have demonstrated a greater degree of economic stimulus or economic activity and readiness to proceed with a project. Given the considerable statewide interest in the HB 645 Historic Preservation Grants, relative to the available funding, the Department may award only portions of total grant requests. MDOC will notify applicants when a tentative funding decision has been made. In order for the MDOC to comply with the Montana Environment Policy Act regarding the award of the historic preservation grants, applicants for historic preservation projects that have been tentatively selected for funding will be required to complete an Environmental Checklist to assess the potential environmental impacts of the project. A final decision regarding the projects to be selected for awards will be made following a review of each applicant’s completed Environmental Checklist. Application Scoring Page 3 of 6Historic Preservation Grant Program 11/4/2009http://recovery.mt.gov/commerce/hpg/default.mcpx 70 After reviewing each application and any technical review comments, the application review committee will assess the degree to which the proposed project responds to each of the five statutory ranking criteria. Scores will be assigned according to the point values established for each criterion. The use of a numerical scoring system will allow the review committee to systematically rank the projects in order of quality in a manner that is accountable to the statutory criteria. The point weights also provide a mechanism to compare ranking scores to assure that applications are being evaluated consistently and fairly. A maximum of 200 points will be awarded for each of the five statutory ranking criteria with five scoring levels for each, relative to the overall quality of the applicant's response relative to the ranking criteria, as follows: BEST 5 -- 200 points 4 -- 160 points 3 -- 120 points 2 -- 80 points 1 -- 40 points 0 -- 0 points Failure to respond to a criterion or to comply with a pertinent and important application requirement will result in no points being awarded for that criterion. If the ranking team determines that the applicant has inadequately documented specific statements or claims made in responding to a criterion, it may assign the application a lower score than would otherwise have been assigned based on the statement or claim itself. Likewise, quantitative claims, such as for economic benefits, will be accepted and considered valid only to the extent to which accompanying documentation has clearly substantiated them. General Requirements for HB 645 Historic Preservation Grant Applicants z Grant applicants or sub-recipient organizations must have legal title to the property to be awarded a HB 645 Historic Preservation Grant, or have the written permission of the property owner to carry out the planned historic preservation activities. The legal property owner will need to co-sign the grant contract. z A property that receives HB 645 grant funds may not be sold or transferred for the duration of the grant agreement without the notification and written approval of the MDOC, or the grant funds received must be returned. z When applicable, grant recipients must comply with the Montana State Antiquities Act, MCA 22- 3-421 through 442. Preservation Easement Grant recipients must agree to comply with the following preservation easement requirement for a period of (5) five years: z The Property Owner must agree to assume the cost of continued maintenance and repair of the assisted historic property, so as to preserve the architectural, historical, or archaeological integrity of the property. z The Property Owner must agree that the Montana Department of Commerce, its agents and designees shall have the right to inspect the property at all reasonable times in order to ascertain whether or not the conditions of this agreement are being observed. Applicable State Laws and Regulations HB 645 historic preservation funds are state general funds and, as such, are not subject to federal requirements, such as the federal Davis-Bacon Act. All applicable state statutes and regulations will apply to the use of these funds, such as state laws for local government bidding thresholds and procedures, when applicable. State prevailing wage rates, often referred to as “Little Davis-Bacon” wage rates, will apply in situations where they are currently applicable. Page 4 of 6Historic Preservation Grant Program 11/4/2009http://recovery.mt.gov/commerce/hpg/default.mcpx 71 Because the grants are not federal funds, federal requirements applicable to projects funded directly under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) do not apply to projects funded through House Bill 645, the Montana Reinvestment Act passed by the 2009 Legislature, with the exception of the reporting and accountability requirements of the ARRA. The reporting and accountability requirements are mandated by Section 54 of House Bill 645. If local government officials have questions about state requirements, such as procurement, we suggest that they refer to the Administrative Manual for Treasure State Endowment Program (TSEP) projects, which provides a summary of the state requirements that apply to local infrastructure projects that are using state funds only. The TSEP Manual provides a good summary of the state requirements that could apply to a HB 645 Historic Preservation project. Please see: http://comdev.mt.gov/CDD_TSEP_AM_2009.asp for the text of the TSEP Administrative Manual. Nondiscrimination Any non-profit organization, for-profit organization, or any public agency to be assisted with HB 645 funds must agree to provide its services or operate its facilities without discrimination, in accordance with the civil rights laws and regulations of the United States and the State of Montana. These laws and regulations prohibit any discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, handicap, age, or family status (families with children). Any organization receiving HB 645 grant assistance must also carry out equal employment opportunity hiring practices. Grant Administration Once MDOC gives final approval to a historic preservation grant award, the recipient will enter into a contract with MDOC that will specify the terms and conditions associated with the project. The recipient must agree to comply with all state laws and regulations and administrative directives and procedures established by MDOC, unless federal law supersedes. The grant funds will be disbursed after the contract is fully executed between MDOC and the recipient, and the recipient has complied with any special conditions established by MDOC. The Department will reimburse the grant recipient for successfully completing eligible activities as the grant recipient incurs eligible project costs. Upon approving the grant recipient’s request for funds, the Department will reimburse all eligible expenses, as provided in the contract between the Department and the grant recipient. Substantially incomplete work or work that does not adhere to that proposed in the application will not be eligible for reimbursement. Only costs incurred after final grant award will be eligible for reimbursement. HB 645 Historic Preservation Competitive Grant funds cannot be used to reimburse expenses incurred prior to the date of grant award. All projects should be capable of completion by June 30, 2011. In the event of unforeseen circumstances, contracts may be extended beyond that date by contract amendment with the agreement of the Montana Department of Commerce. Submitting Applications The companion HB 645 Historic Preservation Competitive Grant Program Grant Application Form, including instructions for submitting the application, is located on this website and may be downloaded by applicants. The guidelines and application are available in both Adobe Acrobat and Microsoft Word. Historic Preservation Competitive Grant Program Application Form (Adobe Acrobat pdf) Historic Preservation Competitive Grant Program Application Form (Microsoft Word) Incomplete applications will not be accepted. Grant applications will be considered incomplete without one original hard copy of the grant application, including a complete set of photographs and exhibits, three additional hard copies and one electronic copy. An original and three copies of the application must be sent to the Montana Department of Commerce at the following address: HB 645 Historic Preservation Competitive Grant Program Community Development Division Montana Department of Commerce Page 5 of 6Historic Preservation Grant Program 11/4/2009http://recovery.mt.gov/commerce/hpg/default.mcpx 72 PO Box 200523 301 South Park Avenue Helena, MT 59620-0523 Application Deadline One original and three copies of the application and attachments, PLUS one copy of the application in digital format, must be delivered or postmarked or shipped on or before November 16, 2009. For assistance call Dave Cole at 841-2776 or e-mail DOCHPGrant@mt.gov (copy this email address and paste it into your email program or click on the "Email Historic Preservation Grant Program" in the contact information box in the right hand column). Page 6 of 6Historic Preservation Grant Program 11/4/2009http://recovery.mt.gov/commerce/hpg/default.mcpx 73