Safford: Changes to Demolition No Longer Included in Proposed UDO Changes

Saratoga Springs Mayor John Safford has announced that proposed changes to the Unified Development Ordinance concerning demolition in the city’s architectural review and historic districts won’t move forward. 

The decision was announced in a press release issued on Oct 13 and comes a week after the first public hearing regarding the new changes which have generated a great deal of concern from residents and preservation experts in that they went too far and didn’t do enough to preserve Saratoga Springs’ historic character. 

“Throughout this process, we have heard from residents, preservation advocates, property owners, and members of our land use boards who care deeply about the future of Saratoga Springs,” said Mayor Safford said in the press release. “Good government means being willing to listen, evaluate concerns, and adjust course when appropriate.”

Under the now retracted proposal, if the Design Review Board (DRB) found historic significance in a structure, they would have been required to make a recommendation to the City Council to designate the structure as a landmark or part of a historic district.

In the past, Mayor Safford had argued that the changes were necessary because the DRB had been too broad in applying historic standards to buildings in the architectural review district.  

The Oct. 13 press release reasserted these arguments stating that the existing procedure “raises questions about whether demolition restrictions based on historic significance are consistent with the Architectural District’s stated purpose and the authority delegated to the Design Review Board.”

Safford said in the release that the city had applied for a grant from the State Historic Preservation Office to update the city’s historic resources survey to identify historic resources prior to changing demolition review. 

The proposed changes to demolition had been opposed by both the Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation and the DRB who argued in their advisory opinions at the mayor’s office that the changes went too far.

While the demolitions portion of the proposed UDO changes won’t move forward, the press release identified several changes to the UDO that will be considered including: 

• “Clarifying the respective responsibilities of the Planning Board and Design Review Board for height-related decisions in the Historic District, as guided by SHPO.”

• “Strengthening the Ordinance’s procedure for ‘Designation of Landmarks and Historic Districts’ as previously recommended by SHPO. The City’s zoning ordinance has always provided that the City Council has the legislative authority to designate historic resources, which is consistent with the SHPO Model Law. “

• “Distinguishing the applicable review standards of districts and allowing more flexibility of materials in the Architectural District.”

• “Adding an economic hardship appeal, which will allow the DRB to consider specific hardship criteria. This is consistent with the SHPO Model Law and previously recommended by SHPO.”

• “Adding an appeal to the City Council, with limited grounds for review based on factual errors, procedural errors, or incorrect interpretation or application of the UDO. This is consistent with the SHPO Model Law.”

• “The amendment also updates and clarifies provisions governing legally nonconforming properties and structures, including the applicable reference date of June 1, 1980.” 

The discussion over the proposed amendments to the UDO on going since April 2026 when the City Council, lead by Mayor Safford voted 4-1 to begin considering changes to it. Since then, the proposed changes have lead to multiple community organized meetings and many had spoken out against the changes during City Council meetings. 

A second public hearing on the proposed changes is set for Oct. 20.