99-040 Ordinance - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Commissioner as if a Certificate of Appropriateness had been issued, provided that no substantial change is made in the application. c) Further Action of Comtnission on unacceptable proposed work. If the proposed work is found to be not acceptable as outlined in subsection (b), the Commission, acting with all due diligence, shall thereafter, after making its subsection (b) report to the Building Commissioner, continue to review the application, conduct studies, and explore all means for substantially preserving the Landmark which the Commission has found would be adversely affected by the construction, demolition or other alteration proposed in the building permit application. These reviews, studies and explorations shall be involve further contact and negotiations with the applicant, and may include, by way of example, but not limitation: 1) Feasibility of modification of the plans; 2) Feasibility of any alternative private use of the structure or structures which would substantially preserve the original character thereof; 3) Possibility of public acquisition for a public purpose of the structure or structures involved. d) Issuance of Building Permit for Proposed Work not Acceptable. If the Commission is ultimately unsuccessful in obtaining the owner's consent to modifications which would render the proposed work acceptable, and the City and the owner cannot agree upon an alternative appropriate public or other private use for such Landmark, the Cornmission shall so notify the Building Commissioner in a second written report which shall be transmitted to the Building Commissioner no later than six (6) months from the date of the applicant's original application for the buiiding permit. If, within said six (6) month period, the Commission does not submit such a second report to the Building Commissioner, then the Building Commissioner shall proceed as if such second report had in fact been transmitted. Upon receipt of the second report from the Commission, the Building Commissioner shall notify the original applicant that if the applicant files a new application for a building permit for the same work within twelve (12) months of the issuance of the Commission's second report, the application for the permit shall be processed in accordance with the usual procedures of the City without further delay imposed by reason of the provisions of this Chapter. If a period of more than twelve (12) months elapses before the application for a building permit is refiled or if the new application differs substantially from the original application, then the new application shall be processed as if the initial application had not been made. Notwithstanding the provisions of this subsection (d), no demolition permit for any Landmark shall be issued until a building permit for a building or other structure to replace the Landmark, has been reviewed by the Commission and issued by the Building Commissioner. 165.09 REVIEW PROCESS FOR ALTERATIONS, ETC., TO OTHER BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES IN LANDMARKS DISTRICTS. a) Pre-Approval of acceptable proposed work on buildings and structures which have not been desi-gnated as Landmarks but are located in Landmark Districts. Upon the request of any affected property owner the Commission may review any proposal for constructing, reconstructing, erecting, adding to, demolishing, or otherwise altering any building or other structure described in subsections (a)(3), (a)(4) and (a)(5) of Section 165.07, prior to receiving an application for a building permit for such alterations from the Building Commissioner. If the Commission finds that the proposed work is of a nature which is appropriate or compatible with the character of the Landmark District as described in the designating ordinance, and will have no 10