1999-11-15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

237 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Council finds as follows: 1. The cottage was of historical significance and, among other things had been listed by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources as a "contributing structure" to the historic district. 2. The original Dumkum-Spooner-Brown House, to which this cottage was an out-building, was the residence of Mr. Wallace Spooner, a prominent Charlottesville builder, amateur architect, and the grandson of John M. Perry, one of Thomas Jefferson's master builders. 3. The cottage was probably the original kitchen for the Dunkum-Spooner- Brown House, and it probably dates from the 1840's. 4. The cottage was one of only a few remaining free-standing 'kdtchen dependencies" in the City. 5. Over the years one or more of the previous owners of the Property failed to maintain the original character and materials of the structure. Due to the neglect of the site by previous owners, the overall condition and aesthetic quality of the site and the structure was poor. 6. Applicants have not, however, provided at this point persuasive evidence that the cottage was incapable of earning a reasonable economic return on its value, in light of its overall condition, and potential uses, nor met to the satisfaction of Council any of the other related criteria that would have permitted demolition. 7. The owners of the Property knew, or should have known, ofthe zoning of the Property, and that the Property and this cottage were "protected properties." With reasonable diligence the owners could have teamed of their obligation to seek the BAR's permission prior to initiating any demolition of the cottage. THEREFORE, in consideration of the criteria listed in City Code Section 34- 577(b), the BAR's Design Guidelines pertaining to demolitions, and on the basis of the foregoing findings, a certificate of appropriateness for demolition is hereby denied. Mr. Gouldman said he will inform Council what he proposes be done and ask them to indicate 'whether they favor him moving lombard. Mr: Cox said he would like the issue addressed of having a frae greater than twice the property value, especially in neighborhoods where property values are not as high as in other neighborhoods. Ms. Richards suggested tagging properties that are historic to assure that new property owners know of the regulations. Mr. Gouldman said that the City is not part of the real estate process and has no authority to do so. Mr. Gouldman said the City is restricted in what it can get in civil penalties. Mr. Gouldman said the City could pursue criminal penalties, but not both civil and criminal penalties, and could amend the ordinance to substitute criminal for civil penalties, but added that criminal offenses must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, a much harder standard than civil offenses. Ms. Richards said she would be interested in seeing what penalties other cities such as Savannah have. Mr. Gouldman said the issue could be pursued through the Planning Commission because it is part of the zoning ordinance. Ms. Daugherty said this situation illustrates shat the City does not have a system to deal with historic properties, especially those in low income neighborhoods, and feels this needs to be worked on.