TO: ADAM PIRRIE, CITY MANAGER
FROM: BRAD JOHNSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: MARCH 26, 2024
Reviewed by:
City Manager: AP
SUBJECT:
Title
AMENDMENT TO CLAREMONT MUNICIPAL CODE: CULTURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION ORDINANCE (FUNDING SOURCE - GENERAL FUND)
Body
SUMMARY
During the 2017 City Council Priorities setting workshop, public comment and City Council discussion led to the creation of an Ad Hoc Committee to consider Citywide design guidelines and historic preservation in the context of neighborhoods. The motion included direction for the Ad Hoc Committee to consider whether the work could be completed by the Committee without extensive use of Planning Division staff or a consultant.
The Ad Hoc Committee convened on January 30, 2018, and concluded that much of the work could be completed by the volunteers serving on the Committee along with nominal support from City staff. The Committee then set out to complete the work and met twenty times over a four-year period that concluded December 13, 2021. Volunteers on the Committee produced drafts of both a Historic Preservation Ordinance and Citywide Design Guidelines.
Staff modified the Ad Hoc Committee’s draft Preservation Ordinance to integrate it into the Claremont Municipal Code (“CMC”). The result is a code amendment that creates an entirely new Chapter and modifies four existing code chapters. This package of code changes, which make up the draft Cultural Resources Preservation Ordinance (Preservation Ordinance), is Attachment A to this report. Changes to existing code chapters are “redlined” to highlight any deleted language (strikethrough) and inserted language (underlined). The entirely new chapter (Chapter 16.302 - Cultural Resources Preservation) is shown as standardized text (no redlining) for readability. The Preservation Ordinance has been reviewed by both the Architectural Commission and Planning Commission with both bodies approving it unanimously.
Staff is now presenting the Preservation Ordinance for first reading by the City Council. If approved, the ordinance will be presented for second reading and adoption on April 9, 2024 and would then become effective on May 9, 2024.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommended Action
Staff recommends the City Council:
A. Introduce for first reading, and that reading be by title only, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 2 AND TITLE 16 OF THE CLAREMONT MUNICIPAL CODE TO: AMEND CHAPTER 2.42 TO RENAME THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION TO BE THE ARCHITECTURAL AND PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND MODIFY ITS DUTIES; DELETE SECTION 15.04.020.B AND RENUMBER THE REMAINING SUBSECTIONS; AMEND CHAPTERS 16.300 TITLED “ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW” AND 16.301 TITLED “BUILDING CONSERVATION/DEMOLITION”; ADD A NEW CHAPTER 16.302 TITLED “CULTURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION”; AND AMEND CHAPTER 16.321 TITLED “APPEALS AND COUNCIL REVIEW”; and
B. Find this item is exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Body
ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATION
In addition to the staff recommendation, there are the following alternatives:
A. Continue the item for additional information or comment.
B. Request changes and/or additions to the proposed Cultural Resources Preservation Ordinance and remand the revised ordinance back to the Planning Commission for a report on the proposed changes in accordance with Section 16.315.090(B) of the Claremont Municipal Code (“CMC”), which states “The City Council shall not make any change or addition to the proposed amendment or ordinance which has not been previously considered by the Planning Commission during its hearing until the proposed change or addition has been referred to the Planning Commission for a report.”
C. Do not approve the ordinance.
FINANCIAL REVIEW
The staff cost to research and modify the ordinance and prepare this report is estimated to be approximately $26,800 and is included in the operating budget of the Community Development Department.
ANALYSIS
Historic preservation has many benefits including building appreciation of local history, fostering civic pride, and bolstering and maintaining property values. While early preservation efforts focused on historic structure preservation, the definition has evolved with increasing use of the term “Cultural Resource.” A cultural resource can be any historic, prehistoric, built, and natural resource that is significant in the history of a city, region, state, or nation. Cultural resources can be man-made or natural features and include: buildings, non-habitable structures or objects, sites of historic events, land formations, heritage trees, historic districts, and more.
Background - Preservation in Claremont
Despite the lack of a formal preservation ordinance, the City of Claremont has a rich history and tradition of protecting historic buildings. Due to decades of excellent work by the Architectural Commission, Claremont Heritage, City staff, and local property owners, Claremont has managed to earn an A+ rating from the Los Angeles Conservancy dating back to 2014. The primary tools that have been used to accomplish this are: a City Design review process that applies to all development in the City, Claremont Heritage’s strong advocacy and education efforts, the creation of a local register of historic properties, and implementation of the Mills Act to provide tax reduction in exchange for preservation of historic residential structures. Historic preservation continues to be consistently identified as a core value for many in our community. “Preserving our cultural and historic resources” was recently reaffirmed as one of seven City Council Priorities.
Early Efforts
Early preservation efforts in Claremont were focused on preserving the City’s oldest residential neighborhoods by cataloging historic structures to record and highlight their history. In 1976, local volunteers formed Claremont Heritage, a non-profit devoted to the preservation of the City’s history and character. The group compiled a list of historic properties and structures that would become the Register of Structures of Historic or Architectural Merit in Claremont (the Claremont Register), which is now the official list of properties in the City that have been designated by the City Council as cultural resources. The Claremont Register was first adopted by the City Council in 1980 and several additional batches of properties were approved for listing in the register by the Council in subsequent years. There were no written procedures or criteria for approving additions to the Claremont Register until 1998, when the City Council approved a set of criteria that now appear to be overly broad when compared to state and federal preservation best practices. The Claremont Register currently includes approximately 1,150 properties.
The consent of the owner has never been required prior to listing a property in the Claremont Register. This has never been controversial as listing of a property in the Claremont Register has been relatively non-threatening to property owners as it did not prevent the owner from altering or demolishing resources and did not include additional review procedures that were not already required of all properties. Being listed required only recordation of the listing with the County Recorder’s Office and a ninety-day delay prior to demolition of a listed structure.
Historic Districts
The City has modified the zoning for three districts to both recognize and help retain their unique historic character. These zoning districts, which are informally classified as historic districts, have modified development standards (setbacks, height limits, and lot coverage), as well as lower thresholds for projects that require commission level design review. These unique zoning districts are:
• Historic Claremont (HC), which includes the residential neighborhood located north of the Claremont Village;
• Claremont Village (CV), which was established in 1978 and also includes a set of design guidelines and structure assessments that were approved in 1978; and
• Arbol Verde (AV), which is located to the northeast of the intersection of Mills Avenue and First Street and includes the remaining portions of one of Claremont’s two original barrios.
In addition to these zoning districts, there are at least three groups of structures that are formally identified on the Claremont, State, or National Register as historic and can also be considered districts. These include: Russian Village, the Scripps College Campus, and Intercultural Council Housing (ICC) in Arbol Verde.
Evolution of Preservation Practices
Historic preservation practices have evolved since Claremont first initiated the Claremont Register and its listing criteria. As noted, our current listing criteria are overly broad and there are concerns that the City lacks sufficient controls to prevent a truly landmark structure from being altered or destroyed by a determined property owner.
Perhaps even more significant is a trend among the State legislature and courts to curtail the ability of local governments to utilize subjective judgement in making land use and design review decisions. Claremont’s past success has depended heavily on the skills of its staff and a sound relationship with local preservation advocates guiding development on or around its cultural resources by utilizing the procedures and often-subjective criteria contained in Chapter 16.300 of the Claremont Municipal Code. With the recent passage of several State laws designed to spur new housing and denser development, the City is being increasingly required to utilize only objective criteria in reviewing new development.
Preservation Ordinances can be a helpful tool to retain some local control over our most important cultural resources. To be effective, preservation rules need to be clearly defined and based in professional best practices. The procedures in the draft Preservation Ordinance are intended to implement the types of practices that are needed for legally defensible regulation of development within or adjacent to legitimate cultural resources.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has also impacted preservation practice. Being listed on the Claremont Register does not necessarily change the need for an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) before demolition. The loss of a structure listed on the Register is not always determined to be a significant environmental impact, and conversely, just because a structure is not listed on the Claremont Register does not mean it is not an important cultural resource to the community. Proposed demolitions are frequently part of larger new development projects and, therefore, must be included in the environmental review for the larger project.
Benefits of Being Designated a Cultural Resource and Listed in the Claremont Register
The primary benefit of being formally designated a Cultural Resource and listed on the Claremont Register is the ability to qualify for a Mills Act tax reduction in exchange for preserving the historic structure. Listing/designation also allows owners to use the State Historical Building Code that provides for more permissive construction alternatives to current building codes. Other benefits to property owners may include design assistance from Claremont Heritage, and the recognition of being an important property due to historical or architectural merit.
Owner Consent
The draft Preservation Ordinance does not require owner consent for listing a property on the Claremont Register; however, it does require that owners be notified and provided the opportunity to speak before the Architectural and Preservation Commission. Owners may also appeal any decision by the Commission to the City Council. In drafting the ordinance, the Ad Hoc Committee indicated that the most effective ordinances do not require owner consent as it can result in a veto right of the current owner despite the historic significance of the property. The Committee believed the determining factor for listing a property should be the architectural and/or historical merits of the property, not the owner’s preference. This will help ensure that similar properties are treated equally in a manner based on the adopted criteria. It might also be somewhat unfair to allow present owners of non-listed properties to have consent, when owners of previously listed properties and future owners cannot reverse the listing/designation of those properties.
Background - Ad Hoc Committee
The City Council charged the Ad Hoc Committee with considering design guidelines for commercial and residential structures and historic preservation. On December 19, 2017, the Mayor made appointments to the Ad Hoc Committee, which included two members from each of the following: City Council, Planning Commission, Architectural Commission, and Claremont Heritage/Community Member. Due to the length of the assignment, several members of the Committee rotated off the Committee. All persons who served on the Committee are listed below:
|
Committee Member |
Affiliation |
|
Jennifer Stark |
City Council |
|
Jed Leano |
City Council |
|
Larry Schroeder |
City Council |
|
Sam Pedroza |
City Council |
|
John Neiuber |
Architectural Commission |
|
Mark Schoeman |
Architectural Commission |
|
Brian Worley |
Architectural Commission |
|
Robert Perry |
Architectural Commission |
|
Richard Rosenbluth |
Planning Commission |
|
Catherine Curtis |
Planning Commission |
|
Leigh Anne Jones |
Planning Commission |
|
Mary Stoddard |
Claremont Heritage |
|
Ginger Elliott |
Claremont Heritage |
The Committee’s original draft historic preservation ordinance was attached to both the Architectural and Planning Commission Agenda Reports and is available upon request from the Planning Division.
NEW CHAPTER 16.302 - CULTURAL RESORUCES PRESERVATION ORDINANCE
The bulk of the new preservation ordinance is contained in a new chapter (chapter number 16.302) to be added to the Claremont Municipal Code. This new chapter, which consists of approximately 27 pages of new text, includes the following sections which have been outlined below:
Section #(s) Description of Section(s)
000 - 020 Intent, Definitions, Purpose & Goals
040 - 070 Staff, Architectural Preservation Commission, and Council Review Responsibilities
080 - 090 Criteria & Procedures for Designating Resources
100 Mandatory Review for Demolition of Structures over 45 years of age
120 - 150 Certificates of Appropriateness (CofA’s) Procedures
160 - 200 Review Criteria & Conditions of Approval for CofA’s
210 - 220 Economic Hardship & Waiver for Imminent Threat
230 Maintenance of Cultural Resources Required
240 Economic Incentives
260 Enforcement and Penalties
ADDITIONAL ACTIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE NEW ORDINANCE
In addition to the draft ordinance, the Ad Hoc Committee and staff recommend the following actions be taken:
1. Become a Certified Local Government (CLG) through the State Office of Historic Preservation and seek grants to support implementation;
2. Create application and certificate forms and guidance materials;
3. Adopt Design Guidelines for protecting the character of the City’s neighborhoods;
4. Adopt Design Guidelines for protecting the architectural character of existing non-historic structures that includes the various types of architecture that are prevalent in the City;
5. Create a database identifying the character defining features of the City’s various neighborhoods; and
6. Develop City specific guidelines for protecting the historic character of existing historic structures, landscapes, and places.
7. Consider conducting a City-wide cultural resources survey; and
8. Update the Claremont Register by adding and removing resources to be more consistent with current best practices and the City’s Preservation Ordinance.
In addition to these actions, staff notes that the following on-going actions will be required to fully implement the Preservation Ordinance:
1. Develop forms and fees necessary to implement the ordinance including, Certificates of Appropriateness and listing applications;
2. Provide the on-going staff resources necessary to complete the analysis and reports necessary to process listing requests and applications for work subject to the requirements of the ordinance; and
3. Provide preservation training for staff and commissioners on an as-needed basis.
ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION REVIEW
The Architectural Commission reviewed the draft Cultural Resources Preservation Ordinance during its February 14, 2024 meeting. During the meeting, six members of the public spoke. All speakers were in support of the ordinance. The Commission reviewed the details of the draft ordinance with staff, provided mostly supportive comments, requested no changes, and unanimously recommended that the City Council approve the ordinance as currently drafted.
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW
The Planning Commission reviewed the draft Cultural Resources Preservation Ordinance during its March 5, 2024 meeting. At that meeting, staff recommended minor text changes related to heritage tree criteria that had been suggested by members of the public during a public outreach event hosted by Sustainable Claremont and Claremont Heritage. During the Planning Commission meeting, eight members of the public spoke. All speakers were in support of the ordinance. Additional written comments received prior to the meeting expressed support; however there was one written comment opposed to the ordinance expressing concern that it would be used to stop development of new housing in the future. The Commission reviewed the details of the draft ordinance with staff, provided mostly supportive comments, requested one additional minor change to Section 16.300.030.C.2 to delete a reference to Commission review of accessory second units, and on a 6-0 (one member absent) vote, unanimously recommended that the City Council approve the ordinance as amended during the meeting. The ordinance being presented to the City Council with this report includes all revisions approved by the Planning Commission.
LEGAL REVIEW
The proposed Cultural Resources Preservation Ordinance (Attachment A) has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.
RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Staff has evaluated this agenda item in relationship to the City’s strategic and visioning documents and finds that it applies to the following City Planning Documents: Council Priorities, General Plan, and the 2022-24 Budget.
CEQA REVIEW
This proposed action, adoption, and implementation of a Citywide Cultural Resources Preservation Ordinance is covered under the General Rule Exemption of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") for projects that can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the action in question may have a significant effect on the environment per CEQA Section 15061 (b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines as the ordinance is designed to protect and preserve existing cultural resources including historic structures and sites in the City. The adoption of the ordinance is also categorically exempt under Section 15308, Class 8, as it represents an action taken by a regulatory agency (the City) to assure the maintenance, restoration, and protection of the environment (cultural and historic resources). Furthermore, the adoption of the ordinance will not result in construction activities or other direct physical changes or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes nor will it result in the relaxation of standards to allow for environmental degradation. Therefore, no additional review is required at this time.
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
Display ad has been placed in the Claremont Courier and the agenda and staff report have been posted on the City website and distributed to interested parties, including Claremont Heritage, Sustainable Claremont, and the members of the Ad Hoc Committee. If you desire a copy, please contact the City Clerk’s Office.
Submitted by: Prepared by:
Brad Johnson Christopher Veirs
Community Development Director Principal Planner
Attachments:
A - Draft Historic Preservation Ordinance
B - Planning Commission Resolution #2024-02 Recommending Ordinance Adoption
C - Architectural Commission Meeting Minutes of February 14, 2024
D - Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 5, 2024