Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />June 17,1993 Plan Commission Meeting Minutes Page 2 <br /> <br />Lisa VanAmburg, 7114 Washington, also appeared on behalf of the HPC. Ms. VanAmburg <br />stated that the building was formerly owned by the Living Word Apostolic Church headed by <br />Reverend, Robert K. Buckner. When that owner's conditional use permit was approved, it <br />required that any change to the facade first be reviewed by the HPC. Reverend Buckner had <br />a positive relationship with the HPC and voluntarily cooperated with the HPC's <br />recommendations. Therefore, historic designation of the facade was not a high priority at that <br />time. However, last year when the Higher Heights Christian Church obtained their conditional <br />use permit, the formerly mentioned condition was dropped. Since Higher Heights is resistant <br />to any HPC involvement, the HPC felt it was now necessary to push for historic designation. <br /> <br />Bettye Battle Turner, 3910 Lindell, St. Louis, MO 63108, attorney for the owner of the <br />building, Higher Heights Christian Church, stated that Higher Heights should not be compared <br />to Reverend Buckner's church. She stated that the HPC should not be allowed to make decisions <br />concerning a building that Higher Heights owns outright. The congregation is committed to <br />maintaining and improving the building but they feel that their own heritage and religious beliefs <br />should be the guide to how that is done. Historic landmark designation of the facade will rob <br />Higher Heights of its freewill. She further stated that the art deco style of the facade is not so <br />historically significant that it outweighs the rights of the property owner to be free from city <br />government's excessive involvement in the private use of property. <br /> <br />Vice Chairperson Ratner asked Mr. Goldman to report on the staff review. Mr. Goldman stated <br />that it was the Plan Commission's role to review the designation and give a recommendation to <br />the City Council because the procedure amends the Zoning Code. The City Council will later <br />have to hold a public hearing on the matter. Mr. Goldman stated that the building meets the <br />minimum criteria for historic designation as set forth in the Zoning Code. However, there will <br />probably be difficulties in carrying out the designation since the property owner opposes it. <br /> <br />Mr. Foxworth stated that there was a similar situation with the Mt. Olive School. Ms. <br />VanAmburg replied that the Mt. Olive School was never designated as an historical landmark. <br /> <br />Mr. Kahn asked what additional burdens and costs are foreseen by the applicant. Ms. Battle <br />Turner stated that the whole designation process is an interference with the owner's property <br />rights. Ms. VanAmburg replied that designation would only require that the applicant come <br />before the HPC for a recommendation prior to the Zoning Administrator issuing a building <br />permit concerning the facade. <br /> <br />Mr. Safe asked for clarification of the procedure after the HPC makes its recommendation. Ms. <br />VanAmburg stated that the Zoning Administrator decides whether or not the recommendation <br />must be followed. If either the property owner or the HPC disputes the Zoning Administrator's <br />decision, they can appeal to the Board of Adjustment. Board of Adjustment decisions are <br />appealable to the Circuit Court. <br /> <br />Ms. Kreishman asked for clarification of art deco's historic significance. Mr. Hamilton replied <br /> <br />m-6-17.plc <br />