Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Certificate Of Appropriateness Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic Preservation commissioners push for faster COA reviews and more owner outreach
Summary
At a study session, commissioners and staff discussed accelerating Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) timelines, creating a contact list and quarterly status updates, and a clearer process for small amendments to previously approved COAs to reduce delays that affect downtown tenants and businesses.
At a study session of the Historic Preservation Commission, members and staff discussed steps to shorten the time between COA application and decision and to improve outreach to property owners so tenants are not stalled by permitting uncertainty. The discussion focused on applicant timelines, staff capacity and notice requirements, a possible owner-contact list, and how to handle small changes to previously approved COAs.
The commission heard from staff member Sarah, who described typical lead times and administrative constraints. “My preference is generally have about 2 months,” Sarah said of the ideal timeline from pre-application through final filing; she added the fastest case she has handled was “about a month” when an applicant submitted a complete package. Sarah also noted administrative limits: building permits and applications must be noticed and postcards printed, and staff work across many projects, which can lengthen review times.
Commissioners stressed the real costs of delay for tenants and small businesses. A commissioner said the difference between a one-month and a three-month wait can be critical for leasing decisions because “that’s 30 days of huge cost and benefit to each party.” Commissioners asked about options for expediting repeat applicants or urgent projects and whether the commission could hold emergency or additional meetings when needed.
On outreach, Sarah said the city maintains property-owner records but acknowledged the list is sometimes out of date because the city is not always alerted when properties change hands. She suggested using county assessor records and periodic checks to refresh contact information and said she could provide annual owner contact updates. Sarah also described an existing internal flag in the building-permit system that allows staff to catch designated properties when a permit is applied for and reach out to applicants.
Commissioners asked for regular status updates once a COA is approved. Sarah agreed she can track projects and report back when a building permit is issued, saying she will include those milestones in regular staff comments at HPC meetings.
On small edits to previously approved COAs, staff and commissioners discussed the lack of a clear, enumerated process for de minimis or follow-up tweaks (for example, minor storefront adjustments or window mullion changes). The commission asked staff to research how other jurisdictions differentiate between in-kind or minor repairs that could be handled administratively and changes that should return to the commission for review.
Direction and next steps: the commission gave staff a consensus charge to research best practices and return recommended language and procedures for (1) outreach to downtown property owners, (2) an approach to expedite repeat or time-sensitive COA applications, and (3) criteria for staff-level review of small amendments to previously approved COAs. Sarah agreed to bring examples and proposed language back at the commission’s next study session, tentatively scheduled for August.
The discussion closed with agreement that preservation benefits the downtown economy but that processes should be clearer and faster where possible so owners and tenants are not needlessly delayed.
