Laserfiche WebLink
from the recommended limits are warranted, as the AAC and Planning Commission <br />found. <br /> <br />b. Staff Response to Points of Appeals. <br /> <br />Despite the fact that the City has solid grounds for finding the Project consistent with the <br />DTPP, Appellants contend that Council should find the Project to be inconsistent. The <br />following discussion refutes Appellants’ contentions. <br /> <br />i. The Project Is Consistent with All Historic Resource Preservation <br />Regulations. <br /> <br />Appellants’ Position: The Project is inconsistent with historic resource preservation <br />provisions, of the DTPP, asserting that “historical resources must be placed first in the <br />consideration of any development,” that the DTPP reflects a “community preference” for <br />structures that reflect historic architecture, and that the Project will detract from a cluster <br />of historic resources. (See, e.g., Carr Appeal, pp. 1-2; Keyes Appeal, pp. 1-2.) <br /> <br />City Response: The City properly considered historic resources, community <br />preferences for structures that reflect the character of the area’s historic architecture, <br />and whether the Project will detract from adjacent historic resources. To specifically <br />address these issues, this report outlines how the Project complies with all historic <br />preservation provisions as well as all mitigation measures of the DTPP which apply to <br />non-historic sites (such as the subject site) that are adjacent to historic resources. <br /> <br />First, as described in the Planning Commission report, the Project is in compliance with <br />all historic preservation measures. <br /> <br />The historic resources regulations are placed first in order in Book 2 of the DTPP <br />because they are of particular interest. However, they do not trump any other <br />regulations and are interrelated to and complementary with the other regulations of <br />Book 2. <br /> <br />In preparing the DTPP, every property in the larger downtown area (approximately 183 <br />acres) was studied and all historic resources were identified. (DTPP, p. 157.) A total of <br />40 properties were found to have very high historic significance, and were identified as <br />“Resources to be Preserved” (depicted in red on the Historic Resources Preservation <br />Regulations Map on p. 30 and the Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey Map on <br />p. 157.) An additional seven resources that contain low significance, integrity and <br />context were also identified and labeled as “Resources which may be Altered, <br />Relocated or Removed” (depicted in brown on the same maps). <br /> <br />7.A. - Page 8