Wednesday, December 27, 2006

PART II (of IV): Reconsideration of a Mills Act Contract...and adoption of Findings?

Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Tuesday, December 19, 2006 at 4:30 p.m.

IV. Orders of Business

B. Reconsideration of a Mills Act Contract and a Maintenance and Management Plan and adoption of Findings for an existing historic residence located on the west side of Lincoln Street between 8th and 9th Avenues. The property owners are David & Debbie Hutchings. (De novo Hearing).

In representing Mr. & Mrs. Hutchings, their representation presented a Power Point Presentation, as follows:

CURRENT LAW

MILLS ACT
(GOVERNMENT CODE 50281)

CARMEL LAND USE PLAN

CMC 17.32.100


Purposes of Mills Act
“The Mills Act program is especially beneficial for recent buyers of historic properties and for current owners who have made major improvements to their properties, Technical Assistance Bulletin #12.”

“The Mills Act program allows the property owner to utilize the tax savings per year to be used in future years for repair, maintenance and rehabilitation of historic properties.”
Dennis Webber, State of California Department of Parks

CMC 17.32.100
The following preservation incentives are available to owners of resources listed in the Carmel Register.
B. Mills Act Historic Property Contracts. All Mills Act contracts shall be established, processed and approved in conformance with California law.


EXISTING HISTORIC CONTEXT STATEMENT
Developed in 1997
Currently in effect
First Inventory, then Register


Historical Consultants
Hutchings’ property has been evaluated by at least 3 historic consultants:
Kent Seavey, April 9, 2002
“The Elizabeth F. Armstrong House is significant under California Register criteria 3, in the area of architecture as an excellent and unaltered example of the English Arts and Crafts style of architecture, articulated in a sophisticated, individualistic design by noted California architect C. J. Ryland.”

William Salmon, May 13, 2002
“THE ORIGINAL HOUSE HAS RETAINED A HIGH DEGREE OF PHYSICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY TO THE ORIGINAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION…”

Sheila McElroy, October 10, 2005.
“The Elizabeth Armstrong House is an intact example of an English Arts and Crafts style, as an example of residential architectural design (Ryland) and craftsmanship (Bain) and maintains a high level of integrity.”


Historic Elements of House
Original Carmel Stone Chimney, 1935.
Original Garage with wood doors,…
Casement Windows, original panes
Naturalistic Landscaping


Zoning Issues
Plans Approved
2002
In compliance with Current Zoning Code
Changes to an existing non-conformity, no change in historicity.


Exception to Zoning Code Standards
2002 Staff Report
Plate Height and Continuation of the three stories on lower level addition, existing non-conformities
Neither change visible from the front of the house

In conformance with R-1 Zoning Standards; a condition of approval in 2002 of Planning Commission.


CMC 17.32.100
D. Existing structural nonconformities associated with a historic resource listed on the register…excess height or insufficient parking, etc…shall be treated as conforming.


Financial Impacts
Cost to City: $2,000.00/year
(Figure derived from consultation with Monterey County Assessor’s Office)


Maintenance Plan
Created by City consultant
Designed in accord with Secretary of Interior Standards
Designed to be renewable, modifiable and flexible
Plan need to be updated, as Plan was prepared 2 years ago.


Updated Exhibit B
Updated Expenses
10/1/04 through 11/30/06
$231,000 now, $216,000 originally


Elements of the Maintenance Plan
Deferred maintenance premium
Correct stucco finish
Ongoing maintenance
Erosion and drainage control
Paint, stucco and caulk house garage
Repainting windows
Improvement of less than “E” items. (“E” means excellent)


Updated Maintenance Plan


Secretary of Interior Standards
Specific standards for:
Protect and Maintain
Repair
Replace
“Not a normal maintenance program.”


EFFECT ON CONTEXT STATEMENT
Only 8 historical properties on Register and as demonstrated not all will seek contracts.

City can rely upon extensive historical review of this property built in 1935.

No Effect. City reserves its right in non-renewal, no financial impact to City if include Fee for Contract language.

No comments: