TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THROUGH:
Mark Danaj, City Manager
FROM:
Marisa Lundstedt, Community Development Director
Laurie Jester, Planning Manager
Angelica Ochoa, Associate Planner
Rafael Garcia, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT:Title
Consideration of Amendments to the Zoning Code, Chapter 10.86 and the Local Coastal Program, Chapter A.86, Historic Preservation (Community Development Director Lundstedt)
CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING, INTRODUCE ORDINANCE NOS. 15-0034 AND 15-0035
Line
_________________________________________________________
Recommended Action
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the public hearing, waive further reading and introduce Ordinance No. 15-0034 for Amendments to the Zoning Code, Chapter 10.86 and Ordinance No. 15-0035 for Amendments to the Local Coastal Program, Chapter A.86 related to the proposed Historic Preservation regulations. This staff report and presentation will introduce the proposed code language and Planning Commission recommendations to the City Council for review and consideration.
Body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Background
The existing Landmark Ordinance was adopted by the City Council in 2006. These provisions recognize properties of cultural significance without limiting or prohibiting any alterations or development rights; the designation is honorary and voluntary, and may only be initiated by the property owner. In 2014 and 2015 the Council had a series of meetings, adopted a Mills Act Resolution to encourage historic preservation by providing property tax incentives, and directed staff to revise and develop an expanded and more robust Historic Preservation Ordinance with assistance from a consultant. The Council directed staff to provide regulations that would include the following: 1) a new stand-alone Historic Preservation Commission; 2) pursue State Certified Local Government (CLG) status; 3) have a limited voluntary designation process for Landmarks that would not be limited to only property owner requests; and 4) provide a process to protect potential Landmarks prior to designation.
Historic Preservation Provisions
The Ordinance, as recommended by the Planning Commission, focuses on the following seven main areas including:
1. Purpose
2. Definition of Terms
3. Historic Preservation Commission
4. Historic Landmarks
5. Historic Districts
6. Certificates of Appropriateness (C of A)
7. Plan, Survey, Inventory and Register of Historic Resources
Purpose
The intent of the regulations, as stated within the Purpose Section (10.86.020), is to preserve and protect historic resources in the City, foster civic and neighborhood pride in the City’s history and culture, preserve our heritage for future generations, promote public education, participation and appreciation of historic preservation, and preserve diverse and significant architectural styles while balancing historic preservation objectives with property owners’ rights.
Definition of Terms
Important terms, as summarized below, are provided within the Definition Section (10.86.030) including:
• “Historic Landmark” is any building or place that has actually been designated as such through the historic preservation process.
• “Historic District” is a defined geographic area that has a concentration of buildings or features that are united historically that has actually been designated as a District through the historic preservation process. Within a District there are “Contributing Resources” which are buildings or features that contribute to the Districts historic significance as well as “Non-Contributing” resources.
• “Certificate of Appropriateness (C of A)” is a permit from the City to a) demolish or to alter a designated or proposed historic landmark or contributing resource, or b) to demolish a historic resource listed in the Inventory of Historic Resources. The C of A verifies the building or place is property treated in accordance with State standards.
• “Historic Resource” is a property that is listed, nominated or eligible for listing in the Register of Historic Resources, including historic landmarks, historic districts and contributing resources to historic districts.
• “Inventory of Historic Resources” is the list of buildings, places, and historic districts that are potentially eligible for local landmark designation, but have not yet been designated.
• “Register of Historic Resources” is a list of all the designated historic landmarks, districts and contributing resources.
The following sections provided a general overview of the main areas of the proposed ordinance:
Historic Preservation Commission
The Ordinance provides for the creation of the new 5-member Historic Preservation Commission that will act as an advisory board to the City Council, Planning Commission and staff (10.86.040). The Historic Preservation Commission will make recommendations to the City Council on the designation of Historic Landmarks and Historic Districts and the City Council will take final action on the applications (10.86.080 and 110). The Commission also has a number of other responsibilities including establishing a Plan for a Historic Resources Survey, review of the Survey, compilation of an Inventory of Historic Resources using the baseline date of the Inventory, and finally maintaining a Register of Historic Resources (10.86.050-060).
Historic Landmark and District- criteria, procedures and owners consent
The proposed Ordinance allows only the owner, the City or a local City recognized Preservation Organization, to submit an application request for Landmark designation (10.86.080). The Ordinance requires owner’s consent for the actual designation of an individual Landmark, with one exception. If the City Council makes specific findings for exceptional resources in very limited situations, it may designate a Landmark without owners consent through a public hearing process (10.86.090). For all instances, specific criteria must be met in order to designate a Historic Landmark (10.86.070).
An application for a Historic District must include a petition that is signed by at least 25% of the property owners within the district prior to the Historic Preservation Commission hearing. Prior to final approval, at least 51% of the owners must agree to the designation and any time prior to final City Council designation a property owner may elect to not be included within the proposed district. Design guidelines may be approved as part of the district (10.86.110).
Certificate of Appropriateness (C of A)
Historic Landmark designation limits alterations, improvements and demolition of the designated landmark, and contributing resources within Historic Districts, and generally requires review through a Certificate of Appropriateness (C of A) to determine that historical integrity is maintained. Additionally, work is not permitted on a property that has a pending Historic Landmark designation application or a proposed contributing resource within a proposed Historic District without a C of A. There are exceptions for safety issues, and there is a 60-day waiting period before a demolition permit request is reviewed (10.86.180-190).
Most ordinary repair and maintenance and minor alterations are exempt from the C of A process. Minor alterations may be acted on by the Director of Community Development and work that does not qualify as minor is reviewed and acted on by the Historic Preservation Commission (10.86.150-170). If the findings for a C of A cannot be met, then an Economic Hardship Exception may be applied for and the Historic Preservation Commission will review and take action (10.86.200).
Plan, Survey, Inventory and Register of Historic Resources
The Historic Preservation Commission develops a Plan for City Council approval for preparation of the comprehensive citywide Historic Resource Survey. The MBCHC informal Historic Resource Survey will serve as a baseline for the formal Historic Resource Survey prepared by a qualified historical consultant identifying the City’s potential Historic Resources. The formal survey will then be used as a baseline for the Inventory of Historic Resources. This is an inventory of potential historic landmarks and districts and is approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. The Register of Historic Resources is a list of all the designated historic landmarks, historic districts and contributing resources (10.86.050 thru .060).
Policy Alternatives
Several policy items have been discussed with the City Council in the course of developing the Ordinance. Further discussion regarding CLG status, owner’s consent and Historic Districts were also discussed at the Planning Commission as further described below.
CLG status, consent of owner(s) and Historic Districts:
The Ordinances were originally developed with the intention of the City obtaining CLG status through the State as directed by the City Council in February 2015. At that time, the Council also directed staff to provide a Limited Voluntary designation process that requires owners consent, except for very significant historic properties the City Council could override the lack of owners consent.
The Planning Commission has recommended provisions for Historic Districts which will likely preclude the Ordinance from securing CLG status. The Commission recommends that inclusion within Districts be completely voluntary with an “opt out” provision which allows owners to not be included within a proposed Historic District at any time prior to designation. The Commission felt this was a balanced approach to preserving property rights and encouraging historic preservation.
Option 1- Opt-out
Pros: Retains individual property rights
Cons: No possibility for CLG status. The concept of Historic districts may be eroded by allowing individuals to opt-out, thereby possibly resulting in disjointed and/or non-contiguous districts.
Option 2- No Opt-out
Pros: Retains possibility of CLG status, Historic Districts remain intact and consistent with CLG designation.
Cons: This option does not fully retain all individual property rights.
Staff is seeking policy direction from City Council on whether to retain the “opt out” provision as part of the Ordinance, as recommended by the Planning Commission. The “opt out” provision would preclude the ordinance from securing CLG status which was part of City Council’s original direction, however the “opt-out” provision would be consistent with the intent of the limited voluntary application and designation process as originally directed by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The implementation of the Mills Act Pilot Program and Historic Preservation Ordinance will require additional staff time and resources, as well as the services of a historic preservation consultant. Staff has prepared a detailed cost estimate for the Historic Preservation Program, which is anticipated to be approximately $250,000 for an initial launch of the program. The estimated $250,000 cost includes the establishment of a Historic Preservation Commission, planning support, consultant fees, admin support (new half-time admin clerk), training/education, community outreach, as well as conducting a Citywide survey to research and evaluate potential historic properties. The cost is anticipated to be reduced in future years once the Citywide survey (estimated at $100,000) is completed and as less consultant support is required. On October 7, 2014, the Council approved a $50,000 contract for a Historic Preservation Consultant to assist staff with the historic preservation process. These fees are currently being expended in the current drafting of the ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
The existing honorary and voluntary Landmark Ordinance was adopted by the City Council in 2006. The City Council had several meetings in mid to late 2014, which included discussions on the Mills Act and amending the current provisions of the local Historic Preservation regulations. In June 2014, the City Council directed staff to research the feasibility of implementing the Mills Act to provide property tax incentives to property owners to preserve, maintain, and rehabilitate historic properties in the City. In October 2014, the City Council approved a Mills Act Resolution and Pilot Program and directed staff to retain a Historic Preservation Consultant. Staff contracted with SWCA Environmental Consultants to assist with development of a revised Historic Preservation Ordinance.
On December 16, 2014, the City Council requested that staff further research the following key policy issues:
• Options for establishing a Historic Preservation Commission,
• Designation process for Historic Resources; and,
• Demolition and Alteration Permits Process of Historic Resources
On February 17, 2015, staff provided City Council with an update on these key policy issues, and the Council provided direction as follows:
• Commission-Establish a separate stand-alone Historic Preservation Commission, with five members, two having architect/historic expertise, and quarterly meetings.
• Certified Local Government (CLG) status- Pursue State CLG status to be eligible for annual Federal grants up to $40,000, with a 40% local match, as discussed in more detail later in this report.
• Designation Process - Limited Voluntary - City Council, Historic Preservation Commission, Director, the local preservation group, or the property owner may initiate an application to request a historic designation, but the property owners agreement is required to actually designate a property, except in exceptional situations the Council may designate; and,
• Demolition/Alteration Permits - Establish a process and review for protection of potential historic resources prior to their actual designation.
Planning Commission meetings
The Planning Commission held public hearings on April 29th, June 10th, and September 23, 2015. The Planning Commission discussion focused on the following:
• Consistency and formatting of Code Language
• City Council findings or criteria for Landmark Designation without owner’s consent
• Work Moratorium time limit for Certificate of Appropriateness
• Owners consent requirement for Historic Districts
• Demolition and alteration limitations for properties within Historic Districts
• Notification of property owners listed on potential Inventory of Historic Resources
The proposed Ordinances reflect the Planning Commission recommendations (Attachments 1 and 2). If approved, these Ordinances will be codified in the City’s Municipal Code, replacing the existing landmark ordinance, Chapter 10.86, Culturally Significant Landmarks, as well as the same regulations in the Local Coastal Program, pending State Coastal Commission approval.
Through the entire process, staff has worked closely with the City Attorney, the historic preservation consultant, the State, the Manhattan Beach Cultural Heritage Conservancy (MBCHC) which is the local preservation group, other interested community members and the Los Angeles Conservancy in developing the proposed Historic Preservation regulations. Attached is a comment letter from the Los Angeles Conservancy (Attachment 11). The proposed ordinances are based on all of this input, as well as input and examples from other Southern California cities.
DISCUSSION:
The intent of this report is an introduction to the Historical Preservation regulations and the Planning Commission’s recommendations.
Research
The City's historical consultant SWCA, conducted research and collected comparative data on other historic preservation programs in numerous cities throughout California, with a focus on Southern California. Staff also consulted several other cities for purposes of benchmarking and evaluating best practices. The various cities included Beverly Hills, Monrovia, Pasadena, South Pasadena, Redondo Beach, Santa Ana, Ontario, Fresno, Brea, Auburn and Glendale.
The analysis and options presented to the Planning Commission combine that research information, the State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) guidelines as provided in their document “Drafting Effective Historic Preservation Ordinances”, as found on their website at <http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1072/files/tab14hpordinances.pdf>, as well as the consultant's experience in historic preservation at the local level.
It is important to note that historic preservation ordinances vary widely and there is no one accepted way of designing and implementing an effective, balanced preservation program. A variety of options have been considered in order to design a preservation program tailored to the specific needs and situation of the City of Manhattan Beach.
Historic Preservation Provisions
The following section provides summary information on the key aspects of the Historic Preservation regulations as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Main Topics
• Purpose
• Definition of Terms
• Historic Preservation Commission
• Historic Landmarks- Designation Criteria and Procedures, and Owners consent
• Historic Districts- Designation Criteria and Procedures
• Certificates of Appropriateness - (C of A)
• Plan, Survey, Inventory and Register of Historic Resources
Purpose- Section 10.86.020
The purpose and intent of the proposed Ordinance is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare by providing for the identification, protection and use of buildings, sites and features that represent the City’s architectural, cultural and historical heritage. The intent is to preserve and protect historic resources in the City, foster civic and neighborhood pride in the City’s history and culture, preserve our heritage for future generations, promote public education, participation and appreciation of historic preservation, and preserve diverse and significant architectural styles while balancing historic preservation objectives with property owners’ rights.
Definition of Terms- Section 10.86.030
Important terms, as summarized below, are provided within the Definition Section (10.86.030) including:
“Historic Landmark” means any building, structure, object, site, sign, area, place, or natural feature designated as a historic landmark pursuant to this Chapter.
“Historic District” means a geographic area having a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of buildings, structures, objects, sites, and other features united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development that has been designated pursuant to the provisions in this Chapter.
“Contributing Resource” (or “Contributor”) means any building, structure, object, site, sign, area, place, or natural feature within a historic district that is either a separately designated historic landmark or designated as a resource that contributes to the district’s historic, cultural, or architectural significance.
“Non-Contributing Resource” means any building, structure, object, site, sign, area, place, or natural feature within a historic district that is not a contributing resource.
“Certificate of Appropriateness” means the permit granted on the finding by the Historic Preservation Commission or Director that an application to demolish, alter, or relocate a historic resource as defined by this ordinance is in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and other applicable criteria as provided in this Chapter.
“Historic Resource” means a property listed, nominated, or eligible for listing in the Register of Historic Resources, including historic landmarks, historic districts, and contributing resources to historic districts.
“Inventory of Historic Resources” means the inventory of buildings, structures, objects, sites, historic districts, signs, areas, places, and natural features determined potentially eligible for local landmark listing in the City, prepared and approved in accordance with Section 10.86.050.
“Register of Historic Resources” means the register of historic landmarks, historic districts, and contributing resources to historic districts prepared and approved in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter.
Historic Preservation Commission- Section 10.86.040
A stand-alone Commission is necessary if the Council desires to pursue CLG status, as directed by the Council on February 17, 2015. A new Historic Preservation Commission will be established to oversee the City’s Historic Preservation Program. The Commission would be an advisory board and the City Council directed that the Commission meet quarterly. The Commission will consist of five (5) members (per Chapter 2.44), of which, at least two (2) members would be professionals from the following fields: architecture, history, planning, land economics, real estate or related discipline. The Historic Preservation Commission would be tasked with the following:
Summary of Duties:
a. Advise the Council on historic preservation matters;
b. Compile and maintain the Register of Historic Resources;
c. Compile, maintain, and periodically update the Inventory of Historic Resources;
d. Recommend the designation of, and nominate historic landmarks and districts;
e. Approve or disapprove applications for Certificates of Appropriateness for the demolition, alteration, or relocation of individual landmarks, historic districts, sites, and their contributing resources;
f. Review and comment on the decisions and documents that might affect designated or eligible historical resources within the City;
g. Participate in, promote, and conduct public informational, educational, and interpretive programs pertaining to historic preservation;
h. Recommend and encourage the protection, enhancement, appreciation, and use of properties of historical, cultural, architectural, community or aesthetic value that have not been designated as historical resources but are deserving of recognition;
i. Review applications and make recommendations to the City Council on Mills Act Tax Abatement program contracts;
j. Upon request, make recommendations to the Planning Commission on historic preservation goals and policies; and
k. Perform any other functions that may be designated by the City Council.
Historic Landmarks-
Designation Criteria- Section 10.86.070
All properties seeking to obtain Landmark Designation must conform to specific criteria. Detailed information prepared by a qualified expert would need to be submitted by the applicant to assist in determining whether the resource has historical significance.
Historic landmarks must be at least 45 years of age unless the Council determines that a resource that is less than 45 years old is exceptional. Landmarks must retain sufficient historic integrity of the seven aspects including location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Additionally, in summary, historic landmarks must meet at least one of the following criteria:
1. Be associated with significant contributions to social, political, cultural, or architectural history.
2. Be associated with important person(s) who made a significant contribution to history, development, and/or culture.
3. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction.
4. Represent the work of a master, or possesses high artistic or aesthetic values.
5. Represent the last, best remaining example of an architectural type or style that was common but is increasing rare.
6. Yields information important to prehistory or history.
Designation Procedures - Section 10.86.080
The City Council, Historic Preservation Commission, Director, or owners of the subject property may apply for historic landmark designation. Information prepared by a qualified historian must be presented with the application, and the City will also have an expert evaluate conformance with the required criteria. The City Council may designate a property as a historic landmark if it meets the findings and criteria in Section 10.86.070 above, as well as the criteria in Section 10.86.090 below. The designation of Historic Landmarks requires a public hearing by the Historic Preservation Commission, and its recommendation is forwarded to the City Council. If after the public hearing is conducted the City Council approves the designation, the property is included as part of the City’s Register of Historic Resources.
Owners Consent for Landmark Designation - Section 10.86.090
Applications to request landmark designation can be initiated and considered by the Commission without owner consent. However, owner consent is required for a property to actually be designated as a historic landmark. The one exception is that the City Council may designate a historic landmark without the owner’s consent, if the Council makes all of the following findings, as well as one of the six criteria in Section 10.86.070, summarized above:
1. The property possesses exceptional architectural, historical, aesthetic, or cultural significance,
2. The exceptional architectural, historical, aesthetic, or cultural significance is of overriding importance to the heritage of the City,
3. Preservation of the resource is in the interest of and will serve the greater good of the community; and
4. Designation will facilitate the preservation, rehabilitation, or protection of the property.
Historic Districts
Designation Criteria and Procedures- Sections 10.86.100 and 110
The criteria and procedures for designating historic districts is essentially the same as for Historic Landmarks, although additional criteria are required that describes the districts shared and common history or architecture and how that is significant and creates an identifiable and distinct entity. Prior to the Commission hearing at least 25% of the owners within the proposed district must sign a petition supporting the application. At least 51% of owners must consent prior to City Council designation.
Properties that contribute to a district’s significance are referred to as a “contributing resource”. Other properties within a district that do not contribute to the district due to lack of historic integrity or other reasons, are considered non-contributing resources and are generally subject to very minimal limitations within a district. Design guidelines may be prepared and approved by City Council for the district.
Owners consent of Historic District inclusion- Section 10.86.110
An owner within a proposed district can “opt out” of the process by submitting a written request at any time prior to the designation. Based on discussions that the consultant has had with the State, the “opt out” provision would preclude the Ordinance from securing CLG status from the State Office of Historic Preservation. The Planning Commission discussed Historic Districts and this opt-out provision extensively as they had concerns with the possibility of owners having their property rights restricted unwillingly. The quick 60 days applicant resubmittal time and the opt-out provisions were very important to the Commission. The Planning Commission indicated that if the Council does not agree with the opt-out provision that they would recommend that the Ordinance be returned to the Commission. The Planning Commission would like the opportunity to review other options and also determine any impacts that revisions may have in other sections of the regulations.
Certificates of Appropriateness- (C of A)
Requirement, Procedures and Findings- Sections 10.86.150 thru 170
A certificate of appropriateness (C of A) is required for any proposed work or demolition of a historic landmark or a contributing resource to a historic district listed on the Register of Historic Resources. Additionally, a C of A is required for any demolition proposed for any historic resource on the Inventory of Historic Resources. Certificates of Appropriateness would either be reviewed by the Director (administrative review), or by the Historical Preservation Commission. Work to a historic resource that would be eligible for administrative review includes minor additions and alterations, as well as repairs and maintenance. Commission review would be required when the scope of work is greater than what is eligible as part of the administrative approval. Commission review requires a public hearing. All C of A’s require specific findings to be met, and any decision may be appealed. Repair and maintenance that do not require a permit or involve a change of the exterior design or materials is exempt.
Work Moratorium and 60-day Waiting Period for Demolition - Sections 10.86.180 and 190
Work on a proposed historic landmark or a proposed contributing resource within a proposed historic district, where an application has been submitted but not yet acted upon, requires review and action through the C of A process.
Applications for a C of A for demolition of a historic resource are subject to a 60-day waiting period. A notice of the pending demolition permit is posted on the property and alternatives to demolition are explored, including adaptive re-use and/or rehabilitation, flexibility in code requirements, possible use of financial incentives such as the Mills Act Tax Abatement program, relocation, resale, or other provisions as appropriate.
Economic Hardship Exception- Section 10.86.200
If the criteria for issuing a C of A cannot be met, the applicant has the option of submitting a request for an Economic Hardship Exception for the alteration or demolition of a historic landmark or contributing resource. The application includes substantial economic and other data, a public hearing before the Commission, and specific findings must be made that show the denial of a C of A would cause an undue hardship on the owner.
Plan, Survey, Inventory and Register of Historic Resources- Sections 10.86.050 thru 060
A comprehensive historic resources survey is anticipated to be completed in the future. Currently, the MBCHC is researching and identifying properties within the City that may possess historically significant attributes and features. The Conservancy has indicated that they have almost completed this preliminary survey and it contains about 175 potential Historic Resources, but with the current rate of development they feel that this number will be reduced by the time the formal Historic Resources Survey is completed. This valuable research will act as a baseline for the preparation of a formal Historic Resources Survey, and then ultimately the Inventory of Historic Resources. All properties in the City will periodically be reviewed for their potential as a Historic Resource.
1- Plan- Historic Preservation Commission develops a Plan for City Council approval for preparation of the comprehensive citywide Historic Resource Survey.
2- Survey- The MBCHC informal Historic Resource Survey will serve as a baseline for the formal Historic Resource Survey prepared by a qualified historical consultant. A survey is a systematic and standardized process for identifying and gathering data on the City’s potential Historic Resources.
3- Inventory-The formal survey will then be used as a baseline for the Inventory of Historic Resources. This inventory is then reviewed, compiled and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. This is an Inventory of potential historic landmarks and historic districts.
4- Register- The Register of Historic Resources is a list of all the historic landmarks, historic districts and contributing resources within historic districts that have been approved by the City. Landmarks in the City that are already on the State or National Register are automatically designated as local historic landmarks.
Certified Local Government Program (CLG)-Benefits and Requirements
This Program is jointly administered by the National Park Service and the State Office of Historic Preservation, and seeks to encourage preservation through partnership. The program is designed to encourage local governments to establish policies and procedures for the identification, registration, and preservation of historic properties. A local government becomes a CLG by developing and implementing a local historic preservation program based on Federal and State standards.
The benefits to being a CLG include eligibility for annual federal grants up to $40,000 (with a 40% match required from the local agency) from the Historic Preservation Fund, which is administered by OHP; technical expertise and assistance in preservation-related initiatives, including the nomination of historic properties to the National Register of Historic Places; special assistance and training for local preservation commission members and staff from OHP; and potential for participation in the review of building rehabilitation plans for Federal investment tax credits.
In order to qualify as a CLG, each city must meet the following minimum requirements:
Federal investment tax credits.
In order to qualify as a CLG, each city must meet the following minimum requirements:
1. Establish a Historic Preservation Commission including 5 members with interest in historic preservation and at least 2 members who are professionals in history, architecture or planning.
2. Establish process and procedures for the designation and protection of historic properties; including enforcing relevant state and local laws pertaining to historic resources;
3. Maintain a survey and inventory of historic properties
4. Provide the opportunity for public participation in the Local Historic Preservation program;
5. Perform the responsibilities designated by the State Office of Historic Preservation in their CLG procedures (the main task is preparation of an annual report).
The city’s historic preservation consultant has had discussions with the State Office of Historic Preservation and the agency has indicated that the Historic District “opt out” provision would preclude the Ordinance from qualifying for CLG status. As indicated earlier, the Planning Commission recommended that the provision be included in order to give the owners the option to withdraw from being designated as part of a Historic District.
CLG Advantages:
1. Grants- Ability to apply for grants to carry out citywide surveys, preparation of a focused Manhattan Beach historic context statement, feasibility studies, Walking Tour brochures, training, educational plans, and/or specialized preservation projects or nominations. According to the State Office of Historic Preservation, approximately 12 grant applications are received each year from approximately 66 CLGs across California, therefore, chances of receiving a grant are good.
2. Technical assistance - The State Office of Historic Preservation would be an active partner in providing advice and support for the City’s preservation program.
3. Preservation prestige - This is the fastest way to improve Los Angeles Conservancy report card grade which the City’s current grade is an “F”.
CLG Disadvantages:
City staff throughout California report few disadvantages to having CLG status. The annual reporting requirement entails some staff time and coordination; but, as one city planner explained, the ongoing record-keeping throughout the year lends itself easily to preparation of an annual report.
POLICY ALTERNATIVES:
CLG status, consent of owner(s) and Historic Districts:
The Ordinances were originally developed and presented to the Planning Commission with the intention of the City obtaining “Certified Local Government” (CLG) status through the State Office of Historic Preservation as directed by the City Council in February 2015. At that time the Council also directed staff to move forward with a Limited Voluntary application and designation process that requires owners consent, except for very significant historic properties the City Council could override the lack of owners consent.
The Planning Commission is recommended provisions within the Ordinance in relation to Historic Districts which will likely preclude the Ordinance from securing CLG status based on the discussions between the City’s historic preservation consultant and the Office of Historic Preservation. The Planning Commission recommends that the Ordinance be completely voluntary with regards to Historic Districts by incorporating an “opt out” provision which allows any property owner to not be included within a proposed Historic District. The Commission felt this was a balanced approach to preserving property rights and encouraging historic preservation.
The Ordinance as originally presented to the Commission required the majority percentage (51%) of the property owners within a proposed District to consent in order to initiate the designation process for the formation of a Historic District and 100% owner consent was not required. The “opt out” provision allows the property owner to withdraw from the Historic District designation process at any point in time prior to designation. This, in essence, renders the Historic District designation process completely voluntary and inconsistent with what is considered common practice for securing CLG status, however staff believes that it is consistent with the intent of limited voluntary application and designation as directed by the City Council in February 2015.
Option 1- Opt-out
Pros: Retains individual property rights
Cons: No possibility for CLG status. The concept of Historic districts may be eroded by allowing individuals to opt-out, thereby possibly resulting in disjointed and/or non-contiguous districts.
Option 2- No Opt-out
Pros: Retains possibility of CLG status, Historic Districts remain intact and consistent with CLG designation.
Cons: This option does not fully retain all individual property rights.
Staff is seeking policy direction from City Council on whether to retain the “opt out” provision as part of the Ordinance, as recommended by the Planning Commission. The “opt out” provision would preclude the ordinance from securing CLG status which was part of City Council’s original direction.
PUBLIC OUTREACH/INTEREST:
Staff had numerous meetings and received valuable input from with the Manhattan Beach Cultural Heritage Conservancy (MBCHC) and the Los Angeles Conservancy throughout development of the new regulations. Both groups have the final Planning Commission Resolution, which contains the same provisions as the City Council Ordinances, and as of the writing of this report staff has not received further comments from the MBCHC or from any other members of the public. Attached is a comment letter from the Los Angeles Conservancy (Attachment 11). The City Council meeting was noticed in the Beach Reporter with a ¼ page ad and the California Coastal Commission as well as interested parties received notices.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The project is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). The activity is covered by the general rule which exempts activities that can be seen with certainty to have no possibility for causing a significant effect on the environment. No development activity is proposed in conjunction with this project.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney has approved as to form both ordinances.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the public hearing, waive further reading and introduce Ordinance No. 15-0034 for Amendments to the Zoning Code, Chapter 10.86 and Ordinance No. 15-0035 for Amendments to the Local Coastal Program, Chapter A.86, to revise the Historic Preservation regulations as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Attachments:
1. Draft Ordinance No. ORD 15-0034- MBMC
2. Draft Ordinance No. ORD 15-0035- LCP
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 15-06
4. Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments- April 29, 2015
5. Planning Commission Minutes- April 29, 2015
6. Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments- June 10, 2015
7. Planning Commission Minutes- June 10, 2015
8. Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments- September 23, 2015
9. Planning Commission Minutes- September 23, 2015
10. Late Attachment Email Cover Page and Compare Document; draft Planning Commission Resolution- September 23, 2015
11. Los Angeles Conservancy Letter - December 23, 2015