12-12-16 Informal Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

hazard. Rather, in this case, if he did it correctly, both the Code Enforcement and the Building Department state his current design does not meet their standards. Councilmember Williams- Preston stated that when she spoke with him, part of the issue was that he had already moved forward and put a roof on the building, otherwise there would have been more damage from the weather. Interim Council Attorney De Rose stated that he did receive a certificate of appropriateness in 2011 on how to preserve it and contain the building. What he wanted in 2015 was to make it different and that has to go through the Commission. There is case law that shows the fact that someone doing something wrong for whatever reason is not an excuse; that the person is then free of any restrictions. Councilmember Williams- Preston asked if the HPC is asking Mr. Boyd to tear off what he has already done and then redo it. Interim Council Attorney De Rose responded that that is correct, which is tough and they acknowledged that. Councilmember Dr. Varner stated that he also believed that there were also questions about whether what he wanted to build was structurally sound. Interim Council Attorney De Rose responded that is correct, and it is what Code Enforcement believes and the Building Department. Councilmember Scott stated that he came before Council for a tax abatement for this property and at the time there were concerns about him taking on this project because it would take substantial financial resources. That was two (2) or three (3) years ago. Councilmember Jo M. Broden asked for clarification of the 2011 routine maintenance exception. Interim Council Attorney De Rose responded that a routine maintenance exception is a form of certificate of appropriateness. A COA can be done in two (2) ways. First, through a routine maintenance exception, which is just a staff approval and the lowest level which essentially means nothing is changing about the building. When those are approved, that means nothing has been asked for anything unusual. A routine maintenance exception requires no public hearing and a staff member can approve it. It is just replacing like with like, and nothing is changed. A COA means that the petitioner wants to make a structural change of some kind and that requires the public hearing. A big issue that comes are up are windows such as wooden windows versus new vinyl windows. That was the subject of a 2008 appeal to the Council. That is moving from a traditional and historical feature to a new and modern material so the Commission has to approve it. Since he had already applied for a routine maintenance exception he knew about the process. Councilmember Davis asked, If Mr. Boyd continues his request tonight, is there a timeframe built in?