07/23/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ordinance is passed. In addition, the historic ordinance is already three J months old and she questioned whether the Council could amend legislation in which the public may have an established, vested right to have the e legislation enforced as it reads. She suggested an alternative in that the Council could direct the Building Official to revoke the permits. Terry Hammons, 1417 Mesa, attorney for Unthank, Seder, Poticha, spoke for the ordinances. He said he did not agree with Ms. Holt's view of the law. With regard to legal requirements for prior non-conforming use, Mr. Hammon said Ms. Holt was referring to state statutes which apply only to counties and do not apply to home rule cities. He said it had been suggested that if the Council adopted the ordinances, it would permit someone to thwart that legislation by making an early application just to get around it. The difficulty with that position, as he sees it, is that filing an appli- cation for a building permit isn't simply going down and filling out a half-page form. You have to submit a full copy of your drawings, which is a large undertaking. He said he had heard no evidence of this happening . in the past. Mr. Hammons also stated that Ms. Holt's worry that other land owners in the area would complain that the Unthank firm had received favored treatment was unfounded. He said the Council would simply be applying the City's policy as it has always existed. Mr. Hammons said it was very important for the Council to adopt the ordinances before it. He said the opponents are asking the Council to adopt a policy that is unique among the cities in Oregon and one that goes contrary to what the policy of this city has always been. Mr. Hammons said the resolution that Ms. Holt proposed would be asking the City to aodpt a discriminatory policy. He didn't feel the e City had any place doing that. He further stated that the architects would suffer a loss of $600,000 if they were forced to go through the design review process. He didn't feel the City's policy should be changed to accommodate a couple of people. Mr. Hammons said the opponents were asking the City to get out of a lawsuit that it has virtually no chance of losing, and get into a lawsuit that the City might very well lose. He didn't feel the City should take that risk. Joan Rich, 2050 Madison, read a letter from Glenn Mason, Director of the Lane County Museum. The letter read in part, "I feel it is important to remind the City Council again of the Historic Review Board's stated intent concerning the question before you with regard to the new develop- ment within the East Skinner Butte Historic Landmark Area. In their meeting of January 11, 1979, the minutes clearly reflect the intent of the HRB with regard to new development and, in particular, to new development on the vacant land north of 2nd Avenue. It was felt that the impact of development on this vacant land would affect the character of development of the core area to the south. Therefore, although a higher density would be allowed, the HRB's intent, and that of the subsequent landmark area e 3qb 7/23/79--6