1998-02-17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

159 ORDINANCE: "AN ORDINANCE AMENDiNG AND REORDAINING SECTION 19-139 OF ARTICLE V OF CHAPTER 19 OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY CODE, 1990, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO HEALTH CARE COVERAGE FOR RETIREES" (carried over) RESOLUTION: WEST ~ DESIGN GUiDELINES ORDINANCE Mr. Clyde Gouldman, City Attorney, explained that the West Main Street design control district was created in January of 1997, on the condition that guidelines be developed by March of 1998 that would address the mixture of structures on the corridor and would provide an easier process for demolition of non-contributing structures. Mr. Gouldman explained that the Urban Design Committee and Board of Architectural Review took the existing chapters, rewrote one chapter and added two chapters. Mr. Gouldman said that after reviewing the recommended guidelines, he proposed some changes, including changes in the demolition section since the procedures for demolition of contributing and non-contributing structures were not substantially different. Ms. Daugherty suggested that Council adopt the ordinance extending the sunset clause to allow more time to deal wSth the recommendations since she feels that at least two issues need rnore study: the demolition requirements and clarification of the map showing contributing structures. Ms: Daugherty made a motion to approve the ordinance marked exhibit D, and Ms. Richards seconded the motion. Mr. Cox said there have been extensive and intensive meetings over the past year and he thinks the guidelines should be approv, ed, noting that there is a mechanism to update them after their initial approval. Mr. Cox said Council should discuss specific buildings that are causing concern. Mr. Toscano said that he feels it would be possible to do some modification of the recommendations at this time. Ms. Richards said she would like to hear from the BAR on the rationale for some of the guidelines. Council agreed to table the ordinance extending the sunset clause. Mr. Cox asked about the designation of the Peyton Pontiac building as contributing, and Mr. Toscano asked about the designation of Stacy Hall. Mn William Frazier, consultant who had worked on the original design guidelines and the updated ones, noted that the guidelines are meant to help the BAR and the public. Mr. Frazier said that he understands the Peyton Pontiac building was included because it was built during the era of the automobile, but noted that it has been altered to such an extent that it may not have any original character left. Mr. Frazier said other reasons for determining that buildings may be non-contributing are if they are less than 50 years old or are in very poor condition. Mr. Eldon Wood, member of the Board of Architectural Review, said that the BAR felt that there might be good original material under the facade of the Peyton Pontiac building, and also felt it was significant because it had been there for quite a few years. Mr. Wood said that Stacy Hall was included because it was the purest example of international style. Mr. Toscano, referring to the criteria for contributing structures mentioned by Mr. Frazier, noted that Stacy Hall was built in 1957, was fairly recently remodeled, and includes black glass which is not even allowed under the recommended guidelines.