11/04/1998 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 11/4/98 been built around 1957 or 1958, which means it does not quality for the 50 year rule. ~, He estimates the older building on the corner was built in the 1920's or 1930's. It is his understanding that the old post office building probably dates back to the 1940's. Mr. Miller noted that we will never have 150-year-old buildings if we tear them down when they are 50 or 75 years old. Mr. Haas replied that some buildings are not worth keeping beyond 50 or 75 years, and he feels it is a decision for the owner to make. In response to a question by Councilman Gareau, Mr. Haas agreed that standards for color, design, etc. could be suggested by the Architectural Review Board. Councilman Gareau said it was his hope that the moratorium will provide time to establish standards or criteria for the historic district. Then, if the building is torn down, the city will have standards to give this particular area a unique flavor as a historical district. Mr. Haas said he felt that the city should have acted sooner. By taking action now, the city is interfering with the owners' property rights as there are signed contracts for the sale of the property. Law Director Gareau said that this area was identified in the historical landmarks district that was established in the early 1980's. He believes that the Landmarks Commission has a copy of the map. Mrs. Saringer noted that the district was designated as historical, but the buildings themselves were not declared landmarks. Mr. Haas said his family had the understanding that the district did not go as far as the buildings in question. Councilman Gareau noted that was one of the issues that would be clarified during the 90-day moratorium. Also, he said that he had never talked with anybody associated with this project/development regarding the owners' contractual rights or obligations. He had no idea about the contracts until they were mentioned this evening. • Neil Weinberger, J & D Properties, said that he had spoken with Mr. Lang, a member of the Landmarks Commission, and was given conflicting information as to the boundaries of the historic district. Also, he remembers a conversation where Mr. Lang stated that the area in question used to be the "hub" of the city, one of the buildings was constructed in 1928 and the buildings had historic relevance to the city but he could not tell Mr. Weinberger that the development couldn't go forward. Mr. Weinberger has also had conversations with Councilman Nashar who had expressed his interest in seeing that the building design was not typical of the prototypical design of the client and that the city's interest in having a special design to blend in with the historic area be recognized. Mr. Weinberger said he had indicated that, at the appropriate time, they would attempt to comply with and talk to the various officials. He further stated that, if they ever get to that stage, they would be happy to continue to work with Council and all the various city boards to look at possible designs and perhaps placing a plaque to designate the area's historical significance. He reiterated that, if the moratorium does go forward, they would have to stop all expenditures and re-evaluate the contracts. In response to Councilman Gareau's inquiry, he said he could not identify the client at this time. However, he does recognize that he will have to come back before Council and he is looking to create a positive relationship and to bring something to the community and the neighborhood that is acceptable. He has had preliminary, informal meetings with Building Commissioner Conway, Councilman Nashar and Mayor Musial in an attempt to become familiar with the standards and codes of the city. Councilman McKay asked ~, 12