2006-06-19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

9 Responding to a question from Mr. Caravati, Mr. Brown said that the factors for the BAR are the same for demolition or relocation. He said Council can refer it back to the BAR if it would be helpful in their deliberations. He said Council may want to consider that no site has been chosen. He said if the houses are moved outside of the district, they will not be protected because they are not now individually designated as historic. He said if Council wants to pursue the idea of relocation, they may need more information. Ms. Boyd said that language can be crafted once a location is found. Ms. Hamilton asked what if a site is found in the County, and Ms. Boyd said that has not been discussed. Ms. Hamilton asked if other options for the site have been explored. Mr. Pratt said that a lot of possibilities were looked at, but it would be very difficult to keep the structures on site without significantly reducing the density or pushing the development back toward Page Street. He said towering over or encapsulating the structures would not be satisfactory to anyone. Regarding the perceived conflict between the historic preservation ordinance and density allowed in the district, Mr. Lynch said it would be helpful to look at Council’s previous discussions. He said the intent was to increase density by filling in spaces and developing back lots. He said there was a clear desire to have preservation mechanisms in place and not take down landmark buildings. He said it was clearly the intent to have preservation and not to clear lots. He said the BAR was not asked that the building be moved, and he would be more comfortable asking the whole BAR to consider that. He said if it was up to him he would have no problem moving the structures on the lots, but the question is where to move them and he would look to the BAR for that. He said he would have a problem moving the houses to the County. He asked that moving the structures be referred back to the BAR. Dr. Brown said the public made very thoughtful comments. He said he agrees with comments made by Mr. Kleeman that Council appoints members to the BAR and Planning Commission to take advantage of their expertise. He said he is inclined to support their unanimous decision, and is comfortable upholding their decision and referring the proposal to move the structures back to the BAR. Ms. Hamilton said she is closer to Mr. Lynch’s thinking and is open to the idea of moving the structures, but is uncomfortable that a location has not been identified. She said the criteria is the same but it is a different question and she would feel better with the BAR deliberating the issue. Ms. Boyd said if Council is amendable to moving the structures they could adopt a resolution authorizing the move subject to approval by the BAR. Mr. Wolf said he agrees that moving the structures is a different issue and feels it would be better for the whole board to discuss it which will enable the BAR to address a larger range of issues. Dr. Brown aid he would like to hear whether the BAR approves the move, not just where they could be moved. Mr. Lynch said he would like to hear what the BAR has to say. He said they might want to consider what happens in the context around those buildings. He said you could arguably say what comes on the site is important. He said clustering the structures on a site could be an improvement with the right new development. He said he would like to give the BAR the flexibility to look at what is coming in place of the structures. Mr. Lynch made a motion to refer the request to move the structures to the BAR, and to have them consider whether the buildings could be moved and the extent to which they could be moved. Ms. Hamilton seconded the motion and it was approved by the