Folsom council approves ordinance moving most minor historic‑district design reviews to staff

The Folsom City Council on Oct. 14 voted unanimously to introduce and conduct first reading of an ordinance that would move many minor design‑review decisions in the city's Historic District from the Historic District Commission to the Community Development director and staff.

City planning manager Desmond Perrington told the council the changes are intended to speed processing and reduce costs for small projects while preserving the commission's oversight for more significant matters. "The Historic District is a very special area in the city with really unique characteristics that we don't see anywhere else," Perrington said. He added that staff time currently spent bringing minor items to the commission limits the department's ability to tackle larger policy work.

The ordinance would: delegate director‑level review for many exterior renovations, small additions to non‑historic structures, accessory buildings and certain sign permits; exempt routine like‑for‑like replacements (roof materials, windows, doors) and small patio covers when not visible from the public right of way; require mailed notices to adjacent property owners in addition to on‑site posting and online project postings; provide a written summary of director approvals to the Historic District Commission for informational review; and impose limits on accessory structures (maximum 15‑foot height, no more than 50% of the primary structure's square footage, and prohibiting placement in front of the primary building).

Perrington said staff also added procedures that allow the Community Development director to elevate an individual director‑level decision to the commission when a project appears to be unique or controversial. He said: "If there is something kind of unique or potentially controversial that director level reviews can be elevated by the community development director to the commission."

Commissioners and public speakers voiced concerns at earlier Historic District Commission meetings about transparency, noticing and whether the commission could review or reverse staff decisions. Resident Loretta Hettinger, speaking during the council's public hearing, said she supported the ordinance's overall goal but warned that small changes can cumulatively change the district's character: "The ordinance has the potential to eat away one little thing at a time at the historicity of the district," Hettinger said. She asked that exemptions only apply when projects require a building permit and that there be clear recourse if an inappropriate change is approved.

Perrington described the staff approach to identifying potentially historic properties, saying planners will consult the city's Cultural Resources Inventory, the Folsom History Museum and the California Historical Resources Information System, and will consider CEQA eligibility in making determinations.

Councilmembers asked how the new noticing would work and whether commissioners could opt in to the mailed list. Perrington replied that community organizations that historically received notices would continue to receive them and that members of the public, including commissioners, may sign up for email distribution lists to get director‑level notices. He clarified that director‑level decisions will be appealable (a 10‑day appeal period applies), but items fully exempted from design review would not be appealable.

Councilmember questions also covered technical points — for example, whether like‑for‑like window replacements would bypass review (Perrington confirmed they would) and whether solar panels remain outside the city's design‑review authority (he noted state law largely preempts local design review of solar).

The council approved the motion to conduct first reading with a clerical correction to the ordinance's cross‑reference (the staff noted a correction to the code citation in section 17.52.320). The resolution passed with a roll call vote of 5–0.

If the council adopts the ordinance on second reading, Perrington said staff will lower fees tied to director‑level reviews and implement mailed notices and online posting, with the fee changes planned to take effect at the start of the next calendar year. Perrington said the changes are part of a broader effort to free staff capacity to develop objective design standards and update zoning in the Historic District, work he said became more urgent with the passage of SB 79.

A second reading and adoption was set for Oct. 28.

Votes at a glance: Ordinance introduction (17.52 amendments) — Passed, 5–0 (Leary: yes; Raffel: yes; Rorba: yes; Kozlowski: yes; Aquino: yes).