Laserfiche WebLink
find out if the plan described was to be done by the city and then to act accordingly. He explained <br />that a Mayor's Committee had dealt with the issue for all historic districts, He also stated that he <br />had told Councilman Luecke that the city should apply for a COA if they intended to change lights in <br />the district. <br />• Mr. Holycross stated that the city intended to apply for a COA in April to replace five fiberglass <br />lights on the north side of Riverside Drive with concrete poles. <br />Mrs, Sporleder asked for clarification of the location of current and proposed streetlights and for <br />specifics of the intended change. Mr, Talley answered that there were several proposals being <br />considered. He described them. He stated that the residents had twice voted for what they wanted; the <br />mayor had made his decision; the neighborhood still wants the original lights "alternating up and <br />down the street." <br />Mrs, Dennan asked whether he would be happy if the city came in and replaced all the poles on the <br />north side of the street with concrete poles. Mr. Talley then explained the difference in light <br />patterns and how the city's plan would result in dark areas. <br />Mr. Talley then talked about the park department and trees. <br />Mr. Oxian asked for a vote on the issue at hand. <br />Mr. Talley again asked for a temporary COA valid until the commission either: A. approved poles on <br />both sides of the street or B. "we would have a problem.. because our well-being and security is not <br />being addressed because there is not enough light." <br />Ms. Brubaker then asked whether he realized that "under scenario A [he] might be required to bring <br />[the] light down completely." <br />Mr. Oxian stated that the commission would make the final decision as to the appropriateness of <br />• either scenario. <br />Mrs, Choitz explained that many people had worked on this issue over the years, in addition to Mr. <br />Talley, long before Riverside Drive came into being. There is no reassurance in my view that any of <br />this will take place... if the city and IoM don't agree to go along with the plan." She stated that <br />her intention was to resolve "this one issue in one yard" before making any other decisions. "These <br />are two separate [issues]." If a temporary COA is issued it must have explicit time limits. Lighting <br />has been a sore spot for many years "to the point of idiocy... lighting is a safety problem, it is not <br />a decorative problem... it has long since been beyond [the HPC's] control... its a bigger issue than <br />just decoration." <br />Ms. DeRose offered a recommendation: since it was the staff's recommendation that the proposal was <br />inappropriate, the HPC could deny the COA but give the owner a period of time to find a solution with <br />the understanding that the fixture would be removed if it was ultimately determined that it was <br />inappropriate and no appropriate alternative was offered. In her view, a temporary COA could be <br />construed as determining the proposal as being appropriate. <br />Mrs Choitz moved to deny the certificate of appropriateness and to allow time in which to come up <br />with an acceptable alternative plan. <br />Mr. Talley stated that such streetlights were located on the south side of Riverside to the east. <br />Mrs, Sporleder asked how soon he could acquire a post. Mr. Talley answered "as soon as Carl <br />Littrell... would allow I&M to deliver one." <br />9 6 <br />