01/18/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Young said the development had been referred to the Westside neigh- borhood group and that group felt the design was adequate and there was ~ a need for this housing in the area. However, the group did indicate it .., would like to see design review occur at the pre-application stage. Mr. Lieuallen said the central factor involved was subsidizing a project with public money which gives the Council the obligation to understand the development and to impose restrictions and controls. In response to a question from Mr. Lieuallen, Mr. Kupper said there was a design review process for urban renewal and there had been no difficulty with it. However, he said he would not like to see a lengthy process instituted. In response to Mr. Obie's statement about the building codes, Mr. Lieuallen questioned whether the building codes speak to the issue of how long a project would last. Don Allen, Public Works Director, said that is the purpose of the code, if the code is followed there is an assurance the project will go through the normal life cycle. However, he said the maintenance factor does enter into the length of life of any building. He cautioned Council that this is not a City code, but a State code. Mr. Lieuallen said he was very concerned that Council develop some better controls for future applications. Mr. Williams agreed, noting the Council passed the enabling legislation without much discussion. He expressed sympathy for the present applicant, but wondered if Council should not set its rules now rather than simply slide over this one. 4It Betty Niven said she saw no problem with pre-application review if real criteria were set up. However, she did see problems with people's various conceptions of what is meant by attractive. She cautioned Council of the time consumed which adds to the cost of the structure which is passed on in the rent. She also mentioned in previous experience with architects, they do not want to review each other' s work in public. She said if it is impossible to get agreement among this professional group, then it would be even more difficult to get agreement among the public. In response to a question by Mr. abie, Ms. Niven replied the deadline for requests was the January 1, 1980 completion date. Mr. abie then wondered if there were substantial applications coming in. Ms. Niven and Mr. Kupper replied they knew of no others. Mr. abie continued, as much as he would like to work out a better program, it seemed unfair to the present applicant in view of the number of dollars he has invested based on his perception from the staff and City Council in meeting the criteria set forth. He believed the applicant has come to this point in good faith based on the ordinance the Council had passed and he would vote for this proposal. However, he wanted to go on record as requesting that the public benefit portion be definitively worked out prior to consideration of any future applications. 1/18/78--8 . 35