Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Edwards indicated that what is being proposed is not out of line compazed to what <br />other cities are doing. Commissioner Chinn asked why the City of Los Angeles was not <br />included in the survey. Mr. Edwards responded that staff did not feel it was very <br />comparable. <br />Mr. View distributed a historic district proposal as part of his discussion and noted the <br />focus was to provide the Historic Resources Commission with architectural review <br />authority of new construction and exterior modifications within geographically defined <br />' historic districts. Commissioner Cribb noted that it is important to respect the <br />architectural style and period of time that structures possess. <br />Mr. View added that the key in creating a district is to determine under whose authority <br />does it lie, is it the Historic Resources Commission or create a system with ability to go <br />to Planning Commission. Madam Chair Kings highlighted her three primary objectives <br />of creating districts: 1) to preserve existing structures of character; 2) preserve <br />development standards that create character; and 3) ensure new development is in quality <br />and character of district. Commissioner Rankin added that in the South Main azea the <br />new development standazds did not recognize historic development standards that <br />preserve character. Cynthia Nelson, Deputy City Manger, responded that it should be <br />assumed that if we create a historic district it would have development standards adopted <br />by City Council. Ms. Nelson added that the Historic Resources Commission should <br />determine whether their goal is to review every building in the district or only historic <br />buildings and to think through who has authority to do what and streamline the process so <br />development may occur. Commissioner Bustamante suggested that the standards be <br />written tightly and that the Planning Commission do the review in order to reduce the <br />process for the applicant. <br />Commissioner Cribb noted his support of creating historic districts and Broadway <br />Corridor being the first to establish this status. <br />' Madam Chair Kings noted that having two commissions review could be problematic. <br />Commissioner O'Callaghan suggested any new construction be reviewed by the Historic <br />Resources Commission; then proceeded to highlight concerns with the length of time new <br />construction reviews in Heninger Park require. Commissioner Rankin noted for the <br />standards to be written to allow appeals to be heard by the Historic Resources <br />Commission first. <br />Mr. View summarized the overall consensus that there is support for districts; that the <br />Historic Resources Commission create and establish the standards; and asked if there was <br />need for the Historic Resources Commission to review non-listed buildings. <br />Commissioner Bustamante noted that the existing model should be left in place and to <br />give the Planning Commission review authority. Ms. Nelson added that staff is <br />committed to keeping the Historic Resources Commission in the loop of projects being <br />approved. <br />Mr. View noted the need to confirm a mechanism for the ¢ode changes, which will be <br />discussed in August with the Historic Resources Commission. Commissioner <br />Bustamante requested that Commissioner Cribb be invited to that meeting in August. <br />B. Oral Comments. <br />There were no public comments. <br />C. Comments from Staff. <br />There were no comments. <br />D. Comments from Historic Resources Commission. <br />There were no comments. <br />HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES 2 JUNE 14, 2001 <br />