Laserfiche WebLink
CITY ATTORNEY IS OFFICE <br />FROM: <br />SUBJECT: <br />DAVID CHAPLEAU <br />r <br />1 <br />EUCENIA S. SCHFdAIiTG ,/11 <br />�� <br />AMENDMENT OF HISTORIC DISTRI C`I' <br />DATE: FEB. 21, 1986 <br />A question has arisen in the Lincolnway East historic <br />district about how property owners who do not wish to be included <br />in the district any long <br />er (their property is currently in the <br />district) can cause their property to be omitted from tlrat <br />district. The South Ben�I Mun-l_eipal Code sections dealing with <br />Historic Preservatio�i Commission addi°es, only the creation of a <br />district by the Common Council through the passage of an ordinance. <br />SBMC 21-117.2: <br />Said ordinance shall be init,.lated In the usual manner: <br />by a mei;iber of the Common Council; by a petition by the <br />owners of fifty (50) percent or more of the subject; area; <br />or by the Area Plan Commission. <br />I find nothing in the ordinance which addr•eoses deletion of the <br />area or a portion of the area. Vollowi.nt_; the usual rules of <br />st,.tutorry eonstrrietion, therefore, it; is my opinion that the only <br />way to amend the I):L ;tortc district; ordinance would be by the same <br />process as one 1•Kas established, that is, that; the amendment be <br />initiated by a Cornlu;�n Council member, by a petition of the owners <br />of fifty percent or ;More of the subject Aarea, or by the Area. Plan <br />Commission. Further, by the language oi' the code section, "of the <br />subject area," I belj_eve that that refers to the area to be <br />designated an historic district or still to be included in the <br />historic district In the amended oLcJin-ince, rather than the area to <br />be omitted from the historic distr-I-ct. <br />I have discu:t!3ed this tnterpreta.ti.on with Kevin Butler, <br />who Agreed with this interpretatlor}:, <br />In your al:,sence, therefore, I have advised Karen Kieranec <br />of i,i1e historic Preservation Commis»i.on, David Roo.3, who had been <br />coat rcted by John Voorde about the mr.tter upon receipt of an <br />inquiry by one of the property owners who wished to be out of the <br />district, and a lady named "Irene" who lives in the district and <br />opposes it. It; appears, and I have so advised these people, that <br />v;r�ile a. property owner's petition to remove themselves from the <br />