1.  Report: Presentation to the Rutland Town Board February 3, 2004 re State and National Registry and hiring of a architectural consultant: Jean

a. Jean summarized the value of registering the church and also pointed out the limitations when the property is owned by a local government.   Board members understood the issues and went ahead to approve hiring a consultant to help prepare the nomination packet for the registers and placing a limit of $1200 on the project.  They also asked that the consultant send them a contract for consideration and signature at their March meeting.

2.  Decisions made:

a.  The committee agreed to proceed with our plans to register the building .

1)  Once the building is registered, the State Historical Society will have a say in any restoration work and modifications we may plan.   Mark talked with Brian McCormick, one of the architects who might have a say, about our plans.  Jim Sewell is the architect specifically assigned to our part of the state and our contact when we want to get specific.

b.  Should we do any restoration work prior to completion of the registry process?

1) Advantages and disadvantages

-Timing is going to be a problem. Good question to raise with Jim Sewell.

-Must make the foundation look like it does now.

-Need to investigate the procedure for building a basement: costs, etc. Who would do it, get it approved by Jim Sewell.

-We agreed we would talk Elizabeth about the process, and get a contract for the Board to sign at the next Rutland Town Board meeting.  Jean will call her.

Board wants a contract from Elizabeth that they can sign.

2) The committee differed deciding to do any work until more information is available.

c.  Hire either of the two candidates? The committee decided to hire Ms. Miller .

1) Emily Pettis , an architectural historian with Mead and Hunt in Madison, who quoted $4312.  Her firm is doing a  historic survey of homes in Oregon.  She would need approximately a month or more to put the survey together.

2) Elizabeth Miller , an architectural consultant from Madison, quoted $1000 to $1200.  She did the historical district survey for downtown Oregon.  She would require about 3 months to prepare the nomination.

 

3. Notification: Jean agreed to notify both Ms. Pettis and Ms. Miller of our decisions.

 

4. Assessment of our building:

a.  At the November meeting, the committee authorized Becca to find out what it will cost for an architect familiar with historic building practices to provide a list of what the building needs and what it will cost to restore the building.   This was deferred while we sought a consultant for the register nomination.  The committee decided that we could begin identifying items to be repaired, the cost of such work, and people who might do it for us.

b.  Mike and others suggested we could get a number of people together to look at the building.  Possible candidates include:

1) Dale Arndt, plumber who said he would donate the hydronic heating.

2) Ken Crowley: stone work, masonry (lives on A going West in Town of Oregon)

3) Tim Woodstock, who did Jean's sister's flat work

4) Steel Forms might loan us the forms.

5) Mike Schuh, who does walls

6) Knipfer Concrete also does walls. He's a Rutland resident.

7) Bob Everson: excavating

8) Bob Childs: moves buildings. Mike says it's better to move the building off, dig the basement and then put it back.

9) Arlan Kay has offered to consult on architectural and moving issues.

c. We may want to look at moving the driveway as part of planning.

d. While talking about the "period of significance" for this building, the committee asked when were the greatest number of burials.  That may not correspond to the use of the building.  When was the building at its peak? Perhaps Ms. Miller will be able to include it in her report.

e. Need to have help with how it looked at a certain point.  Elizabeth is not preservationist.  Becca says she will be able to take the history of the building and lay it out for us. We have to ask her about this. Some disagreement abut what she will do.

f. Picture of church with porch and stairs attached.  Gerry Neath produced an excellent photo of the church that shows the porch and stairs.  It is now on our website at: www.rutlandchurch.org/photos/rutlandchurch1.jpg.

g. The group decided that we need to have a wishlist, a listing of what we want to do and what each procedure will cost .  Perhaps people will agree to buy a window or pay for some part of the process (interior, plumbing, electricity, etc.). Mark will set up the list when the information becomes available.

h. Mike has agreed to do a survey of the property to determine if we can move the building, where it will sit, how the equipment will get into the worksite, etc.

i. Issue of insurance: volunteer labor might get hurt.  Have the town attorney look into a policy of some kind.  If Mike is the general contractor and a volunteer gets hurt, who pays?  Maybe the township will be the general contractor.  Jean will talk with town chairman Dale Beske about this.

5. Grants and Finance

a. Status of our donations to the project.  Jean reported that approximately $12,000 has been donated.

Question: people put limits on the money they contribute.  Jean and Mark will go through the list to determine what has been specified.

 

b. Letter from Rev. Jim Christiansen in Madison (received in August.)

Asked whether it would be possible to establish a fund in memory of Rev. Roy Boserman, who had been affiliated with the United Brethren Churches. He discussed a possible memorial fund. Jean will talk with Rev. Christiansen.

5. Public Information

a. Mark has designed a brochure holder but making it is slow going. Will try to crank several more this month.

D. Next Meeting: March 10, 2004. 3:30-5:00 P.M.

E. Adjournment 5:35 p.m.

Return to Home Page

Respectfully submitted
Mark Hanson
February 15, 2004