(A)
The demolition or moving of heritage landmarks shall be discouraged. The Commission may, however, after careful consideration of the effect of the move on the heritage landmark in question and on the entire heritage landmark district, issue a certificate of appropriateness for moving or demolition of a heritage landmark or contributing structure of a heritage landmark district.
(B) In applications involving the demolition or relocation of a heritage landmark, provision shall be made for a public hearing as set forth in this chapter.
(C) Upon receiving an application concerning the demolition or relocation of a heritage landmark or a contributing site located in an heritage landmark district, the Commission within 90 days after receipt of the application shall either approve or deny such application, or find that the preservation and protection of heritage landmarks and the public interest will best be served by postponing the demolition or relocation for a designated period, which shall not exceed 180 days from the receipt of the application, and notify the applicant of such postponement.
(D) Within the period of postponement of such demolition of any heritage landmark or contributing site, the Commission shall take steps to ascertain what the City Council can or may do to preserve such building, including consultation with private civic groups and interested private citizens and including investigation of the potential use of the power of eminent domain when the preservation of a given building is clearly in the interest of the general welfare of the community and of certain historic and architectural significance. The Commission may also request a reuse study be completed to determine potential reuses of the building proposed to be demolished.
(E) For review of a certificate of appropriateness for relocating or demolition, the Commission shall use the following general criteria. In order for the Commission to approve relocating or demolition of a heritage landmark or contributing site, at least one of the following requirements must be met:
(1) Despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, retention of the resource constitutes a hazard to public safety that cannot be eliminated by economic means available to the owner, including the sale of the structure on its present site to any purchaser willing to preserve the structure.
(2) Preservation of the resource is a deterrent to a major improvement program that will be of substantial benefit to the community.
(3) Retaining the resource will cause an undue and unreasonable financial hardship to the owner, taking into account the financial resources available to the owner including the sale of the structure to any purchaser willing to preserve the building. The applicant shall provide proof of financial hardship as required and defined by the Commission.
(F) In determining whether reasonable alternatives exist, the Commission shall consider, but not be limited to, the integrity of the property and the economic value or usefulness of the existing structure, including its current use, costs of renovation and feasible alternative uses.
(G) In addition to the general criteria listed in division (E) the applicant must also demonstrate:
(1) If requesting demolition, that the structure cannot be practically moved to another site in Gaylord.
(2) If requesting relocation, that structure can be moved without significant damage to its physical integrity and the applicant can show the relocation activity is the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure.
(H) Prior to issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for demolition or relocation of a building or structure, a plan for the use of the property being vacated by the proposed demolition or relocation shall be submitted and approved by the commission. The approval of a certificate of appropriateness for demolition or relocation may be conditioned on issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for the new construction on the site.
(Ord. 324, passed 11-4-2015; Am. Ord. 324, passed 10- 3-2018)