AGENDA
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
4:30 p.m., Open Session
City Hall
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
Live and archived video streaming
V. Announcements from Closed Session, from City Council Members and the City Administrator
C. Announcements from City Administrator
3. Receive update on San Antonio Walkway.
VII. Consent Calendar
These matters include routine financial and administrative actions, which are usually approved by a single majority vote. Individual items may be removed from Consent by a member of the Council or the public for discussion and action.
G. Consideration of a Resolution expressing opposition to the Villas de Carmelo project proposed at 24945 Valley Way in the City’s Sphere of Influence.
Description: The Villas del Carmelo project is proposed on the Carmel Convalescent Hospital site, just outside the City limits. The project proposes the adaptive reuse of the two existing historic buildings and the construction of several new buildings to accommodate 46 residential units and associated improvements. This Resolution expresses opposition to the project based on potentially significant impacts to the City residents and the City’s Sphere of Influence.
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.
Important Considerations: A Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was circulated from April 17th through June 5th, 2009. The City submitted a comment letter on the DEIR on June 3, 2009, expressing concern about several aspects of the project including its effect on aesthetics, cultural resources, land use/planning, and transportation.
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2010-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY THE SEA EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO THE VILLAS DE CARMELO PROJECT PROPOSED AT 24945 VALLEY WAY IN THE CITY’S SPHERE OF INFLUENCE.
WHEREAS, the proposed project is inconsistent with Policy P1-127 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan that encourages areas in the Sphere of Influence to continue the existing pattern of low density development; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project is inconsistent with Objective O1-23 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan that encourages the City to support efforts to reduce congestion on Highway One; and
WHEREAS, the proposed scale and density of the project is inconsistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, the project will create negative traffic and circulation impacts on the residents in the area; and
WHEREAS, the project will degrade streets maintained by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea; and
WHEREAS, the project has the potential of significantly impacting the existing historic buildings on the site; and
WHEREAS, the project requires the removal of significant Monterey Pine and Coast Live Oak trees that should be preserved.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA does hereby:
Adopt a Resolution expressing opposition to the Villas de Carmelo project located at 24945 Valley Way in the City’s Sphere of Influence.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 6th day of April 2010 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED,
________________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
H. Consideration of a Resolution authorizing repairs to the Forest Theater stage floor by KNA Construction in an amount not to exceed $12,400.
Description: The plywood overlay on the Forest Theater stage floor deteriorated and needed repairs. This plywood is part of the normal maintenance repairs made to the stage from time to time. KNA Construction was hired on a time and material basis to remove the weathered 5/8-inch plywood overlay and they replaced it with new plywood. After the old plywood was removed, it was discovered that repairs were needed to the 2-inch-by-6 inch Douglas fir underdecking that was damaged by dry rot in several places.
Overall Cost:
City Funds: $12,400
Grant Funds: N/A
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.
Important Considerations: The existing plywood overlay was installed eight years ago. It was overdue for replacement and more so, considering that there are many areas of dry rot. The dry rot has contributed to the 2” x 6” decking deterioration.
Decision Record: No prior action was taken by the City Council on the proposed theater stage repairs.
K. Consideration of a Resolution to lend two Mary DeNeale Morgan paintings to Hearst Art Gallery, Saint Mary’s College of California, from July 15 through September 30, 2010.
Title: “Cypress, Monterey Coast”
Date: Unknown
Medium: Oil on Canvas
Dimensions: 40’ high x 50” wide
Title/Description: "Cypress Trees by the Seashore"
Date: Unknown
Medium: Oil on Board
Dimensions: 24’ high x 30” wide
Description: The Hearst Art Gallery of Saint Mary’s College of California has requested permission to borrow two paintings by early California artist Mary DeNeale Morgan for an exhibition that will run from July 25 through September 19, 2010.
The paintings will be hung, using archival standards, in a climate-controlled, secure facility. They will be fully insured by the Hearst Art Gallery for the entire loan period and packaged and transported by trained, experienced Hearst Art Gallery staff.
Overall Cost:
City Funds: N/A
Grant Funds: N/A
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution
Important Considerations: Loans such as this foster collaboration and strengthen professional relationships between institutions and generate positive publicity for the lender.
Decision Record: In 2000 “Old Whaler’s Cabin – Point Lobos” by Charles Rollo Peters was loaned for four months to the Monterey Museum of Art for the exhibition, “Painting of the Monterey Adobes: A Walking Tour”.
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR McCLOUD AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
THROUGH: RICH GUILLEN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: JANET CUBBAGE, LIBRARY DIRECTOR
DATE: MARCH 9, 2010
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION TO LEND
TWO MARY DENEALE MORGAN PAINTINGS TO
HEARST ART GALLERY, SAINT MARY’S COLLEGE
OF CALIFORNIA, FROM JULY 15 THROUGH
SEPTEMBER 30, 2010.
RECOMMENDED MOTION
Adopt a Resolution to lend two Mary DeNeale Morgan paintings to Hearst Art Gallery, Saint Mary’s College of California, from July 15 – September 30, 2010.
BACKGROUND
In January 2010, Julie Armistead, Collections Manager / Registrar for the Hearst Art Gallery of Saint Mary’s College in Moraga, California, submitted a formal request to borrow two Mary DeNeale Morgan paintings, one titled “Cypress, Monterey Coast”, which hangs in the Main Library lobby, and the other, “Cypress Trees by the Seashore”, which hangs in the Sunset Center lobby, for an exhibition titled “Delicate Strength: Early California Paintings by Annie Harmon, Mary DeNeale Morgan, and Marion Kavanagh Wachtel”. The three artists featured in the exhibition all studied under William Keith, an important early California landscape artist whose works form the heart of the Hearst Art Gallery collection.
Important points to consider regarding the request from Hearst Art Gallery:
• Hearst Gallery environmental conditions with regard to temperature and relative humidity are maintained according to archival standards.
• The paintings will be secured with standard museum quality hanging tools.
• The mounting and display process will not affect the condition of the paintings.
• The gallery space is fully alarmed and equipped with closed circuit TV cameras, magnetic contacts and microwave motion detectors, with additional security provided by Hearst Art gallery staff.
• The paintings will be fully insured for the full loan period under the fine arts policy carried by Saint Mary’s College.
• Packing and transportation of the paintings will be done under the supervision of Ms. Armistead by Hearst Art Gallery staff experienced in handling and moving artwork.
The dates of the requested loan period for the paintings are July 12 through October 1, 2010.
The Harrison Memorial Library Board of Trustees approved the loan of “Cypress Monterey Coast”, the painting that hangs in the Main Library, during its January 21, 2010 regular meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT
None. The Hearst Art Gallery will be responsible for all costs, including transportation and insurance.
SUMMARY
Requests to borrow City works of art have been rare; however, occasional loans have been made. In 2000, “Old Whaler’s Cabin – Point Lobos” by Charles Rollo Peters, was loaned for four months to the Monterey Museum of Art for an exhibition, “Painting of the Monterey Adobes: A Walking Tour”.
Loans such as this foster collaboration. They strengthen professional relationships between institutions and enable them to offer services beyond what they could provide using their own resources. They also generate positive publicity for the lender while giving people in other areas a chance to view and appreciate works of art they might otherwise not see.
IX. Ordinances
B. Consideration of an Ordinance amending the Mills Act program found in the Historic Preservation Ordinance (First reading).
Description: This proposal would amend the application requirements of the Mills Act to eliminate some of the existing standards and to place an emphasis on rehabilitation as a basis for contract approval.
Staff Recommendation: Approve the Ordinance (First reading).
Important Considerations: The Mills Act was enacted by the State of California in 1972 as a way to encourage partnerships between local governments and property owners of historic resources. Local governments are not required to participate in the Mills Act.
For participating governments, a Mills Act contract may be offered to any property that contains an historic resource. The contract must be for at least 10 years and the property owner typically agrees to specific rehabilitation/restoration efforts. In turn, the property owner receives a reduced property tax assessment. The jurisdiction benefits by having historic resources maintained and enhanced, while the property owner benefits by having a reduced tax burden.
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY PLANNING AND BUILDING
STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR MCCLOUD & COUNCIL MEMEBERS
FROM: SEAN CONROY, PLNG & BLDG SERVICES MANAGER
THROUGH: RICH GUILLEN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: 6 APRIL 2010
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM FOUND IN THE CITY’S HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE. (FIRST READING)
BACKGROUND & DESCRIPTION
The Mills Act was enacted by the State of California in 1972 as a way to encourage partnerships between local governments and property owners of historic resources. Local governments are not required to participate in the Mills Act. For participating governments, a Mills Act contract may be offered to any property that contains an historic resource. The contract must be for at least 10 years and the property owner typically agrees to specific rehabilitation/restoration efforts. In turn, the property owner receives a reduced property tax assessment.
The jurisdiction benefits by having historic resources rehabilitated and maintained, while the property owner benefits by having a reduced tax burden.
As part of the approval of the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP) in 2004, the updated Historic Preservation Ordinance offers Mills Act contracts as a potential benefit to property owners of historic resources. CMC Section 17.32.100.B establishes criteria that an applicant must meet in order to qualify for a contract. Some of the criteria have proven to be problematic and have made qualifying for a contract difficult.
The proposed amendments (Exhibit “A”) would revise the criteria to eliminate some of the more problematic standards and to favor projects that have a demonstrable rehabilitation need. Staff has also attached a copy of the California Government Code relating to the Mills Act for the Council’s reference (Exhibit “B”).
PROCESS
The proposed ordinance would amend the Zoning Ordinance/Local Coastal
Implementation Plan and requires review by the Historic Resources Board (HRB), Planning Commission (PC), City Council and the California Coastal Commission.
The HRB and Planning Commission unanimously recommended adoption of the attached ordinance on 25 January 2010 and 10 March 2010 respectively.
EVALUATION
The primary focus of the HRB and PC’s review of the Mills Act was based on the following policy question:
“Should Mills Act Contracts be offered primarily to properties with significant rehabilitation needs or should they be offered to all historic properties?”
Response: The HRB and PC determined that the Mills Act program should be used primarily as a tool to assist in the rehabilitation/restoration of degraded historic properties. Properties that have a demonstrable rehabilitation need should be given preference over properties with little or no rehabilitation needs. In that way, contracts that the City approves would result in rehabilitated and restored historic properties.
Focusing on rehabilitation would benefit not only the property owner, but also the surrounding neighborhood and the City as a whole. Offering contracts to properties with little or no need for rehabilitation would have less of a benefit to the community and may not justify the reduction in tax income to the City. The proposed amendments would require an applicant to clearly demonstrate how the tax reductions are necessary to assist in the rehabilitation of the property. Staff concurs with the recommendation of the HRB and PC.
A Carmel resident has submitted several documents related to the Mills Act for the Council’s review (see Exhibit “C”). It is this resident’s opinion that the City cannot restrict contracts to only properties that require rehabilitation since the Government Code allows for contracts for historic properties that may or may not require restoration and rehabilitation.
Staff does not concur with this opinion. While it is true that the Government Code allows the City to offer contracts to all historic properties, it is completely discretionary by the City to determine what types of properties are approved for contracts.
Budget Considerations: Based on the value of a property receiving a Mills Act Contract, and the property’s current tax rates, staff estimates that the granting of a Mills Act Contract would result in a decrease in tax revenue to the City of between $1,000 to $3,000 dollars.
The proposed Mills Act requirements limit the number of historic properties that could potentially qualify for a contract. However, if the Council is still concerned about potential financial impacts, a cap could be established that limited the number of contracts that could be approved during any given fiscal years. Many communities that offer Mills Act Contracts have established similar caps.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Ordinance amending the Mills Act requirements on first reading.
Exhibit “A”City Mills Act Requirements (revisions shown in strikeout (noted as Strikeout at beginning and end) and underline (noted in bold))
B. Mills Act Historical Property Contracts. (CMC 17.32.10)
1. Purpose.
The primary purpose for offering Mills Act contracts in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea is to assist in the rehabilitation and long-term maintenance of historic resources.
5. Applications.
b. The following materials are required for a complete application:
iii. A rehabilitation and maintenance plan for the historic resource prepared or reviewed by a qualified professional together with a cost estimate of the work to be done attached and labeled as “Exhibit B.”
iv. Photos of the exterior of the property attached as “- to assist in the rehabilitation and maintenance of the property attached as “Exhibit D”.
6. Review Process.
c. To grant approval of a Mills Act contract, the Board and City Council shall make all of the following findings:
ii. The proposed rehabilitation and maintenance plan is appropriate in scope and sufficient in detail to guide long-term maintenance. Required maintenance and rehabilitation should be more significant than just routine maintenance that would be expected for any property.
iii. Alterations to the historic resource have been in the past, and will continue to be in the future, limited to interior work and to exterior rehabilitation and alterations that:
(A) Comply with the Secretary’s Standards (future additions only), Strikeout and do not affect the basic form and design of the original historic resource Strikeout, and
(B) Do not significantly alter affect any primary elevation, and
Strikeout (C) Do not alter, damage or diminish any character-defining feature, Strikeout and
-(D) Do not increase floor area on the property by more than 15 percent beyond the amount established in the documented original or historic design of the resource,
Strikeout (F) Meet all zoning standards applicable to the location of the property. Strikeout
iv. The Mills Act contract will aid in offsetting the costs of rehabilitating and/or maintaining the historic resource Strikeout and/or will offset potential losses of income that might otherwise be achieved on the property. Strikeout
3 comments:
It is interesting the city feels loans of city owned artworks foster collaboration and strengthen professional relationships between institutions and generate positive publicity for the lender. How about generating positive vibes from us, the owners of the artworks, by having an exhibition of all our artworks. I feel the city has missed an opportunity to fix up Flanders Mansion and make it into a facility where residents and visitors can go to see our artworks on display in monthly rotating exhibitions. We owners deserve to see our artwork displayed and not stored away somewhere forever and ever.
Let me get this straight. The city council is concerned about potential financial impacts, but the estimated decrease in tax revenue to the City is between $1,000 to $3,000 dollars. In my opinion, the tax revenue decrease does not justify the strict standards for qualification of a Mills Act Contract. The City should do all it can to create an incentive for historic property owners to rehabilitate and maintain their residences or commercial buildings with the reward of a Mills Act Contract-that is only fair.
The intent of the Government Code for Mills Act Contracts is to offer contracts to all historic property owners. I think the city should honor the general intent of the State and not narrowly define what qualifies for a contract. Just because a residence does not require immediate restoration or rehabiliation does not mean an owner should not get a tax break because normal maintenance of historic structures requires greater costs than a non-historic property. To deny historic property owners a contract defeats the city's mantra about taking pride in its historic buildings, in my opinion.
Post a Comment