Laserfiche WebLink
<br />G. Council minutes as circulated - December 22, January 12 (special), <br />January 12 (regular), January 13, 26, and 28, February 2,S,lO,12(special), <br />e February 9 and 23 Approve <br /> <br />H. Planning COrnnQssion Appciintment - Mr. Keller suggested a Noon meeting to <br />review applications for appointment to fill the Planning Commission vacancy. <br />It was his hope that selection of finalists could be accomplished at that <br />time. Mr. Murray suggested that applications be reviewed by Council prior <br />to the meeting time. <br /> <br />It was understood a Special Council Meeting would be <br />May 3, at 12:00 Noon in the McNutt Room at City Hall <br />applications for Planning Commdssion appointment. <br /> <br />held Monday, <br />to consider <br /> <br />Corom <br />4/28/76 <br />Affirm <br /> <br />I. Historic Review Board Financial Request Procedures - Modified guidelines have <br />been distributed to Council. <br /> <br />Added to the original suggested guidelines was the statement, "Under unusual <br />circumstances, however, the Board may determine that a particular application <br />warrants special consideration, and, therefore, may use its discretion in <br />allocating funds in excess of this percentage to the applicant, redistributing <br />the remaining available funds proportionately". This provision was added to <br />give flexibility to the Board in special cases, since a $5,000 limit per year <br />per request is proposed. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Willi~ms, while realizing the modification provides an opportunity to <br />deviate sGnewhat, feels the Historic Review Board should be able to exercise <br />a more jud~mental type of role. He feels they should be able to evaluate <br />need on thcl basis of benefit to the City rather than follow a very mechanical <br />procedure. <br />Mr. Murray recalled discussion at the time the ordinance was passed relating <br />to setting strict limits to avoid having one or two projects use all available <br />funds. Mrs. Beal added the idea is to encourage and induce rehabilitation for <br />preservation purposes, but not to totally finance projects. <br /> <br />Mayor Anderson felt perhaps a clause such as "except in extenuating circumstances" <br />could be included for projects requiring more than $5,000 which are extreme <br />hardship cases and which might otherwise be delayed. It would seem more economicall~ <br /> <br />sound to grant $15,000 all at once rather than go through the same procedure <br />for three years to spread out the funds. <br /> <br />Mr. Murray felt that the proposed modification provided for that circumstance. <br />Mayor Anderson disagreed, however, feeling the modification is contrary to the <br />beginning of the proposal which states that no request for financial assistance <br />will be granted for JIDre than $5,000 per year, regardless of the amount requested. <br /> <br />Mr. Murray wondered if the last sentence could read that the Board may use its <br />discretion in allocating funds in excess of the limitations. He would hope, <br />though, that the overriding philosophy would be kept in mind. <br /> <br />Jan Muller, Historic Review Board, noted that the ordinance requires a limit be <br />set. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Sugaya noted possible legal problems because of that stipulation,~iDg too that, <br />in the event funds are limited, the funds available divided by the total <br />requested and approved will equal the percentage of the request to be paid. <br /> <br />City Attorney said it is his understanding an outside limit would be required as <br />well for special cases. :J.S3 <br /> <br />5/10/76 - 11 <br />