08/11/2003 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Corell made a motion that the demolition of either or both buildings would be detrimental to the district and the historical character and integrity of the community and that it be entered into the record by virtue of the motion. It would create a permanent loss of historical integrity. The motion was seconded by L. VanAuken and unanimously approved. Mr. Halleen asked if the board had made its determination. Mr. Lang replied they did not. They determined that there would be a negative impact on the district. Mr. Corell commented that is what is required by code before they could go either way with the proposal. Mr. Halleen said he went back through old minutes and found that the former chairman, Betty Lord, indicated Rebecca's Floral is not in the historic district. He said he wants that in the record. Mr. Lang said it has been in the record in the form of minutes. Mr. O'Malley asked Mr. Halleen to also put on the record the date of those minutes. Mr. Halleen said it was April 9, 2001. Mr. O'Malley said he is familiar with those records and in its entirety it makes reference to Mrs. Lord's concern or question of whether Rebecca's is in the district or not. As he recalls, Mr. Corell suggested that rather than table the matter, it should be treated as though it is in the district and proceed on the merits to address the certificate of appropriateness, which he believes was granted for Rebecca's to put siding on the building. He said he believes Mrs. Kasler was on the commission then, and others commented that it would be a good idea to get a definitive answer on where the district boundary is. He said he is sure Mr. Halleen can cite additional minutes based on his various appearances before the board where there has been some debate or discussion about the district boundary. The commission does not, Mrs. Lord nor any chairman, does not have jurisdiction or authority to determine the jurisdiction of the Landmarks Commission. The matters that come before the board are based upon the interpretation of the zoning code rendered in the first instance by the Building Commissioner. Council determined the confines of the landmarks district. Historically the Landmarks Commission had a significant role in defining the district and the council then adopted or ratified the district boundaries. When Halleen KIA made an application for a demolition permit for the Ziebart building, it did not come to Landmarks because the Building Commissioner determined it was not in the district and he granted a permit. He said this application, for this particular location, was presented to the building commissioner. He was uncertain as to the location of the district and sought legal advice and he then rendered a determination that this demolition permit was within the district boundaries and therefore, he was precluded from issuing the demolition permit. Mr. Barker said he remembers the meeting with Rebecca's but Mr. Halleen also came to the board in 2000 with the original plans for the KIA dealership. The board thanked him for coming and they determined that what he wanted to do with the dealership and the buildings behind it were not included in the plan. They had no discussion about Rebecca's and/or the medical building because that was not in the original plans that he showed the board. He pointed out that in the time between the initial meeting and subsequent meetings, they did more research as far as maps and what is included in the district and the law department assisted in that regard. Mr. Lang said they have passed a motion saying that demolition would be detrimental. He asked Mr. O'Malley for help with the next step. Mr. O'Malley said if the commission finds the demolition will have a detrimental effect on the landmark district of the city in general, approval may not be given for a period of up to six months. During that period, the commission shall review the following: alternative uses for the building or structure, the condition of the building, the potential return on investment by rehabilitation and use of the building on the existing site, efforts by the owners to secure profitable new owners or lessees for the building, the impact of the demolition or removal on adjoining structures and the integrity of the area as a whole, including proposed new structures on the vacated site. At the end of the six month period or any mutual extension, the city or any other public or private body shall either make a bonafide purchase or lease offer for the building, or the application for the demolition shall be recommended for approval. Having made a finding that there would be a detrimental effect, the commission can proceed if it chooses to immediately consider the alternatives, the condition of the building, other plans, other resources that might be available. There may be historical societies that might take Mr. Halleen up on his generous offer to donate the building. Mr. Lang said he would ask W. Halleen or his representative if there would be an opportunity for expert individuals to enter that premises to examine it so they can gain evidence to respond to the provisions of 5