April 1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

W Lincolnway East. Commissioner Bullene seconded the motion. The motion was defeated 4 -2. Commissioner Bullene asked for alternative suggestions. Mrs. DeRose said there needed to be an alternative motion to deny the COA with specific reasons for denying it in the record. President Oxian said if this were going to go before Council, there needed to be a basis from the Commission for denial. Commissioner Bullene gave his reasons for supporting the motion to approve the COA. Commissioner Eide said he did not feel it would be responsible to deny the COA without some fairly convincing reasons. Mr. Greta asked for clarification on how long it would take for Common Council to hear the appeal. Mrs. DeRose explained it would come before the Common Council next month and if the Council sided with Code Enforcement, the Commission could appeal the decision in court. President Oxian inquired how large of a fine Mrs. Dempsey could seek from Dr. Klopfer. She replied the maximum Civil Penalty was $1000. President Oxian inquired if there was any provision in state legislation for criminal charges. Mrs. DeRose replied negatively. Mrs. Dempsey said she felt better means of enforcement had been enacted, however several buildings, such as 1244 Lincolnway East, had been in Code Enforcement longer than the new regulations had been in place. Mrs. Dempsey enumerated the many programs and agencies available to prevent demolitions and noted all possibilities had been exhausted for this structure. She said her biggest fear would be a tragedy would occur in the building before any action was taken. President"Oxian said he could see Mrs. Dempsey`s point, but the felt there ought to be some means of getting a criminal suit filed against delinquent property owners. President Oxian called for a motion to deny the COA with reason for denial or for a revote on the previous motion. Commissioner Petrass indicated she had changed her vote. Commissioner Hostetler said she felt the Commission needed to take a stand against absentee landlords who do not care for their property. Mrs. DeRose said she felt Dr. Klopfer had another agenda and could not be placed in the category with regular absentee landlords. Mrs. Dempsey voiced her agreement with President Oxian that very strong enforcement of the standards was necessary. Commissioner Bullene inquired if Mrs. Dempsey could as part of the demolition, make requirements regarding the retention of surrounding landscaping elements. President Oxian said Commissioner Bullene could introduce that into a motion. Mr. Kent said he did not feel just telling Dr. Klopfer he could not cut down the historic trees on the property would stop him from cutting them down if that is what he desired. Commissioner Hostetler noted under Indiana law the Commission can not confiscate the property or hold it against the rightful owner or could not coerce him to repair the property by withholding licenses from him. Mr. Kent said the Commission should not justify its decision to allow the demolition by saying they could save the trees. Commission Bullene replied the Commission was not justifying the demolition, but were trying to make it as limited as possible. Mr. Duvall noted there were other landscape features such as ornamental rock structures and the fence as well as the trees. Commissioner Bullene moved the COA for demolition be approved and asked that Code Enforcement notifv the owner in a letter of the sentiment of the Commission that anv new construction would have to respect the existing building as a historic precedent. that all mature trees and decorative landscape features which do not have to be removed for safetv reason be