Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Wilson then asked who wrote the ordinance and asked why it was <br />written and whether or not any type of building or termite inspections <br />were made to the properties shown on the listing. Harvey Levine, City <br />Attorney, stated he had no knowledge that there were any such inspections. <br />Mr. Wilson then inquired as to whether or not the City's Engineering <br />Department was consulted with regard to the structures shown on the <br />list. Mr. Levine stated they were not. <br />Mr. Geppert then asked if all of the property owners in the proposed <br />Main Street Historic Area were notified of this meeting and reports. <br />Mr. Harris stated everyone was notified through press release and news- <br />paper publications. Mr. Geppert said he felt uncomfortable with the <br />notification to the property owners. He further asked what the control <br />currently is with regard to demolition of a property. Mr. Levine stated <br />there are no discretionary controls, as such. <br />Mr. Geppert addressed Jeff Luxenberg asking if any determination was <br />made as to how many repairs are needed. Mr. Luxenberg said his studies <br />did not specifically address this. <br />Joyce Getty stated that if any ordinances are adopted, there should be <br />two kinds of ordinances; one for historically significant structures; the <br />other for architecturally significant structures. Joyce Getty asked who <br />would determine a property would qualify under either of these items. <br />Jeff Luxenberg pointed out that judgments would be made based on the <br />actual structural conditions, visually. He stated that this entire matter <br />would be based on the exterior of structures. Jeff Luxenberg reiterated <br />that the purpose of the ordinance is to preserve some of the structures <br />which either have historical or architectural significance. <br />Joyce Getty stated that in her perusal of the material furnished there is <br />no program written for the Historical Overlay Ordinance whereby structures <br />would be brought up to current codes. She cited that the current S.P. <br />Depot could be brought up tocurrent codes. She cited that the current <br />S.P. Depot could set there forever under the proposal and she couldn't see <br />any point in this. Mr. Harris pointed out that once it is determined a <br />structure meets the criteria and qualifies as historical or architecturally <br />significant by the City it then could qualify for funding for rehabili- <br />tation. Jeff Luxenberg said State funding may be available for this <br />purpose. <br />Mr. Geppert then asked if it was necessary to have an entire H-O District <br />for structures to qualify for State funding for rehabilitation? He asked <br />if the City Council were empowered to designate certain structures as <br />historical wouldn't this meet State funding criteria? Jeff Luxenberg <br />stated that guidelines and criteria must be set up. The City Attorney <br />clarified this and stated that a district need not be set up but that at <br />the time the ordinance was drafted, the Supreme Court was deciding which <br />approach to take with regard to this subject; landmark preservation or <br />district approach. Mr. Geppert stated that if this ordinance is passed <br />it virtually effects every property in the Historic Area and would be a <br />constraint on the property owners. The City Attorney stated that this is <br />why there are compatability guidelines. <br />-2- <br />