08-E Hist Pres Comm (03-22-04) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

this building after providing thc Commission with a 1958 picture ofthe building with no comments. Hc stated that he wrote a letter to thc owner to offer to purchase thc property ¡rom him. The motion to recuse Paul Denny was made by Barbara Wilson and seconded by Becki Normcnt. After Mr. Denny's dcparture, the discussion was opened concerning thc property. Becki Nonnent asked for clarification [¡-om the Chairman as to what the Commission's responsibility should be. Chairman Starrett said that we could declare that the house had historical significancc and that a 180 day time [¡-ame would be placed on the house. Barbara Wilson indicated that she wou1d like to see a time framc because even if it could not be rehabilitated, it may have historical salvageable items. She then moved that house was historically significant. The motion was scconded by Becki Norment and aftcr a voice vote, the motion passed unarumously. Before beginning thc last structure, Thc Chairman asked for a motion to allow Paul Denny to return. Thc motion was madc by Becki Norment and seconded by Barbara Wilson. Building M. 2.49 3rd St SW . The building was not deemed historically sigruficant and could not be rchabilitated. The motion was made by Claudia Hunt and seconded by Paul Denny. Aftcr a voice vote, thc motion carried unanimously. Item 5: Discussion and possible action on: A. Making revisions to thc Commission's rules regar--ding..Ct'.úiticatcs of Appropriateness. There were conccrns among the members of the Commission as to how many times should an applicant appear before the Commission and if they ask for a request to be tabled, how many times should it appear on the agenda before being dismissed. Therc was also a discussion about requiring a time for the completion of a project. Steve Medven of Buildings and Standards stated that Planning and Zoning automatically rejects a perrlÙt if the homeowncr does not appcar a second time after being on the agenda. Several solutions were proposed by CornnlÍssion members. Onc was to use the P&Z's rule that a nÜssed second appearance triggers a rejection and requires reapplication. The Chairman felt that we should makc cvery cffort to assist homeowners. There was some question as to whcthcr the Commission could, by rule do this or would this action require a change in the ordinance by the City Council. After further discussion, it was dccided to havc Lisa Wright, Community Developmcnt Dircctor ask for a ruling nom the City Attorney's ollice. A motion was made by Barbara Wilson to have Lisa Wright ask the City Attorney for a ruling. It was seconded by Becki Norment Thc motion passcd unanimously. Claudia Hunt then suggested using P&Z's rules to trigger declination and fe-application of certificatc. A motion was then offered by Barbara Wilson that failurc of the applicant to appear on a requested Certificate of Appropriateness, the Ccrtificate would be tabled until the following Commission meeting. Ifthc pctitioner did not appear, the Certificate would be derued. . The motion was sccondcd by Becki Norment. The motion passed unanimously. At this point, Becki Norment asked thc Chairman, if questions that she had received [¡-om a homeowner would be appropriate at this time. After assurances [¡-om that this was thc place in the agenda to do so, she stated that a homcowner had callcd to say that she was told that she wou1d need a Certificate of Appropriatcness to plant