Stonecipher and others were trying to work a deal, not the council. And all the while Stonecipher is also a member of Crossings Church, which is a conflict of interest.
He also authored a resolution without even talking to Cooper, which was relatively unprecedented considering it was in his ward and he was also working with First Christian.
So, some pretty suspect behavior on the part of an elected official, as if that status somehow makes you superior.
Man, your answers are incredibly hard to decipher, they're so vague and this one doesn't really answer the question. So if a study is commenced, can the property owner demolish a building? Or do they have to wait 6 months or ........? I don't know the current process works, sorry, or how this new one will, but wondering if either have any teeth - are there any actual, real consequences if a property owner demolishes a building that's under HP status or in the midst of a study or "on hold pending a study" or ....?
if the study is started they can not demo for 6 months .. (if this passes on final vote only the council could start the process )
i have no idea what recourse the city would have if some one demoed with out permission ( i guess the city would have to take the issue to court)
Oh good... I was afraid it would be in the hands of knowledgeable advocates of historic preservation. Now we can rely on the unbiased, incorruptible and unconflicted elected more interested in staying in power than advocating for the right thing. Can sleep better now.
Proposal to limit commissions power
https://oklahoman.com/article/564086...-oklahoma-city
Good thing we're doing this in reaction to a First Christian Church purchase deal that has *checks notes* already fallen apart due to issues that have nothing to do with either the presence or absence of a historic preservation listing.
Update regarding the proposed historic protections:
- https://freepressokc.com/its-urban-v...ial-ordinance/Greenwell Ordinance
The controversial ordinance proposed by Wards 5 and 8 Councilmen David Greenwell and Mark Stonecipher has been workshopped and refocused repeatedly since it was first introduced months ago.
It has been before the Council and the Planning Commission twice. On its most recent review, the Planning Commission failed to vote to recommend the ordinance and it was returned to Council as “without recommendation.”
Since returning to the Council for review, the ordinance has been rewritten to clarify the language several times.
Last week Mayor Holt, who has some experience in drafting legislation, inserted himself into the process.
This is getting torn down in Fort Smith
https://talkbusiness.net/2022/05/ico...Cw2h8inmNs6nDg
That’s depressing and a **** decision.
Though not as cool architecturally, a similar type building from the 1960s was knocked down in Broken Arrow a few years ago.
https://bahspulse.com/convent-to-be-demolished/#
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks