The URL can be used to link to this page

ZONING AND HP ORD'S ;4.1 • - 1%4 } _ jt ,, ,,e, R c y. :..x _, a � ;',i _ � , icn .a. rj v.,9L r `�b°'..LL "�`* ; b ? C am•' -3��t- : - --+�-•-qy•. <,n c �, '•• {ir z -.7-7 ;' Y,� -F t :a,L 'r y -_ 3. - j. _r d T ,;r.I.) 7 i. 1 •�-"'." t i �,i 3'.r^r ,pri vy l+$J�S "', a¢"'----II. -- j `'• 1 .`3P _ ,, E. r i _ B.. .H 4} _ cSg.p,E,,. F .. - �l � ns,-r,-r-,-7. t"b2A.,C��.•.+moo a...t. ----- • Li! , �' c.... �_ �... 1— .� t �f. --.! \ ;l_4 r.J.c l 12�! fi EE i __ f ff._7. -,., � C'G,a!1 jib`�_fi L ,gli i £tea i,_ ?vk= , F 1.' t(c• T t f F_ ,,,,,,,,,,,,;,,,,,,,',,,C G .� T :-" = ,-0, �r�l i_h`.7 ii : .. 1 y f E11tttt F. , f c d '•�.f#� z t bs L9L � s A jIP y am [�4tA s,f' : Y L+;pi G z`�L: �'uL L2ri:d q rNi F. 11.1:r4p,, b9 :g nE L -E.6 , i;% r_,x..P `] dF'--A an —tf. 1 i.l;l{,.731 liglj t 4� ti' 7 ! 1..... i:� -, v ._I „;Elk.. lit'�3�EiP , .-AI `, EEl'B.� idIi i1 I M :.Y rt ea ,• i RZ a i f _ 01 1 I t" 4, �. I i f �' g,t rc V 'A ,.4 -ter -fl.k�`V-•. ti. .r':!' 4 ,T.. :f FK `tom Y- #�„'. I � ... Id rr,' -- ,p L; ,rr �+: _ �} r, ,'W. r `i -,_e t� �.7'ro;J: '�,Y : .,3;- =- /!':��,'•:•��a . � .. zaa�a.-11‘ ,_' `--` -fge"•4' 4 j '' ^t{ , ''may . z�- ' �`5--- ,i... t`5...: �.''3 - . ;f " L` .1 Y, . e, o 1r• e - a ' 1 _ ,•�,-r..: .. tip r �W„s.}ea { r 4 ,/�..�/ M4f V -Oi Y �._/`Y ��"v :s h Wien- �t ,,rr,. , -' :a <_' '"3>ii, � 1 - tea''•• -•'-'4 A .�.. w .t. ,�•. ,z.'+, 'M :Par �f :e ce �-. i.,,%�'C,,+.« ,., ^ -.7s•, -,,, �.,' ' ��,_ :. a_.it y..,4?� 1,.'t- ". , s '=_ t'r: t .,'r 41S5,. -4 1rrw: <'r `ot''`� -,k-t'i`"y� r Tn a.�� .� � t2r'!i++-zg Via- :1a — ..-. . 'r:�� ._.,.,_+:[�:7..,.Ab.ry -:"-`yi`•'Ya ',.� ,Xri.-V".'' .y"_'w .S=F•i��Y,' '1 I�r. 4, , .:�nnC.,�.= ti.r.:_,:_� ..ems-�,�.z.,:.=„rapt--„ti..,h;vsw .t�r�itz^a.t,c.C:�4."" X reaps: . • V.; • N r\ ZONING AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION .t R -_ Stephen A. Morris Preservation Planner, National Park Service ki August 1989 `"' in Zoning is one of many ordinances affecting the use of land in a k=` F local community; `xf among the others are building and fire codes, <- environmental regulations, subdivision ordinances, and the land -=-Y use policies expressed in a comprehensive plan. Of all these, s however, zoning is the most far reaching and , perhaps, the best ; established . Historic properties occupy land area and , like 44 other land uses, are subject to zoning regulations. When 1: properly applied , zoning can be a powerful tool in protecting historic properties. It is important, therefore,, that preservationists become knowledgeable about the zoning in their ' communities in order to determine how it affects historic resources and how it might better protect historic properties. =-�= What is zoning? Under state enabling legislation, a local government is . ; authorized to divide the land area in its jurisdiction into districts , or zones, each with a set of regulations g. , 9 governing the - * development of private land . The districts are marked on a 1,.. zoning map which is an official government document. Generally, the text of the ordinance specifies the categories of uses - allowed in each district (residential, commercial, industrial, etc.) , the maximum size of the buildings , the size of the lot , : 'h the required spaces around the buildings , the number of off- ` - street parking spaces, and other requirements for development. z_ Zoning districts are designated by classifications, such as "RS1" which might stand for Residential Single Family Low-Density, or "C2," which could be Commercial Medium-Density (generally letters ,•'y refer to uses while the numbers indicate density) . - t rrt - � .ci.. A — — LTD __LAC_ ..i - • ail — �fiL� � '-�='�— — — — - - - - - - - - - �"I EXISTING ZONING Map 10 }I.--�� (SC,E'MA=BOUNDARY OILY) C-1 C-2 C-U d (� 1 CO(i ERC1AL DISTRICTS NCRS RC-1 RC-2NTI �3O1iC-4 CIAL COMBINED DISTRICTS Commercial Zones in a Section of San Francisco. Source: Neighborhood Commercial Rezoning Study, San Francisco Department of City Planning, May 1984 What kinds of local governments can adopt zoning? State zoning enabling legislation generally specifies which local jurisdictions are authorized to adopt a zoning ordinance. In • some States both municipalities (cities and towns) and counties can adopt zoning laws; in others, zoning is a function reserved for municipalities. The State of Texas , for example, restricts zoning to cities and towns of a certain size and requires counties to get special permission from the state legislature in order to adopt a zoning ordinance. How long has zoning been in practice? The nation' s first comprehensive zoning ordinance was adopted in 1916 by New York City. The Standard State Zoning Enabling Act was drafted by the Department of Commerce in 1922 and had much to do with the widespread adoption of State enabling legislation and the acceptance of zoning by many of the larger cities and suburban communities around the country. The right of local governments to zone was affirmed by the Supreme Court' s landmark decision in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. in 1926, which upheld that , in principle , zoning was a valid expression of the 3 police power (i .e. , the power of the government to regulate activity by private persons for the health , safety, morals, and • general welfare of the public) . • What about pre-existing uses or buildings? - • Buildings or uses in existence prior to the establishment or amendment of the zoning ordinance which are inconsistent with the new or amended zoning requirements are called non-conformities. A lot which does not meet minimum size requirements can also be non-conforming. Non-conformities are sometimes given a set • period within which they must be brought into conformity; in some cases they are allowed to remain in existence indefinitely under the condition that they will not be expanded or improved . How is a zoning ordinance adopted and administered? Zoning ordinances are adopted by the local governing body, such as the city or county council or town board , based on the recommendations of the planning commission, or a specially appointed zoning commission. The zoning commission makes its recommendations after studying existing patterns of development and particular land use issues in a community. After the ordinance is finalized and adopted, an appointed zoning board of appeals or board of adjustment is established to decide when exceptions to the ordinance can be granted to particular property owners. A zoning administrator or officer administers the zoning ordinance on a day-to-day basis, granting zoning permits for proposed developments that comply with the terms of the ordinance. • How are changes made to a zoning ordinance? • Changes to the text of a zoning ordinance or a zoning map can be in the form of zoning amendments or revisions. A revision is • considered to be more comprehensive than an amendment and usually results in a completely new ordinance. Both require following the legal process established by the state enabling legislation and must be approved by the local governing body. Often the planning commission reviews proposed amendments and makes recommendations to the town council. The term rezoning applies to both amendments and revisions and does not distinguish between changes that apply to a small area or to the entire community. 4 What is a variance and under whose authority is it granted? Given the unique characteristics of each parcel of land , zoning authorities recognized early on that although every property • owner within a district would be bound to the same requirements, in certain cases exceptions would have to be made. One common type of exception is a variance, in which a property owner is exempted from all or a number of the provisions of the zoning ordinance. Variances require the property owner to prove to the • zoning appeals board that, due to the particular physical • surroundings, shape, or topographical condition of the property, • compliance with the zoning regulations would result in undue hardship. Variances may cover any aspect of the zoning requirements (such as use, number of parking spaces , size of building , or setbacks--the required distance between buildings and lot lines) . What about special exceptions? Special exceptions, also known as conditional uses, apply to nonconforming -..uses thought to be desirable in a particular district under certain circumstances, such as a school in a residential district. Unlike variances, special exceptions are listed in the text of the zoning ordinance along with those uses permitted as a matter of right. The conditions required for the zoning board to grant a special exception are also set forth in the ordinance, although sometimes the board negotiates particular conditions to be placed on a proposed development with a property owner. What is historic zoning or historic district overlay zoning? Where historic district design review is established through the zoning ordinance, it is often referred to as historic zoning or • historic district overlay zoning. An overlay zone is an additional layer of regulations for a particular area which is laid atop the underlying or base zoning regulations. There are many different kinds of overlay zones including those that establish additional controls on development in areas subject to airport noise, or those that promote downtown retail development. The base zoning provisions , which relate to use and density, continue to be administered by the zoning authorities. The regulations contained in the historic overlay zone are administered by a design review board or historic preservation commission. 5 Should historic zoning or design review regulations and base zoning be coordinated? Regardless of whether or not design review in historic districts is called historic zoning or it is implemented through an. independent process, it is essential that preservation regulations , such as historic district design review, and zoning be coordinated. Where there is no coordination the preservation regulations which seek to preserve and protect the integrity of historic neighborhoods may be working at cross-purposes with the zoning ordinance, the goal of which could well be to attract high density new development. How can preservation regulations and zoning be coordinated? Coordination can take place in a variety of ways. One way is to arrange for regular meetings between members of the zoning board and the preservation commission or to have a member of the zoning board also serve on the preservation commission. Interaction between the staff of both groups is also important. A number of zoning ordinances provide a degree of coordination by allowing the historic district commission or design review board to review and make recommendations on all use permits , variances, rezoning requests, and zoning text amendment applications within the historic district. - Where preservation and zoning are separate , an ideal solution is to include a clause in each ordinance stating that where there are conflicts, the preservation ordinance takes precedence. - . Alternatively, the zoning ordinance might have a provision stating that there is a presumption against developments, rezonings, and variances that harm individual landmarks or historic districts. In addition, successful preservation commissions build in the opportunity to comment on any zoning issues that may affect historic properties and have the authority to recommend a suspension of certain zoning requirements that hamper preservation (see page 9) . What are the typical problems that result from a lack of coordination between preservation regulations and zoning rules? Zoning Incompatible with Current Use. The most typical problems arise because the current and historical uses in an area do not match the current zoning designation. Often a historic residential neighborhood may be zoned for retail , office, or industrial uses. The pressure to convert to one of these uses can result in the demolition or inappropriate remodeling of historic residences. 6 • Density. A related conflict between zoning and preservation is density. In many cases, the current and traditional uses in a historic district may be of the same type as that .contained in • the zoning , but the historic uses may be at a much lower density. This is frequently the case in older commercial districts where historic commercial buildings are an average of two or three stories in height but the zoning allows much taller buildings. The greater economic return generated by larger buildings creates pressure to demolish or to build incompatible and disproportionately large additions to smaller historic • buildings. Residential areas zoned for densities much higher than those represented by the existing buildings frequently suffer from disinvestment, since owners of the existing houses are reluctant to maintain them without any assurance that a large apartment building will not be built on a neighboring property. • Lot Sizes. Minimum lot sizes can also be a source of problems. For example, the 1950s zoning in a Virginia town encouraged redevelopment of older, so-called "obsolete, " residential • neighborhoods close to the downtown. The zoning enlarged the minimum lot size beyond the traditional size (small urban lots) in order to redevelop the district in a manner similar to a large lot suburban neighborhood . Redevelopment did not take place as planned, and years later the area became desirable as a historic residential neighborhood . Property owners, however, were prevented from building compatible infill houses on traditionally-sized vacant lots by the 1950s zoning which • required large lots. The inability to develop the vacant lots hampered the revitalization of the neighborhood . The converse situation can also work against preservation. In historic areas where houses were traditionally built on large lots, current zoning or subdivision regulations may allow new dwellings to be wedged between historic houses on newly subdivided lots much smaller than those of the surrounding houses. Off-Street Parking. Finally, preservation regulations and zoning rules often appear to be working at cross purposes in regard to • off-street parking requirements. Typically, modern zoning requires a greater number of off-street spaces than can be easily accommodated on a small historic lot. As a result , the property owner rehabilitating a historic building or constructing a compatible infill building in a historic district often faces the dilemma of either demolishing an adjacent historic building to provide enough space for the required parking or abandoning the project altogether. Neither of these results is a favorable preservation outcome. 7 Each of the problems discussed above can be resolved by changing the existing zoning. However, prior to considering solutions to individual problems it is advisable to take a comprehensive look at zoning and preservation conflicts throughout a community. What steps should a community take to study the effect of zoning on the protection of historic properties in the area? A logical place to begin studying the relationship between zoning and preservation in a community is to compile a single map showing both the boundaries of historic districts (or potential historic districts) and individual landmarks and the boundaries of the various zoning districts that affect the same area. This type of map clearly illustrates what zoning designations apply in areas of historic interest. At this point the text of the zoning ordinance should be analyzed to determine the requirements for each zoning district and whether or not they support or conflict with the preservation and revitalization of the historic properties or areas. The following- questions provide a starting point for an analysis of this sort: - - Are historic residential neighborhoods with single-family houses zoned for single-family residential or other compatible uses? - Do lot sizes and the building setback requirements from the front lot line match historic patterns? - Do separate zoning districts with widely divergent regulations (one for high-density commercial use, one for single-family residential use, for example) divide a single historic neighborhood? - Does the zoning for areas immediately surrounding a historic district provide an adequate buffer against development that would have a negative impact on the historic area? - Do commercial zones allow much taller and larger buildings than currently exist in the historic district? - Do commercial zones permit automobile-oriented commercial uses, such as drive-through facilities or those with large parking lots, that conflict with the traditional street-front and pedestrian orientation of historic commercial buildings? - Does the zoning r, quire so many off-street parking spaces that it hampers the rehabilitation of historic buildings or the construction of new infill buildings? If an analysis of zoning designations in historic districts reveals situations of the kind mentioned above, the next step is to examine the zoning ordinance to determine what, if any, 8 existing zoning classifications might be more appropriate , or if it is necessary to amend the zoning in other ways . What kinds of amendments should be considered to make the zoning in historic districts more responsive to preservation concerns? Amendments might involve shifting the boundaries between adjacent zones or substituting one classification for another, such as changing from an inappropriate low-density residential designation to a more appropriate medium-density residential one. The existing zoning ordinance, however, may not include classifications that are entirely appropriate for historic districts. In such cases, a particular requirement may have to be changed . If, for instance, the required minimum lot size in a particular single-family residential zone is too large and discourages infill construction and rehabilitation, changing this regulation to allow smaller lot sizes may be required . Or, if parking requirements are such that it is difficult to rehabilitate buildings in historic areas, then the number of required parking spaces should be reduced . Another option would be to draft an entirely new zoning classification with requirements tailored to the specific needs of a historic district. Zoning classifications that apply only to particular areas of a community are known as special purpose districts or special use districts. Cities have enacted these not only for historic districts but also for other areas of the city with specialized uses or needs such as ethnic neighborhoods or areas with large institutions (hospitals, universities, etc.) . Seattle has two districts of this kind; the Pioneer Square Preservation District which was established to protect the historical and architectural character of that commercial historic district; and , the International Special Review District which aims to maintain the International District core as an Asian cultural, retail, and residential center by encouraging , for example, uses such as small scale food processing and craft work with an Asian emphasis. What is downzoning? If the current zoning permits development at densities far higher than existing buildings , rezoning might involve what is known as downzoning, or reducing the permitted height and bulk of buildings. Downzoning can be controversial since affected property owners may perceive it as diminishing the value of their property. Nonetheless, in historic commercial areas, and particularly downtown business districts , downzoning may be the single most effective protection measure that can be achieved • through zoning because it substantially removes the pressure for high density development from the district. What other measures are available to make zoning compatible with historic preservation? A number of cities have amended their zoning ordinances to include special exceptions that allow historic properties to be used in ways not permitted as a matter of right in a particular zone. For example, in Denver, offices or art galleries are permitted by special exception in residential zones if they are housed in historic buildings. This measure has made the large mansions in the city' s Capitol Hill district more economically competitive with new residential buildings. Similarly, the District of Columbia created a special exception to allow nonprofit organizations to use residential landmark buildings for certain nonresidential use under specified circumstances (the building must contain a gross floor area of 10 ,000 square feet or greater, for example) . Some cities , such as Richmond , Virginia provide for the waiver of certain zoning requirements , such as height and area regulations and off-street parking and loading requirements.c for buildings in historic districts when it can be demonstrated that the waiver is necessary in order to achieve the purposes outlined in the city' s preservation ordinance. Transfer of development rights or TDR is another zoning technique that has been used to promote preservation in a few large cities. Following this approach the development rights to the portion of a property that remains undeveloped, such as the air space above a historic building , are sold or traded and put into use at another location. The cost and expertise required to administer a full-scale TDR program have presented difficulties, especially for smaller communities which lack full-time planning • staff. Bonus or incentive zoning has also been used to encourage the historic preservation in cities around the country. The bonus refers to the additional density (beyond what would otherwise be permitted) granted to developers in exchange for providing specified public amenities. Philadelphia' s new plan for Center City proposes that density bonuses be granted for the preservation of locally designated historic structures and that the city' s zoning code be revised to include standards to define the requirements. **** • 10 Some Practical Suggestions Preservationists should demonstrate a sincere, constructive, and continuing interest in local zoning issues by attending scheduled meetings and public hearings of the zoning commission or board of zoning adjustment (whether or not a "preservation case" is on the agenda) . It is not necessary (and sometimes counterproductive) to give formal testimony on every topic; but thoughtful queries by the public at a hearing will often raise questions that board members themselves would not have considered , and ideas from the public can help the board develop the conditions and requirements to be included in its decisions. Preservationists can also frame their questions and observations to make clear connections between historic preservation and zoning issues--connections board members might not otherwise see. Secondly, having demonstrated their commitment, credibility , and interest in local zoning , preservationists should take the next step and offer historic preservation training or presentations for local zoning (and other land use) boards . The training has to be attractive, appealing , and user-friendly and should be promoted as a way to enhance the board members' ability to do their work more effectively and efficiently, not as a "favor" or lobbying from a special-interest group. Arranging for cosponsorship of the sessions by the state or regional planning agency, the State Historic Preservation Office, local non-profit or service clubs, and business organizations demonstrates that preservation concerns are varied and widely shared public policy issues and not special-interest concerns. 11 Reference List For those interested in learning more about zoning and pursuing the connections between zoning and historic preservation the following publications may be useful.. Unless otherwise noted these works should be available in a good-sized public library. The Citizen' s Guide to Zoning . Herbert H. Smith. Chicago: American Planning Association, Planners Press, 1983 , 242 pages. This is an excellent introduction to zoning for the layperson. It includes a comprehensive glossary on zoning terminology. Available from: Planners Bookstore, 1313 East 60th Street, Chicago, IL 60637-2891, (312) 955-9100; $16.95 plus $3 .00 for postage and handling . A Handbook on Historic Preservation Law. Christopher J. Duerksen, editor. Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation and the National Center for Preservation Law, 1983 , 523 pages plus appendices. Chapter 2 , "Local Preservation Law," is particularly useful and features an indepth discussion of the components of a comprehensive local preservation program and the integration of such a program with local planning and zoning processes. Available from: Conservation Foundation, P.O. Box 4866 , Baltimore , MD 21211, (301) 338-6951; $30 (paperback) plus $2 for postage and handling . Dealing with Change in the Connecticut River Valley: A Design Manual for Conservation and Development. Robert D. Yaro et al. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and the Environmental Law Foundation, September 1988, 182 pages. This well-illustrated manual on rural landscape and small town preservation juxtaposes alternative development scenarios for particular sites--conventional development v. creative development. It also includes model ordinances for site plan review, signage, and farmland/open space preservation. Available from: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Publications Office, 1033 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02138 , (617) 661-3016; $25.00 plus $2 .50 for postage and . handling . Preservation and Zoning : A Study Paper on the Effects of the Zoning Code on Staunton' s Historic Resources. Staunton, VA: Historic Staunton Foundation, September 1986 , 21 pages plus appendices. A basic yet thorough analysis of the impact of current zoning on Staunton' s five National Register historic districts, carried out by a committee of community leaders. The paper identifies the problems and makes recommendations to correct them. The format and approach of the study are widely 12 applicable to many communities across the country. Available from: Historic Staunton Foundation, 120 South Augusta Street , Staunton, VA 24401, (703) 885-7676; $5 .00 for postage and handling . Saving America' s Countryside : A Guide to Rural Conservation. Samuel N. Stokes, et al. Washington , DC: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1989, 306 pages. Presents a comprehensive approach, with numerous case studies, for initiating and carrying out a rural conservation program at the local level. Chapter 4 , "Land-Protection Techniques That Local Governments Can Use," explains how comprehensive planning , zoning , and other regulatory techniques can be adapted to serve rural conservation goals. Available from: National Trust for Historic Preservation , Mail Order , 1600 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006 , ( 800) 537-5487; $16.95 (paperback) plus $3 .00 for postage and handling . Roanoke Vision: Zoning : A Process for Balancing Preservation and Change, 1986. Roanoke City Planning Commission and Roanoke Office of Community Planning . 32 pages. This magazine style publication describes the process undertaken to revise the :zoning ordinance in Roanoke, Virginia. Roanoke' s zoning dated from the 1950s and 1960s and did not recognize the increasing value placed on preserving the city' s past. Included are excerpts from the new proposed zoning ordinance addressing preservation concerns. Available from: City of Roanoke, Office of Community Planning , Room 355 , Municipal Building , 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24011 , (703) 981-2344 . Zoning for Downtown Urban Design: How Cities Control Development. Robert S. Cook, Jr. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Company, 1980 , 178 pages. Historic preservation issues are often treated within the framework of urban design . This book provides an overview of urban design controls ( including those relating to preservation) and presents case studies of nine different-sized cities across the country that have used zoning to promote good urban design. Includes an extensive bibliography on zoning. Zoning and Historic Preservation: A Survey of Current Zoning Techniques in U.S . Cities To Encourage Historic Preservation. Chicago: Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois , 1983 , 32 pages. This paper provides an overview of a variety of zoning measures in use around the country to encourage preservation. Appendices focus on transfer of development rights (TDR) schemes. Available from: Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois , 53 W. Jackson Blvd . , Suite 752 , Chicago, IL 60604 , (312) 922-1742; $6.50. • Peparinga Historic1 \-- s'''\ .\\ •)t Preservation Ordinance Richard J.Roddewig • • - — '. F7,.. fik_______ : 11_.__�— -. Irk _lg �_.1 i�'� Q' 1r, 3' • • 7 -.a ?�— I \.=•) •� 4`• I -fir. •y •a: -. „. 4.r.E • • _ ., '_• /® 1 ace _` "' t • r..s —_ _____ • �•1 • 1'4 /, .' - �a �w. _>.. .., .. ..L_: �� `� . '•b24 N/ V.. . • s: P �. ma R. f9P1A 1->7 & -. 1y' \``l,y,�l✓ .. V . 'J ..� 2. �a*�ion SS$.t..i.3 k Ara.i'2 :.._ V~ V, •�rv/ - `•� - -__ ag m. .� rain. a L_f f kk. LI- ... *V.\7:.:. .,s - ' � / / s._•. _ = i IMMIftles k Est: p 41M M 1_ •-- • -\_ /� r i. -- - .t V.1-4-.V.1',1 it•4-d'_L;1 i r r_ " � a Y...� h "bas.a.2 -']iSC' �iYf V _ .. • __•.,^t•►•► � _ • :t I�I�t Till 1 1 1 1 f r '"ig. ""Iglt„ . -4(0° ' .,I...., . ._. /. ...44,44 4&4040,..,,,_ ....-___::11.,%;-S77.-::::-;.- - . r • -- � ,� '' ��►� ,✓ Ems - .l / f �� 11111Q111=11111 r� 1 - Nc-ii e- rl , _ -"A;--7L-:!,4''r',_..:,._.1".;:,t:-•.y.-'.‘w..t.it-'s,,.1,r.•:-•7'•„.-.'.A-it t...d..t t-l......---:;'_-.--_.,-.,,_-.,-'.,1._-"7_"-_._-,-:;.:- _. ,. / - r 'i,)..,%. -' ., pj K „a c b 11• l `•1 -'r'?t2•L1Ji1=:•^I`1.-_.:7_ � _� - 4!!I i4LE !I .; ... A 1 American Planning-Atsocta-tion PASPlanning Advisory Service Report Number 374 • Richard J. Roddewig is an attorney-at-law based in Chicago.He is also a real estate consultant associated with Shlaes&Company.Roddewig has counseled communities around the country on the drafting,implementation, and legal defense of preservation ordinances. Cover: New Orleans, Louisiana, in 1815. Reproduced from the Library of Congress copy of Jacques Tanesse's survey of 1815 as engraved by Rollinson and published two years later by Del Vecchio and Maspero. Planning Advisory Service is a subscription research service of the American Planning Association.Eight to 10 reports are pro- duced each year. Subscribers also receive the PAS Memo each month and have use of the Inquiry Answering Service. Israel Stollman, Executive Director; Frank S. So, Deputy Executive Director; David R.Mosena, Director of Research. Planning Advisory Service Reports are produced at APA.Sylvia Lewis,Publications Director;Adele Rothblatt,Assistant Editor. © Copyright February 1983 by the American Planning Association,1313 E.60th St.,Chicago,IL 60637.APA has headquarters offices at 1776 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20036. Preparing a Historic Preservation Ordinance Richard J. Roddewig TABLE OF CONTENTS Part 1. Fifty Years of Preservation Ordinances 1 Purposes, Uses, and Benefits of Historic Preservation Ordinances 1 Types of Structures and Areas Protected 3 Legal Basis 4 Tailoring the Ordinance to Local Needs 6 Basic Components of a Preservation Ordinance 7 Establishment of the Commission 10 Part 2. Criteria for Designation of Landmarks and Historic Districts 13 Nomination and Designation 14 Reviewable Actions 16 Criteria for Review 19 Part 3. Other Legal Issues 25 Historic Preservation and Economic Hardship 25 Appeals from Preservation Commission Decisions 28 Fines and Penalties 29 Conclusion: What Is the Future of Historic Preservation? 30 Appendices Appendix A. Excerpts from the Evanston, Illinois, Preservation Plan 31 Appendix B. Analysis of the Historic Zoning Commission's Summary of Recommendations, Metropolitan Nashville-Davidson County, 1981 33 Appendix C. Design Guidelines for Pike Place Market, Seattle, Washington 34 Appendix D. Historic District Design Guidelines for New Construction, Salt Lake City, Utah 35 Appendix E. A Proposed Ordinance Providing for the Preservation of Structures or Areas of Historic or Architectural Significance, Liberty, Missouri 38 • • _ M . . A • • 4 • . . , . ....., . . •1 - • t , , •t I • �r % 1- ' C\ 1#4.4 IN: �� _ ‘4... .,4. ;ter :•. k' / h.44il1i14ti1 ,.' - ,, • I �'� , •ks • � " ` � •‘44t ' ! 0.4. •tea h� r, . i _ ,4 � . :' * • :•IP � 'In Y • t • n. • <a F • SRN A♦ *; 'r y4• = a"t] t., t::• 1 to r •a • • • - • 11 �'� c'_v •r.ri'- •. „y �! A Ii � ♦ i` ►x 1 r ` 1Y_ ' > • •' - •- r- i- � • ' a• ~ �I .rr 0 ' •.f II t ., . ::-♦ • • t - „„ 1. /4rJ• • J . • ^ V. 4. ,.: ,, 1,,,•sc...•. -,rs.',...-':.,:. .."':4-',.:•• •tr'''';-.4,,,"--- 1,'",:..,...--• • .s:,r; .f •• •i -..' L„.•;'.A .. , I I' /4' * r....It., • M y i' S �,.w• ti. 11 r ,- 'fit} - ---- �_ � • C r �, ! :i'• -y� ; c --.-----,! .ia'r----41111;111--"- er. -,may: •+a \06`• /� �I� i �� / ` = . %f1 fff • } * dv IL AO.- ' i/.e .N /4; f•- - yr'. 1 1:1 4111111riritI , I 1 i• _.0.* „ 1:let',., • ."ii f. - ` 0.-- r ``.' ices _ 4' . i i1' ___ •di!' r I ms. . • 11, s' • , efi./. n. 'AA` , � t ;• .• /` t1 -- __ r]i 1•r; • �Ft f. ry _ l •�• •d . ,_.. er: •• - atiVit• - - . ix r.:".7:,; , _ _ ..1j.ijllr-411"liifllPIIIIII • � -•tea- . . y_ .- - t ♦ , Part 1. Fifty Years of Preservation Ordinances Historic preservation in America was once simply the district was passed a year later. San Antonio, Texas, purchase and museum-quality restoration of homes of followed in 1939 with a local ordinance protecting La historic figures or buildings where significant historic Villita, the original Mexican village marketplace. events took place. Thomas Jefferson's Monticello, George From the Southeast and South in the 1930s, the local Washington's Mount Vernon, and Independence Hall in ordinance concept spread to the Northeast in the 1950s. Philadelphia are perhaps the best-known examples. Georgetown, in Washington, D.C., was protected by a Sometime in,the 1920s, however, the historic preser- special federal law in 1950. By 1957, about 11 corn- vation movement in America became interested in ar- munities in the Southeast and Northeast had enacted chitecture as well as history. Once the attention became preservation ordinances, and, by 1965, that number had focused on preservation of buildings because of their ar- grown slowly to 51, including a few communities in the chitectural significance, it was inevitable that the concept Midwest and West as well. of the historic district to protect privately owned historic There was a sudden surge in interest in local preserva- buildings would evolve.The protection of a single house tion ordinances from the mid-1960s through the might be within the resources of a small private preser- mid-1970s experienced as a result of the general awaken- vation organization that could purchase the building, ing of America to the value of protecting its environment, restore it, and operate it as a museum. Protection of an including its urban environment.A 1975 study by the Na- entire historic neighborhood required a different ap- tional Trust for Historic Preservation found 421 active proach. It needed government intervention to get the job historic preservation commissions at the local level across done—either public funds to assist in the purchase and the United States. Almost 200 of these commissions were restoration of groups of buildings or public protection in the Northeast, but historic preservation ordinances had through the establishment of standards and guidelines for spread throughout the country. proper maintenance and repair of privately owned struc- The number has more than doubled in the last 10 years. tures in historic areas. By 1983, there were between 800 and 1,000 historic The cost of the first public alternative was, and still preservation commissions around the country.The deci- is, too expensive. The second alternative is the one that sion of the United States Supreme Court in Penn Central has been pursued since the 1920s. The historic preserva- Transportation Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 tion ordinance has evolved as a legitimate governmental (1978), has helped spark this recent surge in the use of tool for the protection of individual landmarks and en- preservation ordinances. It was the first Supreme Court tire historic neighborhoods. decision to recognize and uphold the constitutionality of The first preservation ordinance was enacted in local regulation and protection of landmarks. It has done Charleston,South Carolina, in 1931.New Orleans soon for historic preservation what Village of Euclid v. Ambler followed as the result of a Louisiana constitutional Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365 (1926), did for the concept of amendment in 1936 that authorized the city of New zoning. It has created a quiet confidence in the legal basis Orleans to protect the Vieux Carre area through local or- of historic preservation that has prompted innovative dinance. The New Orleans ordinance protecting that ways of protecting local landmarks and historic districts. PURPOSES, USES, AND BENEFITS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCES Commonwealth Avenue is part of Boston's Back Bay The purpose of the typical historic preservation or- Architectural District, one of the nation's earliest dinance has changed dramatically since the 1930s. At that preservation districts. time, the intention of a preservation ordinance was to 1 4 ..- to realize that historic preservation could serve to initiate the private revitalization of neighborhoods. Planning ' departments in Boston, Philadelphia, and Charleston, South Carolina, developed preservation plans to attract private investment to designated historic neighborhoods. Design controls over exterior renovation activity were i` essential to ensure that the historic character of the neighborhood was not destroyed in the process of r.T• �. "_ , ,. revitalization. ' : `•' ::: -� Other cities, such as Savannah, Georgia, saw the suc- "i` ' • ; \ aa- cess of New Orleans in attracting tourist business and ‘• \_c t consciously tried to duplicate those efforts.In Savannah, ;iZ�� \ I "' ;� _ = between 1965 and 1970, more than $2.75 million in I � - - ` 41:`4_ ,, private funds was spent on restoration in the designated � y ii _ = "=- historic areas of the city, and tourist spending in Savan- 1 �-� ' nah increased from $1 million in 1962 to $75 million in t t ;, `i - -`•} i .1_• -_ _ _ 1977, largely as a result of the attractiveness of the city's * 711 , - - III I I historic neighborhoods. ll r - .a Vieux Carre in New Orleans showed that historic 9';ia• g:dr< ' 1 preservation could be used to revitalize an entertainment `�fC.41iiwd r '_ and restaurant area. Adaptive use of San Francisco's . 4 x� _+- << fi+r• Ghirardelli chocolate factory into Ghirardelli Square {' ` t_ 4 . ,. .. `rt, i i - � . . MY 1 - 11 fie6 , i • - Designation of some historic neighborhoods in the Southeast F { • t. 1 i -' • _ — and Northeast in the 1950s spurred private reinvestment. '� Tired old townhouses,when rehabilitated, became some of +� —'^�--� the most fashionable residences in the city. _ i :1_ /..... • ' - __� _ 1 '�-- Beacon Hill, Boston . I t I% Alexandria, Virginia `� ; I ^./ .•• freeze a building or neighborhood at a point in time.The ` k ilk % •= �`� ;= purpose was not much different from that behind a . t._ � historic house museum. % 1 f Nti'.' » In the 1950s, it became clear that historic preservation "< < -e could be a catalyst for the revitalization of entire := • ` `•-' neighborhoods. Designation of some historic r . ( Ir" ` }‘ k '�, neighborhoods in the Southeast and Northeast spurred , Il `'` t private reinvestment. Legislators, lobbyists, and career --zz1 = - .p'•' .1 i public servants were first attracted to the Georgetown sec- i i - '1,.'t r- tion of Washington, D.C., in the 1950s. The tired _ = L',13 ,. townhouses there became some of the most fashionable _I- _ -( - -a t � ,•� '�� --` ,. residences in the city. Something similar occurred in Alex- _ _ ! r R, 1 ',+ • andria, Virginia. In the Beacon Hill neighborhood of — _ -'`�` " Boston, a recognized historic neighborhood, property r`� `,'" ' ` •values-tripled between 1955 and 1962.In the Vieux Carre „ - t:;`r in New Orleans, the tourist trade that came to the area, fil - for its historic charm as much as for its jazz, generated ,,,' $150 million annually in income and made New Orleans ` I ', .i*�'� r 1-'_ . - •- . a premier convention city. All across the country in the ;:� .- `' ;"A • 1950s, middle-class Americans began to love old buildings •- .,-•4. ` ' �_ '' - _ for the charm and character that was not present in the `_ `• ' '"•- typical new construction of the day. .o ,.,.�T ;''z- ' +� '" ,_ - In the late 1960s and early 1970s, public officials began r; Y `tis , .2% t� ~� '*' ._:-ma • a , ,•!: - 1"� �;�v e;�" -- -:£' `_,• Y = is -}-x.�'_::-s • s:.`1:. ,''i•.i '," - .;• --- . A • ; f; ; •'~: - - .14% - and improved by the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, which created a 25 percent investment tax credit for the • rehabilitation of "certified" historic structures. Again, " \ income-producing properties in local and state historic 1 ` .:. • districts qualified if the designating ordinance was --,.� -; approved. ��j t c Between 1976 and early 1983 more than 5,600 `" IIi , • . . 1 ,. 1 . ....kkk,N,_, I rehabilitation projects involving a total expenditure of $2.98 billion were approved for the income tax incentives.' - This has, for the first time, created a groundswell of #` ` I ' public support for historic preservation among both large e ' u ;Pi _ and small develo ers around the count . •. "y�x ~' K • Asa result of the National Historic Peservation Act I!: �,% - ', Amendments of 1980 (P.L. 96-515), there is another in- �.. • ,, ,; ••t, . '} centive for local historic preservation ordinances. Coin- lt I!% at w, :, • munities may have an ordinance certified by the agency j. • 3 ;; •' in each state designated by the Department of the Interior "; .;;�, t 'r.` as the State Historic Preservation Office. If the ordinance lit `.1 ::: •• • t'.:� contains proper standards for the designation of in-• - r - r. :,� �ti`=1!�� dividual landmarks in historic districts(as determined by • the state agency)and procedures for the review of altera- s i' tions and demolitions affecting designated landmarks, -:_� j �- two benefits are available to the community. First, the , . _ Toca istoric preservation commission and the mayor �l T i +"{ may review and comment upon all proposed National ,. ,,„we 01. -!li•� iikuti cl '•• iou Register nominations before they are considered by the a i � • C state and federal levels of government. Second, a = . •��,. :1 � ,: '`1 3. minimum of 10 percent of each states share of the an- nual federal appropriation for historic preservation, the p : ' �--—•"" •.7-t— Historic Preservation Fund, is required by law to be a , :`--' i!� ;�§ I• ' S'" to through to communities with certified historic 2. preservation ordinances. m In the spirit of the federal tax incentives for historic �+^ 1--r f• �� - - _ - a preservation, many states have now created property tax, �-''i�'- �'_ ` '� income tax, or special financing incentives for the Society Hill, Philadelphia rehabilitation of locally designated historic structures.' Participation in a state program by enactment of a historical preservation ordinance can make available in- centives for rehabilitation that can create significant showed what historic preservation could mean for economic benefit to the community. restaurants and retail shopping.Work began on the reuse of the historic chocolate factory near San Francisco's TYPES OF STRUCTURES AND AREAS PROTECTED Fisherman's Wharf in 1963.The first portions of the proj- Preservation ordinances can be tailored to fit the needs ect opened in 1965, and by 1968 the entire complex of of every community with historic neighborhoods and 85 stores and restaurants totaling 175,000 square feet was buildings. Some towns with only a few historic houses opened at.a total cost of$12 million. Ghirardelli Square may pass an ordinance that designates all of them at the attracted visitors from around the country, and they went same time. Other larger towns and cities with many home to their own cities with an eye for similar buildings houses and neighborhoods and even business districts that that might be rehabilitated. have historic character may simply establish a set of stan- The federal income tax code has also become a stimu- dards for designation and a process for systematically lant to local preservation ordinances. The Tax Reform considering and designating landmarks and districts. Act of 1976 allowed owners of historic,income-producing Districts may simply be an enclave of historic houses properties on the National Register of Historic Places to such as Savannah's Victorian district and San Antonio's amortize the cost of rehabilitation over 60 months or, as King William Street.It may be a collection of townhouses an alternative, to take various forms of accelerated depreciation on their rehab expenditure.Those incentives 1. A recent compilation of state and local tax and financing incen- were also available to state or locally designated historic tives,"State and Local Historic Preservation Tax Statutes,"is available buildings if the state or local ordinance had been ap- from the National Trust for Historic Preservation,1785 Massachusetts proved by the Department of the Interior as providing Ave.,N.W.,Washington,DC 20036.For an up-to-date discussion of state incentives,see Chapter 7 of the Handbook on Historic Preserva- sufficient protection for landmarks and having designa- tion Law, National Center for Preservation Law and the Conserva- tion standards substantially similar to those for the Na- tion Foundation,1983, available from the Conservation Foundation, tional Register.Those income tax incentives were changed 1717 Massachusetts Ave.,N.W.,Washington,DC 20036. 3 i a.. A 0 a .ram Urs • i PRINTING 1 it i` ...,,,.r- 4 HOUSE 'Ili , _ r:;' II R ROW , .. , 4 I ! Pk. 1 ; -,- !..t.,1 '•• , ils...viiii t • 6, 1 1i ;t. ,1 + 1 ``i:It " ' i : t �:;; ' ��,; ;Ili- , _• - Even industrial areas with a richness of } ` ;I. 1) a- L . _ . historic character are beginning to be puom-�,� i;D designated as historic sites.The ,. �� 1 "--.— ;, Chicago Landmarks Commission is .E '1li PillziA ij ( - :IL. u•N_ ' "" now considering the South Loop _ ,e_ _ *=< _: Printing House District—also known as Printing House Row—an area of 4 _; - ^�, c-,.. `� industrial buildings and warehouses sr •�" -. south of the Loop.This mural, by artist ,;4, .- -- - Robert Addison, is at the entrance to s. "v.—A- ...:-: ' ;r_: .,_ the district. and small, historic apartment buildings such as Chicago's mission must be appointed to survey the community for Astor Street Historic District. properties with historic or architectural significance and A town may designate its downtown commercial prepare a report on their appropriateness for designation. district; examples are Corning, New York; Galena, I1- Pennsylvania requires that a statewide historical commis- linois; and Park City, Utah. Or a town may designate sion approve any area proposed as a local historic district. , both a commercial district and its surrounding residen- Other states, such as Florida, Alabama, and Minnesota, • . tial area,such as Georgetown in Washington,D.C.;Alex- require enactment of specific state legislation before a par- " andria, Virginia; or Annapolis, Maryland. ticular community may designate local districts. i Chicago, New York City, and other large cities have All of this means only that the legal framework in each not forgotten to designate individual historic office state must be carefully considcred before a local preser- buildings downtown.Even industrial areas with a richness - vation ordinance is adopted. The case law interpreting of historic character are beginning to be designated as that legal basis also varies somewhat from state to state. historic districts. The Chicago Landmarks Commission It, too, must be researched and considered to determine is now considering the South Loop Printing House the constitutional basis of historic preservation in each District, an area of industrial buildings and warehouses state and the substantive and procedural points that must south of the Loop. be addressed in a preservation ordinance. The general constitutionality of historic preservation LEGAL BASIS under the United States Constitution, however, is no Every state now authorizes local communities to longer in doubt as a result of the decision of the United prepare preservation ordinances or protect historic struc- States Supreme Court in Penn Central Transportation tures. Some states, such as Louisiana and Missouri, even Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104, 98 S.Ct. 2646 mention historic preservation in their state constitutions (1978). as a legitimate function of local government. Some states, That case involved a challenge to New York City's such as Louisiana and Michigan,require that before local historic preservation ordinance. Penn Central Transpor- landmarks or districts may be designated, a study com- tation Company owned Grand Central Terminal in 4 , Manhattan, a designated New York City landmark.Penn incentives or a plan that will provide a sufficient return Central did not challenge the designation but instead to him. challenged the denial by the Landmarks Preservation The Supreme Court seemed impressed also by the com- Commission of its application to construct a cantilevered prehensiveness of the process by which New York City 50-story office building above the existing station. The seeks out and designates potential landmarks and New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission re- districts. The owners of Grand Central Terminal argued jected the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness that designation of individual landmarks was quite dif- for the project. Penn Central Transportation Company ferent from designation of historic districts. Landmark filed a lawsuit claiming that the New York City Land- designation was, according to them, "reverse spot zon- marks Preservation Law had"taken"its property without ing." Spot zoning unfairly singles out one individual just compensation as prohibited by the Fifth and Four- parcel for a particularly beneficial zoning classification. teenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. "Reverse"spot zoning unfairly singles out one parcel for The United States Supreme Court disagreed with Penn a particularly restrictive zoning classification. The Central. It recognized that protection of landmarks and Supreme Court rejected this argument and said the New historic districts is a valid public purpose and a legitimate York City law "embodies a comprehensive plan to function of local government. It also recognized that it preserve structures of historic or aesthetic interest would be absurd to expect local governments to acquire wherever they might be found in the city, and, as noted, outright all landmarks in order to protect them: "Public over 400 landmarks and 31 historic districts have been ownership reduces the tax base, burdens the public budget designated pursuant to this plan." (438 U.S. at 132.) with costs of acquisitions and maintenance, and results The court seems to be saying that singling out in- in the preservation of public buildings as museums and dividual properties for landmark designation can be a similar facilities, rather than as economically productive problem in the absence of assurance in the language of features of the urban scene."(438 U.S. 104, at 109, fn 6.) the ordinance and activities of the historic preservation But in upholding the New York City preservation or- commission that all potential individual landmarks will dinance, the Supreme Court by no means found that eventually be given landmark status. There must be every historic preservation ordinance is constitutional. assurance that all property owners similarly situated will The facts of the Penn Central situation and the content be treated similarly by the historic preservation ordinance of the New ;York City Landmarks Preservation Law and receive the equal protection, equal benefit, and equal argued strongly for constitutionality. Penn Central did burden of the historic preservation ordinance. not enter into a long-term lease with the developer of the How would the Penn Central have been decided in a • proposed office building until five months after Grand different factual situation?What if the owner of the prop- Central Terminal was designated a landmark. Nothing erty had clearly been singled out for landmark designa- in the Landmarks Preservation Law prohibited Penn Cen- tion? What if the criteria and process for designation had tral from continuing to use Grand Central Terminal for been written so that only a handful of a great number railroad operations and accompanying retail uses just as of local landmarks were designated? What if the New it had for the previous 65 years. Although Penn Central York City ordinance did not contain anything like a was prohibited from making more lucrative use of the transfer of development rights mechanism to partly corn- property, there was no evidence that Penn Central could pensate property owners burdened by landmark designa- not make a reasonable return from the property in its cur- tion? What if the ordinance had no provision for a deter- rent condition. The court concluded, therefore, that the mination of economic hardship? What if the owner of landmark designation did not interfere with the the property had entered into a development agreement "reasonable investment-backed expectations" of the prior to landmark designation and then his"investment- owner. (438 U.S. at 124.) backed expectation"had been dashed by the application The New York City historic preservation ordinance is of a historic preservation ordinance? What if there real- one against which not many preservation ordinances ly was quite little use of or return from the property in t around the country could measure up: its current condition? All of these questions wait for another case. They are/ While the law does place special restrictions on landmark questions left unresolved by the Penn CentraLdesisionl- properties as a necessary feature to the attainment of its larger objectives, the major theme of the law is to ensure A well-drafted preservation ordinance must deal with the the owners of any such properties both"reasonable return" questions that remain unanswered after Penn Central as on their investments and maximum latitude to use their well as those issues decided by it. parcels for purposes not inconsistent with the preserva- The Penn Central decision has been hailed as a major • tion goals. (438 U.S. at 110.) decision for landmark designation (see, for example, Norman Marcus, "The Grand Slam Grand Central. The New York City ordinance allows property owners Decision"in Ecology Law Quarterly, 1978). Since 1978, affected by landmark designation to transfer development however, zoning and land-use decisions of the United rights to other nearby property they may own. It also States Supreme Court and in many state court decisions provides for a hearing on the questions of economic hard- have taken a turn that puts the legal status of historic , ship. If the owner proves that denial of a Certificate of preservation in almost as much uncertainty in 1983 as Appropriateness will leave him with an insufficient return it was in 1977 before the Penn Central decision. "Inverse from the property in its present condition, the burden condemnation" has come into its own as a remedy for shifts to the city of New York to provide a package of land-use restrictions, and three decisions, San Diego Gas 5 and Electric Co. v. City of San Diego, 450 U.S. 621, 101 of three Chicago buildings were issued demolition per- S.Ct. 1287 (1981); Burrows v. City of Keane, 432 A.2d mits, but the next day the permits were revoked because 15 (N.H. 1982); and Harris Bank and Trust Co. v. Dug- the buildings were being considered by the Chicago Corn- gan, 446 N.E.2d , 95 Ill.2d (1983); are par- mission on Historical and Architectural Landmarks for ticularly troublesome. historic designation. The owners of the property chal- The San Diego Gas &Electric case involved 200 acres lenged the revocation of the permits in the courts, and, purchased by a public utility in San Diego as a possible when the properties were later designated as official nuclear power plant site. At the time of purchase, the Chicago landmarks, they amended their legal action to property was zoned for industrial use or as an agricultural include a claim for inverse condemnation damages. In "holding"area. After purchase, the city rezoned parts of 1981, a circuit court in Cook County entered judgment the property from industrial to agricultural use, increased for the property owners on the inverse condemnation the minimum lot size, reclassified the land as permanent count of the complaint: open space, and then proposed a bond issue in order to It determined that the landmark ordinance, together with purchase the utility company's land for open space use. the city's refusal to issue the permits,deprived Harris(the The bond issue failed in a referendum, but the open space property owner)of all reasonable use of the property and plan and designation remained in effect. constituted a taking requiring payment of just compensa- San Diego Gas & Electric Company claimed that the tion.The court found that 53.65 million would be just corn- rezoning and planning policies of the city of San Diego pensation but did not enter the money judgment because resulted in a"taking"of their property for public use for the city was unwilling to acquire the property and com- which they should be compensated. This is the basic con- pensate Harris therefor. Instead, the court entered a declaratory judgment declaring the landmark ordinance cept of inverse condemnation—a claim that regulation unconstitutional and void. The court also awarded Har- can go_so far as to take all reasonable use of_roperty ris 51,037,849.76 under Section 5 of "An Act to Revise from a private owner and therefore should result in the the Law in Relation to Mandamus"(Ill. Rev. Stat., 1979, payment of mone damages to the.property ownes. Ch.87,Par.5), for the city's wrongful failure to issue the he case worked its way through the courts and even- permits. (446 N.E.2d , 95 I11.2d [19831.) tually to the United States Supreme Court. The precise procedural effect of the Supreme Court's decision was to Although that circuit court decision in Illinois was send the case' tack to a lower court for further pro- muddled on the issue of inverse condemnation because ceedings.Justice Brennan's dissent—in which three other of the court's determination to withhold imposition of dissenting justices joined and with which Justice Rehn- the full money judgment, the inverse condemnation quist was in sympathy, although he agreed with the ma- remedy will be used increasingly by developers seeking jority on the procedural aspects of the case—is quite demolition of officially designated landmarks. A properly i troubling for the future of land-use and historic preser- drafted preservation ordinance—as will be explained vation law. Justice Brennan wrote the majority opinion later—can provide a preservation commission with an supporting historic preservation in the Penn Central deci- opportunity to review the effect of a demolition denial sion of the Supreme Court, but here he supports the pay- on the property owner before the issue of economic hard- i ment of money damages when land-use regulation goes ship reaches the courts. A hearing on the question of so far as to constitute an unconstitutional taking of prop- economic hardship, combined with public incentives for erty.In the course of upholding"inverse condemnation" rehab of designated landmarks, can do much to defuse as a legitimate remedy for overly stringent land-use the inverse condemnation issue before it reaches the regulation, Justice Brennan reaffirms his previous deci- courts.' sion in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York TAILORING THE ORDINANCE TO LOCAL NEEDS City and distinguishes that previous case because the Every historic preservation ordinance should be owner of the terminal was allowed " 'opportunities fur- unique. It should be a specific solution to a particular set ther to enhance not only the Terminal site proper but also of problems faced by a community. A community con- other properties' "as a result of New York City's historic sidering a preservation ordinance, or evaluating the of preservation ordinance (450 U.S. at 648). festiveness of its current ordinance, must ask itself the Legitimization of the inverse condemnation theory in following questions: the San Diego Gas & Electric decision has already prompted a round of state court challenges to land-use • What is the accepted purpose and goal of historic and even historic preservation regulations on a similar preservation in our community? Is it to prevent theory. The Burrows decision of the New Hampshire threatened demolition of one key historic structure? Supreme Court involved the rezoning of 109 acres from Is it to protect a threatened neighborhood or area? agricultural and residential use to open space use. The Is it to prevent continued alteration of historic property owners charged that the regulation was an un- facades? Is it to encourage and promote renovation constitutional"taking"entitling them to inverse condem- of historic structures and neighborhoods? nation money damages. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire agreed and based its decision on the New • Do we have only a few scattered individual historic Hampshire state constitution rather than the federal structures in our community? Constitution. 2. An Annotated List of Decided Court Opinions, by Stephen N. This new interest in inverse condemnation is beginning Dennis,August 1982,is available from the National Trust for Historic to show up in historic preservation cases as well. Owners Preservation,1785 Massachusetts Ave.,N.W.,Washington,DC 20036. 6 •/..,.''' 0." "•• • Are the economic stakes so high that owners of some 4"' ''t historic properties are likely to litigate historic -•'', \.t ,• .; designation? Is there public and private legal talent '`-- ..��I''.� '.., in the community ready, willing, and able to defend the ordinance from attack? Does the municipality ANS , , % = or the localpreservation grouphave the resources -� :,;,a-- j1 :4. to sustain an effective legal defense? pr x. . I Only when a community has gone through that ques- tion> �.- and answer exercise is it ready to have the best local = *� ' preservation ordinance to fit its peculiar needs. The set of answers to those questions will be quite different in *01.•< .,./P11 "..4,;- each community, and every ordinance will therefore be "''•-�'' quite different. There are, however, some basic com- �---..... ponents that almost all preservation ordinances have in common. _ : f i BASIC COMPONENTS OF A PRESERVATION tri ! "I'l j . ji ORDINANCE ,I, L; f i, ,4�; While no two preservation ordinances are alike, most -D M. it contain the following10 component parts: �i ii i� i! P ,,;� :} �l1111 I ` 'l 1. Purpose of the ordinance; �' I ( i, 's;l,�t 1��i t. 2. A statement of powers and authorities; ` F{.,1-1-1 1 • • 3. Creation of a historic preservation commission; ., , , I' ,!i�.'Y 4. Criteria for designation of landmarks and/or ••• a historic districts; 5. Procedures and criteria for nomination and designation of landmarks; Grand Central Terminal, a New York City landmark, 6. Types of actions that are reviewable by the preser- became the focus of a legal battle, the results of which left no vation commission and the legal effect of the doubt as to the constitutionality of historic preservation. review; 7. The criteria applied by the commission to the ac- tion reviewed; • Do we have only one historic neighborhood in which 8. Consideration of the economic effect of designa- our community's historic structures are concen- tion or review of an action; trated? Or do.we have many individual historic 9. Procedures for appeals from a preservation com- structures and many historic neighborhoods? mission decision; and • If our community has a historic neighborhood, is the 10. Fines and penalties for violation of ordinance predominant use commercial or residential?Or is it a combination of the two? provisions. • Is the threat to our historic structures or areas a pres- To understand the preservation ordinance concept, ent one? Or is it a vague future threat of redevelop- each component should be considered in some detail. (See ment and demolition? Appendix E for the complete text of a proposed, but not • Is there a general community understanding and Yet adopted, ordinance for Liberty, Missouri.) sympathy with the purposes, techniques, and pro- Purpose of the Ordinance cesses of zoning in our community? Is there con- The purpose of the local preservation ordinance must ' fidence in our community's local plan commission be clearly stated. This is essential to give it the proper and zoning board of appeals?Are our plan commis- legal basis and to tie historic preservation efforts to sion and zoning board sympathetic to historic legitimate governmental functions. A review of state case preservation? law is especially important before drafting the purpose • Do we have the available talent to staff yet another section.The language of any key decisions of the courts volunteer civic committee?Or is our community so upholding historic preservation efforts and stating its small that it makes sense to give existing planning legitimate purposes should be repeated or paraphrased. and zoning committees additional duties concerning Helpful language in the Penn Central decision of the historic preservation? United States Supreme Court should also be included. 7 In some states, aesthetics alone may not be a proper immediate area and neighboring areas for residential, basis for zoning or historic preservation. The historic business, and other purposes,and by so doing impair the preservation ordinance, therefore, should always be tied benefits of occupancy of existing property in such areas, to some other legitimate governmental purpose in addi- impair the stability and value of both improved and unim- proved real property in such areas,prevent the appropriate tion to protection of the attractiveness or historic preservation and development of such areas, produce character of the community. It could be tourism, if the undesirable conditions affecting the health, safety, corn- historic resources of the community are a legitimate at- fort,and general welfare of the inhabitants of the city,and traction to tourists. It could be promotion of renovation destroy the proper relationship between the taxable value and rehabilitation and avoidance of urban decay. It could of real property in such areas and the cost of municipal be conservation and enhancement of property values. services provided therefor.It is the purpose of this article The Madison, Wisconsin, preservation ordinance has to preserve these irreplaceable areas and places of historical a purpose section that is similar to those found in many significance for the benefit and enjoyment of the public other ordinances around the country: and to prevent the previously enumerated and other harm- ful effects on such areas and places and thus to promote (1) Purpose and Intent. It is hereby declared a matter of , and protect the health, safety, comfort, and the general public policy that the protection, enhancement, welfare of the community, to promote the public conve- perpetuation, and use of improvements of special nience and prosperity, to conserve the value of the character or special historical interest or value is a buildings, and to encourage the most appropriate use of public necessity and is required in the interest of the such real property within the city. (San Antonio, Texas, health, prosperity, safety, and welfare of the people. Ordinance, Section 42-112.) The purpose of this section is to: Other cities accomplish the same thing in a"whereas" (a) Effect and accomplish the protection, enhance- section that precedes the actual text of the preservation ment,and perpetuation of such improvements and ordinance. For example, Dallas, Texas, in adopting its of districts that represent or reflect elements of the landmark preservation ordinance in 1973, preceded it city's cultural,social,economic,political,and ar with the following statement of its concern: chitectural history; (b) Safeguard the city's historic and cultural heritage, WHEREAS, the legislature of the state of Texas has as embodied and reflected in such landmarks and recognized the importance of protecting and preserving historic districts; places and areas of historical and cultural importance and significance by. . .empowering cities to adopt regulations (c) Stabilize and improve property values; and restrictions for the protection of such places and areas; (d) Foster civic pride in the beauty and noble and ac- complishments of the past; WHEREAS, the city council realizes that the city of (e) Protect and enhance the city's attractions to Dallas is one of the largest cities in the state and a focal point in the historical,cultural,and architectural develop- residents,tourists, and visitors and serve as a sup- ment of Texas; and port and stimulus to business and industry; (f) Strengthen the economy of the city; WHEREAS,within the city of Dallas there are a number of areas, places, buildings, structures, works of art, and (g) Promote the use of historic districts and landmarks other objects having significant historical,archaeological, for the education,pleasure,and welfare of the peo- or cultural interest and value that reflect the heritage of ple of the city.(Madison,Wisconsin, Ordinance, the city; and Section 33.01.) WHEREAS, the rapid changes in population,economic functions,and land-use activities in the city have increas- San Antonio,Texas, has quite different language, but ingly threatened to uproot or destroy many significant it very accurately reflects the concerns of the communi- buildings, land, areas, or districts having important ty that led to the adoption of the historic preservation historical, architectural, archaeological, or cultural interest ordinance: and values that reflect the heritage of the city, and, once uprooted or destroyed, their distinctiveness is gone forever; The council hereby finds that the city of San Antonio is and internationally known and has become a worldwide synonym for beauty,friendliness, and historical excellence WHEREAS, it is desirable to preserve these reminders as an example of the confluence of cultures in the New of Dallas's culture and heritage for the enlightenment of World;that while many persons who travel to or through its citizens; and San Antonio do so for business reasons, a growing number WHEREAS,commercial activity and economic prosperi- of visitors come from far_and near for the purpose of en- ty of the city are enhanced by the preservation of the city's joying the aesthetic, educational, and historical features character as portrayed by its historic landmarks.(Dallas, of our city; that areas and places of historical significance Texas, Ordinance Number 14012, March 1973.) are being seriously endangered by repairs and construc- tion of inferior quality and appearance, and by alterations that are incompatible with their preservation and enjoy Some preservation ordinances are adopted for quite ment; that poor quality of design or incongruity and ap- limited purposes. If so, the ordinance should state clear- pearance of the buildings erected in such areas or in the ly the narrow reason.Claremont,California,has a special development and maintenance of structures,landscaping, zoning classification called a Historical District. Some signs,and general appearance affect the desirability of the types of land uses are specifically permitted within the 8 . 4 - i;,-. - -PURSE6ULMhalesaleFURNITURE: . jilt AAA '' , — ! fit``,+.,. L -•,.: All 4 •k� j ; A 6,6. rI • i/ i _ • a �� i e • v O Dallas, Texas, adopted its landmark _— o P f i1i '-- preservation ordinance in 1973. Some mayyi examples of the city's historic buildings: - 9 :' ntop right, the Wilson Block; far right, a • —- West End District warehouse; and, hl • o bottom right, the World Exhibits _ �I I t�' Building at the state fairgrounds. --c = . 4:.5.. district, others are permitted only as conditional uses, and is quite detailed and specific on the powers and authori- some uses are prohibited outright. There are special ty that may be exercised by local historic preservation stipulations on minimum lot size, minimum lot area per commissions. Other state legislation is quite general and dwelling unit, lot width and depth, setbacks, side yards, vague in the granting of authority to local government. height, parking, and required open space within the For example, the state historic preservation enabling district. Claremont quite clearly sets out the limited pur- legislation for cities in California provides a quite brief pose of this ordinance as follows: statement of local government authority: This ordinance is intended to preserve the amenity and The legislative body may acquire property for the preser- unusual character of development within this district by vation or development of a historical landmark. It may encouraging the conservation of structurally sound existing also acquire property for the development of recreational structures and by encouraging flexibility and variety in purposes and facilities in connection therewith. future development.In order to preserve the single-family The legislative body may provide for places, buildings, appearance within this district, uses shall be prohibited structures,works of art,and other objects having a special which are incompatible in the district or could more ap- character or special historical or aesthetic interest or value, propriately be located outside this district.These regula special conditions or regulations for their protection, tions are intended to promote the maintenance of this liv enhancement,perpetuation, or use, which may include ap- ing environment without creating numerous nonconform propriate and reasonable control of the use or appearance ing structures or uses. (Claremont, California, Ordinance, of neighboring private property within public view, or Chapter 1, Part 5, adopted August 27, 1976.) both. (California Government Code, Section 37361.) Powers and Authority Once the limits of authority have been determined, the' The authority given a historic preservation commis- preservation ordinances must specifically list which of the , sion is established by state law.The authority to protect authorized powers are being granted to the local govern- historic landmarks and districts may vary from one type ment and the historic preservation commission.This list of governmental unit to another. A county may have of powers should be drafted quite carefully. It will be the quite different authority from a municipality when it operating instructions for the historic preservation corn- comes to historic preservation. For example, in Illinois mission, and there must be no ambiguity in the authori- there is specific state enabling legislation authorizing ty given it.Some ordinances, such as that of Enfield, Con- municipalities to create historic preservation commissions necticut, simply say that the historic preservation corn- and adopt preservation ordinances. There is no such mission"shall exercise the powers and responsibilities im- specific enabling legislation for counties. In some states, posed upon a Historic District Commission by the pro- home rule communities and non-home rule communities visions of the Connecticut General Statutes." (Enfield, may have quite different authority, and, similarly, the Connecticut, Ordinance, Section 7.) This hardly helps authority of charter cities and noncharter cities may also clarify the precise limit of the powers to be exercised by differ. a preservation commission, especially if state enabling An essential first step in the preparation of a local legislation is also vaguely worded. preservation ordinance is a thorough understanding of Other ordinances do not have a specific list of powers the legal basis of preservation in the state. This should and authorities but rather allow the text of the ordinance include a review of state cases interpreting the authority to speak for itself.Each section of the ordinance provides of historic preservation commissions. a specific power and responsibility. Some state enabling legislation, such as that in Illinois, It seems better, however, to list the powers and 9 • authorities at tree beginning of the preservation nrrlinance to the Commission that the interest of the public in and to explain each power and responsibility later in a the landmark or historic district is in need of protec- separate section. For example, the Rockford, Illinois, tion through the exercise of litigation.The court may, preservation ordinance gives the Rockford Historical in its discretion, assess attorneys' fees and costs Preservation Commission the following powers, duties, against a defendant to such action; and and responsibilities: (14) To identify and certify for historical preservation pur- poses such organization or organizations to which fee Subject to state law and the procedures prescribed titles or lesser interests in property may be granted hereunder, the Rockford Historical Preservation Commis- by recommendation of the Commission.(Rockford, sion shall have and may exercise the following powers, Illinois, Ordinance, Section 34-3.) duties, and responsibilties: (1) To accept such gifts, grants, and money, as may be ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMISSION appropriate for the purposes of this ordinance. Such In this section, such procedural matters as the number money may be expended for publishing maps and of members of the historic preservation commission, brochures,hiring staff persons or consultants, and for terms of members, any required expertise that commis- performing such other functions as are appropriate for sion members must have in historic preservation, the the purposes of this ordinance; and regularity of meetings,naming of officers, and voting pro- (2) To conduct a survey of Rockford buildings, places, cedures must be dealt with. There are few set rules for or areas for,the purpose of identifying those of historic any of these matters, although state law once again must significance; and be analyzed to determine requirements of state enabling (3) To recommend that the city council designate by or- legislation and minimal procedural requirements required dinance certain improvements as landmarks, if they by state judicial decisions. qualify as defined hereunder; and Preservation commissions typically have five to nine (4) To recommend that the city council designate by or members; an odd number of members helps to prevent dinance certain places and areas as historic districts, tie votes.Terms usually vary from three to five years and if they qualify as defined hereunder; and should also be staggered to make sure that experienced members will always be serving. (5) To determine an appropriate system of markers for A requirement that some members of a historic preser- designated landmarks or historic districts; and vation commission have a particular expertise is a popular (6) To prepare and publish maps, brochures, and other and good one. A few preservation ordinances handle the descriptive material about Rockford's landmarks and qualification issue by requiring nominations to come from historic districts; and organizations with an interest in historic preservation. (7) To cooperate with and enlist the assistance of per- For example, the New Orleans ordinance establishing the sons, organizations,corporations,foundations, and Vieux Carre Historic District reads as follows: public agencies in matters involving historic preser- The members of the Commission shall be appointed by vation, renovation, rehabilitation, and reuse; and the mayor as follows:one from a list of two persons recom- (8) To advise and assist owners of landmarks or historic mended by the Louisiana Historical Society; one from a structures on physical and financial aspects of preser- list of two persons recommended by the curators of the vation, renovation, rehabilitation, and reuse; and Louisiana State Museum; one from a list of two persons recommended by the Association of Commerce of the city; (9) To review and make decisions on any application for three qualified architects from a list of six qualified ar- a Certificate of Appropriateness and to require the chitects recommended by the New Orleans Chapter of the presentation of such plans, drawings,elevations, and American Institute of Architects, and three at large. (New other information as may be necessary to make such Orleans, Louisiana,Vieux Carre Ordinance,Section 65-2.) decisions; and (10) To adopt, publish, and make available bylaws for More typical is a provision somewhat like that of the conduct of Commission meetings not inconsis Louisville, Kentucky, which requires all members to have tent with the"Administrative Review Act of 1945," an interest in historic preservation and a few to be Chapter 110, Section 264 et. seq., of the Illinois Re- specialists: vised Statutes; and Of the members to be appointed by the mayor at least one (11) To make recommendations to the city council, pur- shall be an architect; at least one shall be a historian suant to procedures prescribed hereunder,relative to qualified in the field of historic preservation; at least one the exercise of eminent domain powers; and shall be a licensed real estate broker; at least one shall be an attorney;and all members shall have a known interest (12) To certify this ordinance with the Illinois Office of in historic landmarks and districts preservation. Preservation Services of the Illinois Department of (Louisville,Kentucky,Preservation Ordinance,Section 2 Conservation and with the Secretary of the United [a].) States Department of the Interior so as to qualify historic structures under this ordinance as historic In small towns in particular it may be difficult to find structures under the"Tax Reform Act of 1976,"Sec- enough citizens with the time, interest, and background tion 2124; and in historic preservation to fill the slots'on a preservation (13) To act as conservator of,and therefore sue on behalf commission. A preservation ordinance must be careful- of,any landmark or historic district when it appears ly drafted, therefore, so as not to make the required ex- 10 i, pertise an impossible one to find. Every effort should be the proposed designation, together with its recommenda- made, however, to appoint persons with a demonstrated tion of approval,rejection,or modification of the proposed interest in historic preservation to the preservation designation.The recommendation shall become part of the Icommission. official record concerning the proposed designation and Another crucial consideration here is the role of the shall be submitted by the Landmarks Commission along preservation commission vis-a-vis other local government with its recommendation concerning the proposed designa entities with responsibility for land-use decisions, such as tion to Council.The Landmarks Commission may make such modifications, changes, and alterations concerning the plan commission or zoning board of appeals. This the proposed designation as it deems necessary in con- relationship must be dealt with quite carefully if sideration of the recommendation by the Planning Com- designated landmarks or historic districts are official zon- mission. (Cleveland Landmarks Commission Ordinance, ing districts—in the community.' There may be little Section 161.04 [b] [1].) discussion of historic preservation in the state zoning The New York City Landmarks Commission, upon enabling legislation. Plan commissions and zoning boards designating a building or district, submits a copy of its of appeals may be specifically mentioned in the state designation to the New York City Board of Estimate, the enabling legislation while historic preservation commis- Department of Buildings, the City Planning Commission, sion are not. That is the case in Illinois where the only the Board of Standards and Appeals, and other city mention of historic preservation in the state zoning enabl- departments. The City Planning Commission then has ing act for municipalities is a mere statement that one of the proper purposes of local zoning is historic preserva- 30 days to submit a report "with respect to the relation tion. Plan commissions and zoning boards of appeals are of such designation or amendment thereof to the master mentioned but not preservation commissions. Therefore, plan, the zoning resolution, projected public im- most Illinois communities that have adopted historic. provements, and any plans for the renewal of the area preservation ordinances based on the zoning enabling act involved." (New York City Landmarks Ordinance, Sec- carefully link the responsibilities of the preservation com- tion 207-2.0 g [1].) mission to that of the plan commission or zoning board of appeals.In Wayne, Illinois, which has a zoning-based historic preservation ordinance, review of proposed alterations or demolitions affecting property within the The Arcade, Cleveland, Ohio designated historic district by the Wayne Historic Sites • -'' is+`• •Sil �,t. {• t� N. Commission is only advisory to the Plan Commission. .. ` " fss'� vim, �• .�f `-:�liR_ - •�. The Historic Sites Commission acts as a special body of ` y. .• Ii! _ 's1�3j" �qf . experts to the Plan Commission, which has the ultimate . '7 • ^.iiii''� .- decision to approve or deny a Certificate of �... ' a>--��r,... Appropriateness. •:' `� -.-f fl o`` s'= °"' Another way of assuring a linkage between the ac- ,� r • lr,l e tivities of the preservation commission and those of other ' i `'' .=-' s r'r t �•, "i planning agencies is to require some members of a plan • ,`A i 3t,,,�--,,�. 'W."'.,�. .; Ate commissi on or zoningboard of appeals or zoningcom- \1--`:'¢ w t..! . C . • '4,-,.. - PP • -.1�, er- ,�.. � • � ti �. ,G�.,, mission to serve on the historic preservation commission `� v ,;4. • � f 'as well. This may be done by making them ex officio, `" cif �:z•- T'' ' ' _ r• .;M:•4' nonvoting members, or they may be full and active , �, ,J=r ..III , members of the commission. Alexandria, Virginia, re- ' 1 I j i t it T a tn'- „ . �- }I '_ quires that the city planning commission elect one of its tqt. • members to serve on the preservation commission. So do f . j, •• i� '7'J'}'!',,,,„1-, `- - ; : .s 1 Charleston, South Carolina, and many other commis- '� r"h►. 1 sions around the country. ^''#.- �' ' Pi? • ` _�= —'7' Cleveland, Ohio,requires its Landmarks Commission • ','.IrN F. . ' µ,��..,4 " _ to undertake the following procedure whenever a land- 4 .& , : ,•" ; _ • :,..t.t ; 1 mark or landmark district is proposed: -'" r* , * „1 '� ,t•1p- ? .y.sof -.j -�' ,-tip:-,4%. *?, ' The Landmark Commission shall advise the City Planning -_ Commission of the proposed designation and secure from L. - t ,. the Planning Commission its recommendation with respect •`�',l +'i �;. to the relationship of the proposed designation to the corn- ,_ t, / I. '_ - yt' prehensiveplan of the city, its opinion as to the effect of 1 ' ! `- i' " ti i !" ' " P j r .� , t the proposed designation upon the surrounding ' t - I ,f neighborhood,and its opinion and recommendation as to .- • any other planning consideration that may be relevant to - � li .,�� ' -• , • 3. It may indeed be possible to designate individual landmarks as = . ' zoning"districts"without violating the prohibitions against spot zon-4.. �y -_ i ing.The key consideration is to assure that all potential landmarks are, tf. ' or will be, designated according to some plan for identifying and ?F►-•• nominating all potential landmarks. II _" 'r .4'• £' '# - I , 1 j[ • .?t,, .- _ .' f I ..,., '.::r} - '' ;- - '',% . +3 <ie - fir f x •} Fa *,,..:-.7•y -,-,,1 -; -,,,-',•;.-' • -r, '3 _ y g firz 7pA ` . - 73 s,..' 1ia e Y .i'=$ , . $ r rF ..� l ev y.. ' i. : 2. 3y . •a '''' < -., " a a,4 ' p '4 g v b.> *�1 L ' o : mi, i- u *r• •r, -f-',.:v a � ' `7..,sf `^ .:-,.Ly 5'` 1.; rA-- . `sK -',. n r oS' > t S-- li�, -xt. .Y .FiiY^ ;;• 0 .r S3▪ ztf y :* 1:•V 41 � � , ;d •Y hitte, K ' i yc i-'2';'-: S } { t-� • t/c. ",r;�ell' -n L W � 7 a LL x"fi} r� .A. 7rt. h �: Zp 1T r.k yY a ap r' ..,..,::::: 1 '--.TE-1-1:::', 17 -.:;;;;; ,.:::::::::L.:- '.f.'.4.`'...--tz•I'.'-'-',:i.i;:r'i?r-'''---7.---=.:?-4‘sti.'-'•'..'',•','-" A... s=",:- ." -.. --...7”.g...S‘,•;_10.'..,,C---74;;;;; Iii,-4:.-,yic-cro',:`-::,..,,,....„,- -,•-•,,,r-:-..,..17,,-;;;---- " 00/-..''' ./ ▪ \• N.'t 5v11 t.,'x.of t* .r r'W. k z6-.4.7u 7.1, .•;'hh�'.",,.}f' y . i f fi♦ s,;,-i wha Y p 1 S E.N.1'Y J i.• -. k.. _ s \ • t •\ ..... 1 %;:1"--.1 i , , • ir insau k�•''T d ... _ '.I .i7=y `1. ^',.-4_.... ♦ MH`:.,, '`..,,..._ . L'* Y S 1'_ i '�''•. S r 3 1},�L: .♦,.' .. !h`� . + a 4•.!►.{ - '{ Nti:` • j •cs;` r..,., , • • q d ' 7 Y Part 2. Criteria for Designation of Landmarks and Historic Districts Some communities, especially smaller communities 5. Its portrayal of the environment of a group of people with only one historic neighborhood or a few scattered in an era of history characterized by a distinctive ar- landmarks, may actually designate the historic district chitectural style. or all the individual landmarks in the ordinance estab- 6. Its embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an lishing the preservation commission as well as outlin- architectural type or specimen. ing the additional duties of the commission. More com- mon is an:ordinance that simply establishes a preserva- 7. Its identification as the work of an architect or master tion commission and the criteria for a continuing survey builder whose individual work has influenced the 'y of the community for the nomination of landmarks and development of the city of Chicago. historic districts. The criteria must be consistent with any 8. Its embodiment of elements of architectural design, state enabling legislation.' detail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a The standards used by the Chicago Commission on significant architectural innovation. Historical and Architectural Landmarks, adopted in the 9. Its relationship to other distinctive areas that are eligi- :r_,- 1960s, typify good standards and are used with slight ble for preservation according to a plan based on a variations in form in many other ordinances around the historic, cultural, or architectural motif. country. When considering whether a nominated land- 10. Its unique location or singular physical characteristic mark or historic district should be designated, the representing an established and familiar visual feature 's` Chicago Commission looks at the following factors: of a neighborhood, community, or the city of 1. Its character,interest,or value as part of the develop Chicago. (Chicago Landmarks Ordinance, Section ment, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the city 21.63 [b].) of Chicago, state of Illinois, or the United States. Many communities working with a basic set of stan- 2. Its location as a site of a significant historic event. dards similar to that in Chicago have grafted onto it ad- ditional standards to fit special landmarks or historic 3. Its identification with a person or persons who districts they believe it might be necessary to designate. significantly contributed to the culture and develop- ment of the city of Chicago. For example, Seattle, Washington, adds the following i: standard to a set otherwise quite similar to the one in 4. Its exemplification of the cultural, economic, social, Chicago: or historic heritage of the city of Chicago. A structure, group of structures, site, or district may be 4. Communities with only one historic district or a few landmarks designated for preservation as a landmark or landmark district if it [has]: :---.1 that are designating them at the same time the preservation commis- sion sion is established should carefully summarize the historic or architec- rural character of the designated district or landmarks in the preserva- ztion ordinance. This character must also be carefully related to the Geographic Importance general criteria for landmark designation in the state enabling legislation. (8) By being part of or related to a square,park,or other distinctive area,should be developed or preserved ac- cording to a plan based on a historic,cultural, or ar- chitectural motif; or . li RI a Frank Lloyd Wright's Robie House,left, is one of Chicago's (9) Owing to its unique location or singular physical = most famous architectural landmarks. characteristic, represents an established or familiar ii visual feature of the neighborhood, community, or ► ` 13 city; (Seattle, Washington, Landmarks Ordinance No. 102229, Section 6.) 1 An ordinance proposed in Highland Park,Illinois, but 1 ,---------2. not yet adopted, also builds upon a set of standards similar to Chicago's by adding the following criterion: . j ` (9) Its character as a particularly fine or unique example St y OIL t of a utilitarian structure or group of such structures, 4k ' - iler- including,but not limited to,farm houses,gas stations or other commercial structures, with a high level of integrity or architectural significance. (Highland Park, ,,,,�._ ..� �f' �- - ., Illinois, proposed ordinance, Section 24.025.) �\ �r.- ' _ ar, NOMINATION AND DESIGNATION11 : _ O W . While there is remarkably little variation between or- . 7 f , -'`-__ - :� �l/%/ dinances in the criteria used for designation, there are •' - ,, : >:1 '#/, striking differences in the process for nomination and ', __SZ � FVil t I�I designation of landmarks in historic districts, although "i � _ fi ' 0� N,� a almost all require,that the designation be by ordinance 1, 't '� 3,,,> `;, - i' ."-: i/ 1 of the city council or village board. For the landmark j i - I ` \ designation to have the force of law, it must be passed —`li ", j .j ' ' by the local legislative body. = t AI , h Limitations on Nomination ,=, ., " . ,. '� , r ' .\"� 1 The question of who may nominate a landmark or I� C i ;1► 'f;,Lj .' , _--w 1, historic district is an important one. A few preservation i ordinances allow any person to nominate a landmark or 1 V i. historic district. Much more common is a limitation on Tit 1 • /' - nominations. Often only the historic preservation corn- • ission, a member of the city council, or the owner of } ' proposed landmark may submit a nomination. The - outh Bend, Indiana, historic preservation ordinance :�I• ''r' ` - allows nominations to be submitted by any member of t- ` - t the city council, by a petition signed by 50 percent or - ' R - • `I --+ more of the property owners in the nominated district — '- ` C. or landmark, or by the plan commission. St. Louis, • „� �; t -. ;. Missouri, requires that nominating petitions come from __;,,,..a.,,-..,:_-_,ti*- , _ '_� r ` -• either a majority of the property owners within a pro- ' '''�. .- _ w - -• posed historic district or from the alderman who t :- - 4 � i represents the district.Boulder, Colorado, extends the op- t . , - portunity to nominate to the city council, the landmarks a `= = - board, the owners of the property to be designated, and Q -'- . to any organization"with a recognized interest in historic ` preservation." (Boulder, Colorado, Ordinance, Section New York City had a comprehensive program for surveying 51-302.)In Boston, "the mayor, and 10 registered voters the city to find potential landmarks and then designating them.This building, in the South Street Seaport area, is of the city, or any (preservation) commission member undergoing an extensive face-lift. may petition to the commission to designate a landmark, landmark district, architectural conservation district, or protection area."(Boston, Massachusetts, Landmarks Or- dinance, Section 4.) historic district to consent before that district may be Owner Consent designated. This raises the issue of owner consent, one of the most In the 1970s, the concept of owner consent prior to difficult issues facing historic preservation today. Con- designation seemed to be losing ground. That changed trary to popular belief, nn state law recpair t with the enactment of the federal Historic Preservation unanimous owner consent be given prior to landmark Act Amendments of 1980, which, for the first time, re- designation.Nor is there any requiremst in I Jnithcl States quired owner consent prior to listing of a structure or constitutional law that owner consent be given prier to district on the National Register of Historic Places. The I historic desi nation. Yet many, but by no means most, owner of an individually nominated property must now historic preservation ordinances require that owner con- consent in writing prior to National Register listing. If , sent be secured prior to landmark designation, and many 51 percent or more of the property owners within a pro- require some percentage of owners within a proposed posed National Register district formally object in writing 14 • 1 to the designation, the district will not be listed on the 25 percent of the property owners within a historic district National Register of Historic Places. should show sufficient interest on the part of all proper- . That change in the National Register rules has caused ty owners. many communities to consider similar owner consent re- quirements in their preservation ordinances. Again, Many preservation ordinances authorize a preserva- however, it must be stated that there is nothing in state lion commission to conduct a survey of the community or federal constitutional law that requires such owner to find potential landmarks and historic districts. Some consent. In many ways, too, the concept of owner con- even require a survey before historic districts or land- sent is contrary to usual rules that apply in land use and {; marks may be designated. This survey is especially im-� Izoning. Certainly notice of a d designation, and portant in the case of individual landmark designation. '� an opportunity to comment upon it, is a procedural re- The Penn Central decision of the Supreme Court em- quirement that must be given all property owners.When that New York City had a comprehensive gro- an area is proposed for a rezoning that will drastically phasized for surf in the cityCto andpotentialmprelandmark- - affect permitted uses, development density, building gramsurveying heights, and yard and setback requirements, there is andthen designating them.This was critical, in the court's universally no requirement that property owners must view, to assuring the equal protection and equal burden approve. The concept of owner consent could interfere of the laws to all owners of potential landmarks. Ar- with the need.for comprehensive land-use planning for bitrarily singling out a handful of properties in a corn- the entire community.The same argument against owner munity for landmark designation without some assurance consent when zoning regulations are involved applies that all potential landmarks have been, or at least some- day will be, considered by the preservation commission with equal force to historic preservation ord protectquitecertainly the Thepreservation ordinance in Galesburg, Illinois, has historic or architectural significance of a landmark or the following language concerning a survey: district for the benefit of the entire community. The wishes of the owner should be considered but should not The Commission shall conduct,within the corporate limits be allowed to frustrate legitimate public purposes. of the city of Galesburg,a survey from which all buildings Most of the more than 800 preservation commissions and structures shall be classified and designated on the around the country solicit owner opinion but do not re- Historical and Architectural Building Map to be reviewed by the City Council and made part of a series of official quire owner consent. Some have adopted procedures maps.Such buildings and structures shall be divided into quite similar to the new National Register procedures— three(3)categories,the first two of which are not mutually that is, owner consent is required prior to designation of exclusive: an individual landmark, and opposition by more than 50 percent of the owners within a proposed district may A. Historically significant; stop district designation. B. Architecturally significant; At least two states, Alabama and Connecticut, require C. Noncompatible: a building(s), structure(s), or ob- ject(s)a specified percentage of owners to consent before historic ject(s) which has not historical and architectural districts may be designated. In Connecticut, 75 percent significance. (Galesburg, Illinois, Historic architectural of all property owners must approve a proposed district. tion Ordinance, No. 79-671, Section .032112.) (Conn. Gen. Stat. Rev. Section 7-147b [g].) Alabama state law requires that 60 percent of the property owners Berkeley, California, requires that landmarks or within a proposed historic preservation district request historic districts be designated only from lists compiled designation in writing(H.2095, Alabama, 1971 session), by its preservation commission: but this applies only to cities with populations of between The Commission shall: (1)After the effective date of this 135,000 and 0 people. ordinance undertake to establish and maintain a list of The differencence between a required owner consent pro- structures, sites, and areas having a special historical, ar vision and a petition by a specified percentage of prop- chitectural, or aesthetic interest or value.This list may in erty owners before a preservation district may be dude single structures or sites, portions of structures, established should be kept clear. Consent by even 50 per- groups of structures, man-made or natural landscape cent of the owners within a historic district usually is quite elements,works of art,or integrated combinations thereof. difficult to obtain. Few people will sign their names to After public hearings,the Commission may designate land- anything, especially something that describes a new law marks and historic districts from said list. (Berkeley, that they may not be able to completely understand. It California, Ordinance, Section 2(g].) ' has been reported that in Connecticut, where 75 percent Some communities appoint special technical advisory of the property owners must approve a proposed district, groups to undertake this initial survey and screening pro- 21 proposed historic districts in 17 towns were rejected cess. The Chicago Commission on Historical and Ar- between 1962 and 1975.5 A petition, in contrast, shows chitectural Landmarks has appointed an advisory group a sufficient level of interest on the part of property owners to create a pipeline for future designations.The advisory to justify consideration by a historic preservation corn- board searches the city for possible landmarks and mission. The requirement of a petition by 15 percent to historic districts and composes a list of potential land- 5. Wiedl, Michael F. III, "Historic District Ordinances,"in 8 Con- marks and historic districts that it presents to the full com- necticut Law Review, 230. mission for its action. 15 A Preservation Plan ?=_: Historic preservation should properly be considered as --- r - � one element of a community's general land-use control ...� • mechanism. As such, it should be carefully integrated , with any comprehensive general plan of the communi- � t. ty. Many states require that a community have a corn- prehensive plan to accompany its zoning ordinance and ••- subdivision regulations. Sometimes this plan is required . to have a preservation component. Other states simply - -7 n+ make comprehensive planning a possible but not man- , datory part of a city's land-use control mechanism. ..•"` •"`` ' A state's case law concerning the necessity for corn- , o; 1:r • prehensive planning when land-use and zoning matters •• ! i are considered must be researched before a preservation gll ordinance is implemented. Any implications for historic i preservation from that case law concerning the need for . `' . ''esED;;o;si;c�4 a preservation component should be carefully considered. '�r --_ The Preservation Commission in Evanston, Illinois,has 'fr.` UD SE "�'�? --- adopted a preservation plan to complement its preserva- ;. - " • Egc., tion ordinance. Evanston's General Comprehensive Plan - " RETAIL Fnil} of 1974 had as one objective, "the preservation of those • PER homes that exhibit architectural and historical value"and assistance for"all residents in obtaining a basic knowledge and the legal and financial resources needed"for conser- - ' vation of the community's housing. Following the General Comprehensive Plan of 1974, the Evanston Plan • ./ Commission urged the city council to adopt a preserva- a_ mor tion ordinance to implement the preservation goals of the v.- . �- '' ;� ,9-'"V;;L'�' general plan.An Evanston Preservation Commission was r >�Fy �: pii"fork ; ,r ` . duly established by ordinance in 1975. In 1980, the t; wj."x Evanston Preservation Commission paused to evaluate '.•4;'-� , .;y r - : " its work to date and to develop a specific Preservation '� f - Plan for the community that would build upon its past 1 - y � A _ ------- work and set out a process for fulfilling its long-term ob- y : ,. •n•-- — .. , jectives. The Evanston Preservation Plan identified four d w' - �`�s �- ":16, 's long-range goals of the Preservation Commission, as- a --_,; '' sessed past progress to meet those goals, and made a series a , - -. te; 1 ,..- of recommendations for future implementation of the : ? ...."1• _+* .a goals. Included in the recommendations was a set of Pioneer Square, Seattle detailed proposals for amendments to strengthen the Evanston historic preservation ordinance.This included authority to designate districts and a binding rather than advisory review of alterations and demolition affecting Most preservation ordinances provide some form of review designated landmarks and districts. (Portions of the of physical changes that might destroy or compromise the preservation plan for Evanston are contained in Appen- integrity of the district.The public is often informed of such dix A.) impending actions. Nashville,Tennessee,has gone through an evaluation of the activities of its preservation commission similar to that in Evanston. The result in Nashville has not been a formal preservation plan but a report that is quite Dallas, Texas, also has a Historic Preservation Plan similar to a preservation plan in many ways. It sum- issued in June, 1981,and prepared by the Historic Land- marizes past preservation activities, proposes ad- mark Preservation Committee and the city's Department ministrative changes to make preservation more effective of Urban Planning. in designated districts, proposes improvements to the 'I present historic preservation ordinance, and even pro- REVIEWABLE ACTIONS poses amendments to Tennessee state enabling legislation The heart of any preservation ordinance is the section to improve local preservation efforts. That type of summarizing the actions affecting landmarks and analysis and report can function just as well as a formal- designated historic districts that are reviewable by a ly adopted preservation plan if a city council agrees to historic preservation commission. Some preservation or- implement the recommendations. (The summary of the dinances make landmark designation honorific only: a recommendations in the Nashville report is contained in plaque is put on a property or a certificate is issued to Appendix B.) a property owner, and the preservation commission has 16 no real power to review any future actions affecting the cant interior features that contribute to the historic or ar- landmark.Most preservation ordinances go much beyond chitectural character of the landmark. that. They provide some form of review of physical The most frequently reviewed actions are "exterior' changes that might destroy or compromise the historic alterations requiring a building permit." Attaching the or architectural integrity of the designated landmark or review process to procedures for building permit applica- district. tion is an easy way to assure compliance with preserva- 1 Every preservation ordinance must answer two ques- tion review procedures.This is typically done by requir- tions raised by this concept. What actions should be ing the building department to forward all applications reviewed, and how should those actions be defined?How for building permits that involve exterior work on a land- strong should the review authority of the preservation mark or within a historic district to the preservation corn- ' ' commission be? mission for its review and certification. The language in Most preservation ordinances limit review to exterior the Seattle, Washington, preservation ordinance is typical actions only. Some further limit it to exterior actions visi- of that found in countless preservation ordinances around ble from a public way. This means that additions or the country: alterations on the rear of a structure normally would not All applications to the Superintendent for a permit involv- be reviewable.This may raise problems concerning what ing landmarks or landmark districts shall be forwarded im- is or is not visible from a street.A few ordinances around mediately by the Superintendent to the Board. Not- the country.even include interior alterations as subject withstanding any other provision of law, the Superinten- to review, o'r at least interior alterations affecting signifi- dent shall not permit any alteration,demolition,construc- tion, reconstruction, restoration, remodeling, or any material change in appearance to be carried out on a land- mark or in a landmark district except pursuant to a cer- , Boulder, Colorado tificate of approval issued by the Board. (Seattle, Washington, Ordinance, No. 102229 Section 8 [a].) ►s There is a serious problem in limiting preservation com- mission review to actions requiring a building permit on- ly. Many types of actions that might significantly affect • the historic or architectural character of a landmark may not need a building permit. For example, it may be quite permissible in most communities to remove architectural ME detail such as fretwork, door and window moldings; or . porch railings, and install aluminum siding over clap- +r • . . , board without obtaining a building permit. Many com- Y.,� munities, too, are concerned about gaudy paint colors „'""4. ` :,,{ ,- .�:< :--rase-.... in historic districts, and painting almost never is an ac- jrr_.r r c.:�, •k r1. ...,; tivity requiring a building permit.That has caused many ";'` , ; communities to look beyond the building permit process 7 =� �,� '4445 It.-# NI �-- and to define those specific types of actions that should ., ,,. r be reviewed by a historic preservation commission. Such • 'X 3--' • "' '"i""��.• C:", ' attempts usually have two elements: first, definitions of i :=�.- h . • • key terms such as alteration, construction, demolition, fir'' ' "'" ._ ue,' and removal; and, second, a nonexhaustive list of the . =�,' 1 1 i, . 1-. types of specific alteration, construction, demolition, and r _ removal that should be reviewed. �,, f A preservation ordinance recently proposed in Liber- VI ty, Missouri, a town of 17,000 people 20 miles north of tom' T_ _ Kansas City, would give the Liberty Historic Preserva- w'' tion Commission the power"to hold public hearings and a: to review applications for construction, alteration, Ili removal, or demolition affecting proposed or designated ;e.1 I "_. "' 1 landmarks or structures within historic districts and issue - or deny Certificates of Appropriateness for such actions." :-I Itl11•..•I I.I (Zoning Ordinance of the city of Liberty, 1971, proposed . Section XXXI, Paragraph G.10.) The Liberty ordinance Aiiiii . -_' then defines alteration, construction, demolition, and -fi , �_• removal as follows: iil - 1. Alteration—Any act or process that changes one or lit:--,:, ,,,,,:', more of the exterior architectural features of a struc- RI%II kl'I, i•+H ture, including,but not limited to, the erection,con- , :•I.,...1:,,,. .. I,,,, ,h,, ; 0,..\•,,,r• struction, reconstruction,or removal of any structure. I.OR I\N'R'I%I I••• 17 • b A A . 6. Construction—The act of adding an addition to an preservation commissions with quite weak review existing structure or the erection of a new principal authority. Typically, these weaker ordinances allow a or accessory structure on a lot or property. preservation commission to delay, but not ultimately 8. Demolition—Any act or process that destroys in part deny, a Certificate of Appropriateness to a property or in whole a landmark or a structure within a historic owner within a historic district or an owner of a district. designated landmark. The purpose of the delay period 15. Removal—Any relocation of a structure on its site or is to allow negotiations between the historic preservation to another site.(Zoning Ordinance of the city of Liber commission and the owner to resolve the differences and • ty, proposed Section XXXI, Paragraph B.) "educate"him to the necessity of undertaking his altera- V tion, repair, or construction in a manner that will con- The Liberty ordinance then goes on to say that only form with the standards set forth in the preservation or- that construction, alteration, demolition, or removal that dinance. The Kansas City, Missouri, preservation or- affects the "exterior architectural appearance" of land- dinance authorizes an 18-month delay upon the denial marks or property within historic districts shall be re- of a Certificate of Appropriateness: viewed. Again, a definition is necessary, and "exterior E. If said Commission shall find that such changes are architectural appearance" is defined as"the architectural visible from any public street, park, or other public character and general composition of the exterior of a place,and that such changes are detrimental to the ar- structure, including, but not limited to, the kind, color, chitectural, cultural, historic, or textural character of and texture of the building material and the type, design, the real property designated as historic landmarks or and character of all windows, doors, light fixtures, signs, historic districts, or of other improvements therein, the and appurtenant elements."(Zoning Ordinance of the city Commission shall enter its order denying the issuance of Liberty, proposed Section XXXI, Paragraph B.) of the Certificate of Appropriateness,and shall record The significant exterior architectural features may vary in writing any detailed conclusions and the facts upon on- from one landmark to another and even within designated which its conclusions were based. However, the curring vote of five (5) members of the Commission historic districts. The Liberty preservation ordinance is necessary in order to deny any Certificate of Ap- recognized this and requires the Historic Preservation propriateness. In the event of the denial of the applica- Commission to list the specific architectural features that tion,no building or demolition permit for which a Cer- are to be protected and the types of actions that are to tificate of Appropriateness was requested shall be issued be reviewed every time a landmark or historic district is for a period of eighteen(18)months after the date ap- designated: plication for the permit is filed.(Kansas City,Missouri, Ordinance, Section A6.126.E.) Upon designation, the landmark or historic district shall be classified as a "District H, Historic District," and the San Francisco, California, also has an 18-month delay designating ordinance shall prescribe the significant ex- period. Many communities have a shorter delay; for ex- terior architectural features; the types of construction, ample, Trenton, New Jersey, and Cleveland, Ohio, im- alteration, demolition, and removal other than those re- pose a six-month delay period. quiring a building or demolition permit that should be reviewed for appropriateness; (and)the design guidelines Some preservation ordinances distinguish between for applying the criteria for review of appropriateness. . . . review of mere alteration or new construction, and the (Zoning Ordinance of the city of Liberty, proposed Sec- review of an application for demolition.Applications for tion XXXI, Paragraph S.) alteration, repair, or new construction may be denied outright by the preservation commission, plan commis- That may be the best way to custom-tailor the review sion, or city council for noncompliance with review stan- process to fit the specific character of a designated land- dards.Applications for demolition permits, however, are mark or district. only delayed in these ordinances.Dallas,Texas,provides Once the question of the types of reviewable actions for a demolition delay of anywhere from 90 days to 240 has been settled, the preservation ordinance must deal days: with the issue of how much authority the preservation The Commission may recommend the disapproval of the commission should have in reviewing prescribed actions. application by determining that, in the interest of preser- The Penn Central decision of the Supreme Court upheld ving historical values, the structure should not be a very strong set of protections for New York City land- demolished, and, in that event, the application shall be marks. If a property owner does not comply with the suspended for a period not exceeding ninety(90)days from standards for review of actions, he can be denied the Cer- the date of application.Within the suspension period, the tificate of Appropriateness permit to undertake the City Planning Commission, upon the advice of the com- action.` mittee, may request an extension of the suspension period by the City Council. If the City Council, after notice to Nevertheless, many communities around the country, applicant and public hearing, determines that there is especially those that adopted preservation ordinances prior to the Penn Central decision, ex- provide their historic reasonable ground for preservation, the Council may ex- P tend the suspension period for an additional period not exceeding one hundred twenty (120) days, a total of not • 6. As mentioned,and as will be discussed later,if the property owner more than two hundred forty(240)days, to a total of not proves economic hardship, the New York City landmarks ordinance more than two hundred forty(240)days from the date of requires either a package of public incentives to be provided to offset the application for demolition. During the period of at en- hardship or approval of the proposed action. 18 . -.- *ion of that application,no permit shall be issued for such demolition or removal, nor shall any person demolish or i remove the building or structure.If no action is taken by r the City Council within two hundred forty(240)days from -* r , * the date of application, the demolition permit shall issue, _ and the Building Inspection Division shall so advise the • °-'�� - ��_ applicant. (Dallas, Texas, Landmark Preservation Or- — -_.- -� ,1""L� dinance, March 1973, Ordinance No. 14012, Section _• - ` -» i 19-A-10.) '.' . c••' �`. The Nashville, Tennessee, ordinance is even more ,. '! E 1 "4,i.- . t. blunt: — .- �:_,. t/ t, _ : . --� ate- = z. 7P.1 In the event an application for removal or demolition or ' ;. r ti - ►3 •Ner�•�{. redevelopment of a building or other structure within a -,�•T - h`3: historic district is submitted,or such demolition is required, Q :_li 1 at -'°°` .`-_t: thegovernmental agency receivingsuch request or in- •.:--- '` 1 -t g cY q �. -i • -. itiating such action shall transmit a copy thereof to the t , I it? Historic Zoning Commission and said Commission shall ^kW ; ' :+ -- -- .;:.1; .:�„ have a period of 90 days from the date the application was , !T ' filed to acquire such property.(Nashville Historic District -- '.:�r - -: --f^ • I }11 t. Regulations, Section 91.64.) • �,':- `, �,.. • . Many more preservation ordinances,however, give the »- � h F �;, -'' •historic preservation commission the absolute authority ^._.4 ; ;_ t a'`', • EN : «.O ;..,y' 'r' to approve or deny a certificate of appropriateness for ,_-1 .,� , ,it " }- ‘ i� * y* Jam_ alteration, construction, or demolition, based solely upon - :.�< 4._ t compliance with the standards of review. Often an ap- ' ' ' peal is allowed to the city council for final action, as will f 1 f '. - I el ". 37 be discussed,later, and some ordinances also require that - • i ; u=-p 4 L. the Certificate of Appropriateness be issued if the prop- :- ' 0 1.,. ;< • - ,?;1 erty owner can prove denial works an economic hard- z - ^ `""" . ship on him. That, too, will be discussed later. CRITERIA FOR REVIEW 87f -- t•d Every preservation ordinance authorizing review of �' {"" ""-' , - -- alterations, new construction, demolitions, or removals ^"'may a must also have a set of standards to be applied by the -_ - - ii historic preservation commission in reviewing those ac- j . •;O N tions. The standards are a set of principles to guide the =.. �� o commission in deciding what is proper action that will " not harm the historic or architectural character of the By building historic preservation criteria into the ordinance, landmark and what is improper action that will cause it should be possible to avoid such inappropriate alterations harm. as the new doorway above. There are two basic types of criteria.The first type may be called"general"review criteria.These are broad stan- dards that apply to all landmarks and all property within historic districts. The second set of principles may be called "specific" guidelines and may be custom-tailored not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any to specific architectural styles or types of structures or historic material or distinctive architectural features specific landmarks or districts. A good example of the should be avoided when possible. first,general type of criteria can be found in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation.These sY! 3. All buildings,structures,and sites shall be recognized as products of their own time. Alterations that have dards are being used increasingly in local historic preset- no historical basis and that seek to create an earlier vation ordinances as well because they set forth the prin- ., appearance shall be discouraged. ciples and purposes of historic preservation adequately. They read as follows: 4. Changes that may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the history and development of 1. Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a a building, structure, or site and its environment. compatible use for a property which requires minimal These changes may have acquired significance in their alteration of the building,structure, or site and its en- own right, and this significance shall be recognized vironment, or to use a property for its originally in- and respected. tended purpose. 5. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled 2. The distinguishing original qualities or character of craftsmanship which characterize a building,structure, a building,structure,or site and its environment shall or site shall be treated with sensitivity. 19 6. Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired buildings, public ways, and places to which it is rather than replaced, wherever possible. In the event visually related. replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, (6) Rhythm of entrance porch and other projections. design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. The relationship of entrances and other projec Repair or replacement of missing architectural features tions to sidewalks shall be visually compatible should be based on accurate duplications of features, with the buildings, public ways, and places to substantiated by historic, physical, or pictorial which it is visually related. evidence, rather than on conjectural designs or the (7) Relationship of materials. texture, and color.The availability of different architectural elements from relationship of the materials, texture, and color other buildings or structures. of the facade shall be visually compatible with 7. The surface cleaning of structures shall be undertaken the predominant materials used in the buildings with the gentlest means possible. Sandblasting and and structures to which it is visually related. other cleaning methods that will damage the historic (8) Roof shapes. The roof shape of a building shall building materials shall not be undertaken. be visually compatible with the buildings to which 8. Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and it is visually related. preserve archaeological resources affected by, or ad- (9) Walls of continuity. Building facades and ap- jacent to, any project. purtenances,such as walls,fences,and landscape 9. Contemporary design for alterations and additions to masses, shall, when it is a characteristic of the existing properties shall not be discouraged when such area, form cohesive walls of enclosure along a alterations and additions do not destroy significant street, to ensure visual compatibility with the historical,architectural,or cultural material,and such buildings,public ways, and places to which such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, elements are visually related. material, and character of the property, (10) Scale of a building.The size and mass of buildings neighborhood, or environment. and structures in relation to open spaces, win- 10. Wherever possible, new additions or alterations to dows,door openings,porches,and balconies shall structures shall be done in such a manner that, if such be visually compatible with the buildings, public additions.br alterations were to be removed in the ways, and places to which they are visually future, the essential form and integrity of the struc- related. ture would be unimpaired. (11) Directional expression of front elevation. A building shall be visually compatible with the Other general review standards focus on the architec- buildings, public ways, and places to which it is tural elements of a structure that are protected by a visually related in its directional character, preservation ordinance. The Rochester, New York, whether this be vertical character, horizontal preservation ordinance provides for visual compatibili- character, or nondirectional character. ty of such things as height, rhythm of spacing, roof shape, Many historic districts do not have a unified architec- and relationship of materials: tural style. They may be a hodgepodge of styles and (a) Visual compatibility. New and existing buildings and buildings from different eras. It is precisely this situation structures,and appurtenances thereof, that are moved, that requires the second, specific set of review standards. reconstructed, materially altered, or repaired shall be The ordinance, in effect, defines what it is that is historic visually compatible in terms of: about the particular designated district or landmark and (1) Height. The height of the proposed buildings and then creates design guidelines to protect that historic structures shall be visually compatible with ad- character. jacent buildings. The Lincoln, Nebraska, ordinance has a quite good set (2) Proportion of front facade. The relationship of of specific design guidelines for its Mount Emerald Land- the width to the height of the front elevation shall mark District.The guidelines describe appropriate build- • be visually compatible with buildings, public ing materials, roofs and roofing, doors and windows, ways, and places to which it is visually related. porches, steps, and mechanical services. For each building element, there is a description of the character of that ele- (3) Proportion of openings. The relationship of the ment in the district and required, recommended, not width to height of windows shall be visually corn- recommended, and prohibited actions affecting that ele- patible with buildings, public ways, and places ment. Following are examples of the specific Lincoln, to which the building is visually related. Nebraska, standards for roofs and for windows and (4) Rhythm of solids to voids in front facades. The doors: relationship of solids to voids in the front facade of a building shall be visually compatible with B. Roofs and Roofing buildings,public ways, and places to which it is Most roof shapes in the Landmark District are hipped visually related. or gabled—and some instances involve both shapes. (5) Rhythm of spacing and buildings on streets.The Dormers are prolific. relationship of a building or structure to the open (1) Required. The existing shape and materials of the space between it and adjoining buildings or strut- roof shall be retained,if feasible.All architectural tures shall be visually compatible with the features that give the roof its essential character, 20 such as dormer windows, cornices, brackets, (2) Recommended. Wood-frame storm windows and chimneys,weather vanes, lightning rods, gutters, doors, painted to match the existing or original, etc., shall be retained. should be used but should not damage existing (2) Recommended. Whenever possible, the original frames and should be removable in the future. If shape and materials of the roof should be restored. new sash and doors are used, the existing or Particular effort should be made to retain unique original materials,design, and hardware should be materials not commonly found in new construc- used. When metal storm windows and doors are tion. Roof covering that is deteriorated beyond used, they should be painted,anodized, or coated repair should be replaced with new material that to match the existing.When awnings are used, they matches as closely as possible the existing or should be of canvas material. original material in composition, size, shape, col- (3) Prohibited. Existing or original windows, doors, or, and texture. and hardware shall not be discarded when they can (3) Prohibited. Nothing shall be done to change the be restored and reused in place. New windows or essential character of the roof by adding architec- door openings that would alter the scale and pro- tural features or roofing materials inappropriate to portion of the building shall not be introduced. In • the style of the house.The roof shall not be stripped appropriate new window or door features (e.g., of architectural features important to its character. aluminum frames that require the removal of original windows or doors)shall not be installed. (4) Not Recommended. None. (4) Not Recommended. Metal, vinyl, or fiberglass C. Windows and Doors awnings,hoods,or fake shutters that would detract Windows and door frames are in nearly all cases of from the existing character or appearance of the wood. Brick structures frequently involve stone trim, building should not be used. (Lincoln, Nebraska, including window and door elements. Ordinance No. 13202, Preservation Guidelines, Section II, September 15, 1981.) (1) Required. Existing or original windows and doors, including sash, lintels, sills, shutters, decorative New construction in an old neighborhood may be glass,pediments,hoods,and hardware shall be re- especially troublesome.Some preservation ordinances do tained or, when deteriorated beyond repair, not even review new construction on vacant sites.Many preferably replaced with duplicates of the existing do, however, and the intent is not to discourage new con- or,original. Where duplicates are unavailable, replaced elements shall match the existing or struction nor to demand exact replicas of historic original elements as closely as possible. buildings. The real purpose in reviewing new construc- New construction in an old neighborhood, like-this one in Indianapolis, may be difficult to deal with in the ordinance.The purpose of reviewing new construction is not to discourage it, but to make it compatible with its historic surroundings. - ►1� . 1 , , it Fr L. 0 ,• �•. • # - i. • t AltIM Nlw�r Ipi ,r t rr 1 ac1 - I _ _.1',1 it'll II; 1 ,..._.1 • V tion is to make it compatible with its historic surround- - 11 ings. Loudoun County, Virginia, establishes the follow- ing review criteria for both rehabilitation and new con- t struction in its preservation ordinance: 61 • -1 1. I _ an application.� In reviewing in an HS District, the Com- � mittee shall base its decision on whether the proposals therein are architecturally compatible with the building, I . • structure, or landmark in said district. In applying such standards, the Committee shall consider, among other • • factors: • A. Exterior architectural features, including all signs; B. General design, scale, and arrangement; C. Texture and material; `~ _`` D. The relationship of a, b, c, above, to other structures -` • ` - and features of the district; a•..: b..,- ` E. The purposes for which the district was created; mo �' R.-, F. The relationship of the size, design,and siting of any t -- - .-_--�. ` -_. +,. . . new or reconstructed structure to the landscape of the - • district.(Loudoun County,Virginia,Zoning Ordinance, ;`:r T` , ' - " 1 SSection 750.11.) . '� 1 '^^ ; Specific review criteria may be needed for specific prob- 4 _ 71. - .e-4., lems. The design of new signs is often incompatible, t �1_ ' - -Qantas especially in historic commercial districts. Many preser- - `� _ / Y vation ordinances contain special sign standards. For ex- J Portsmouth, New Hampshire ample, the Wayne, Illinois, preservation ordinance con- tains the following provisions concerning signs: Madison, Indiana i - i ,p - Advertising signs are not allowed in a Historic Preserva- tion District. Signs are permitted in those portions of a Historic Preservation District also classified as a Residen- �i` = tial District, in accordance with the regulations of the underlying Residential District and subject to the provi- sions111h.".. ' ith.....- , i of this paragraph. Every new business sign or ex- pansion of an existing business sign in those portions of �: '' I a Historic Preservation District also classified as a Business District shall be a special use. In addition to the re jj quirements applicable to signs in the underlying Zoning —41111111111.0110 ` District, the size, shape, and character of the sign shall be in keeping with the historic character of a Historic • Preservation District,according to the appropriate criteria v •„? _`--- • 4 fi I.jl l , and architectural and aesthetic considerations for the is- - -- suance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. The Historic - 1 .� Sites Commission shall review and submit findings and i� recommendations to the Plan Commission and to the • •AMEN, Village Board concerning the effect of the size, shape, or character of the sign on the Historic Preservation District. i (Wayne, Illinois, Zoning Ordinance, Section IX.B.3.) 1 Historic commercial districts may need a special kind ! of design review guideline. Window displays and even merchandising may be as important as building materials 4 t and signs in creating a sense of the historic character of 4 the street. Innovative preservation ordinances today try i ,� to define this historic commercial character and create 1' Many preservation ordinances contain special sign standards 1 -, s „�, so that the size, shape, and character of signs are in 1 ""�° = keeping with the character of the district. F • r .., KUM -11 -LA:A Fr ook:0, iil WE 1. ITiV 1 jl,j:!II i i k - NO. NO. NO. YES. YES. YES. DIAGONAL Vtcl ICAL WIDE (8-12) NARROW(3-0 NARROW WIDE CORNER SIDING SIDING,FAKE LAP SIDING, HORIZONTAL SIDING,WIDE BOARD,NARROW SHUTTERS NO WINDOW LAP SIDING CORNER SIDING,WINDOW TRIM BOARD TRIM - FIGURE 1. MATERIALS AND DETAILS Variety in the use of architectural materials and details While slate, cedar shakes and tile roofs are preferred, adds to the intimacy and visual delight of the district. asphalt shingles which match their approximate color When first confronted with this variety, it is easy to and texture are acceptable substitutes. Diagonal and overlook the overall thread of continuity provided by vertical siding are general unacceptable. Materials the relatively limited palette of materials available to which imitate natural materials are not acceptable. the turn of the century builders.This thread of Imitative materials such as asphalt siding,wood- continuity is threatened by the availability of textured metal siding or artificial stone should not be inappropriate materials and building parts in today's used. Four-inch metal siding,when well installed and market place. carefully detailed, may be acceptable in some cases. The purpose of this section is to encourage the proper Materials will be reviewed to determine their use of appropriate materials and details.The materials appropriate use in relation to the overall design of the and details of new construction should relate to the structure. materials and details of existing adjacent buildings. Some of the design review guidelines for the Saint Paul Historic Hill Heritage Preservation District. design guidelines to assure its continuation. Seattle has hood, an architectural analysis, the types of improve- created special design guidelines for its Pike Place Market, ments and changes that will be necessary to improve a seven-acre historic district. The market area has been the character of the neighborhood, and specific recom- divided into five separate zones, and each zone has its mendations and guidelines for carrying out those changes. own special design guidelines. Zone I, according to the St. Paul, Minnesota, and Salt Lake City, Utah, also guidelines, "is characterized by open shopping stalls, free have developed detailed design guidelines for specific pedestrian movement, a linear row of connected spaces, historic districts. Each set of guidelines is accompanied and the prominence of merchandising- rather than by helpful drawings illustrating architectural styles and buildings, walls, signs, or marketing decor."The specific showing what is meant by design review standards in an design guidelines for the Pike Place Market are contained easy to understand drawing. The design guidelines for in Appendix C. "materials and details"within the Historic Hill District of Usually these types of specific guidelines are so detailed St. Paul, Minnesota, are shown in Figure 1. See Appen- that they are not included in the preservation ordinance dix D for the design guidelines for all new construction itself. They are enacted by the preservation commission within designated Salt Lake City historic districts. as formal rules or adopted standards that have the force of law. This allows the commission to prepare a special booklet for every historic district or for individual land- marks that sets out the specific guidelines and provides Pike Place Market, Seattle examples of good and bad restoration work.Often these :.-� i. y'5'f s i \,AfsxAL racer,. .,7� guidelines are prepared before an area is designated as ` 'ems - a historic district.This allows the property owners in the - �� .s� .- • "` 1k district to comment on the proposed principles that will r' �. eAeg.,�- — tz- . govern alterations and new construction when they are ) c�_ ,�. �'x '.,j� '' first considering the effect of a historic preservation or- �•, - . . c. 44t,T,. • ,' 4-• dinance. Some ordinances, like that in Nashville, Ten- , ` ;ti ' d.. nessee, absolutely require that these design guidelines be e� - prepared before a historic district is designated. The 'w „• • .-'.-- • Nashville Metropolitan Historical Commission prepares c i.111 _ a comprehensive design study of a proposed historic / - ' district that covers the components of the neighbor- - '" a` 40.10. N ii. J ti li F �'�� t`' � �' •� kff �' f t : taF'rrr .' . '4 '''•3" 1 ` "4 --"s' a 4'i♦?..1, i' / ., W , �'�"' • '4:.a rt•:" + 4, �: j‘l..-I-Il tl,.• r' e'1 J . '' t" - ! t` _ . K'- µ - �lr�;i'� �":_ 'S ate'\ 4 i .. \ Kw . _r 'fix , '. '4 _-_ J: -� - i'- .. `� r 7 ,t y!`. - 0 _ iy , '_' . fin' 4 Y 4•Y�� yi4 '"�✓ t•� 'A. 1 i S Iw ems':. 4 - • S{' ` Jr/• .. :'�.�Z+ {•Zr-�i_s� .f. r Z '�iC nit."'! �,l {` yt -�.T _4 -'•Ls. + -i ,a: S Y:1t '" - - iJr7a .••�ti N, a -F i '"`} --, - IC ':+.- t w } ri- •�-;.. Y♦ ..,"•r3, - • Z; '4 J fit` + "a V. • •,L h�ti"' g. t}. •': ..,,! •£ •.%D wr' :-'`1 4c / i �... „--,- r. L y..,s , y i fi I t� � �`� "T?4 z ,fit 1 �� .� F s ",� ?A �'•r.T. '.•T , �' _ `•,4-.��ti , ^ F �.-" �1.. .: - -1• ., _ Yam:: .. . • E. •" ;r ' `.mac •-- ��]d ".! A' r , ,,, ...-. • C 0. a• .4- ~..: f x♦', ♦ ::I a it ''cffi � w., my,:, g r • s t.y. _.., ,_• +-'- �t f s 1 • 9 ti .�t d -1: y't�� - .t v" •? � -._'! `fyW.lf•" xi 1 ;{Yw1"' { a i� itz:k <a . A - .s I � y� ti• Sf ; :41 ��7� .R..'. .. �' +�- ifi.. � � S. F � .� •� � `�`'t,l � �^!^ L• rr� +x.��Fat � .^ ,A S E'`` s .C5'• >- - '*? .o- } �PZ _( ;F L✓ "+e t T�}`•Y - g2-. Lk *$'4 • , fir. �- 4 _,-ti.-s- �, s� '_ -,.,,,� ., �'.Y},1`{„,- ` .,i X-, i�, ��.� �, ,r . ' , 4x�3 4, � J rr^-. • •: i �� e';+5' - y nySv y �fi `�..ter; w Y • tx'c`iw R �Y "3'" ir^'♦,,V„g s •'s.'-�, +..sib-t+'a ^3',t.,'�'t .•.%•'. ' �.` - 4• r Y 'Z' .k�La"'-"^. >R' -.t 7.. ''?z! „ :_ �' �; • k ' . "~ca}t '4=.r_7C �C" .` L. fraL l•. zv' -��t J ,.ram `�. • r a -r•• -` "Tham .r-'`"1`k.z ��may ' G.�,yJy4y {:, '• � �a..n,rSat•4.i� •'j,, '•'Z .. =Tw�K 1l '.�,�y- -< -{' ‘.01,....... -` '4 """• •'Y+'r',:. s �' -� :-J a Rtt• ,vrlfn -.i'v-' ,' h~,'„ _' �1.. � , + _ '� r *�F' �„$� , . t-• s.,, .a�yc .- y. '- ti..~ • }y ' �v • 4 • T #14 {f't t• z .•-may � �`'ri K� �= y T �.�C ,,�'��•�Y. t '/ '^t '� 11�.<. •?C �. �..�• � r� � 'l�'' iC - ^ ��r '__'a�.,--h� � .rvx ,;�.. _ a..Y �7, i �"+f._:• b: `h'.it..Z7. 1••S ywi .µ'+r 41 'r -.: .„s,"•.j, t. +s ,Y' -v�f•La• .r`• +.� +a-r.r-7 j ,( 1tpT�4•,� __].Yr`.�;.. - _ • - j'f _.tea �.3 _ ....'.- .l- -s"�'ZC,'; 1'_..�'.5;,4* 441 N 1 ,' % v.`-1'mac' _�� z y.4,'. ef�..'• .T� - � ••- . y- 1 ,47 c- ti-..... 'K` aE K .'�" _ •'• ::V 31 .5+'nr.,.g, y,a, ry{}. �-+„•¢♦•,C�-p• - - � + �v r• ' ffi, �� Y y I'ar♦ "+^'e:�'�F,- .i-af.� 4. "TSS .��..•►' �,yyww�.' z • Y.+♦♦`�tia ..S .. .. ` 1 .1: .•.,�(_ sy45 - - „l�r+..,{. -' t• c ALL+**•^ .• / t . ' •!5� _ ` ' - -. Y • i _V> 3\T ter. t4+.+iM p' ..f. �y.�iy, • f I ( ,4•...f •1 .'1.y 'W `L..: •i i -Y�..'�TMS •ITS'' , P. a d _ •,(rs ,+, z \ •t' Y :-. � N d�.a t+ �.;;;.. t z �`yLC j Fs.t �� ?,�.; ` a `s �s�+. '' .'. -. . +p..f i •1 ! \\ •l/• yt v .• a7L i i. '+c* Si a,'• • _ y,3p ,:9 '4 C 1 ` 7 4 e. q +mac • {s.-V4A2 -J _ ti_ - :a o/ I .�. ,„f..;-„; -,,4, . . . , ,,• .,-, ,. ...:,.., ..-.... -:.•C•Are'ry„,--;A,,,‘,-ct.c-...,7-.-W4..&* . .---:-.,::-.-.;:,-"`" -'...- 15-14...i..1: r".:, •.-:;-: . .? x\ A\ .,..,.... -, ,. , , . .,..-..- / . , ., . ‘ . ._...-. .. ,.... „... ,,.-„,: __.-., .3 '-,-1.-.•-•-'4 .e-; ,-,":-..-• •„..-, 44- ,',.„.:`.,`.. 1 ,.: ,i.,1,;>,_ ., , ! ,.,._, . \/\: :,_ .„#/: ; ...„,-, ....., .....,--: •-_--•-•',...,-:_- - '_„-44:-r-k?r,„: - ..-'7.-5r-,,„, ....v., "-tt' !I.-7,, —... ! L. 7-,•' 4-'', ,--t . `. I,*c.,;•• • , ' r,3 _ , tN• r r �,� w 1`\/ .x � �r.,. '+ `. f�. � '� .,/ .... •a 's < � r,y .}M�,tr-Kl• .. r4 ..� Y{ �c�� 1 7f}►� .."�; 4. i y -,5 {' j f•%, • r itit k -•!- a -".v r f '3' .- s.=• r , + ``v - f 3 Zrt��,��I\/y\ �. ,+-+� , -l. +/"S �, �i. • .. «.4 '� T 't� r .ysi a t ..�i 'i s C t: ' c :.�.s. - am P ..4 .,w -a -^"- w l •" ( r•'�'7 �'�.svt.; i '- . 4.- vY y '•--,4- +E ,-.t,,.; - a. *-. vc ,*" fitf>rt. , r ;� Y-,rg ' .c�••�Y`�Y� h '`- 'er J+, • Part 3. Other Legal Issues 'HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND ECONOMIC get from the rehabilitation of the existing building?What HARDSHIP is the value of the landmark as a cleared site ready for Few preservation ordinances require the preservation new construction compared to its value as a building commission to consider the economic effect of a denial ready for rehabilitation? Is that difference substantial? of an alteration or demolition permit on the property All of these are questions that can only be answered owner. Typically, communities concerned about the when a particular controversy concerning a particular economic impact of historic designation simply weaken building is in issue. General discussions concerning possi- their ordinance to make review of permits by the preser- ble economic effects of landmark protection at the vation commission advisory in nature only. Some preser- designation stage cannot focus on a particular project. vation ordinances require the commission to consider It is important to consider these questions at the time economic impact at the time a landmark historic district when a Certificate of Appropriateness is being sought is being considered for designation. While that may be from a preservation commission. a legitimate concern of a plan commission or city coun- If the landmark commission itself does not consider cil interested in the future of a community, it is virtually economic hardship, a court may. A property owner impossible to prove or disprove the economic effect on disgruntled by the denial of an alteration or demolition a community of landmark designation.' permit may sue the preservation commission claiming an The best time to consider the economic effect of land- unconstitutional"taking" of his property for which corn- mark protection is when the preservation commission is pensation should be paid. Under the standard set down considering a specific application for alteration, new con- by the United States Supreme Court in the Penn Central struction, or demolition.At that point, the hardship ques- decision,if all reasonable use or return is denied the prop- tion can be framed in terms of facts concerning a specific erty owner, a taking may have occurred. piece of property. How much will it cost the property Courts are in many ways no more qualified than owner to perform the work according to the criteria for preservation commissions to consider the question of review of alterations?I's that more than the cost of doing economic hardship. In fact, it may be much easier to elicit it some other way? How much more? Why is the prop- the complete facts concerning a development controver- erty owner proposing a demolition? Could not the ex- sy at a hearing before a landmark commission.As a result isting landmark be renovated profitably? Why or why of the Penn Central decision, more and more preserva- not? Who are the investors in the project proposed for tion ordinances require the preservation commission to the landmark site? What are their tax brackets and ex- consider possible economic hardship from the denial of pected rates of return on the new project that will replace a demolition or alteration permit application. the landmark? Is that higher than the return they could State case law should be carefully checked to determine if there is any appropriate standard for weighing the 7. There have been only a few,generally inconclusive,studies of the economic hardship against the public benefit. Some effect of historic designation on property values.See Chapter 2 of David Listokin,Landmark Preservation and the Property Tax.Center for Ur- states, particularly New York, Missouri, Louisiana, and ban Policy Research, 1982, for a discussion of these reports. Texas, have had court decisions that consider the ap- propriate standards for determining the economic effect of denial of a permit. The Penn Central decision, as previously discussed, also established a standard concern- : o ing reasonable use and return that must be left a prop- m erty owner as a result of historic preservation actions. The New York City Landmarks Law has one of the 6 Painters at work on a church in Madison, Wisconsin. oldest and most unusual provisions concerning economic hardship. The owner of a landmark in New York City 25 'has the right is present evidence to the New York City The trend in preservation ordinance drafting is to create Landmarks Preservation Commission that the property a two-ste roces for the consideration of economic cannot earn a reasonable return unless the demolition or har s ip and needed incentives. In the first stage, the alteration is approved.8"Reasonable return"is carefully burden is on the property owner to prove that the denial ' defined in the landmark ordinance as a"net annual return of a demolition or alteration permit will deny him a of six percentum of the valuation"(New York City Land- reasonable use of or return from the property. Typical- marks Ordinance, Section 207-1.0[vD) of the prop- ly, the preservation commission itself acts as the hearing 1 erty.The lack of a reasonable return must be proven"to body on this question, and it is given broad discretion the satisfaction of the commission," and the term "net to call expert witnesses and to request information from annual return". is basically similar to net operating in- the property owner himself. If the commission finds that come. Net annual return excludes mortgage payments but the property owner has proved his case, the burden then does include a deduction for depreciation. If the owner shifts to the municipality, as in New York City, to devise establishes that he cannot earn a reasonable return from a program of incentives that will properly compensate the landmark, the burden shifts to the New York City the owner. If no reasonable incentive package can be put Landmarks Preservation Commission. It may devise a together, the city must either acquire the property, or an plan that will make the property capable of earning a easement on the property, by negotiated acquisition or reasonable return. The ordinance sets out some of the by eminent domain. If it does not, then the permit must contents of the plan as follows: be issued. A preservation ordinance recently proposed in the city c. Any such plan may include,but shall not be limited to: of Liberty,Missouri,provides a good example of the corn- ()) Granting of partial or complete tax exemption; prehensive information that should be available to a preservation commission considering the question of . (2) Remission of taxes; and economic hardship: (3) Authorization for alterations, construction, or AA. CERTIFICATE OF ECONOMIC HARDSHIP. reconstruction appropriate for and not inconsistent Application for a Certificate of Economic Hardship with the effectuation of the purposes of this chapter. (New York City Landmarks Ordinance, Section shall be made on a form prepared by the Preserva 207-8.0[c4.) tion Commission. The Preservation Commission shall schedule a public hearing concerning the ap- If the commission does not formulate a plan, the city must plication and provide notice in the same manner as either acquire the property outright, acquire an easement in Paragraph M of this ordinance, and any person on it, or grant the permit. Plans that include a property may testify at the hearing concerning economic hard- tax exemption or a reduction in property taxes and meet ship in the same manner as provided by Paragraph the definition of reasonable return can be forced upon N of this ordinance. a reluctant owner. The Preservation Commission may solicit expert There has been no litigation in New York to determine testimony or require that the applicant for a Cer- whether a six percent return to a property owner is a con- tificate of Economic Hardship make submissions con- stitutionally reasonable rate. At least New York City has cerning any or all of the following information before tried to devise a comprehensive plan to consider economic it makes a determination on the application: hardship according to a specific standard. Preservation 1. Estimate of the cost of the proposed construe ordinances in a few other cities are much more vague tion, alteration, demolition, or removal and an , about when economic hardship occurs. For example, the estimate of any additional cost that would be in- ! Washington, D.C., preservation ordinance gives the curred to comply with the recommendations of mayor unbounded discretion to decide whether denial of the Preservation Commission for changes a Certificate of Appropriateness will result in an necessary for the issuance of a Certificate of unreasonable economic hardship on the property owner. Appropriateness; There is no standard or evidence-gathering procedure for 2. A report from a licensed engineer or architect [ the mayor in making such a determination. with experience in rehabilitaton as to the struc- Many types of incentives can be provided property tural soundness of any structures on the property owners seriously affected by a denial of a demolition or and their suitability for rehabilitation; alteration permit.The most obvious are property tax ex- 3. Estimated market value of the property in its cur- emptions or at least a reduction in the property tax pay- rent condition; after completion of the proposed ment burden.Municipalities in many states may also issue construction, alteration,demolition, or removal; revenue bonds or general obligation bonds and use the after any changes recommended by the Preser- proceeds to make loans to owners of historic buildings vation Commission; and, in the case of a pro- for rehabilitation or reuse.A small revolving fund could posed demolition, after renovation of the ex- be established from general municipal revenue sources isting property for continued use. and used to make low interest loans to owners of prop- 4. In the case of a proposed demolition,an estimate erty seriously affected by the denial of a permit. from an architect, developer, real estate consul- tant,appraiser,or other real estate professional 8. A very different set of values and standards applies to tax exempt experienced in rehabilitation as to the economic or charitable owners of property in New York City.This is quite a feasibility of rehabilitation or reuse of the ex significant distinction when the effect of landmark designation is being isting structure on the property. considered. 26 5. Amount paid for the property, the date of pur- �., .- chase,and the party from whom purchased,in- - :: cluding a description of the relationship,if any, ' between the owner of record or applicant and '-; ..a. • :1Z ,I -�.7 the person from whom the property was pur- .4 , - chased, and any terms of financing between the .-.- ,. seller and buyer; �-' _ 1 4 6. If the property is income-producing, the annual p gross income from the property for the previous = _ r_ .._-- _:two years;itemized operating and maintenance I expenses for the previous two years; and r ,, A ^ — - • )`•. c depreciation deduction and annual cash flow ,- r ; }'•. 4 ';,., before and after debt service, if any, during the . - it "1 same period; - . '�'„S ', :., s. 7. Remaining balance on any mortgage or other ALPINE HOSE • 4': T: b financing secured by the property and annual Nel:C ' ' debt service, if any,for the previous two years; Georgetown, Colorado—where most of the town is a historic 8. All appraisals obtained within the previous two district. years by the owner or applicant in connection with the purchase, financing, or ownership of the property; 9. Any listing of the property for sale or rent,price posed work, the property cannot be put to a asked, and offers received, if any, within the reasonable use or the owner cannot obtain a reasonable economic return therefrom, then the Com- previous two years; mission shall issue a Certificate of Economic Hard- 10. Assessed value of the property according to the ship approving the proposed work. If the Commis- two most recent assessments; sion finds otherwise, it shall deny the application for a Certificate of Economic Hardship and notify the ap- 11.•Real estate taxes for the previous two years; plicant by mail of the final denial. (Proposed Highland 12. Form of ownership or operation of the proper- Park, Illinois, Ordinance, Section 24.035.) ty, whether sole proprietorship,for profit or not- Some communities have turned to the concept of for-profit corporation,limited partnership,joint transfer of development rights in order to provide an in- venture, or other; centive to owners of designated landmarks. The TDR 13. Any other information, including the income tax concept will not work everywhere. However, it often can bracket of the owner,applicant, or principal in- be a good incentive in larger cities with substantial vestors in the property considered necessary by development pressure for high-density development in the Preservation Commission to a determination historic areas or threatening individual historic buildings. as to whether the property does yield or may The TDR concept is simple: any untapped development yield a reasonable return to the owners. potential on a landmark site is allowed to be transferred An ordinance proposed in the city of Highland Park, -to another parcel of land. For example, if a designated landmark is only four stories tall and contains 40,000 Illinois, has a similar process for determining economic square feet but is in a zoning classification that would hardship. If the preservation commission concludes that allow a 40-story building containing 100,000 square feet hardship will result, the Highland Park ordinance shifts to be built, the owners of the landmark under a transfer the burden to the city to come up with a package of of development rights ordinance would be allowed to incentives: transfer or sell the unused development potential to the (D) Upon a finding by the Commission that without ap- developer of another site.9 proval of the proposed work all reasonable use of, New York City has the most experience with the or return from, a designated landmark or property transfer of development rights concept. New York's zon- .. within a historic district will be denied a property ing code allows the unused portion of the development owner, then the application shall be delayed for a potential of a site to be transferred to lots contiguous to period not to exceed ninety (90) days. During this or across the street from a designated landmark. The period of delay, the Commission shall investigate receiving lot must be under the same ownership as the plans and make recommendations to the City Coun- landmark. Approval of the transfer is by a special zon- cil to allow for a reasonable use of, or return from, ing permit, and the increased development intensity on the property, or to otherwise preserve the subject property. Such plans and recommendations may in- the receiving site is generally limited to 20 percent.There dude, but are not limited to: a relaxation of the pro- have been about 10 successful transfers in New York City. visions of the ordinance,a reduction in real property New Orleans, Louisiana, also allows the transfer of taxes, financial assistance, building code modifica- development rights to protect historic properties. The tions, and/or changes in zoning regulations. 9. See American Society of Planning Officials(now American Plan- (E) If by the end of this ninety(90)day period, the Com- ning Association), 1313 E.60th St., Chicago, IL 60637, Transferable mission has found that without approval of the pro- Development Rights,Planning Advisory Service Report No.304,1974. 27 City Council can issue a special permit for the transfer deny, or modify the requested Certificate of Ap- from designated landmarks to designated receiving propriateness on the basis of the criteria set forth in Sec- districts.The transfer must be accompanied by a program tion 37-17 within 30 days after the public hearing. The for the renovation and maintenance of the protected land- Commission's decision shall be in writing and shall include findings of fact in support thereof. Copies of the decision mark, and the maximum increase in floor area on the shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of proper receiving site is 10 percent. To date, there have been no ty within the subject designation.The decision of the Com- actual transfers in New Orleans. mission shall be the final administrative decision. Denver recently adopted a transfer of development rights mechanism to protect only designated landmarks Following a denial, the application shall not be resubmit- in Denver s central business district.A receiving site may ted within the next 12 months except upon the written re- increase its allowable density by 25 percent. The land- quest of an applicant indicating the incorporation of changes in plans and specifications that may have been mark must be renovated before the transfer can occur. recommended by the Commission. Each transfer requires specific approval by the city coun- cil. A few landmark buildings in downtown Denver have After the issuance of a Certificate, no change may be made taken advantage of the legislation to sell their develop- in the proposed work without resubmittal of an applica- ment rights. tion. (Aurora Ordinance No. 079-4862, Section 37-16.) The availability of a transfer of development rights Many more preservation ordinances, however, allow a mechanism, a property tax incentive scheme, or finan disgruntled property owner to appeal the denial of a Cer- cial incentivesrfor the renovation of historic buildings is tificate of Appropriateness to the city council. fast becoming an important consideration in the drafting A significant issue is who has the last review of a Cer- of a preservation ordinance.The availability of good in- tificate of Appropriateness decision, the preservation centives can do much to soften the economic impact of commission or the city council. The characterization of historic designation.That in turn can assure the constitu- that last review as quasi-judicial or legislative can fun- tionality of strong protections for designated historic damentally affect the right to appeal the final decision buildings. to the courts, and the character of hearing that will be APPEALS FROM PRESERVATION COMMISSION provided by the courts. A two-step appeal process from DECISIONS, . the preservation commission to the city council and only then to the courts may result in a court characterization The preservation ordinance must consider the role of of the city council action as "legislative." When courts the city council and the courts vis-a-vis the preservation review "legislative" determinations, they routinely commission in the designation of landmark and historic disregard the record made at the preservation commis- districts, the review of actions for a Certificate of Ap sion or city council hearings and order a trial de novo propriateness, and the consideration of economic hard- on all the issues involved in the issuance of the permit ship. As indicated previously, the actual designation of or certificate. Trials are expensive, and this can a landmark or historic district is almost universally done significantly increase the cost of a court review. by an ordinance enacted by a city council upon the In contrast, "administrative" decisions reviewable recommendation of the preservation commission. Some under state administrative procedure acts that apply to ordinances are worded so that the city council has the local government actions are reviewed by the courts in discretion to review the report of the preservation corn- a different manner. A new trial is not held. Rather, the mission concerning designation, reevaluate the proposed court reviews the record made at either the preservation landmark or district according to the designation Stan- commission hearing or before the city council and con- dards, and make up its own mind concerning whether siders whether the decision was reasonable on the basis the proposed landmark or district meets the designation of all the evidence presented.There is a strong presump- standards. What if the preservation commission fails to tion that the decision was reasonable, and the burden on recommend a nominated landmark or historic district for the person challenging the administrative decision is a designation by the city council? Some ordinances pro- heavy one. The costs of such an administrative review hibit the nomination from being appealed to the city bya court are much lower.No new expert witnesses need '� council.Others allow such an appeal.The choice depends be called, lawyers' time can be reduced, the decision of upon how willing the city council is to become involved the court can be quickly rendered, and the entire pro- in a review of the designation criteria. ceeding is much simpler. The issue of an appeal to the city council must also This issue must be squarely faced by a community con- be considered when the preservation commission issues sidering a preservation ordinance. Does our city council or denies a Certificate of Appropriateness or a Certificate want to get involved in controversies over the issuance of Economic Hardship. The Aurora, Illinois, preserva- of alteration or demolition permits on historic structures? ordinance lion ordinance is a good example of a strong . Or would it rather leave those decisions to the preserva- The Aurora Preservation Commission is given final tion commission and to the courts? What are the ap- authority to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness if the plicable state laws concerning administrative review? If work violates the commission's standards for review.Ap- we provide for an intermediate appeal from a preserva- peal is only to the courts, not to the city council: tion commission to the city council and then only to the Subject to the provisions of Section 37-18(Economic Hard- courts, does this mean that a whole new trial will ensue ship), the Commission shall render a decision to issue, in the courts? Is that fair to both the commission and to 28 the property-Owner? Do the courts understand the pur- ping any work attempted to be done without or contrary pose and operation of preservation ordinances well to the permits required by this chapter. enough to frame the issues fairly in a trial de novo7 Any sign or exterior illumination of walls,exteriors,roofs, All of these questions should be answered before the or appurtenances of buildings displayed contrary to the appeal process is enacted. A preservation commission provision of this article shall be removed. working under an ordinance that bypasses the city council Failure of the owner, or other proper person having legal for a direct appeal to the courts must be very careful that custody of the structure or building, to correct the defects its hearings on the issuance of a demolition or alteration as outlined in Section 65-36, after knowledge of the ex- permit, or on the question of economic hardship, meet istence of such defects has been brought to their attention, all procedural due process requirements and are fair to shall constitute a violation of this article and shall be the applicant. The commission should have carefully punishable as provided in Section 1-6.(New Orleans,Loui- prepared procedural rules for the conduct of such hear- siana, Vieux Carre Ordinance, Section 65-15, 65-33, and ings, the presentation of evidence, and the types of in- 65-37.) formation and expert testimony necessary to frame and Some communities provide for criminal as well as civil answer the issues properly. penalities for violation of ordinance provisions.It is often FINES AND PENALTIES necessary, in order to stress the seriousness of a viola- tion of the ordinance, to make each day that a violation A preservation ordinance has no real force of law if it can be routinely violated with little threat that a penalty occurs a separate offense. The Louisville, Kentucky, or- will be imposed. If a Certificate of Appropriateness is dinance has a typical penalty provision: re- quired only for exterior work requiring a building per- Any person violating any of the provisions of this or- mit, general penalties for undertaking work without a dinance shall be fined not less than fifteen dollars ($15), building permit may be strong enough to deter midnight nor more than one hundred dollars($100),or imprisoned renovations and illegal demolitions.Often,however, they not more than fifty (50) days, or both such fine and im- are not. prisonment,for each offense.Each day's continued viola- tion shall constitute a separate offense. (Louisville, Ken- Many ordinances give rather specific powers to the tucky, Ordinance, Section 12.) preservation commission, the city, or other persons to enforce the terms of the ordinance. In some cities, it is Some ordinances go even further and require that a the building inspector who has enforcement powers; in demolished or damaged landmark be reconstructed. This others, it is the preservation commission itself; and, in can be a very expensive penalty and a good deterrent. still others, it may be the plan commission, the mayor's The District of Columbia ordinance is typical of such office, or the corporation counsel. The New Orleans, provisions: Louisiana, ordinance protecting the Vieux Carre historic district is typical of such provisions: Any person who demolishes, alters, or constructs a building or structure in violation of sections 5, 6, or 8 of The Director of the Division of Regulatory Inspections this act shall be required to restore the building or struc- shall promptly stop any work attempted to be done ture and its site to its appearance prior to the violation. without or contrary to a permit issued under this article Any action to enforce this subsection shall be brought by and shall promptly prosecute any person responsible for the Corporation Counsel.This civil remedy shall be in ad- • such a violation of this chapter or engaged in such viola- dition to and not in lieu of any criminal prosecution and tion.Any officer or authorized agent of the Commission penalty. (District of Columbia Historic Landmark and shall exercise concurrent or independent powers with the Historic District Protection Act of 1978,D.C.Law 2-144, Director in prosecuting violations of this chapter and stop- Section 11[b].) C. B. &Q. railroad roundhouse, Aurora, Illinois.The building will be part of a new intermodal transportation center. !I - t. ..ram -, o sa, _ -.- _ ,>.Uff _ .:::-`:.ei --.7.-:i-- ---li.-2112ii ..,� LT�A^, ..4 _: �� _ - �t C 29 • • Zfic E.r. 4, . ao lit � r -0t • - 1• I 7f _ . . �� tt�i '�. I t .. per.'a c • i 11.1 r-«!,I j• ' . `•�..��y l �• . ."' I• 'I • sit sr.r - 1I1lIi L1-1IIlll1lll 'Ill, I - '?11,4 ' lid. Irtllfly , .7 i f rr V o' J.= 44.- ,, ram, 1. T . si V, .'a _ : s. 'k 1,•- - .ram .i. .r,,,.• 1 , _ .. + tyilin kr -I- - - . - - 1 iami .. ,-,-.! ....k 4.,/.. - .1.-, .. . ; ,_ .„ t. • y , a ems, _ . n „ �. Ili ♦" r -�i Y•-. Y' •mil- ra It I .�. �*� ^mow Pioneer Square, Seattle CONCLUSION: WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF tion of other civil rights will increasingly come up as HISTORIC PRESERVATION? issues in the designation of historic landmarks and the The number of historic preservation ordinances around review of alteration and demolition permits. More and the country will continue to increase throughout the 1980s more communities will devise ways to soften the and 1990s. By no means every community with historic economic impact of historic preservation in cases where character has adopted an ordinance. Communities that a property owner can truly demonstrate that denial of have had a historic preservation program for some years an alteration or demolition permit will work an will also begin to see the need for a comprehensive revi- unreasonable economic harm.This will be done to short sion of their preservation ordinances.The state of the art circuit the number of preservation controversies that wind in the drafting of preservation ordinances has changed up in the courts by providing a preservation commission dramatically in the last 10 years, and every ordinance with an opportunity to review economic information and should be periodically reviewed and amended to tighten determine whether protection of the landmark is worth it and make it more useful. the likely cost of constitutionally required compensation The relationship between a historic preservation or- to the property owner. dinance and a community's comprehensive plan will also More and more property owners, too, when challeng- receive greater attention. Many more communities will ing a preservation ordinance, will do so on a procedural adopt formal preservation plans or add a preservation due process basis. Many preservation ordinances, component to an existing land-use plan. More corn- especially those drafted many years ago, are vague in munities will understand the relationship between historic their language,standards of designation,and standards for preservation and real property tax assessment policies and review of demolition and alteration permits, and deficient building codes and adopt new programs to encourage the in the procedural protections provided owners of renovation of designated landmarks by modifying designated landmarks.There will be court challenges to stringent building codes and providing property tax in- poorly written preservation ordinances, and the results centives to owners of landmark structures. More corn- of those court tests should benefit preservation as a whole munities, too, will develop financing incentives to en- by improving the state of the art in the use of preserva- courage the rehabilitation of designated landmarks. tion ordinances. A few individual buildings may be lost The legal basis for historic preservation is certainly as a result of these challenges, but if the lessons can be clearer now than it was prior to the decision of the applied to historic preservation law as a whole, stronger Supreme Court in the Penn Central case. Inverse condem- and better protection will be provided countless addi- nation, vested rights, and money damages for the viola- tional landmarks and historic districts. 30 , Appendices Appendix A. Excerpts from the Evanston, Illinois, Preservation Plan RECOMMENDATIONS located in northeast Evanston, northwest Evanston, Recommendations are put forth in this plan to provide and south-central Evanston respectively. Boundaries a basis for the successful management of preservation ac- should be defined on the basis of the concentration tivities in Evanston. These recommendations will serve of landmark-quality buildings, existing zoning, the as a strong foundation for the ongoing assessment of the character of surrounding structures, and the provision Commission's work and effectiveness. The basic recom- of a buffer zone. mendations are: 3. Develop a Lakefront Protection Ordinance 1. Complete the survey of significant structures in the The Commission should assist the Evanston Plan 10 intensive study areas, and establish new criteria Commission and the City Council in developing a for determining the most noteworthy landmarks Lakefront Protection Ordinance similar to that of through a second evaluation of the landmarks Chicago, which is cited in Appendix B.The Commis- already designated. sion should be attentive to activities in U-2 zoning 2. Identify and designate conservation and National districts to detect early on any potential conflicts be- Register districts. tween Northwestern University development interests and preservation objectives. 3. Assist in developing a Lakefront Protection l Ordinance. 4. Acquire Binding Review Powers 4. Acquire binding review powers. It is recommended that the Commission acquire bind- ing rather than advisory review powers to make it tru- I . 5. ReviGe the ordinance where necessary. ly effective.There is considerable precedent in Illinois for acquiring such powers. Because Evanston has such The Commission should develop procedures to ensure an abundance of landmarks and a special ambience, that these goals are effectively executed. the city demands a Commission with powers equal to the task of conservation in Evanston.The acquisition 1. Complete the Survey of binding review powers would require a redefinition The Commission should finish the identification and of the steps in the review process as well as a change evaluation of significant structures in the remainder in the ordinance. of the intensive study areas. Upon completion of this survey, new criteria should be established to determine 5. Revise the Ordinance the most noteworthy landmarks through a second Because the Commission derives its ultimate power Ievaluation of the landmarks already designated. In so from the preservation ordinance, a good ordinance is doing, different levels of protection could be essential to Commission effectiveness. The following developed to respond to different levels of significance. recommended revisions would strengthen the or- dinance and thus the Commission. 2. Identify and Designate Districts It is recommended that the Commission identify and 1. Cite home rule legislation as the statutory author designate local conservation and National Register ity. districts as well as individual landmark structures and 2. Define more clearly the composition of the sites. The Commission should develop detailed criteria Commission. for the designation of districts. 3. Compose a clearly stated purpose. — At this time, the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District 4. Group all"Powers and Duties"under one heading. has been officially designated a National Register Historic District.The Evanston Ridge Historic District 5. Develop detailed criteria and the process. for the may soon be nominated to the National Register. designation of districts. These two districts should also be designated as local 6. Grant binding rather than advisory review powers conservation districts, with boundaries roughly toter- on construction, demolition, and alterations of minous with the National Register boundaries. noteworthy landmark properties and within specially designated local districts. In addition to these two districts, three other poten- tial locally designated conservation districts are 7. Establish legally sound due process provisions. 31 8. Establish penalties for ordinance violations. can be dispensed through close interaction of city staff and a technical assistance subcommittee; 6. Develop an Effective Operational Procedure assist staff in developing a technical information The Commission must develop a mechanism whereby data base accessible to the public. the details of preservation activities are worked out prior to meetings of the full Commission so that Corn- 3. Liaison Committee—Create and maintain chan- mission meetings are devoted primarily to policy mak- nels of communication between the Preservation ing.To achieve this, it is recommended that Commis- Commission and the city, business community, sion members continue to belong to committees that citizenry, and institutional community; keep in- deal with specific sets of responsibilities but that the formed of the activities and actions of these committee structure be strengthened and much greater groups in matters that could have a bearing on use be made of staff, associate members, and technical preservation issues; make Preservation Commis- advisers. In this manner, the full Commission will not sion positions clear to these groups through for- have to deal with every aspect of every issue but will mal or informal presentations; inform the Corn- make decisions based on information that has been mission of possible areas of concern or opportuni- previously evaluated in detail. ty with these groups or agencies. At this time, it seems reasonable to organize Corn- 4. Program Development and Procedures mission members into six committees: Research and Committees—Develop and articulate the Com- Evaluation; Review and Technical Assistance; mission's short-range and long-range goals and Liaison; Program Development and Procedures; programs, in cooperation with other committees; Budget and Grants; and Public Education.The corn- establish administrative standards and opera- mittee structure may always be changed as future tional procedures to guide the efforts of the needs dictate, but the essence of doing the bulk of Commission. Commission work at committee level should be main- tained. Listed below are descriptions of the specific 5. Budget and Grants Committee—Review budget kinds of responsibilities of each of the six committees. proposals prepared by staff, make appropriate suggestions for modification, and present budget 1. Research and Evaluation Committee—Create and information to the Commission; monitor budget maintain a historic resource data base through hearings as necessary; report on approved research, photography, and maps; survey and budget, review expenses and expense projections evaluate structures instudy ' `�� .+uremaining intensive stuuy to the Commission on at least a semiannual basis; areas; explore continuing survey in remainder of review consultant contracts, performance reports, city; recommend designation of landmarks and and payments and report to the Commission districts to the Commission for approval by the when appropriate; review grant application pro- j City Council; consider deletions from the land- posals prepared by staff and report on them to mark list for inappropriate exterior alterations or the Commission; coordinate formal presentations demolition; recommend National Register before grantor organizations; investigate and j nominations for structures or districts and assist staff in development of fund-raising prepare nominations where appropriate; develop mechanisms when requested by the Commission. and apply an evaluation system to determine a scale of relative importance for landmarks. 6. Public Education Committee—Sensitize the corn- ' 2. Review and Technical Assistance Committee— munity to the value of preservation and foster an ,I Establish review criteria for evaluating the impact appreciation of Evanston's rich historical and ar- h of alterations on landmark structures; develop chitectural heritage through publications, tours, 1 review procedures compliant with existing or pro- lectures, and school programs; inform citizens of posed preservation ordinances; conduct reviews preservation issues affecting the community; pro- of applications with staff and/or an advisory sub- vide a source of information to assist in restora- committee; establish standards to develop a tion and rehabilitation projects; organize and pre- framework for providing technical assistance; sent special events when necessary to further develop procedures by which technical assistance preservation goals. i i 's 1 a Y 9 11 `( 32 I Appendix B. Analysis of the Historic Zoning Commission's Summary of Recommendations, Metropolitan Nashville-Davidson County, 1981 At present, the MHZC cannot undertake all of the d. Annual reports; recommendations that have been made throughout this e. Glossary of terms; analysis. Some of the recommendations made here re- quire legislation or the cooperation of other groups before f. List of contractors, subcontractors, craftspeople they can be.realized. Some of the recommendations re- working on older structures in Nashville. quire a staff and budget. However, this report looks to the future and optimum improvements for which the 5. MHZC needs a full-time staff person and a small MHZC and its staff can strive. operating budget in order to be able to continue to A summary of the recommendations discussed in this fulfill its obligations as a Metro agency. report follows. A. REVIEW OF WORK C. INVOLVEMENT OF OTHER AGENCIES AND GROUPS 1. A design plan offering constructive approaches to 1. A greater degree of cooperation is necessary on the infill construction in Edgefield is greatly needed to part of MDHA, Board of Education, and Depart- place the MHZC in a positive position when review- ment of Codes Administration staff. ing construction plans and to encourage development. 2. The definitions of"reparable"and"irreparable,"as found in the Metro Housing Code, need to be 2. The "compatibility" of a design should be viewed altered as they relate to contributing buildings in in the broad context of the visual integrity, quali- historic districts. ty, and character of the entire local historic zone. 3. Demolition and rehab notices, issued by the Codes 3. Minor work items that do not require a permit, but department, should force rehabilitation through per that can.be visually disastrous in a historic district, diem fines for lack of improvements, rather than should require MHZC approval if a majority of the forcing demolition in historic districts. district property owners so desire. 4. The MHZC needs the authority to issue stop-work 4. Work undertaken without a permit when one is re- orders in a historic district if the Codes department quired and work undertaken contrary to MHZC ap- staff cannot respond to the MHZC requests for such proval should carry with it a per diem fine from the orders more quickly than it has in the past. time the owner is notified of the error until the work is brought into compliance with MHZC design 5. The MHZC should notify the formal neighborhood guidelines. organization that represents a historic district of commission meetings and business to be discussed, 5. Code compliance should be fostered through and the organization should appoint a represen- penalities that force appropriate rehab rather than tative to attend MHZC meetings. demolition. 6. The MHZC needs the continued support of the B. ADMINISTRATION property owners of a historic district, after local 1. MHZC and the neighborhood group in each local designation. historic zone must commit themselves to 7. Historic district property owners and the MHZC establishing a formal monitoring system of exterior should work together to address neighborhood work. problems that involve both groups, to form a 2. MHZC should meet more often, and portions of public-private partnership. meetings that deal with design agreements should be tape recorded for future clarification. D. LEGISLATION 1. Staff members of the MHZC, MHC, Tennessee 3. Announcements of MHZC meetings should include Historical Commission, and Metro Legal Depart- addresses of structures to be reviewed. ment believe the present state enabling legislation 4. Greater public information and technical assistance affecting local historic zones needs to be revised to should be provided to district property owners by afford greater flexibility at the municipal level. MHZC staff in the form of: 2. Article IX, of the Metro Zoning Ordinance, should a. MHZC brochures; be studied by the MHZC and staff, in conjunction with historic district property owners, to determine b. Periodic newsletters/mailings; if local legislative revisions are favored. c. Neighborhood workshops; 33 Appendix C. Design Guidelines for Pike Place Market, Seattle, Washington T. GENERAL EXTERIOR/INTERIOR ELEMENTS seller are essential in experiencing the Market. a. Exterior building surfaces above the first-story level Display methods or sales practices that lessen or and the primary architectural elements below the eliminate the personal services by the merchant are undesirable. Spaces open to the arcades or public marquee—columns, arches, rails, decorated ceil- ings, etc. ways are much preferable to shops with closed fronts. In all cases, merchandise should be easily Buildings should be a backdrop to the Market ac- visible from the main pedestrian ways. tivities. New building or physical change will be evaluated for the effect on the whole zone.The in- b. Individual shop decor tegrity of a building or series of buildings should Store decor should complement, not compete with be respected. the store products. The use of unfinished wood, b. The Main Market signs rough wood, or shingles ordinarily will not be These should be carefully maintained. permitted. c. The Main Arcade interiors c. Signs Signs should be simple, clear, and direct. Painted These should be meticulously maintained. signs are preferred.Backlit fluorescent signs are not d. Lights that illuminate the interior public ways permitted, but neon may be acceptable.One of the The bulbs should be incandescent, and the fixtures many standard lettering styles should be used. Signs should be maintained or replaced with similar or should not hide or obscure the architectural identical ones. Where possible, the same material elements of the building. Exterior signs should be should be used throughout this zone. flat against the building, painted on it, or hung from the underside of marquees, perpendicular to the 2. PEDESTRIAN/CUSTOMER ELEMENTS sidewalk. Signs attached to the edge of marquees a. Awnings-sunshades should not extend above the marquee's upper edges. Stationary sandwich boards are not allowed on lcity Awnings had h ld be of translucent cloth sidewalks.Where permitted in the Market, Clwnmgs or sunshades should Street)or sidewalks. in , and the same color or pair of colors on any one they should not impede pedestrian movement. building. d. Display cases b. Arcade shop lighting Display structures must not diminish the open feel- The incandescent fixtures should be maintained. ing along the arcades, nor should they interfere with The lights should be of uniform wattage. views into, through, or out of the Market. c. Street lighting e. Security devices One type will be used throughout the district. Off-hour night security doors, gates, and covers d. Street furniture should be finished and unobtrusive. Public seating is needed, particularly on the island f. Color sidewalk of Pike Street. Covered seating along the arcade should be provided without impeding Brighter colors will be allowed for some signs, trim, pedestrian movement. Trash receptacles should be and display shelves than will be allowed on walls, provided throughout this zone. ceilings, etc. Generally, interior colors that are not visible from the pedestrian ways are at the discre- e. Walls and ceilings that are visible along the arcades tion of the individual merchants. However, no Walls and ceiling colors should be light. fluorescent paint colors will be permitted. f. Trees, plants, and flowers g. Interior shop lights Potted trees, plants, and flowers are acceptable but High stalls and enclosed shops or restaurants might should not impede pedestrian traffic. be allowed to use some fluorescent lights if the lights are thoroughly concealed and if incandescent spec- 3. MERCHANT-RELATED ELEMENTS trum tubes are used. Special consideration will be a. Merchandising techniques given to the lighting requirements of the U.S. Face-to-face transactions between the buyer and the Department of Agriculture. 34 • Appendix D. Historic District Design Guidelines for New Construction, Salt Lake City, Utah* HEIGHT MASSING Consider—Relating the overall height of new construc- Consider—Breaking up uninteresting boxlike forms into tion to that of adjacent structures.As a general rule, con- smaller, varied masses such as are common on most struct new buildings to a height roughly equal to the buildings from the historic period. Variety of form and average height of existing buildings from the historic massing are elements essential to the character of the period on and across the street. streetscape in historic districts. 111111, Avoid—New construction that greatly varies in height 4.111" (too high or too low)from older buildings in the vicinity. [J] 1111111 Avoid—Single, monolithic forms that are not relieved by variations in massing. Boxlike facades and forms are in- trusive when placed in a streetscape of older buildings that have varied massing and facade articulation. SCALE Consider—Relating the size and proportions of new struc- tures to the scale of adjacent buildings. Although much larger than its neighbors in terms of square footage, the building shown maintains the same scale and rhythm as DIRECTIONAL EXPRESSION the existing buildings. Consider—Relating the vertical,horizontal, or nondirec- ��,� tional facade character of new buildings to the predomi- - nant directional expression of nearby buildings.Horizon- . . tal buildings can be made to relate to the more vertical • adjacent structures by breaking the facade into smaller ig masses that conform to the primary expression of the streetscape. Avoid—Buildings that in height, width, or massing violate the existing scale of the area. The new building f ' shown here disrupts the scale and rhythm of the streetscape, although it might be appropriate in a different r location. Avoid—Strongly horizontal or vertical facade expressions unless compatible with the character of structures in the immediate area.The new building shown does not relate 4111 ' well to either its neighbors or to the rhythm of the streetscape because of its unbroken horizontal facade. 'Prepared for the Planning and Zoning Commission by Utah State Historical Society. 35 SETBACK SENSE OF ENTRY Consider—Maintaining the historic facade lines of Consider—Articulating the main entrances to the building streetscapes by locating front walls of new buildings in with covered porches, porticos, and other pronounced the same plane as the facades of adjacent buildings. If architectural forms. Entries were historically raised a few exceptions are made, buildings should be set back into steps above the grade of the property and were a promi- the lot rather than closer to the street. If existing setbacks nent visual feature of the street elevation of the building. vary, new buildings should conform to historic siting patterns. AI. , ,.:_ , Ishi, iriA.. , .... ....._...,• _ __ UIjiflj • Avoid—Violating the existing setback pattern by plat-ing new buildings in front of or behind the historic facade �, {- line. Avoid placing buildings at odd angles to the street, unless in an area where diverse siting already exists, even Avoid—Facades with no strong sense of entry. Side en- if proper setback is maintained. tries or entries not defined by a porch or similar transi- tional element result in an incompatible"flat"first-floor Ilk facade. 19Sh ill . g n ---1 LIII 1:::::::'::': I ,. , , 47 '.' ' PLATFORMS '---. fplatformaiti \ �'- Consider—The use of a raised platform is a trau� o.,.�a, siting characteristic of most of the older buildings in Salt Lake City. This visual"pedestal" is created by retaining walls and terracing up to the building or by high foun- dation walls and stepped entries. ROOF SHAPES '�_ �,- found Consider Relating the roof forms of the new buildings to those f in the area. Although not entirely necessary, duplication of the existing or traditional roof /�� _ shapes, pitches, and materials on new construction is one -,.: I� 111 way of making new structures more visually compatible. III Its zz.. .....1■1 Avoid—Bringing walls of new buildings straight out of --_____--- the ground without a sense of platform, i.e., without maintaining the same entry height as neighboring —_________ buildings. Such structures seem squat, visually in- complete, and do not relate well to their elevated Avoid—Introducing roof shapes,pitches, or materials not neighbors. Also avoid leveling off terraced slopes or traditionally used in the area. removing retained platforms. ID Ca P1'. -4' ►l . RHYTHM OF OPENINGS IMITATIONS Consider—Respecting the recurrent alternation of wall Consider—Accurate restoration of or visually compati- areas with door and window elements in the facade.Also ble additions to existing buildings, and,for new construc- consider the width-to-height ratio of bays in the facade. tion, contemporary architecture that well represents our The placement of openings with respect to the facade's own time, yet enhances the nature and character of the overall composition, symmetry, or balanced asymmetry historic district. should be carefully studied. A u.., �� p„,,K•N..1 'WWI El ® � Q : m as EDBno to npri ; ° . p e . ..... r--- 1 f 1 i 71 Avoid—Introducing incompatible facade patterns that Avoid—Replicating or imitating the styles, motifs, or upset the rhythm of openings established in surrounding details of older periods. Such attempts are rarely suc- structures.Glass walls and window and door shapes and cessful and, even if done well, present a confusing pic- locations shown in the example are disrespectful to the ture of the true character of the historical area. adjoining buildings. NI Ai9�J 1 _- lil.71144.0.1 . grn� 11 a n _ � B 11 ®� po El IFTI III i'') - ].! • 37 Appendix E. An Ordinance Providing for the Preservation of Structures or Areas of Historic or Architectural Significance Liberty, Missouri* WHEREAS, movements and shifts of population and the 4. Protecting and enhancing the attractiveness of the changes in residential, commercial, and industrial uses city to home buyers, tourists, visitors, and shop- and customs threaten the destruction of areas, places, pers, and thereby supporting and promoting structures, works of art, and other objects having special business, commerce, industry, and providing historic, community, architectural, or aesthetic impor- economic benefit to the city; tance, interest, or value and whose preservation and con- 5. Fostering and encouraging preservation, restora- tinued utilization are necessary and desirable for the en- tion, and rehabilitation of structures, areas, and joyment and beauty of the city of Liberty and for the neighborhoods and thereby preventing future ur- welfare of the citizens of Liberty; and ban blight. WHEREAS, the city of Liberty contains many structures and areas that embody a sense of time and place unique B. Definitions to the city, or which exemplify or reflect the cultural, Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases social, economic,'political, or architectural history of the in this ordinance shall be interpreted so as to give nation, the state of Missouri, or the city; and them the same meaning as they have in common usage and so as to give this ordinance its most WHEREAS, the protection of the historic and architec- reasonable application. tural character and resources of the city of Liberty is necessary for the promotion of its economic development; 1. Alteration—Any act or process that changes one and or more of the exterior architectural features of a structure, including, but not limited to, the erec- WHEREAS, Sections 20 and 40 of Chapter 89 of the tion, construction, reconstruction, or removal of Missouri Cities,Towns,and Villages Act authorizes estab- any structure. lishment of a comprehensive program for the designation —and protection of features of historic significance; 2. Area—A specific geographic division of the city of Liberty. 'IOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY Certificate of Appropriateness—A certificate COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIBERTY, CLAY COUN- f is TY, MISSOURI: issued by the Preservation Commission in- dicating its approval of plans for alteration, con- SECTION ONE: struction, removal, or demolition of a landmark That "The Zoning Ordinance of the city of Liberty of or of a structure within a historic district. 1971," as amended, shall be further amended by renumbering Section XXXI through Section XXXIX in- 4. Certificate of Economic Hardship—A certificate clusive as Section XXXII through Section XL respective- issued by the Preservation Commission authoriz- ly, and by adding thereto a new section, numbered Sec- ing an alteration, construction, removal, or tion XXXI and entitled "Historic Preservation"; so that demolition, even though a Certificate of Ap- hereafter the said Section XXXI shall be and read as propriateness has previously been denied. follows: 5. Commissioners—Members of the Liberty Historic Preservation Historic Preservation Commission. A. Purpose 6. Construction—The act of adding an addition to The purpose of this ordinance is to promote the an existing structure or the erection of a new prin- educational, cultural, economic, and general welfare cipal or accessory structure on a lot or property. of the community by: 7. Council—The City Council of the city of Liberty. 1. Providing a mechanism to identify and preserve the distinctive historic and architectural 8. Demolition—Any act or process that destroys in characteristics of Liberty which represent part or in whole a landmark or a structure within elements of the city's cultural, social, economic, a historic district. political, and architectural history; 9. Design Guideline—A standard of appropriate ac- 2. Fostering civic pride in the beauty and noble ac- tivity that will preserve the historic and architec- complishments of the past as represented in Liber- tural character of a structure or area. ty's landmarks and historic districts; 10. Exterior Architectural Appearance—The ar- 3. Conserving and improving the value of proper- chitectural character and general composition of ty designated as landmarks or within historic the exterior of a structure, including but not districts; limited to the kind, color, and texture of the *February 8, 1983, draft. building material and the type, design, and 38 character of all windows, doors, light fixtures, of or the disqualification of the regular members. signs, and appurtenant elements. Vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired term only. Members may be removed for cause by the Mayor 11. Historic District—An area designated as a and City Council upon written charges and after "historic district"by ordinance of the City Coun- public hearing. cil and which may contain within definable geographic boundaries one or more landmarks E. Officers and which may have within its boundaries other Officers shall consist of a chairman, a vice-chairman, properties or structures that, while not of such and a secretary elected by the Preservation Commis- historic and/or architectural significance to be sion who shall each serve a term of one (1) year and designated as landmarks, nevertheless contribute shall be eligible for re-election; but no member shall to the overall visual characteristics of the land- serve as chairman for more than two (2)consecutive mark or landmarks located within the historic years. The chairman shall preside over meetings. In district. the absence of the chairman, the vice-chairman shall 12. Landmark—A property or structure designated perform the duties of the chairman. If both are ab- as a"landmark"by ordinance of the City Coun- sent, a temporary chairman shall be elected by those cil,pursuant to procedures prescribed herein, that present. The secretary to the Preservation Commis- is worthy of rehabilitation, restoration, and sion shall have the following duties: preservation because of its historic and/or ar- 1. Take minutes of each Preservation Commission chitectural significance to the city of Liberty. meeting; 13. Owner of Record—The person, corporation, or 2. Be responsible for publication and distribution other legal entity listed as owner on the records of copies of the minutes, reports, and decisions of the County Recorder of Deeds. of the Preservation Commission to the members 14. Preservation Commission—The Liberty Historic of the Preservation Commission; Preservation Commission. 3. Give notice as provided herein or by law for all 15. Remozial—Any relocation of a structure on its public hearings conducted by the Preservation site or to another site. Commission; 16. Repair—Any change that is not construction, 4. Advise the mayor of vacancies on the Preserva- removal, or alteration. tion Commission and expiring terms of members; and 17. Structure—Anything constructed or erected, the use of which requires permanent or temporary 5. Prepare and submit to the City Council a com- location on or in the ground, including, but plete record of the proceedings before the Preser- without limiting the generality of the foregoing, vation Commission on any matter requiring buildings, fences, gazebos, advertising signs, Council consideration. billboards, backstops for tennis courts, radio and television antennae, including supporting towers, F. Meetings and swimming pools. A quorum shall consist of a majority of the members. All decisions or actions of the Preservation Commis- C. Composition of Historic Preservation Commission sion shall be made by a majority vote of those The Liberty Historic Preservation Commission shall members present and voting at any meeting where consist of seven(7)members,residents of Liberty, all a quorum exists. Meetings shall be held at regularly of whom shall be appointed by the Mayor and ap- scheduled times to be established by resolution of the proved by the City Council. The Mayor shall make Preservation Commission at the beginning of each every reasonable effort to appoint persons with a calendar year or at any time upon the call of the demonstrated interest in the history or architecture Chairman. No member of the Preservation Commis- of the city of Liberty, and at least one (1) member sion shall vote on any matter that may materially or of the Preservation Commission shall be a Missouri- apparently affect the property, income, or business registered architect, one(1) an attorney, and one(1) interest of that member. No action shall be taken by a person experienced in real estate. the Commission that could in any manner deprive or restrict the owner of a property in its use, modifica- D. Terms tion, maintenance, disposition, or demolition until The term of office of the members of the Preserva- such owner shall first have had the opportunity to tion Commission shall be for five years,excepting that be heard at public meeting of the Preservation Corn- the membership of the first Preservation Commission mission, as provided herein. The chairman, and in appointed shall serve respectively for terms of one for his absence the acting chairman, may administer one year; one for two years; one for three years; one oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses. All for four years; and one for five years.A member may meetings of the Preservation Commission shall be serve only two consecutive terms. Three alternate open to the public. The Preservation Commission members shall be appointed to serve in the absence shall keep minutes of its proceedings, showing the 39 vote, indicating such fact, and shall keep records of such actions.Applicants may be required to sub- its examinations and other official actions, all of mit plans, drawings, elevations, specifications, which shall be immediately filed in the office of the and other information as may be necessary to Preservation Commission and shall be a public make decisions; record. 11. To consider applications for Certificates of Economic Hardship that would allow the perfor- G. Powers and Duties mance of work for which a Certificate of Ap- The Preservation Commission shall have the follow- propriateness has been denied; ing powers.and duties: 12. To develop specific design guidelines for the 1. To adopt its own procedural regulations; alteration, construction, or removal of landmarks {`• or property and structures within historic 2. To conduct an ongoing survey to identify historically and architecturally significant proper- districts. ties, structures, and areas that exemplify the 13. To review proposed zoning amendments, ap- cultural,social, economic, political, or architec- plications for special use permits, or applications tural history of the nation, state, or city; for zoning variances that affect proposed or 3. To investigate and recommend to the Planning designated landmarks and historic districts.The and Zoning Commission and to the City Coun- Director of Community Development shall send cil the adoption of ordinances designating prop- applications for special use or zoning variations erties or structures having special historic, corn- to the Preservation Commission for comment munity, or architectural value as "landmarks." prior to the date of the hearing by the Planning and Zoning Commission or Board of Zoning 4. To investigate and recommend to the Planning Adjustment; and Zoning Commission and to the City Coun- 14. To administer on behalf of the city of Liberty any cil the adoption of ordinances designating areas property or full or partial interest in real proper- as having special historic, community, or ar- chitectural value as "historic districts"; ty, including easements, that the city of Liberty may have or accept as a gift or otherwise, upon 5. To keep a register of all properties and structures authorization and approval,by the City Council; that have been designated as landmarks or 15. To accept and administer on behalf of the city historic districts, including all information re- of Liberty such gifts, grants, and money as may quired for each designation; be appropriate for the purposes of this ordinance. 6. To determine an appropriate system of markers Such money may be expended for publishing and make recommendations for the design and maps and brochures or for hiring staff persons implementation of specific markings of the streets or consultants or performing other appropriate and routes leading from one landmark or historic functions for the purpose of carrying out the district to another; duties and powers of the Preservation Commis- sion and the purposes of this ordinance; 7. To advise and assist owners of landmarks and property or structures within historic districts on 16. To call upon available city staff members as well physical and financial aspects of preservation, as other experts for technical advice; renovation, rehabilitation, and reuse, and on 17. To retain such specialists or consultants or to ap- f Historic ures for inclusion on the National Register point such citizen advisory committees as may o of His Places; be required from time to time; 8. To nominate landmarks and historic districts to 18. To testify before all boards and commissions, in- the National Register of Historic Places, and to cluding the Planning and Zoning Commission review and comment on any National Register and the Board of Zoning Adjustments, on any nominations submitted to the Preservation Com- matter affecting historically and architecturally mission upon request of the Mayor or City significant property, structures, and areas; Council; 9. To inform and educate the citizens of Liberty con- 19. To confer recognition upon the owners of land- cerning the historic and architectural heritage of marks or property or structures within historic the city by publishing appropriate maps,newslet- districts by means of certificates, plaques, or \ ters, brochures, and pamphlets, and by holding markers; programs and seminars; 20. To develop a preservation component in the 10. To hold public hearings and to review applica- General Plan of the city of Liberty and to recom- tions for construction, alteration, removal, or mend it to the Planning and Zoning Commission demolition affecting proposed or designated land- and to the City Council; ,� marks or structures within historic districts and 21. To periodically review the Liberty Zoning Or- issue or deny Certificates of Appropriateness for dinance and to recommend to the Planning and 40 Zoning Commission and the City Council any ty, state, or national event; amendments appropriate for the protection and 3. Its identification with a person or persons who continued use of landmarks or property and structures within historic districts; and significantly contributed to the development of the community, county, state, or country; 22. To undertake any other action or activity 4. Its embodiment of distinguishing characteristics necessary or appropriate to the implementation of its powers and duties or to implementation of of an architectural style valuable for the study the purpose of this ordinance. of a period, type, method of construction, or use of indigenous materials; H. Surveys and Research 5. Its identification as the work of a master builder, The Preservation Commission shall undertake an designer, architect, or landscape architect whose ongoing survey and research effort in the city of individual work has influenced the development Liberty to identify neighborhoods, areas, sites, struc- of the community, county, state, or country; tures, and objects that have historic, community, ar- chitectural, or aesthetic importance, interest, or value. 6. Its embodiment of elements of design, detailing, As part of the survey, the Preservation Commission materials, or craftsmanship that render it ar- shall review and evaluate any prior surveys and chitecturally significant; studies by any unit of government or private 7. Its embodiment of design elements that make it organization and compile appropriate descriptions, structurally or architecturally innovative; facts, and photographs.Before the Preservation Com- mission shall on its own initiative nominate any land- 8. Its unique location or singular physical mark for designation, it shall first develop a plan and characteristics that make it an established or schedule for completion of a survey of the city of familiar visual feature; Liberty to identify potential landmarks. The Preser- 9. Its character as a particularly fine or unique ex- vation Commission shall then systematically identify ample of a utilitarian structure, including,but not potential landmarks and adopt procedures to limited to farmhouses, gas stations, or other corn- nominate them in groups based upon the following mercial structures, with a high level of integrity criteria: or architectural significance; and/or 1. The potential landmarks in one identifiable 10. Its suitability for preservation or restoration. neighborhood or distinct geographical area of the Any that meets one or city of Liberty; structure, property, or area �.«. ...... more of the above criteria shall also have sufficient 2. The potential landmarks associated with a par- integrity of location, design,materials, and workman- ticular person, event, or historical period; ship to make it worthy of preservation or restoration. 3. The potential landmarks of a particular architec- tural style or school, or of a particular architect, K. Report and Recommendation of Preservation engineer, builder, designer, or craftsman; Commission The Preservation Commission shall within forty-five 4. Such other criteria as may be adopted by the (45)days from receipt of a completed nomination in Preservation Commission to assure systematic proper form adopt by resolution a recommendation survey and nomination of all potential landmarks that the nominated landmark or historic district does within the city of Liberty. or does not meet the criteria for designation in I. Nomination of Landmarks and Historic Districts Paragraph J of this ordinance. The resolution shall Nominations shall be made to the Preservation Corn- be accompanied by a report to the Planning and Zon- mission on a form prepared by it and may be sub- ing Commission containing the following mitted by a member of the Preservation Commission, information: owner of record of the nominated property or struc- 1. Explanation of the significance or lack of ture, the City Council, or any other person or significance of the nominated landmark or organization. historic district as it relates to the criteria for designation; J. Criteria for Consideration of Nomination 2. Explanation of the integrity or lack of integrity The Preservation Commission shall, upon such in-• of the nominated landmark or historic district; vestigation as it deems necessary, make a determina- tion as to whether a nominated property, structures, 3. In the case of a nominated landmark found to or area meets one or more of the following criteria: meet the criteria for designation: 1. Its character, interest, or value as part of the a. The significant exterior architectural features development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the nominated landmark that should be of the community, county, state, or country; protected; 2. Its location as a site of a significant local, coun- b. The types of construction, alteration,demoli- 41 tion, and removal, other than those requir- The relationship of a structure within a historic ing a building or demolition permit, that district to the open space between it and adjoin- should be reviewed for appropriateness pur- ing structures should be compatible. suant to the provisions of Paragraphs V 4. Roof Shape—The design of the roof should be through Z of this ordinance. compatible with the architectural style and character of the landmark and surrounding struc- 4. In the case of a nominated historic district found tures in a historic district. to meet the criteria for designation: a. The.types of significant exterior architectural 5. Landscaping—Landscaping should be compati- features of the structures within the nominated ble with the architectural character and ap- pearance of the landmark and of surrounding historic district that should be protected; structures and landscapes in historic districts. b. The types of alterations and demolitions that 6. Scale—The scale of the structure after alteration, should be reviewed for appropriateness pur- construction, or partial demolition should be suant to the provisions of Paragraphs V compatible with its architectural style and through Z of this ordinance. character and with surrounding structures in a 5. Proposed design guidelines for applying the historic district. criteria for review of Certificates of Ap- 7. Directional Expression—Facades in historic propriateness to the nominated landmark or districts should blend with other structures with historic district. regard to directional expression. Structures in a historic district should be compatible with the 6. The relationship of the nominated landmark or dominant horizontal or vertical expression of sur- historic district to the ongoing effort of the rounding structures. The directional expression Preservation Commission to identify and of a landmark after alteration, construction, or nominate all potential areas and structures that partial demolition should be compatible with its meet the criteria for designation. original architectural style and character. 7. Recommendations as to appropriate permitted 8. Architectural Details—Architectural details in- uses, special uses, height and area regulations, cluding materials, colors, and textures should be minimum dwelling size, floor area, sign regula- treated so as to make a landmark compatible with and parking regulations necessary or ap- its original architectural style and character and Molls, parking propriate to the preservation of the nominated to preserve and enhance the architectural style landmark or historic district. or character of a landmark or historic district. 8. A map showing the location of the nominated M. Notification of Nomination landmark and the boundaries of the nominated historic district. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall schedule a public hearing on the nomination within thirty(30) The recommendations and report of the Preservation days following receipt of a report and recommenda- Commission shall be sent to the Planning and Zon- tion from the Preservation Commission that a ing Commission within seven (7) days following the nominated landmark or historic district does or does vote on the resolution and shall be available to the not meet the criteria for designation. Notice of the public in the offices of the Preservation Commission. date, time, place, and purpose of the public hearing and a copy of the completed nomination form shall L. Design Guidelines be sent by regular mail to the owner(s)of record and Design guidelines for applying the criteria for review to the nominators, as well as to property owners ad- of Certificates of Appropriateness shall, at a joining the nominated landmark or historic district minimum, consider the following architectural at least fifteen(15)days prior to the date of the hear- criteria: ing. Notice shall also be published in a newspaper having general circulation in the city of Liberty.The 1. Height—The height of any proposed alteration notice shall state the street address and legal descrip- or construction should be compatible with the tion of a nominated landmark and the boundaries of style and character of the landmark and with sur- a nominated historic district. rounding structures in a historic district. 2. Proportions of Windows and Doors—The pro- N. Public Hearing portions and relationships between doors and Oral or written testimony concerning the significance windows should be compatible with the architec- of the nominated landmark or historic district shall tural style and character of the landmark and be taken at the public hearing from any person con- with surrounding structures within a historic cerning the nomination. The Preservation Commis- district. sion may present expert testimony or present its own evidence regarding the compliance of the nominated 3. Relationship of Building Masses and Spaces— landmark or historic district with the criteria for con- 42 • i sideration of a nomination set forth in Paragraph J testimony in the same manner as provided in ' of this ordinance.The owner of any nominated land- Paragraphs M and N of this ordinance. Any resolu- mark or of any property within a nominated preser- tion or ordinance shall be accompanied by a written vation district shall be allowed reasonable opportuni- statement explaining the reasons for the action of the ty to present evidence regarding significance and shall Council.The City Clerk shall provide written notifica- be afforded the right of representation by counsel and tion of the action of the Council by regular mail to the reasonable opportunity to cross-examine expert nominator, the appellant,and the owner(s)of record witnesses. The hearing shall be closed upon comple- of the nominated landmark or of all property within tion of testimony. a nominated historic district.The notice shall include a copy of the designation ordinance or resolution O. Determination by Planning and Zoning Commission passed by the Council and shall be sent within seven Within thirty (30) days following close of the public (7)days of the Council action.A copy of each designa- hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall tion ordinance shall be sent to the Preservation Corn- make a determination upon the evidence whether the mission, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and nominated landmark or historic district does or does the Building Department. not meet the criteria for designation. Such a deter- mination shall be passed by resolution of the Plan- S. The Designation Ordinance ning and Zoning Commission and shall be accom- Upon designation, the landmark or historic district f panied by-a report stating the findings of the Plan- shall be classified as a"District H—Historic District," ning and Zoning Commission concerning the relation- and the designating ordinance shall prescribe the ship between the criteria for designation in Paragraph significant exterior architectural features; the types J of this ordinance and the nominated landmark or of construction, alteration, demolition, and removal, ' historic district and all other information required by other than those requiring a building or demolition Paragraph K of this ordinance. permit that should be reviewed for appropriateness; the design guidelines for applying the criteria for P. Notification of Determination review of appropriateness; permitted uses; special Notice of the determination of the Planning and Zon- uses; height and area regulations; minimum dwell- ing Commission, including a copy of the report, shall ing size; floor area; sign regulation; and parking be sent by regular mail to the owijer of record of a regulations. The official zoning map of the city of nominated landmark and of all property within a Liberty shall be amended to show the location of the I nominated historic district and to the nominator "District H—Historic District." within seven (7) days following adoption of i he resolution. Within seven (7) days following a deter- T. Interim Control mination by the Planning and Zoning Commission No building permit shall be issued by the Building that the nominated landmark or historic district does Department for alteration, construction,demolition, meet the criteria for designation, a copy of the resolu- or removal of a nominated landmark or of any prop- tion and report accompanied by a recommendation erty or structure within a nominated historic district that the nominated landmark or historic district be from the date of the meeting of the Preservation Corn- designated shall be sent,to the Council. mission at which a nomination form is first presented until the final disposition of the nomination by the Q. Appeal City Council unless such alteration, removal, or A determination by the Planning and Zoning Corn- demolition is authorized by formal resolution of the mission that the nominated landmark or historic City Council as necessary for public health, welfare, district does not meet the criteria for designation shall or safety. In no event shall the delay be for more than be a final administrative decision reviewable under the one hundred eighty (180) days. Missouri Administrative Procedure and Review Act provided,however, that the nominator or any owner U. Amendment and Rescission of Designation - of the nominated landmark or of property within the Designation may be amended or rescinded upon peti- nominated historic district may within thirty(30)days tion to the Preservation Commission and compliance after the postmarked date of the notice of the deter- with the same procedure and according to the same mination file with the City Clerk a written appeal to criteria set forth herein for designation. the Council. V. Certificate of Appropriateness R. Action by City Council A Certificate of Appropriateness shall be required The Council shall, within sixty(60)days after receiv- before the following actions affecting the exterior ar- ing the recommendation that the nominated landmark chitectural appearance of any landmark or property or historic district be designated or receiving a writ- within a historic district may be undertaken: ten appeal,either reject the recommendation or writ- 1. Any construction, alteration, or removal requir- ten appeal by formal resolution or designate the land- ing a building permit from the city of Liberty; mark or historic district by an ordinance.The Coun- cil may hold a public hearing before enacting the 2. Any demolition in whole or in part requiring a resolution or ordinance and provide notice and take permit from the city of Liberty; 43 3. Any construction, alteration, demolition, or or reapply for a building or demolition permit that removal affecting a significant exterior architec- takes into consideration the recommendations of the tural feature as specified in the ordinance Preservation Commission. designating the landmark or historic district. Z. Standards for Review In considering an application for a building or demoli- W. Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness tion permit or for a Certificate of Appropriateness, Every application for a demolition permit or a the Preservation Commission shall be guided by the building permit, including the accompanying plans following general standards in addition to any design and specifications, affecting the exterior architectural guidelines in the ordinance designating the landmark appearance of a designated landmark or of a proper- or historic district. ty within a designated historic district shall be for- warded by the Building Department to the Preserva- 1. Every reasonable effort shall be made to pro- tion Commission within seven (7) days following vide a compatible use for a property that re- receipt of the application by the Building Department. quires minimal alteration of the building, struc- The Building Department shall not issue the building ture, or site and its environment, or to use a or demolition permit until a Certificate of Ap- property for its originally intended purpose. propriateness has been issued by the Preservation 2. The distinguishing original qualities or Commission. Any applicant may request a meeting character of a building, structure, or site and with the Preservation Commission before the applica- its environment shall not be destroyed. The tion is sent by the Building Department to the Preser- removal or alteration of any historic material vation Commission or during the review of the ap- or distinctive architectural feature should be plication. Application for review of construction, avoided when possible. alteration, demolition, or removal not requiring a building permit for which a Certificate of Ap- 3. All buildings, structures, and sites shall be propriateness is required shall be made on a form recognized as products of their own time. prepared by the Preservation Commission and Alterations that have no historical basis and available at,the office of the Preservation Commis- that seek to create an earlier appearance shall sion.The Preservation Commission shall consider the be discouraged. completed application at its next regular meeting.The 4. Changes that may have taken place in the ■ Preservation Commission may establish a subcom- course of time are evidence of the history and mittee of five of its members to review routine ao- development ent of a building, structure, or site plications for a Certificate of Appropriateness when delay to the next regular meeting would create an un- and its environment.These changes may have necessary inconvenience to the applicant. A Cer- acquired significance in their own right, and this significance shall be recognized and tificate of Appropriateness may be issued prior to the respected. next regular meeting upon the signatures of four of the members of the subcommittee. 5. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship that characterize a X. Determination by Preservation Commission building, structure, or site shall be treated with The Preservation Commission shall review the ap- sensitivity. plication for a building or demolition permit or for a Certificate of Appropriateness and issue or deny the 6. Deteriorated architectural features shall be Certificate of Appropriateness within forty-five(45) repaired rather than replaced, wherever possi- days of receipt of the application. Written notice of ble. In the event replacement is necessary, the the approval or denial of the application for a Cer- new material should match the material being tificate of Appropriateness shall be provided the ap- replaced in composition, design, color, texture, plicant and the Building Department within seven(7) and other visual qualities. Repair or replace- days following the determination and shall be accom- ment of missing architectural features should panied by a Certificate of Appropriateness in the case be based on accurate duplication of features, of an approval. substantiated by historic, physical, or pictorial evidence, rather than on conjectural designs or Y. Denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness the availability of different architectural A denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness shall be elements from other buildings or structures. accompanied by a statement of the reasons for the 7. The surface cleaning of structures shall be denial. The Preservation Commission shall make undertaken with the gentlest means possible. recommendations to the applicant concerning Sandblasting and other cleaning methods that changes, if any, in the proposed action that would will damage the historic building materials shall cause the Preservation Commission to reconsider its not be undertaken. denial and shall confer with the applicant and attempt to resolve as quickly as possible the differences be- 8. Every reasonable effort shall be made to pro- tween the owner and the Preservation Commission. tect and preserve archaeological resources af- The applicant may resubmit an amended application fected by, or adjacent to, any project. 44 y 9. Contemporary design for alterations and addi- two years; itemized operating and maintenance tions to existing properties shall not be discour- expenses for the previous two years; and i aged when such alterations and additions do depreciation deduction and annual cash flow not destroy significant historical, architectural, before and after debt service, if any, during the or cultural material, and such design is corn- same period; patible with the size, scale, color, material, and 7. Remaining balance on any mortgage or other character of the property, neighborhood, or financing secured by the property and annual environment. debt service, if any, for the previous two years; AA. Certificate of Economic Hardship 8. All appraisals obtained within the previous two Application for a Certificate of Economic Hardship years by the owner or applicant in connection shall be made on a form prepared by the Preserva- with the purchase, financing, or ownership of tion Commission. The Preservation Commission the property; shall schedule a public hearing concerning the ap- 9. Any listing of the property for sale or rent,price plication and provide notice in the same manner as asked and offers received, if any, within the in Paragraph M of this ordinance, and any person previous two years; may testify at the hearing concerning economic hardship;in the same manner as provided by 10. Assessed value of the property according to the Paragraph N of this ordinance. two most recent assessments; The Preservation Commission may solicit expert 11. Real estate taxes for the previous two years; testimony or require that the applicant for a Cer- 12. Form of ownership or operation of the proper- tificate of Economic Hardship make submissions ty, whether sole proprietorship, for-profit or concerning any or all of the following information not-for-profit corporation, limited partnership, before it makes a determination on the application: joint venture, or other. 1. Estimate of the cost of the proposed construc- 13. Any other information, including the income tion, alteration, demolition, or removal and an tax bracket of the owner, applicant, or prin- estimate of any additional cost that would be cipal investors in the property considered incurred to comply with the recommendations necessary by the Preservation Commission to _ of the Preservation Commission for changes a determination as to whether the property does o Certificate of yield or may yield a reasonable return to the MI necessary for the issuance of a� Appropriateness; owners. 2. A report from a licensed engineer or architect BB. Determination of Economic Hardship with experience in rehabilitation as to the struc- The Preservation Commission shall review all the tural soundness of any structures on the prop- evidence and information required of an applicant erty and their suitability for rehabilitation; for a Certificate of Economic Hardship and make 3. Estimated market value of the property in its a determination within forty-five (45) days of current condition; after completion of the pro- receipt of the application whether the denial of a posed construction, alteration, demolition, or Certificate of Appropriateness has deprived, or will removal; after any changes recommended by deprive, the owner of the property of reasonable the Preservation Commission; and, in the case use of, or economic return on, the property. Writ- of a proposed demolition, after renovation of ten notice of the determination shall be provided the existing property for continued use. in the same manner as required by Paragraph X. 4. In the case of a proposed demolition, an CC. Appeals estimate from an architect, developer, real A determination by the Preservation Commission estate consultant, appraiser, or other real estate that an application for a Certificate of Ap- professional experienced in rehabilitiation as to propriateness or for a Certificate of Economic Hard- the economic feasibility of rehabilitation or ship be denied shall be a final administrative decision reuse of the existing structure on the property. reviewable under the Missouri Administrative Pro- 5. Amount paid for the property, the date of pur- cedure and Review Act, and any appeal from a denial shall be to the circuit court as provided chase, and the party from whom purchased, in- cluding a description of the relationship, if any, therein. between the owner of record or applicant and DD. Fees and Penalties the person from whom the property was pur- The Preservation Commission may establish an ap- chased,and any terms of financing between the propriate system of processing fees for the review seller and buyer; of nominations, Certificates of Appropriateness, b. If the property is income-producing, the annual and Certificates of Economic Hardship. Any per- gross income from the property for the previous son who undertakes or causes an alteration, con- 45 • struction, demolition, or removal of any nominated SECTION TWO or designated landmark or property within a This ordinance takes precedence in the event of any con- nominated or designated historic district without a flict with any other ordinance of the city of Liberty. Certificate of Appropriateness or a Certificate of Economic Hardship shall be guilty of a misde- SECTION THREE meanor and upon conviction thereof shall be If any particular section of this ordinance is declared to punished by a fine of not less than Fifty Dollars be unconstitutional or void, only that particular section (S50) nor more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500). is affected, and all other sections of this ordinance shall Every day ep.ch such violation shall continue to ex- remain in full force and effect. ist shall constitute a separate violation.The Preser- vation Commission may institute any appropriate SECTION FOUR action or proceeding in the name of the city of This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and Liberty to enjoin, correct, or abate any violation after its passage, approval, and publication in the man- of this ordinance. ner provided by law. • OP 46 • ♦ ' 4 ♦ -a.` ,, - --..,.,,�-,..r._-,� _ '•,...,.,R-..-k.—, -- -.II1 2 ...--• ' ..--; .Y,I.*-1:-- 1.- '1:- : I ' ' l' '-' - '1-1--1'l• . . '. mileaellwattl . . . - 4 -1'2' ,,_.•ha ..t -?..�..-.,..-- i.,,g,,„.—a - -4S-w}` G - ! ' ..mot_ 9- .- y v . -..r_- te, --�77'r R�� . _ .....z • '� ors.. :._7.'•a..& - -•- %� � , _ 'f } �•0 �,.1`: ��' "• '�".' • '4' .w. ' .ram. S L , -_Z A l% .'F"»k.,...}j++.ts i^13 ^ _ li Gk , Jam/''�' ,/,,',�',, -' .r ..� --3. • 'i 11 - . -+_ate i = � � - ,�. — R ¢: dk. ue :.�-, .. 1 - l�•.aa4�ulb415iR • u'k -i t:: "d f: _ .,.... ,.._,_. ... - . � wa' Fla 4 eJ e-q- •. ;F` g-Y,Kss✓..- ° I 7 .1 '�.i LT'l 4-'11•-w ,I yY F.� ., e . • f,Ig if- 1. jay , y.ii-L s_• m 1 •+'; ` . '�''ii k -_ '__.\ ;t1'` !f-iy��»�r- t.1 �.^1 } - , ,(--A-;� • is -. G 1 1 1 ;1 ,® _ fSt _ x w.y, - 1. -,�:> C :-.--, - .,‘:,,.:.-z,.. Zi,.!.-/ .„..,.„ • s. , . ?..,. ,----...34? , . . , -- .1,.- 4 4 C 1 . Ys 1 rx^� � r , / .�i. - t 'I . t ti �- a it a'- . i;t _ i .. .. .„._,..:;„_,, i...---.;,..,. 1 - ..-w:-,--4-it v , . ._, . :••• ••• • : . 11.f,5 .. - � Sri .7;7:- t.„,... ..„....„...., .... .:, , ., _ ......... . .. .., .._... ....... . .._.. ..7- . . „ — --- I.1 •1 American Planning Association a Planning Advisory Service I s V - W • .2 K -: � - r t s - - .�~ _ -Tr._ ,:.j ;t i 7 c4Y 7 F! F_....+'° 'j s- - x ! ! .- ! i L: F i t F a- r i =r - x_ .^`'p' p�3 n�u C� , ,,- PI 7e• • • �t - t i t 1 I .t) tltt 111 �251t - I I M r-- I �' �,, ...�• ,,_, - f� ,:� ' n !- I��I Ids 5 �'�2.:��`L! ,...r, 4 (-{ ,lLfe�Lr�r (;,F��a�y ,� e� :ryry� e�' `i�;'�� _Y_'—�_ ® I _': 8 ,: � � - ' minim r`�� Er0 3 i h . .may_t 2 G ppr = r4 f -. aki'e'' t l! I. 4©Q 9 e i y d F+ Q 7 2 L Y >i� t3 I I II?- 2 60�II� lLI _ f7 .'S(•� tE.rs�i`f f`tp� � .,�'"` {s ...: allFivit 1�� r. •ems. tali; _ cx �c Fo G1 1 ' _ F.: •( 1C+t 7G', c..� ! li ma f. ,` 11 y 9l � !l��+ f�� ' 6 �! �` S � � �€Fr ��4t- ! (=f,�3 ��Q Via` ALt ^ti� ri�:t .�"' + 4 n��= �T'--" �- ,,f It s t. 1_ti,� 4�q iC {l it �.r . ri iipt 2O a 2 1!I ..F,,'{i.- t+ C` m1 • '� 1 p�niI''p7 m @B� I _ .7 :I: _ ".. '�Li—`` `a.3d 141S1 • Jai.1in"'i f1 - f�� S��I't "' �+31'(iII� '- h-1 "-r. //II S C3 :R _ S G 'T ,/''.. `' - i.•r�y� ° t a'�- X ) .;t�4 � r, s rr:. cc”, `4- .t."4•-� [ ! � . .4t'+ra'"'_'a' 4,---. A a r`- n"Y` 'A t� x�y+, �`�.� vim",- s VY '-. ,:- .* t e' Re" , N �, ` ` sC A . r - � i> �.,. .. . ...,,,,,t._a Rfl?SE?WtiOfi4 ,....vt...-e,-i 4 c•:, i s si~ f.+ky� -fY - ue . '. ' _t'+" R Y� {.t.*.V+..) C"St,,ly,-' -. ''..s- 1 �laiyb-12,••y1, *4.,.,�,.s. ..+ �3.`N41.61?ka "Y'i-„S• -, D_ . 's•.� • C`p C n""s Ca ,,}, • i+. 'v' - r��4 r i'.;�, .i( ,y, +h'.- o+��=.F'. '}'1 w�}-^,�z� ty�ti� 3/�"�. r.✓-`.!'.-c,-1.y,•a'sr�-,•7_ .,at,..r wm. 'cj' ',` Derv: "`y. t: =E- (4 a 'V.J 44_ya 4 .V� �-: i54 .VV 71� '2h .A'S�r 7," ' l �� . ..�.�` . .ts r<rec....'sk, y.-.w:l--�+�+......s�-.e^.�wc..::.:`a� w".��a"Y:t`�'.i+'e7;�`7 =,1:` v+.,••".�xe �.? I1,.t U 1 ZONING AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION IT 1 Stephen A. Morris ,, Preservation Planner, National Park Service r. August 1989 F Zoning is one of many ordinances affecting the use of land in a >8 local community; among the others are building and fire codes, -. environmental regulations, subdivision ordinances , and the land y use policies expressed in a comprehensive plan. Of all these, WI, a however, zoning is the most far reaching and , perhaps, the best established. Historic properties occupy land area and , like zy=' other land uses, are subject to zoning regulations. When : properly applied , zoning can be a powerful tool in protecting Y historic properties. it is important, therefore , that set, preservationists become knowledgeable about the zoning in their ' communities in order to determine how it affects historic ry resources and how it might better protect historic properties. °'s What is zoning? Under state enabling legislation, a local government isxx authorized to divide the land area in its jurisdiction into t,=: districts, or zones, each with a set of regulations `'= ¢g governing the _, development of private land . The districts are marked on a ,w zoning map which is an official government document. Generally, the text of the ordinance specifies the categories of uses = allowed in each district =(residential, commercial, industrial, etc.) , the maximum size of the buildings, the size of the lot , the required spaces around the buildings , the number of off- street parking spaces, and other requirements for development. Zoning districts are designated by classifications, such as "RS1" _ which might stand for Residential Single Family Low-Density, or "C2 ," which could be Commercial Medium-Density (generally letters refer to uses while the numbers indicate density) . _ s f 4h y . //C,/K OC(u ' alerillattalZP -t—_- O iiiiig ` — �—'S— — — — • c-15 -41.17i1 -i - pig,ji i_ fisc3 WTI = ---II---I r-� _Ti--\ wrZoas — — EXISTING ZONING Map 10 cfn.44\ - (S Y) LI", -J C-1 C-M1-, C-1 C-2CIAL DiS7iisCTS NC"✓ RC-1 RC-2 RC-3 RC-4 RESIDENTIAL-COMMERCIAL COMBINED DISTRICTS I - Commercial Zones in a Section of San Francisco. Source: Neighborhood Commercial Rezoning Study, San Francisco Department of City Planning, May 1984 What kinds of local governments can adopt zoning? State zoning enabling legislation generally specifies which local jurisdictions are authorized to adopt a zoning ordinance. In some States both municipalities (cities and towns) and counties can adopt zoning laws; in others, zoning is a function reserved for municipalities. The State of Texas, for example, restricts - zoning to cities and towns of a certain size and requires counties to get special permission from the state legislature in order to adopt a zoning ordinance. How long has zoning been in practice? The nation' s first comprehensive zoning ordinance was adopted in 1916 by New York City. The Standard State Zoning Enabling Act was drafted by the Department of Commerce in 1922 and had much to do with the widespread adoption of State enabling legislation and the acceptance of zoning by many of the larger cities and suburban communities around the country. The right of local governments to zone was affirmed by the Supreme Court' s landmark decision in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. in 1926, which upheld that, in principle, zoning was a valid expression of the 3 police power (i.e. , the power of the government to regulate activity by private persons for the health , safety, morals , and general welfare of the public) . • What about pre-existing uses or buildings? • Buildings or uses in existence prior to the establishment or amendment of the zoning ordinance which are inconsistent with the new or amended zoning requirements are called non-conformities. A lot which does not meet minimum size requirements can also be non-conforming . Non-conformities are sometimes given a set period within which they must be brought into conformity; in some cases they are allowed to remain in existence indefinitely under • the condition that they will not be expanded or improved . How is a zoning ordinance adopted and administered? Zoning ordinances are adopted by the local governing body, such as the city or county council or town board , based on the recommendations of the planning commission, or a specially appointed zoning commission. The zoning commission makes its recommendations after studying existing patterns of development and particular land use issues in a community. After the =_ ordinance is finalized and adopted , an appointed zoning board of appeals or board of adjustment is established to decide when exceptions to the ordinance can be granted to particular property owners. A zoning administrator or officer administers the zoning ordinance on a day-to-day basis, granting zoning permits for proposed developments that comply with the terms of the ordinance. How are changes made to a zoning ordinance? Changes to the text of a zoning ordinance or a zoning map can be in the form of zoning amendments or revisions. A revision is considered to be more comprehensive than an amendment and usually results in a completely new ordinance. Both require following the legal process established by the state enabling legislation and must be approved by the local governing body. Often the planning commission reviews proposed amendments and makes recommendations to the town council . The term rezoning applies to both amendments and revisions and does not distinguish between changes that apply to a small area or to the entire community. 4 What is a variance and under whose authority is it granted? Given the unique characteristics of each parcel of land , zoning authorities recognized early on that although every property owner within a district would be bound to the same requirements, in certain cases exceptions would have to be made. One common type of exception is a variance, in which a property owner is exempted from all or a number of the provisions of the zoning ordinance. Variances require the property owner to prove to the zoning appeals board that, due to the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical condition of the property, compliance . with the zoning regulations would result in undue hardship. Variances may cover any aspect of the zoning requirements (such as use, number of parking spaces, size of • building , or setbacks--the required distance between buildings • and lot lines) . • What about special exceptions? Special exceptions, also known as conditional uses, apply to • nonconforming -.uses thought to be desirable in a particular district under certain circumstances, such as a school in a residential district. Unlike variances , special exceptions are listed in the text of the zoning ordinance along with those uses permitted as a matter of right. The conditions required for the zoning board to grant a special exception are also set forth in the ordinance, although sometimes the board negotiates particular conditions to be placed on a proposed development with a property owner. What is historic zoning or historic district overlay zoning? Where historic district design review is established through the zoning ordinance , it is often referred to as historic zoning or historic district overlay zoning. An overlay zone is an additional layer of regulations for a particular area which is laid atop the underlying or base zoning regulations. There are many different kinds of overlay zones including those that establish additional controls on development in areas subject to airport noise, or those that promote downtown retail development. The base zoning provisions , which relate to use and density, continue to be administered by the zoning authorities. The regulations contained in the historic overlay zone are administered by a design review board or historic preservation commission. 5 Should historic zoning or design review regulations and base zoning be coordinated? Regardless of whether or not design review in historic districts is called historic zoning or it is implemented through an independent process, it is essential that preservation regulations, such as historic district design review, and zoning be coordinated . Where there is no coordination the preservation regulations which seek to preserve and protect the integrity of historic neighborhoods may be working at cross-purposes with the zoning ordinance, the goal of which could well be to attract high density new development. How can preservation regulations and zoning be coordinated? Coordination can take place in a variety of ways. One way is to arrange for regular meetings between members of the zoning board and the preservation commission or to have a member of the zoning board also serve on the preservation commission. Interaction between the staff of both groups is also important. A number of zoning ordinances provide a degree of coordination by allowing the historic district commission or design review board to review and make recommendations on all use permits , variances, rezoning requests, and zoning text amendment applications within the historic district. Where preservation and zoning are separate, an ideal solution is to include a clause in each ordinance stating that where there are conflicts, the preservation ordinance takes precedence. Alternatively, the zoning ordinance might have a provision stating that there is a presumption against developments, rezonings, and variances that harm individual landmarks or historic districts. In addition, successful preservation commissions build in the opportunity to comment on any zoning • issues that may affect historic properties and have the authority to recommend a suspension of certain zoning requirements that hamper preservation (see page 9) . What are the typical problems that result from a lack of coordination between preservation regulations and zoning rules? Zoning Incompatible with Current Use. The most typical problems arise because the current and historical uses in an area do not match the current zoning designation. Often a historic residential neighborhood may be zoned for retail , office, or industrial uses. The pressure to convert to one of these uses can result in the demolition or inappropriate remodeling of historic residences. 6 Density. A related conflict between zoning and preservation is density. In many cases, the current and traditional uses in a historic district may be of the same type as that contained in the zoning , but the historic uses may be at a much lower density. This is frequently the case in older commercial districts where historic commercial buildings are an average of two or three stories in height but the zoning allows much taller buildings. The greater economic return generated by larger buildings creates pressure to demolish or to build incompatible • and disproportionately large additions to smaller historic buildings. Residential areas zoned for densities much higher • • than those represented by the existing buildings frequently • • suffer from disinvestment, since owners of the existing houses are reluctant to maintain them without any assurance that a large apartment building will not be built on a neighboring property. • Lot Sizes. Minimum lot sizes can also be a source of problems. For example, the 1950s zoning in a Virginia town encouraged redevelopment of older, so-called "obsolete," residential neighborhoods close to the downtown. The zoning enlarged the minimum lot size beyond the traditional size (small urban lots) in order to redevelop the district in a manner similar to a large • lot suburban neighborhood . Redevelopment did not take place as planned, and years later the area became desirable as a historic • residential neighborhood. Property owners, however, were prevented from building compatible infill houses on traditionally-sized vacant lots by the 1950s zoning which • required large lots. The inability to develop the vacant lots hampered the revitalization of the neighborhood . The converse situation can also work against preservation. In historic areas where houses were traditionally built on large lots, current zoning or subdivision regulations may allow new dwellings to be wedged between historic houses on newly subdivided lots much smaller than those of the surrounding houses. Off-Street Parking. Finally, preservation regulations and zoning rules often appear to be working at cross purposes in regard to • off-street parking requirements. Typically, modern zoning requires a greater number of off-street spaces than can be easily accommodated on a small historic lot. As a result , the property owner rehabilitating a historic building or constructing a • compatible infill building in a historic district often faces the dilemma of either demolishing an adjacent historic building to provide enough space for the required parking or abandoning the project altogether. Neither of these results is a favorable preservation outcome. 7 Each of the problems discussed above can be resolved by changing the existing zoning . However, prior to considering solutions to individual problems it is advisable to take a comprehensive look at zoning and preservation conflicts throughout a community. What steps should a community take to study the effect of zoning on the protection of historic properties in the area? A logical place to begin studying the relationship between zoning and preservation in a community is to compile a single map showing both the boundaries of historic districts (or potential historic districts) and individual landmarks and the boundaries of the various zoning districts that affect the same area. This type of map clearly illustrates what zoning designations apply in areas of historic interest. At this point the text of the zoning ordinance should be analyzed to determine the requirements for each zoning district and whether or not they support or conflict with the preservation and revitalization of the historic properties or areas. The following, questions provide a starting point for an analysis of this sort: - - Are historic residential neighborhoods with single-family houses zoned for single-family residential or other compatible uses? - Do lot sizes and the building setback requirements from the front lot line match historic patterns? - Do separate zoning districts with widely divergent regulations (one for high-density commercial use, one for single-family residential use, for example) divide a single historic neighborhood? - Does the zoning for areas immediately surrounding a historic district provide an adequate buffer against development that would have a negative impact on the historic area? - Do commercial zones allow much taller and larger buildings than currently exist in the historic district? - Do commercial zones permit automobile-oriented commercial uses , such as drive-through facilities or those with large parking lots, that conflict with the traditional street-front and pedestrian orientation of historic commercial buildings? - Does the zoning rgquire so many off-street parking spaces that it hampers the rehabilitation of historic buildings or the construction of new infill buildings? If an analysis of zoning designations in historic districts reveals situations of the kind mentioned above, the next step is to examine the zoning ordinance to determine what, if any, 8 existing zoning classifications might be more appropriate, or if it is necessary to amend the zoning in other ways. What kinds of amendments should be considered to make the zoning in historic districts more responsive to preservation concerns? Amendments might involve shifting the boundaries between adjacent zones or substituting one classification for another, such as changing from an inappropriate low-density residential designation to a more appropriate medium-density residential one. The existing zoning ordinance, however, may not include classifications that are entirely appropriate for historic districts. In such cases, a particular requirement may have to be changed. If, for instance, the required minimum lot size in a particular single-family residential zone is too large and discourages infill construction and rehabilitation, changing this regulation to allow smaller lot sizes may be required . Or , if parking requirements are such that it is difficult to rehabilitate buildings in historic areas, then the number of required parking spaces should be reduced . Another option would be to draft an entirely new zoning classification with requirements tailored to the specific needs of a historic district. Zoning classifications that apply only to particular areas of a community are known as special purpose districts or special use districts. Cities have enacted these not only for historic districts but also for other areas of the city with specialized uses or needs such as ethnic neighborhoods or areas with large institutions (hospitals, universities, etc.) . Seattle has two districts of this kind; the Pioneer Square Preservation District which was established to protect the historical and architectural character of that commercial historic district; and , the International Special Review District which aims to maintain the International District core as an Asian cultural, retail, and residential center by encouraging , for example, uses such as small scale food processing and craft work with an Asian emphasis. What is downzoning? If the current zoning permits development at densities far higher than existing buildings, rezoning might involve what is known as downzoning, or reducing the permitted height and bulk of buildings. Downzoning can be controversial since affected property owners may perceive it as diminishing the value of their property. Nonetheless , in historic commercial areas, and particularly downtown business districts , downzoning may be the single most effective protection measure that can be achieved • 9 through zoning because it substantially removes the pressure for high density development from the district. What other measures are available to make zoning compatible with historic preservation? A number of cities have amended their zoning ordinances to include special exceptions that allow historic properties to be used in ways not permitted as a matter of right in a particular zone. For example, in Denver, offices or art galleries are permitted by special exception in residential zones if they are housed in historic buildings. This measure has made the large mansions in the city' s Capitol Hill district more economically competitive with new residential buildings. Similarly, the District of Columbia created a special exception to allow nonprofit organizations to use residential landmark buildings for certain nonresidential use under specified circumstances (the building must contain a gross floor area of 10,000 square feet or greater, for example) . Some cities , such as Richmond , Virginia provide for the waiver of certain zoning requirements , such as height and area regulations and off-street parking and loading requirements for buildings in historic districts when it can be demonstrated that the waiver is necessary in order to achieve the purposes outlined in the city' s preservation ordinance. Transfer of development rights or TDR is another zoning technique that has been used to promote preservation in a few large cities. Following this approach the development rights to the portion of a property that remains undeveloped , such as the air space above a historic building, are sold or traded and put into use at another location. The cost and expertise required to administer a full-scale TDR program have presented difficulties, especially for smaller communities which lack full-time planning staff. Bonus or incentive zoning has also been used to encourage the historic preservation in cities around the country. The bonus refers to the additional density (beyond what would otherwise be permitted) granted to developers in exchange for providing specified public amenities. Philadelphia' s new plan for Center City proposes that density bonuses be granted for the preservation of locally designated historic structures and that the city' s zoning code be revised to include standards to define the requirements. **** 10 Some Practical Suggestions Preservationists should demonstrate a sincere, constructive, and continuing interest in local zoning issues by attending scheduled meetings and public hearings of the zoning commission or board of zoning adjustment (whether or not a "preservation case" is on the agenda) . It is not necessary (and sometimes counterproductive) to give formal testimony on every topic; but thoughtful queries by the public at a hearing will often raise questions that board members themselves would not have considered , and ideas from the public can help the board develop the conditions and requirements to be included in its decisions. Preservationists can also frame their questions and observations to make clear connections between historic preservation and zoning issues--connections board members might not otherwise see. Secondly, having demonstrated their commitment, credibility, and interest in local zoning , preservationists should take the next step and offer historic preservation training or presentations for local zoning (and other land use) boards . The training has to be attractive, appealing , and user-friendly and should be promoted as a way to enhance the board members' ability to do their work more effectively and efficiently, not as a "favor" or lobbying from a special-interest group. Arranging for cosponsorship of the sessions by the state or regional planning agency, the State Historic Preservation Office, local non-profit or service clubs, and business organizations demonstrates that preservation concerns are varied and widely shared public policy issues and not special-interest concerns. 11 Reference List For those interested in learning more about zoning and pursuing the connections between zoning and historic preservation the following publications may be useful.. Unless otherwise noted these works should be available in a good-sized public library. The Citizen' s Guide to Zoning . Herbert H. Smith. Chicago: American Planning Association, Planners Press, 1983, 242 pages. This is an excellent introduction to zoning for the layperson. It includes a comprehensive glossary on zoning terminology. Available from: Planners Bookstore, 1313 East 60th Street, Chicago, IL 60637-2891, (312) 955-9100; $16.95 plus $3 .00 for postage and handling . A Handbook on Historic Preservation Law. Christopher J. Duerksen, editor. Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation and the National Center for Preservation Law, 1983, 523 pages plus appendices. Chapter 2 , "Local Preservation Law," is particularly useful and features an indepth discussion of the components of a comprehensive local preservation program and the integration of such a program with local planning and zoning processes. Available from: Conservation Foundation, P.O. Box 4866, Baltimore , MD 21211, (301) 338-6951; $30 (paperback) plus $2 for postage and handling . Dealing with Change in the Connecticut River Valley: A Design Manual for Conservation and Development. Robert D. Yaro et al. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and the Environmental Law Foundation, September 1988, 182 pages. This well-illustrated manual on rural landscape and small town preservation juxtaposes alternative development scenarios for particular sites--conventional development v. creative :. development. It also includes model ordinances for site plan review, signage, and farmland/open space preservation. Available from: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Publications Office, 1033 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02138 , (617) 661-3016; $25.00 plus $2 .50 for postage and handling . Preservation and Zoning : A Study Paper on the Effects of the Zoning Code on Staunton' s Historic Resources. Staunton, VA: Historic Staunton Foundation, September 1986 , 21 pages plus appendices. A basic yet thorough analysis of the impact of current zoning on Staunton' s five National Register historic districts, carried out by a committee of community leaders. The paper identifies the problems and makes recommendations to correct them. The format and approach of the study are widely s . 12 applicable to many communities across the country. Available from: Historic Staunton Foundation, 120 South Augusta Street, Staunton, VA 24401, (703) 885-7676; $5 .00 for postage and handling . • Saving America' s Countryside : A Guide to Rural Conservation. Samuel N. Stokes, et al. Washington , DC: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1989, 306 pages. Presents a comprehensive approach, with numerous case studies, for initiating and carrying out a rural conservation program at the local level. Chapter 4, "Land-Protection Techniques That Local Governments Can Use," explains how comprehensive planning , zoning , and other regulatory techniques can be adapted to serve rural conservation goals. Available from: National Trust for Historic Preservation , Mail Order , 1600 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006, ( 800) 537-5487; $16.95 (paperback) plus $3 .00 for postage and handling . Roanoke Vision: Zoning: A Process for Balancing Preservation and Change , 1986. Roanoke City Planning Commission and Roanoke Office of Community Planning . 32 pages. This magazine style publication describes the process undertaken to revise the :zoning ordinance in Roanoke , Virginia. Roanoke' s zoning dated from the 1950s and 1960s and did not recognize the increasing value placed on preserving the city' s past. Included are excerpts from the new proposed zoning ordinance addressing preservation concerns. Available from: City of Roanoke, Office of Community Planning , Room 355 , Municipal Building , 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24011 , (703) 981-2344. Zoning for Downtown Urban Design: How Cities Control Development. Robert S. Cook, Jr. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Company, 1980 , 178 pages. Historic preservation issues are often treated within the framework of urban design . This book provides an overview of urban design controls ( including those relating to preservation) and presents case studies of nine different-sized cities across the country that have used zoning to promote good urban design. Includes an extensive bibliography on zoning. Zoning and Historic Preservation: A Survey of Current Zoning Techniques in. U.S . Cities To Encourage Historic Preservation. Chicago: Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois , 1983 , 32 pages. This paper provides an overview of a variety of zoning measures in use around the country to encourage preservation. Appendices focus on transfer of development rights (TDR) schemes. Available from: Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois , 53 W. Jackson Blvd . , Suite 752 , Chicago, IL 60604 , (312) 922-1742; $6.50 .