SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO

MANITOU SPRINGS HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE

DATE: March 7, 2002

Chapter 2.52 Major Changes -

1) Removed the sections which are “regulations” and left the sections dealing with the Commission and its operation.

2) Added the “Created” section with gives an overview of the Commissions authority.

3) “Membership” section - combined the information in a couple of previous sections dealing with the Commission membership and qualifications. This isn't strictly “new” language, but was consolidated into a single section.

4) “Rules and Procedures” section - looks like a lot of information is being deleted, however this language, again, has primarily been reorganized and consolidated into other sections.

5) “Commission Powers and Duties” section - new section which more specifically outlines what the Commission is actually expected to do.

6) “Delegation of Powers and Duties” section - new section which gives staff authority for making specific decisions. This section was created to help stream-line the approval process and to formalize what was, in fact, already being done by staff.

7) “Commission Meetings” section - new section which simply establishes when meetings are held.

8) “Staff” section - new section which outlines the duties of the Planning staff in regard to Historic Preservation.

Click here to go to Chapter 2.52

Title 17 Major Changes -

1) Create Title 17 “Historic Preservation” with Chapters 17.04 “Historic Preservation Regulations” and 17.08 “Historic Preservation District” (to be moved from Chapter 1.30).

2) Chapter 17.04 contains the balance of information, plus additional sections of the current Historic Preservation Ordinance found in 2.52. The sections have been reordered from their current positions to create a better “flow” to the document.

3) Based on the City Attorney's recommendation in response to RLUIPA, all reference to “landmarking” or “landmarked properties” and the process for landmarking properties has been removed from the ordinance.

4) “Introduction and Purpose” section - adds language introducing the Historic District(s) and categories for designation of the resources within the Districts.

5) “Definitions” section - contains 32 definitions of terms used in the Regulations, where there are currently only 10 terms defined.

6) “Designation of Historic Districts” section - expands the existing language in the regulations to provide for more specific criteria and review process for consideration of Historic District designation.

7) “Material Change of Appearance Certification” section - Again, expands the language in the existing regulations to provide more specifics on when an MCAC is required, what needs to be in an application, notification requirements, and how MCAC's proceed through the Commission process. The application requirements for Downtown development have been upgraded to require additional information both necessary and desirable to making informed decisions on the kind of scale that commercial development entails.

8) “Incentive Awards” section - No major changes.

9) “Maintenance of Structures” section - entire section is new. This has been talked about for a number of years. The existing regulations were not amended a number of years ago because, at that time, the City was looking at implementing maintenance requirements which would have applied to all properties. This was never done, however, and in order to prohibit and prevent “demolition by neglect” maintenance standards are being proposed.

10) “Demolition of Structures” section - expands the language currently found in the regulations which applies to demolition requests. Sets out the process more specifically and provides better details for both the applicant and the City on the submittal information required to allow an informed decision regarding a demolition request. This section also gives criteria for dealing with dangerous structures resulting from natural disasters.

11) “Economic Hardship” section - new section which details the procedures and criteria for reviewing claims of economic hardship. Although there is one sentence in the existing regulations which talks about “denial of a reasonable economic return,” we currently have no criteria or process for claiming a hardship. It is staff's understanding that this section is very important when considering the overall legality of the Preservation Regulations and functions somewhat similarly to a “Variance” process in the Zoning Ordinance.

12) “Appeals” section - while there is currently an “Appeals” section in Section 2.52, it consists of one sentence. The proposed section provides more detail regarding the process of appealing either and staff or Commission decision.

13) “Enforcement and Penalties” section - this section also exists in 2.52, but is comprised of four, rather general sentences. The expanded language proposed more clearly sets out potential enforcement actions. Note the building permit moratorium for illegal demolition (which is currently found in the Fee Schedule) is to be increased from 2 to 10 years. This timeframe is in line with moratoriums imposed in other communities and is more of a “real” penalty than what's existing - which, especially in the case of a commercial property, may not be seen as too long to wait to build another building. This section also requires restoration and notifies aggrieved persons of their right to file a private lawsuit against a violator (and also informs potential violators of this possibility). Both these sections address options that technically already exist, but set them formally out for information purposes, if nothing else.

14) “Withdrawal Provisions” section - language which applies to requirements or opportunities which have already passed is proposed to be removed. It is noted that withdrawn properties are not exempt from the new maintenance requirements in addition to the demolition process already stated in this section. The major change proposed to this section is that withdrawn properties that are sold or conveyed would revert back into the district and remain as a participating property . There would be no option for re-withdrawal within 60 days as there is currently. Staff and the Commission feel strongly this is an important step toward the Historic District becoming the fair, cohesive element of the community it needs to be. In 1996, the Commission redefined the boundaries of the Local District(s) and greatly reduced the number of properties effected by Historic Preservation Regulations. This project was undertaken for two reasons - to create a better, defensible, contextual District and as a step toward making changes to the opt-out provision more acceptable. This, proposed change is middle ground between maintaining the current withdrawal capabilities for some properties and deleting this provision from the regulations entirely.

15) “Severability” section - no language regarding severability currently exists in section 2.52 and the inclusion of this section is desirable in case any portion of the ordinance should ever be legally challenged.

Click here to go to Title 17