2008-08-18 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

13 a committee with stakeholders to see if neighborhoods are protected and look at other cities. He suggested that Ms. Suokko serve on the committee. He agreed that this is the same project that Council considered last time, and what we have is a refinement that exactly addresses the concerns raised by Council regarding size and the pedestrian orientation to the street. He said it would be extremely unfair to tell the applicant that this will take more time. He said he wants to take action tonight. He said the BAR has the ability in the resolution to look at the details of the design. Mr. Huja suggested adding a clause to the resolution acknowledging the modifications to the March proposal. He said the design dated August 18 has significantly improved and is more street friendly, is better in scale and friendlier to the neighborhood. He said if we appoint a committee, which he does not know if we need, ratios should be incorporated. Mr. Taliaferro said he supports moving forward tonight. He agreed we should look at size of buildings. He applauded the applicant for the significant reduction in the size. Mr. Taliaferro made a motion to approve the resolution. Mr. Huja seconded the motion. Mr. Norris noted that the resolution includes. Mr. Huja’s addition as well as the clarifications made by Mr. Toscano and Ms. Ewing. Mr. Norris said he is ready to vote for the resolution. He said he does not think the last sentence serves us well. He said he is trusting in the good sense of the BAR not to be looking for a rework of the design. Mr. Wolf said the BAR will ask for more detail, not changes to the general design. nd The Resolution Granting a Certificate of Appropriateness for 509 2 Street, N.E. was approved by the following vote. Ayes: Dr. Brown, Ms. Edwards, Mr. Huja, Mr. Norris, Mr. Taliaferro. Noes: None. WHEREAS , on March 18, 2008 the Board of Architectural Review (“BAR”) approved a certificate of appropriateness for new construction at 509 2nd Street, N.E., with the condition that certain specified design details would be presented to the BAR for review in the future; and, WHEREAS , by letter dated March 27, 2008 several adjacent property owners noted their appeal of the BAR’s decision to City Council; and, WHEREAS , on May 5, 2008 City Council heard the appeal and deferred action on the appeal, to allow the property owner to work with the BAR and interested neighbors on certain aspects of the design, specifically on how the design of the proposed building related to the adjoining street; and, WHEREAS , on June 17, 2008 the BAR reviewed a revised design submitted by representatives of the property owners, and made comments regarding the appropriateness of the revised design; and, WHEREAS , in response to comments from the BAR the property owner has submitted a revised design, illustrated by drawings and graphics entitled “City Council Certificates of Appropriateness 08/18/08”; and, WHEREAS , this Council has reviewed the revised design in light of the comments and concerns expressed by Council members at their May 5, 2008 meeting, and the comments from the members of the BAR at their June 17, 2008 meeting; and, WHEREAS , this Council acknowledges the modifications to the March proposal which it finds is significantly improved, is more street friendly, better in scale and friendly to the neighborhood as delineated on the August 18, 2008 design; and