HomeMy WebLinkAboutEmail To Marshall Form Drane Wilkinson About 15th and Rock Proposal for COA 08/03/2009Minyard, Brian
From: Drane Wilkinson [drane@uga.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 6:53 AM
To: marshall
Cc: Minyard, Brian; Boyd Maher
Subject: 15th and Rock Proposal for COA
Marshal:
It was good to talk with you the other day. I had hoped to follow-up earlier than now, but
it was a busy week. I have reviewed the materials concerning the C of A application for
the two infill structures at 15th and Rock; and while I cannot comment on the specifics of
the project, I would like to offer the following cautionary reminders.
1) A commission should net rule on an application if it does not have sufficient
information to make an informed decision. Details such as materials and design for
significant parts of a structure, and window size and placement are essential for a
commission to make an informed decision. A commission may discuss options with an
applicant as long as it does not pledge or imply that approval will be given, but it
should not issue a C of A if an application is incomplete. Working with an applicant to
make sure that an application contains all of the information the commission needs both
protects the commission from accusations of negligence and protects the applicant from
unwittingly doing inappropriate work that would need to be changed later and at
potentially greater expense.
2) While a commission may make exceptions to its guidelines, it must be able to show and
clearly articulate that the approved work meets the applicable Secretary of the Interiors
Standards (I believe Little Rock includes the Standards in its guidelines) or will not
have an adverse effect on the district as a whole. This finding should be part of the
official record of the decision.
3) Any decision to give new construction applications less stringent review or to hold
them to a lower threshold as a means of facilitating redevelopment of an area should be
made at the policy level or through a revision to adopted guidelines. Decisions to hold
certain types of applications to a lower or different standard made on a case by case
basis can lead to inconsistency and open the commission to accusations of arbitrary and
capricious behavior.
4) Applications for work that does not follow adopted guidelines in order to achieve a
LEED rating or meet other energy efficiency or "Green" standards must still be reviewed
according to the adopted guidelines. Any decision to hold applications of this sort
according to different standards should be made at a policy level or through a revision to
adopted guidelines, not on a case by case basis. In most cases that have come to NAPC's
attention, a compromise has been found that allowed the project to achieve the desired
rating while still following the adopted guidelines.
I hope that this information is helpful. As always, please feel free to call or write if
NAPC orI can be of further assistance.
Thanks,
Drane
Drane Wilkinson
NAPC Executive Director
1