City’s historic preservation commission and code enforcement look to get in sync

After several recent cases that illustrated a divide between the city’s code enforcement policies and historic preservation aims, Historic Landmark Commission members are working to make sure things are more aligned and less hopelessly complicated for property owners who find themselves in the gray area between the two departments.

Chair Ben Heimsath explained that they had asked for the presentation about code enforcement after learning the Building and Standards Commission and Austin Code were demanding demolition of properties, including two homes on Martin Luther King Boulevard on that meeting’s agenda, without mentioning or considering their historic status.

He said he was concerned that demolition orders made no mention of the “parallel but invisible” historic process, which is required for buildings older than 50 years. Heimsath said that they had had similar problems “in the distant past” but the solutions to those issues had apparently left along with staff that understood the issue. 

“I think we’re all trying to make sure we pull in the same direction so that these kinds of miscommunications or notices from the city that are, literally, in contradiction to each other, that we can nip this in the bud right quick,” Heimsath said. He explained that, more than once, they had spoken to owners that were stuck between a commission saying they had to demolish a building and another saying they could not.

Robert Moore, who is a division manager in the Development Services Department, said their practice is to recommend demolition if there is a safety issue, whether it’s structural, like a poorly maintained building, or a nuisance liability, like ongoing issues with squatters.

“If it’s a concern, then we’re going to recommend demo,” he said. We are coming from a safety standpoint first and foremost.”

Though there doesn’t appear to be an inclusion of information about the historic process in the noticing of code violations, Moore said that when an inspector is putting together a case, they do email the Historic Preservation Office to see if the building is significant. 

“Sometimes that makes a difference,” he said. 

Commissioner JuanRaymon Rubio said that the practice of sending an email about every case to the two-member historic preservation staff was “terrible” and suggested technology be used to ease their load.  

“There are so many resources that we have that are not being utilized,” Rubio said. He said that there’s “absolutely no reason” that code inspectors can’t immediately have information about whether a property is historic through GIS data. “These are things we need to improve.”

Commissioners also expressed an interest in working toward a better solution for the problem of “demolition by neglect” – meaning that buildings are allowed to degrade until they are effectively demolished. For historic properties that suffer this fate, the city code gives the Historic Preservation Office enforcement power but no enforcement tools. Moore said he had been in talks about working together to solve this issue.

On a similar note, Commissioner Kevin Koch asked  if it would be possible to prioritize investigating cases of demolition without a permit, citing a recent nonpermitted demolition in Central East Austin, where concerned residents were told the city would send someone out in three days.

“That’s not a solution,” he said. “Your hands are tied, probably, because you have limited resources. Our hands are tied because we have no direction, and we aren’t in control of it. It’s just that, to me, is the most urgent issue at the moment.”

“If we had 10 people call 311, might that be escalated? Because once demo starts, it only takes a day and a historic resource is gone,” he said. “Probably, in your world, demolition gets rid of the problem, and you may tend to not discourage it.”

Moore reemphasized his department’s focus on safety, but said he was “all for historic preservation.”

“I appreciate what y’all do. Y’all are good stewards of the city,” he said. “I think it’s important.”

Moore said he could “definitely” put something on notices of order, which go out to the public, about historic significance moving forward. He also told commissioners that he would meet with the historic preservation operations committee and incorporate historic preservation staff into their Code Academy training.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.