Bill Rewriting Historic Districts Act
called ‘over-reaction’
Posted by Sean Bradley on February 5th, 2016
MANISTEE — A proposed state law may have consequences for historic districts and their commissions, including the Manistee Historic District Commission.
Introduced last week by state Rep. Chris Afendoulis (R-East Grand Rapids), HB 5232 would rewrite the 45-year-old Historic Districts Act so people affected by historic districts would be able to modify their homes without being easily denied by historic preservation committees or commissions in charge of the districts.
The current law allows preservation activists appointed by a local government to determine a historic district’s location and whether or not to expand them, with little input from local property owners.
T. Eftaxiadis, Manistee historic district commissioner, said if the legislation passes, it would make it difficult for cities to create new historic districts.
“It will also make it more difficult for existing districts to function as they should because it limits the duties or the ability to regulate,” Eftaxiadis said. “It’s an overreaction because sometimes the historic districts are being seen as regulating, or over-regulating, by asking for owners who are making changes, or rehabilitating the buildings, to do things per the Secretary of Interior’s standards, which are the federal standards.”
Among the 10 U.S. Secretary of Interior’s standards are thatproperties be used for their 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; the historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved; 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.
Extaxiadis said at any time, the city council can create, eliminate or make changes to a historic district.
Nancy Finegood,executive director of the Michigan Historic Preservation Network, said if the legislation passes as it is introduced, a district would have to, after 10 years, reassess its existence.
Specifically, the legislation indicates that an existing district would have to submit a renewal to its local unit of government just prior to the date of the 10 year period when the legislation took effect. If a district is not renewed at that time, it will be dissolved.
“In the legislation, they’re suggesting any issues be brought to, say, city council to make the decision of what the next step would be locally and not at the state level, where perhaps (at the city council level) you have nobody who understands the Secretary of Interior’s standards,” Finegood said.
She also said the process of eliminating a district would not include input from the public.
Afendoulis said the bill elevates the level of property rights and raises the bar on creation of historic districts by having more community support.
“This bill gives more equity for the average person to do what they want with their own property within the means of historic districts,” Afendoulis said.
Finegood said the current system works.
“If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it,” she said.
The bill was referred to the House of Representatives’ Local Government Committee on Jan. 26.
Capital News Service reporter Jasmine Watts contributed to this story.