12 - Laserfiche WebLink

DRAFT structure is, there is an architectural style, and there are important details that have been recognized so staff knows what to look for when reviewing the applications. He noted that there is a time savings and a cost savings, considering that it takes about a month or so and costs about $5,000 for a survey like this to be done on an individualized parcel basis. He added that there will be a process efficiency with the review of applications on the historic side of things because the report is so detailed; people would have clear expectations about what is important for their house, and their architect will know that when they come to the counter, it will be a better conversation with the planner. Mr. Beaudin stated that there is the in-house Design Review process which, as mentioned earlier, the City is always looking for ways to make more efficient. He noted that there is permitting software in place to keep things moving, and new technology will be brought forward that will help in this regard as well. He pointed out that there are some anecdotal issues and some history with the Planning Division, but there are also some new ideas and new tools staff is using to do their job, all the way down to the resource that is before the Commission tonight. Commissioner Nagler clarified that something is obviously working because the integrity of the Downtown area has been maintained, other than the degradation that this is attempting to address; that he, for one, is not suggesting it is not. He stated that the question only is — periodically a good one to ask and is not meant to be a criticism but a reflective question going forward — is the City advocating the maintenance of these buildings by being a partner to those who want to make improvements to make sure they are within the guidelines and historical context? Are applicants asked to justify what they are doing in a way that discourages potentially a continued effort to improve these structures? Mr. Beaudin replied that it is the former question and that this document will just help staff to do that better. He stated that when applicants come to the counter and are told that they have a potentially historic structure, the $5,000 it would cost them to figure that out was an impediment to what they want to do with their house. He pointed out that this document is designed to solve that and to do it all very quickly for the homeowners. Commissioner Nagler stated that he would argue that it is the latter and that the homeowner would say: "What do you mean I have a historical home? Just tell me now what my window looks like." Commissioner Balch stated that he remembers the meeting where the Council talked about a historic overlay and when the Task Force brought it back. He recalls there were a lot of speakers who were very much concerned about government intervention or government involvement in things they did not think were necessary because in their opinion, the residents who own these homes own them because they like that style, and by the nature of owning one, they want to keep it up. He indicated that he does not necessarily agree with that, but that was just generally a comment that was frequent at that meeting. He stated that he also remembers the Council really having difficulty trying to do a "one size fits all" approach, which the Council realized was not going to DRAFT EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 10/14/2015 Page 15 of 18