1979-03-19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

largely to the efforts of the Board of Architectural Review. Mr. Albro stated that he would have strong reservations about putting any additional conditions or restrictions on a certificate of appropriateness at this ~oint because he believed the board and architect had already worked out their points of disagreement as far as possible. He stated he believed the refusal of the certificate would be unwarranted because to do so would require the applicant to develop an entirely new concept for the building. Having reviewed the drawings and video- tape presentation he did not consider the height and mass of the building to be unacceptable considering its particular location and orientation. While he understood the difference of opinion on this question he believed this to be a matter about which reasonable people could differ and that on balance the positive aspects of the project out weighed the negative ones. Mr. Albro then offered a motion, seconded by Mr. Gatewood that the decision of the Board of Ar. chitectural Review be reversed and a certificate of appropriateness be granted to the project ms presented. Mrs. O'Brien stated that she had originally intented to vote to grant the certificate of appropriateness, but that the videotape presentation had demonstrated the impact of the mass and height on the neighborhood to be greater than she could support. She stated that there were many good points about what had been proposed, that she supported the concept of mixed use in this area, and that she thought a fine job had been done in developing the plaza area, however iShe felt that the videotape pointed out the over-all inappropriateness of a building of this size in relation to the neighborhood~ Mr. Buck stated that the design before the Council was far superior to the original plans and had many good features. He agreed that the design review process had been beneficial to all concerned. He had originally considered imposing further conditions on approval, but had decided that this would be counter productive at this time. While understanding the differences of opinion with regard to the project he had concluded that he would support it. Mr. Gatewood stated that he too would like to thank the Board of Architectural ReView for its efforts which he felt had resulted in a number of improvements to the project and that while undoubtedly further improvements might be made he felt that the project would be a benefit to the community and the neighborhood and that he was prepared to support it. Mr. Brunton indicated his concern as a long time resident of the downtown neighborhood and again expressed appreciation for the hard work of the board. He stated that after reviewing the matter care- fully he believed the project would be a beneficial replacement for the church which had been destroyed by fire. He noted the importance to the city of encouraging a developer who is willing to make a financial commitment in the downtown area.