[CC 1985 § 25-441; Ord. No. 762 § 2, 10-7-2002]
A. 
A certificate of appropriateness shall be required before the following actions affecting the significance of any landmark or any structure within a historic district may be undertaken:
1. 
Any construction, alteration, or removal requiring a building permit from the City of St. James;
2. 
Any demolition in whole or in part requiring a demolition permit from the City of St. James;
3. 
Any construction, alteration, demolition, or removal affecting a significant exterior architectural feature or appearance as specified in the ordinance designating the landmark or historic district;
4. 
Any construction, alteration or removal involving earth disturbing activities that might affect archaeological resources;
5. 
Any actions to correct a violation of a minimum maintenance standard.
[CC 1985 § 25-442; Ord. No. 762 § 2, 10-7-2002]
Applications for a certificate of appropriateness shall include accompanying plans and specifications affecting the significance of a designated landmark or of a property within a designated historic district; and applications for demolition permits shall include plans and specifications for the contemplated use of the property. Applications for building and demolition permits shall be forwarded by the Building Inspector to the SJHPC within seven (7) days following receipt of the application. A building or demolition permit shall not be issued until a certificate of appropriateness has been issued by the SJHPC. Any applicant may request a meeting with the SJHPC before the application is reviewed by the SJHPC or during the review of the application. Application for review of construction, alteration, demolition, or removal not requiring a building permit for which a certificate of appropriateness is required shall be made on a form prepared by the SJHPC and available at the office of the City Clerk. The SJHPC shall consider the completed application at its next regular meeting.
[CC 1985 § 25-443; Ord. No. 762 § 2, 10-7-2002]
Whenever the SJHPC has reason to believe that an action for which a certificate of appropriateness is required has been initiated, or is about to be initiated, or that a violation of the conditions of a permit has occurred, it shall request that the Building Inspector make every reasonable effort to contact the owners, occupants, contractor or subcontractor and inform them of proper procedures. If the SJHPC determines that a stop-work order is necessary to halt an action, it shall request the Building Inspector to send a copy of the stop-work order by certified mail return receipt requested to the owners, occupants, contractors and subcontractors, and notify them of the process of applying for a certificate of appropriateness. A copy of the proper application form shall be included in the notice. If necessary, a second or subsequent stop-work order may be issued for the same project.
[CC 1985 § 25-444; Ord. No. 762 § 2, 10-7-2002]
The SJHPC shall review the application for a building or demolition permit or for a certificate of appropriateness and issue or deny the permit with forty-five (45) days of receipt of the application. Written notice of the approval or denial of the application for a certificate of appropriateness shall be provided to the applicant and the Building Inspector within seven (7) days following the determination and shall be accompanied by a certificate of appropriateness in the case of an approval.
[CC 1985 § 25-445; Ord. No. 762 § 2, 10-7-2002]
A certificate of appropriateness shall become void unless construction is commenced within six (6) months of date of issuance. Certificates of appropriateness shall be issued for a period of eighteen (18) months and are renewable. If the project is not completed according to the guidelines provided in the certificate of appropriateness, the project shall be deemed in violation of this Chapter.
[CC 1985 § 25-446; Ord. No. 762 § 2, 10-7-2002]
A denial of a certificate of appropriateness shall be accompanied by a statement of the reasons for the denial. The SJHPC shall make recommendations to the applicant concerning changes, if any, in the proposed action that would cause the SJHPC to reconsider its denial and shall confer with the applicant and attempt to resolve as quickly as possible the differences between the owner and the SJHPC. The applicant may resubmit an amended application or reapply for a building or demolition permit that takes into consideration the recommendation of the SJHPC.
[CC 1985 § 25-447; Ord. No. 762 § 2, 10-7-2002]
A. 
Public improvement and land acquisition projects by the City of St. James or any of its departments or agencies shall be reviewed by the SJHPC in the following manner:
1. 
The SJHPC shall review and comment upon any public improvement project proposed by the City of St. James or any of its agencies or departments within any historic district, on the site of or within two hundred (200) feet of any landmarks, or within two hundred (200) feet of any boundary of a historic district. The Department of Public Works shall send a completed preliminary design for a public improvement project to the SJHPC simultaneously with its submission to the City Council for approval. The SJHPC shall have at least thirty (30) days to complete its review and report to the City Council, except when the Department of Public Works, if necessary to accelerate the design review process, may specify a time less than thirty (30) days within which the SJHPC shall complete its review and report to the Council.
2. 
The SJHPC shall review and comment upon any proposed acquisition of a landmark or of land or buildings within a historic district by the City of St. James or any of its agencies or departments. The City Council or the Department of Public Works shall, at the earliest possible date that will not interfere with acquisition negotiations, send the SJHPC information concerning the location, size, purchase price, current use, and proposed use of the land or building to be acquired, and specify the date by which the SJHPC shall report to the City Council.
3. 
The SJHPC shall review the public improvement or land acquisition project to determine its effect upon the historic, archaeological or architectural character of the landmark or historic district and report to the City Council within any time specified by the City Council or Planning Department, but not to exceed forty-five (45) days. The report by the SJHPC shall include any recommendations for changes to the preliminary design or land acquisition that will lessen or alleviate any adverse effect of the proposed project upon the historic, archaeological or architectural character of the landmark or historic district. The City Council shall take no final action on the preliminary design or land acquisition until it has received and reviewed the report of the SJHPC.
[CC 1985 § 25-448; Ord. No. 762 § 2, 10-7-2002]
A. 
In considering an application for a building or demolition permit or for a certificate of appropriateness, the SJHPC shall be guided in principal by the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, as follows, in addition to any design guidelines in the ordinance designating the landmark or historic district. Applications, standards for review and design guidelines shall be available in the office of the City Clerk for distribution to the public.
1. 
A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment.
2. 
The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.
3. 
Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.
4. 
Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.
5. 
Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved.
6. 
Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.
7. 
Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
8. 
Significant archaeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken.
9. 
New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.
10. 
New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
[CC 1985 § 25-449; Ord. No. 762 § 2, 10-7-2002]
A. 
Design guidelines for applying the criteria for review of certificates of appropriateness shall, at a minimum, consider the following architectural criteria:
1. 
Height. The height of any proposed alteration or construction should be compatible with the style and character of the landmark and with surrounding structures in a historic district.
2. 
Proportions Of Windows And Doors. The proportions and relationships between doors and windows should be compatible with the architectural style and character of the landmark and with surrounding structures within a historic district.
3. 
Relationship Of Building Masses And Spaces. The setback and relationship of a structure within a historic district to the open space between it and adjoining structures should be compatible.
4. 
Roof Shape. The design of the roof should be compatible with the architectural style and character of the landmark, and with surrounding structures in a historic district.
5. 
Landscaping. Landscaping should be compatible with the architectural character and appearance of the landmark and of surrounding structures and landscapes in historic districts.
6. 
Scale. The scale of the structure after alteration, construction, or partial demolition should be compatible with its architectural style and character and with surrounding structures in a historic district.
7. 
Directional Expression. Facades in historic districts should blend with other structures with regard to directional expression. Structures in a historic district should be compatible with the dominant horizontal or vertical expression of surrounding structures. The directional expression of a landmark after alteration, construction, or partial demolition should be compatible with its original architectural style and character.
8. 
Architectural Details. Architectural details, including materials, colors, and textures, should be treated so as to make a landmark compatible with its original architectural style and character and to preserve and enhance the architectural style or character of a landmark or historic district.
9. 
Signage. The character of signs should be in keeping with the historic architectural character of a landmark or historic district. Character of a sign includes the number, size, area, scale, location, type (e.g., off-site advertising signs and on-site business signs), letter size or style, and intensity and type of illumination.
10. 
Minimum Maintenance. Significant features should be kept in a condition of good repair and maintenance. All structural and mechanical systems should be maintained in a condition and state of repair that will prevent decay, deterioration or damage to significant features, or otherwise adversely affect the historic or architectural character of structures within a historic district.
[CC 1985 § 25-450; Ord. No. 762 § 2, 10-7-2002]
A. 
Application for a certificate of economic hardship shall be made on a form prepared by the SJHPC only after a certificate of appropriateness has been denied. The SJHPC shall schedule a public hearing concerning the application and provide public notice and individual notice to the applicant, owners of record, and owners adjacent to the property in the same manner as in Article IV of this Chapter, and any person may testify at the hearing concerning economic hardship. All testimony, objections thereto and rulings at such public hearing shall be taken down by a reporter employed by the City for that purpose, or if electronic tape recording equipment is available, by such electronic means. The SJHPC may solicit expert testimony or require that the applicant for a certificate of economic hardship make submissions concerning any or all of the following information before it makes a determination on the application.
1. 
Estimate of the cost of the proposed construction, alteration, demolition or removal and an estimate of any additional cost that would be incurred to comply with the recommendations of the SJHPC for changes necessary for the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness;
2. 
A report from a licensed engineer or architect with experience in rehabilitation as to the structural soundness of any structures on the property and their suitability for rehabilitation;
3. 
Estimated market value of the property in its current condition; after completion of the proposed construction, alteration, demolition or removal; after any changes recommended by the SJHPC, and in the case of a proposed demolition, after renovation of the existing property for continued use;
4. 
In the case of a proposed demolition, an estimate from an architect, developer, real estate consultant, appraiser, or other real estate professional experienced in rehabilitation as to the economic feasibility of rehabilitation or reuse of the existing structure.