2006-06-19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

11 Mr. Woodard said 100 units would be allowed under a special use permit, but he is proposing 80. He said approximately 180 parking spaces would be needed to accommodate the residents and commercial units. Dr. Brown asked if Council, when considering allowing demolition, can tie it to what happens next (i.e., parking). Mr. Brown said that would be difficult to do in a manner that would provide an enforceable guarantee even if it is tied to the building permit. He said the decision is keyed to the significance of the property from an historic perspective. Mr. Lynch said he compromised on this when Council last considered it and thinks that decision was fair, and even a little further than what he was comfortable with. He said he is concerned that not a lot has happened since then, and the applicant is looking to take more now. He said the idea that the property is no longer suitable for renovation is disturbing, and he wondered about the level to which the property has been maintained. He said he does not want to set a precedent to allow demolition by neglect. He said a opportunity has been lost by letting the buildings sit. He said he is concerned about eating away at what is left to allow additional development. He said it is difficult to say without seeing what comes next. He said we may want to change the criteria for the BAR to consider. He said he is not sure he sees anything new or why we should compromise again. Ms. Hamilton said she sees where the project could be a great opportunity, and said the parking is important. She said the additional residents on the mall might provide the tipping point to bring a grocery store to the mall. She said undergrounding utilities would also be beneficial. She said the proposal is for a nine story building with no idea what it would look like. She said she agrees that perhaps we need to look at the procedures and to make the end of the process come together in some cohesive fashion. Dr. Brown said he shares the uneasiness. He said we have a mall that really works, and expressed concern about what could happen. He said he is very uneasy about the process we have and that there would be no guarantee that what is proposed would ever occur. He said he feels we need more discussion on this, but is not supportive of allowing the demolition. Mr. Caravati said Council considers the request de novo, and Council should make the effort to try to seek balance. He said this could be precedent setting on the future of the mall. He said he would like to look at it in two contexts: seeking expertise from the BAR and from other people in the community about how to approach it. He suggested that the decision be deferred for one to two months. He said it is his sense that the appeal will fail if there is a vote tonight. He suggested that there be a joint meeting with Council and the BAR and that other expert advise be sought. Mr. Caravati made a motion to defer the appeal for a maximum of two months, and Mr. Schilling seconded the motion. Ms. Hamilton asked Mr. Caravati to clarify what he is suggesting be done in the interim, and Mr. Caravati said he is suggesting a joint meeting with Council and the full BAR and perhaps the formation of a small advisory group. The appeal for demolition of a portion of 101-105 E. Main Street was deferred by the following vote. Ayes: Dr. Brown, Mr. Caravati, Ms. Hamilton, Mr. Lynch, Mr. Schilling. Noes: None. RESOLUTION : INTERNATIONAL SISTER CITY PROGRAM Mr. Caravati said that given the growth in interest in international sister cities, a committee is proposed that will help take the onus off of Council and will further involve the community. He asked that Council consider the proposal.