Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> Follow-Up on 1102 Grand Ave.Hearing Examiner's Decision <br /> Dave Koenig: This was the project proposing to move a contributing structure and build a new <br /> house at 1102 Grand Ave. The Planning Director issued a decision allowing the structure to be moved <br /> and approving the design of the new residence. That decision was appealed, and the appeal went before <br /> the Hearing Examiner. He issued a decision,which you received via e-mail. The decision upheld the <br /> Planning Director's decision. <br /> However,one issue that came forward that was mentioned in a newspaper article is what projects the <br /> Commission reviews. The Hearing Examiner made a statement in the decision that the historic overlay <br /> ordinance does not give the Historical Commission authority to review single-family homes,and a <br /> statement to this effect appeared in the Herald. We met with the City's legal department on that. <br /> Hearing Examiner's decisions are not precedent setting,meaning that they do not establish law. We <br /> looked at the historic overlay zone code which includes the Neighborhood Conservation Guidelines. <br /> The Guidelines were adopted in the overlay ordinance and the ordinance states that the Guidelines and <br /> the Standards are to be used in review of construction and development in the historic overlay zones. <br /> Within the adopted Guidelines,on page 4,it says that"before demolition of a significant or contributing <br /> structure,there shall be a consideration of alternative uses and review by the Historical Commission of <br /> the proposed new structure. The standards ordinance and the Guidelines are applied in total. The <br /> Historical Commission also reviews requested deviations from standards. We have interpreted the <br /> Guidelines and Standards to require proposed demolitions or removals of contributing structures,design <br /> of new single-family residences proposed following demolitions/removals, and deviations to go to <br /> Historical Commission for review and recommendation. Our legal department is comfortable with that, <br /> and we will continue to take those projects to the Commission. <br /> Sue Walsh: I appreciate what you said about the intent of the Guidelines and Standards;however,I <br /> do think we should go a step further and add a statement in the Standards section 33.130 which very <br /> clearly requires new single-family construction to go to Historical Commission for review. Because of <br /> the density of the area, it would often be following demolition. It would help the public and all of us to <br /> get a clear statement in the standards when it is appropriate to do so. We could add a new section under <br /> 33.130 which includes review of construction of any new single-family residence. We won't have a <br /> codification if we don't do that. This would be a recommendation to the Planning Commission and/or <br /> the Mayor's Office to carry on to City council. That would bring more closure to me. <br /> Barb Hardman: I agree with that; it's a good suggestion. The statement that the Historical <br /> Commission does not have any authority to review new single-family residences troubled me when I <br /> read it, and I think it may have created a lot of misunderstanding. <br /> There are a couple of issues that came up as part of the Hearing Examiner process that I think need more <br /> clarification. <br /> Neil Anderson:• Is that something you could take back to Allen? <br /> Dave Koenig: Allen's here and we do have two City Council members here tonight. <br /> Allan Giffen: Is the suggestion that you would be adding to the code that the Historical Commission <br /> would review construction of all new single-family dwellings or just when there is demolition of a <br /> contributing structure? <br /> 3 <br /> 11 <br />