Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Dolan said the property owner would only be required to add a garage, and meet all new <br /> regulations, with a demolition but not a remodel. The idea is that modern day living requires a garage, <br /> even if the home did not originally have one, so it should be located such that it does not dominate the <br /> front architecture. He noted that there is an exception process for circumstances where lot size or <br /> shape does not make a garage feasible. <br /> Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio requested clarification on the language related to story poles and wondered <br /> whether leaving the requirement to the discretion of the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission <br /> was sufficient to avoid the intended situation. She requested that staff provide several examples of <br /> when story poles might be required at the next meeting. She asked and Mr. Dolan confirmed that the <br /> Planning Department has one person designated as a consistent point of contact regarding these <br /> regulations so that in ormation is provided consistently. She also asked about how staff would handle <br /> metal roofs, which were a common manufacturing technique, on existing homes. <br /> Mr. Dolan stated these roofs would typically have been corrugated metal and he would be very hesitant <br /> to approve such a thing. <br /> BREAK <br /> Mayor Thorne called a brief recess at 8:48 p.m. and reconvened the regular meeting at 9 p.m. <br /> Mayor Thorne opened the public hearing. <br /> Robert Moirano said he purchased a beautiful home on St. Mary's that was built in 20s and is well <br /> maintained but aging In looking at the proposed regulations, he was most concerned with the lack of <br /> financial consideration for those attempting to keep their homes exactly as they were built so long ago. <br /> He said he was particularly concerned with the financial implications of regulations regarding windows. <br /> He said he felt some of the language which uses words like consider, exceptions, and compatible do <br /> little to increase certainty for property owners and asked how they are any less subjective than what <br /> exists today. He said his own home has a garage located to the rear of the site and, because of the <br /> width of his lot, location of the driveway, and certain other features, he was ultimately not able to make <br /> the improvements to his basement that he desired. He said the proposed amendments do little to <br /> change the present process which relies on planning to make the best decisions possible while still <br /> allowing homeowners to preserve and improve their properties. <br /> Jerry Hodnefield, task force member, said he owns a post Civil War home on Second Street and has <br /> personally dealt with remodeling several historic homes. He said he largely agreed with the staff <br /> recommendation with several exceptions. He explained that in many cases when it is discovered that <br /> parts of a historic home are no longer usable, it is difficult or impossible to restore these areas without <br /> disturbing the remainder of the home. He said that a builder or homeowner should have the ability to <br /> remove enough of the unaffected surrounding materials in order to facilitate repairs that match the look <br /> and intent rather than a patch job. He said he did not support the recommendation regarding bulk and <br /> mass, which is very difficult for a non-builder owner to understand and fails to resolve the issues that <br /> invariably arise in the downtown's eclectic historic areas. He noted that under the proposed changes, <br /> some of the existing historic homes could not be built today. He acknowledged the effort to preserve <br /> the appearance of original windows but noted that many have mechanical features that cannot be <br /> obtained today. He advised that the Design Guidelines allow for replacement with energy efficient, <br /> waterproof windows that resemble those originally installed in the home. He expressed frustration over <br /> staff's recommendation of a minimum lot width of 50 feet when the task force thoroughly debated and <br /> agreed upon 60 feet. With regards to Councilmember Brown's concern over changes to the roofline, he <br /> noted that he was not allowed to add several dormers to the roofline of his historic home even though <br /> this would have added to the overall character of the home. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 11 of 20 December 17,2013 <br />