title
CC - (1) Discussion Relating to Updating Culver City’s Historic Preservation Program, Including Updates to Chapter 15.05 of the Culver City Municipal Code Relating to the Historic Preservation Program and (2) Provide Direction to the City Manager as Deemed Appropriate.
body
Contact Person/Dept: B. Christine Byers / City Manager’s Office - Cultural Affairs
Phone Number: (310) 253-6003
Fiscal Impact: Yes [] No [X] General Fund: Yes [] No []
Public Hearing: [] Action Item: [X] Attachments: Yes [] No [X]
Commission Action Required: Yes [] No [X] Date:
Commission Name:
Public Notification: (E-Mail) Meetings and Agendas - City Council and Cultural Affairs Commission (09/30/15 and 10/22/15); Culver City Historical Society (09/30/15); Julie Lugo Cerra, City Historian (09/30/15); Culver City Chamber of Commerce (09/30/15); Sony Pictures Entertainment (09/30/15; The Culver Studios (09/30/15)
Department Approval: Martin R. Cole, Assistant City Manager/City Clerk (10/22/15)
______________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council discuss the City’s Historic Preservation Program, beginning with updating Chapter 15.05 of the Culver City Municipal Code (CCMC) related to the Historic Preservation Program and direct the City Manager as deemed appropriate.
BACKGROUND
The City Council established a Historic Preservation Program by adopting an Ordinance in 1991 which is codified in the Culver City Municipal Code (CCMC) as Section 15.05 et seq. At that time, the City Council also adopted Resolution 91-R015 which outlines a system for ranking and classifying structures as Cultural Resources. There are a total of three Cultural Resource classification categories for both individual structures and districts: “Landmark”, “Significant” and “Recognized”. The “Landmark” and “Significant” categories have certain protections associated with them; the “Recognized” category is honorific only.
Except for the former Culver City Ice Arena, all individual structures and districts designated Culver City Cultural Resources were made in conjunction with a survey completed in 1987 by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc., together with recommendations included in the 1990 Culver City Historic Preservation Advisory Committee (HPAC) Report. (The HPAC, comprised of representatives of community organizations and at-large members, was tasked with making recommendations regarding criteria for designating buildings of historic significance and ranking structures based on these criteria. The majority of the structures ranked and recommended for designation by the HPAC were included in the 1987 survey.) Currently, Culver City’s register of Cultural Resources includes over 120 individual structures and three historic districts.
The last substantive update to the City’s Historic Preservation Program was completed in 2001 when language was added to the CCMC to incorporate Cultural Affairs staff and the Cultural Affairs Commission into implementation of the Historic Preservation Program.
DISCUSSION
While forward looking at the time of its establishment in the early 1990s and with a survey that is more than 25 years old, it is a best practice to update the City’s Historic Preservation Program in order to function as a streamlined and effective planning tool which is consistent with federal and state regulations, including the California Register of Historical Resources (created in 1992) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), substantially amended in 1998 with regard to historical resources. In light of an outdated survey, as one example, Historic Resource Evaluations have to be completed for individual properties 45 years or older as part of the nomination for designation process or for CEQA review in conjunction with discretionary development projects. This approach is both inefficient and expensive in terms of financial and staff resources and imposes additional costs and longer application periods on property owners during the entitlement process.
In addition, there are options for expanding the existing Historic Preservation Program to include financial incentives for property owners of Culver City designated Cultural Resources (such as a Mills Act Program) and applying for designation as a Certified Local Government (CLG). CLG status provides local governments with certain benefits, including eligibility for grant funding up to $40,000 per year toward future updates of surveys, outreach and educational programs, preparation of or updates to General Plan Historic Preservation Elements, and information management and technology.
As a tool for both property owners and City staff, an optimal preservation ordinance reflects a local community’s priorities for preservation and provides a framework for other aspects of a local preservation program such as surveys, nominations for designation, and financial incentives. It is a best practice to update such ordinance to remain consistent with CEQA and state and federal guidelines for designation. Past research, together with input from the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), and recent projects involving older properties (e.g., the former Culver City Ice Arena) have reinforced the need to update the City’s Historic Preservation Program, beginning with an update of the Historic Preservation Ordinance.
Some of the provisions of the Ordinance staff recommends be reviewed include:
• Definitions (“Adverse Effect”, “Contributing Property”, “Demolition” “Demolition by Neglect”, and “Environmental Setting”, are some commonly used terms referenced in CEQA and preservation planning that are currently not included in the CCMC);
• Streamlining the three-tiered designation categories (the “Recognized” category provides no protections, thereby creating a potential disconnect with CEQA and the definition of a historical resource as included therein);
• Threshold criteria for designation;
• Threshold criteria for establishing economic hardship;
• Role of the Cultural Affairs Commission and Planning Commission in review of the treatment of historic properties;
• Role of the Cultural Affairs Commission in the nomination and designation process;
• The relationship between CEQA procedures and the City’s Historic Preservation Program, clarifying whether or not the local preservation decision-making review process will be influenced by the state-mandated CEQA review process; and,
• Provision for economic incentives for property owners (this is optional and can be added at a later date).
Should the City Council so direct, staff is seeking approval to proceed with an Ordinance review and update. It is proposed that staff work with the Cultural Affairs Commission’s (CAC) Ad Hoc Historic Preservation Ordinance and Program Update Subcommittee (Vice Chair Dickter and Commissioner Small), the City Historian, the Culver City Historical Society, business and residential interests, as well as seek general community input in the form of one or more workshops that also can serve as an educational and outreach effort. Ultimately, the process would culminate in the entire CAC providing input on the updated draft ordinance and the CAC making a formal recommendation to the City Council.
FISCAL ANALYSIS
Discussion of this subject does not create a fiscal impact for the City. However, based upon the direction provided by the City Council, proposed updates may involve fiscal impact(s), the amount of which would be analyzed at the time specific recommendations are presented to the City Council for consideration.
ATTACHMENTS
Chapter 15.05 of the CCMC (Historic Preservation Program)
RECOMMENDED MOTIONS
That the City Council:
1. Discuss the City’s Historic Preservation Program, beginning with updating Chapter 15.05 of the Culver City Municipal Code related to the Historic Preservation Program; and,
2. Direct the City Manager as deemed appropriate.