Body
Department of Community Development
Reference: Amendment to the COA Regulations of the Land Use and Development Code
To: Mayor Richard N. McLean and Members of City Council
Through: Philip Rodriguez, City Manager
Marv Falconburg, AICP, Assistant City Manager of Development
Holly Prather, AICP, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Aja Tibbs, Long Range Planner
Date Prepared: November 13, 2017
PURPOSE
To amend Section 17-52-50 of the Land Use and Development Code in order to modify the regulations for obtaining a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA). Article 17-8-20(a) establishes the City Council as the determining entity over all amendments to the Land Use and Development Code.
BACKGROUND
Section 17-52 of the Land Use and Development Code establishes the regulations for Historic Preservation within the City of Brighton. Sections 17-52-30 and 17-52-40 establish the process by which a historic structure, site or district may be designated as a historic landmark on the local Brighton register. The following section, Section 17-52-50 addresses how the Historic Preservation Commission reviews and processes proposed changes to those locally designated structures, sites, and districts. The process of approving changes to a designated structure is known as a Certificate of Appropriateness.
Currently, the adopted regulations define a Certificate of Appropriateness as, “a certificate issued by the Historic Preservation Commission, showing approval of plans for construction, alteration, reconstruction, remodeling, repair, restoration, demolition, or relocation of structures that would affect a cultural resource designated as an historic landmark, district or element thereof.” Additionally, the regulations currently state that the process to review and issue a COA must occur at a public hearing involving the Historic Preservation Commission with a minimum 15-day notice requirement. This process must occur in addition to any other land use process required for the proposal (e.g., rezoning, conditional use, site plan review, etc.).
CODE AMENDMENT PROPOSAL
As the historic preservation program has grown over the last few years, staff has found that the existing regulations create an unnecessary burden on both staff and the applicant of designated properties. While the purpose and established criteria for a COA has remain unchanged, it is inefficient and arguably unnecessary in many cases to require a full public hearing in all cases. Therefore, staff and the Historic Preservation Commission propose that the regulations be modified to permit two additional types of review: an administrative review and a sub-committee review. Essentially, this proposed amendment will establish a “tiered” review process for all COA applications as follows:
Step 1) Administrative review: Staff uses the COA criteria to determine whether significant impacts are being proposed to the historic structure. If no significant impact is found by staff, staff would have the authority to approve the COA. If significant impact is found, staff will forward the request to the COA Sub-Committee.
Step 2) COA Sub-Committee: Staff will provide the Sub-Committee with his/her findings. The Sub-Committee will use the information and perform its own review using the COA criteria. If the COA Sub-Committee does not believe there will be significant impact they may approve the COA. If they agree with staff’s findings (significant impact is found), then the COA must be reviewed at a full hearing before the Historic Preservation Commission.
Step 3) Historic Preservation Commission Hearing: This is the same review that has been done historically. It will require the same notice, and the same process as in the past.
Some additional details regarding the proposed process are:
• An applicant may elect to skip the administrative and sub-committee reviews and proceed directly to a full hearing. This process is meant to expedite the COA review, and larger, more “impactful” projects, may choose to go straight to a hearing.
• Staff and the Sub-Committee will never have the authority to fully deny a COA application. That responsibility will remain with the Commission.
• The COA Sub-Committee will consist of three members (two are a quorum, and two affirmative votes are required to make a determination), and members of the Committee will be reviewed with chair elections each year.
• The new code adds the ability to require a COA even if a building permit is not required (e.g., wall murals), and also gives the staff the ability to determine if a COA is applicable. There are occasionally permits that have no impact on the designated property (e.g., events, right-of-way, underground electrical, etc.)
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Staff has coordinated the proposed amendment under the direction and leadership of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). The proposed code amendment was presented and reviewed by the HPC during its regular meeting held on September 14th, 2017. Following the review, the HPC unanimously approved a motion directing staff to proceed with the proposed code amendment.
PLANNING COMMISSION
A public hearing to review the proposed code amendment was held before the Planning Commission on October 24, 2017. Based on the information received at that meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the code amendment as drafted. The approved Resolution has been attached for reference.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Public notice of the City Council public hearing was published in the Brighton Blade for not less than 15 days before the City Council meeting (published 11/1). No public comment has been received as of this day, November 13, 2017.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of the proposed code amendment with input/revisions from the City Council and public.
OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
• Approve the Ordinance as drafted;
• Approve the Ordinance with specific changes; or
• Deny the proposed Ordinance with specific reasons for the denial
ATTACHMENTS
• Planning Commission Resolution (w/exhibit)
• Draft City Council Ordinance (w/exhibit)