Difference between revisions of "Miscellaneous Issues"

From AURAWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 42: Line 42:
  
 
|-
 
|-
| PA has a huge number of comments on something called "Demolition by Neglect".  They want harsher penalities etc.  Basically if a PA says a place is historic now the owner must pay the taxes and the upkeep.  Frequently this leads to financial ruin (like the owner in Clarksville).  This might be a reach but we should ask the city to pay for maintenance when a property is zoned historic against an owners wishes.  This would make the city only want to declare properties historic that were truly historic.    ||  
+
| Preservation Austin has a huge number of comments on something called "Demolition by Neglect".  They want harsher penalities etc.  Basically if a Preservation Austin is able to declare a place historic now the owner must pay the taxes and the upkeep.  Because of the high cost this can frequently lead to financial ruin (like the owner in Clarksville).  This might be a reach but we should ask the city to pay for maintenance when a property is zoned historic against an owners wishes.  This would make the city only want to declare properties historic that were truly historic.    ||  
 
23-7D-1030 C pdf 32
 
23-7D-1030 C pdf 32
 
|| Historic Preservation
 
|| Historic Preservation

Revision as of 20:13, 27 May 2017

This is a catch-all page for CodeNEXT suggestions on subjects that may or may not have their own articles yet. Feel free to leave comment suggestions here if you're not sure where they go.

Recommendations

Comment Page/Section Issues Opposing Commenter, if any
At the very top Preservation Austin wants to make clear permits are stopped when a property is historic or when there is a pending application. I think we should say it should be stopped when its zoned historic. This encourages us to look for historic structures throughout the city. Not wait until a demo permit is issued and then run out and try to make it historic. This leads to affordability issues because it adds more delays to an already complicated entitlement process. Instead we should look for historic structures neighborhood by neighborhood instead of waiting until the permit process has already started

23-7A-1020 pdf 2

Historic Preservation Preservation Austin


At the very top Preservation Austin has a comment on the heading. In their comment they want the applicant to do historic review instead of the city so the applicant takes on liability. This means that no one will do a demo because they don't know how to do things like "newspaper research". Additionally no one will want to take on the liability. This means if Preservation Austin finds the first person to burp on Youtube lived in the house they can sue the applicant. I am sure they would prefer this because suing the city is much more difficult. This would have a chilling effect on new housing. I would not respond to Preservation Austin but make a new comment.

23-7D-1020 pdf 30

Historic Preservation Preservation Austin


Historic review should be trigged by a property being 80 years old not 50. Preservation Austin didn't comment here but elsewhere they argue it should be reduced to 45

23-7D-1020 C-1 pdf 30

Historic Preservation
Historic review should be trigged by a property being 80 years old not 50. Preservation Austin didn't comment here but elsewhere they argue it should be reduced to 45 elsewhere

23-7D-1040

Historic Preservation


The status quo should be maintained. This encourages us to look for historic structures throughout the city. Not wait until a demo permit is issued and then run out and try to make it historic. This leads to affordability issues because it adds more delays to an already complicated entitlement process. Instead we should look for historic structures neighborhood by neighborhood instead of waiting until the permit process has already started

23-7D-1030 C pdf 32

Historic Preservation


Preservation Austin has a huge number of comments on something called "Demolition by Neglect". They want harsher penalities etc. Basically if a Preservation Austin is able to declare a place historic now the owner must pay the taxes and the upkeep. Because of the high cost this can frequently lead to financial ruin (like the owner in Clarksville). This might be a reach but we should ask the city to pay for maintenance when a property is zoned historic against an owners wishes. This would make the city only want to declare properties historic that were truly historic.

23-7D-1030 C pdf 32

Historic Preservation Preservation Austin|