Loading...
SR-021208-6Ac7~+ ~;~Yo, City Council Report Santa Monica City Council Meeting: February 12, 2008 Agenda Item: ~ w To: Mayor and City Council From: Eileen P. Fogarty, Director of Planning and Community Development Subject: Appeal of Landmarks Commission approval of Certificate of Appropriateness Application for demolition of anon-contributing structure and construction of a new single-family residence at 2642 Second Street. Recommended Action Staff recommends the City Council deny appeal 07APP-010 and approve Certificate of Appropriateness application 07CA-009 for demolition of anon-contributing structure and construction of new asingle-family residence located at 2642 Second Street, based on the findings set forth by the. Landmarks Commission in its action on December 10, 2007. Executive Summary This report supports the Landmarks Commission's approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness application filed by property owners Mark R. Gorman and Beth Burns for construction of a new 2,365 square foot single-family residence on a non- contributing parcel located in the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District ("the District"). On December 10, 2007; a majority of the Landmarks Commission determined that the design of the new, single-family residence and its placement on the parcel would be harmonious with the overall character of the District and with the scale, materials, and massing of Contributing Structures within the District, and therefore approved the application by a vote of 4-1. This report presents analysis of the proposed project in light of the required finding for approval set forth in SMMC Section 9.40.030 (c) (4) that requires new construction be harmonious and compatible with the character of the District and with the scale, massing and materials of contributing structures in the District. The report also addresses the points of the appeal filed by Beatrice Nemlaha, Scott Campbell, and Tony Haig that, in summary, assert the Landmarks Commission erred it in approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness application because the proposed project is not compatible with the character of the District or with Contributing Structures in the District, and is not consistent with the adopted District design guidelines for new construction. In consideration of the full record to date, including review of the appellants' appeal statement, it is recommended that the Landmarks Commission's approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness be upheld and the appeal, therefore, be denied. 1 Discussion On August 28, 2007, Mark R. Gorman and Beth Burns filed a Certificate of Appropriateness application requesting demolition of an existing non-contributing structure and construction of a new two-story 2,365 square foot single-family residence at 2642 Second Street, located within the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District ("District"). The subject property is approximately 50' x 100' and is located on the west side of Second Street between Beach and Hill Streets. The existing one-story duplex on site was constructed in 1953 and was determined to be anon-contributing structure when the District was established in July 1990. The west side of Second Street contains a total of three contributing structures: two adjacent structures at the corner of Ocean Park Boulevard and one structure located two parcels south of the subject property. The properties to the north of the subject property consist of a parking lot and one-story structure. The property to the south is currently vacant, however an approval was recently granted for the construction of a new, two-story plus mezzanine single-family residence. Third Street Neighborhood Historic District Boundaries 2 Rendering of Proposed Single-Family Residence 2642 SecondStreet Third Street Neighborhood Historic District Standards & Design Guidelines When the District was established, its intent was documented in an application referenced in the Municipal Code (SMMC 9.36.290) describing in detail the neighborhood's history, architectural character, proposed boundary alternatives, and the purpose for establishing this area as a historic district. Out of three alternatives offered in the application, the Council designated the District boundaries to include the west side of Second Street, in part, because there was interest on the part of district applicants in relocating historic structures from other areas to these non-contributing and empty parcels on Second Street. When the District was established, contributing structures were defined as -those structures that were built during or prior to 1935; non- contributing properties were identified as vacant parcels and those structures constructed after 1935. Following the establishment of the Third Street Neighborhood Historic .District, the Landmarks Commission adopted the Third Street Neighborhood Design Guidelines and a Landscape Survey ("District Guidelines") in 1992. These District Guidelines are discussed more fully beginning on page 9 of this report. Landmarks Commission Action The Landmarks Commission held a public hearing for the Certificate of Appropriateness application on October 8, 2007. After listening to public testimony both in opposition and in support of the project, and after an extensive discussion regarding the proposal, the hearing was continued to allow the applicant to revise the project based on specific direction provided by the Commission during the course of the discussion. The Landmarks Commission reviewed the revised project at its December 10, 2007 meeting and determined that the applicant had made appropriate" revisions that served to enhance its compatibility with the District. The Commission approved the Certificate of Appropriateness application by a vote of 4-1. The majority of the Commission based its approval, in part, on the following factors: 3 • The project's overall design concept is appropriately responsive to the character of the District and its context on Second Street. The design incorporates carefully selected architectural elements and a palette of materials that complement and reflect in a contemporary and respectful manner the District's character while also creating an understated backdrop for the historic architecture in the District. • The project's restrained modern design, overall building form, low overall building height, and articulated building volumes are harmonious and compatible with the character of the District and with characteristics found in the architecture of a variety of contributing structures in the Historic District. As a condition of approval, the Commission required the applicant to work with the Landmarks Commission Secretary to select a modified exterior paint color palette. The full text of the Landmarks Commission's Statement of Official Action is presented as Attachment B. October 8, 2007 and December 10, 2007 staff reports and meeting minutes are presented as Attachments C and D, respectively. Appeal Summary The appellants state that the Landmarks Commission erred in its decision to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness application. The following is a summary of the appellants' statement; the full text of the appeal is contained in Attachment A: • The proposed project damages the character of the District and violates the purpose for creating the District and the story of an early Santa Monica beach neighborhood the District was created to tell. • The project does not comply with the criteria for issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness contained in SMMC Section 9.36.140. • The project is incompatible with the District's dominant architectural character found in its California bungalows. • The Landmarks Commission failed to strictly apply the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District Design Guidelines in evaluating and approving the project and instead substituted its own criteria that new buildings should be "of their time", a standard not included in the any standards or guidelines relevant to the District. 4 • The project's massing, style, building shape, and materials do not complement the surrounding contributing structures in the District as required in the District Design Guidelines. • The Landmarks Commission failed to apply the analysis of District character- defining features presented in a report prepared by a preservation consultant hired by some neighborhood residents. The City Council, in its review of this appeal, must determine whether the proposed project for construction of a new single-family residence on anon-contributing parcel meets the following criteria for issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness in the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District set forth in SMMC Section 9.40.030 (c) (4): That in the case of any proposed construction of a new improvement on any parcel located within the District boundaries, the exterior features of such new improvement and its placement on the property would not adversely affect and not be disharmonious with the District character as set forth in Section 9.36.290, and with the scale, materials and massing of the contributing structures within the District. Appeal Analysis Based on the full record to date, including testimony and documentary evidence presented at Landmarks Commission public hearings, there is ample support for the Commission's decision to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness. Therefore, staff continues to recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as detailed more fully in the staff reports provided for the Landmark Commission hearings. The following discussion briefly describes the proposed project, addresses the appellants' key arguments, and also summarizes the basis for staff's determination. Description of Project Design The applicant proposes to demolish the existing structures on site and construct a 2,365 square foot, two-story residence with a roof deck. A detached two-car garage is proposed at the rear of the parcel at the northwest corner. 5 All setbacks incorporated into the project design meet zoning ordinance requirements for the OP-2 Zoning District. The height of the proposed residence is 20'-0" to the top of the flat roof and 23'-0" to the top of the clerestory skylights that are stepped back from the primary, street-facing elevation. The maximum height permitted in the Zoning District is 30'-0". The proposed two-story residence is composed of two rectangular volumes clad in sand finish stucco and wood. Its design reflects elements of the International style in accordance with the adopted Ocean Park Neighborhood Development Guide which specifies that new construction in the OP Zoning Districts must be designed in the following historical styles: International style/modern, Craftsman bungalow, or Spanish Colonial Revival/Mediterranean style. The primary, street-facing elevation features doors and windows framed in teak wood, a centrally-located second floor balcony and a ground floor recessed primary entry. Fenestration on the primary elevation consists of ground-floor windows divided into multiple panes a maximum of 2'-0" wide and divided wrap-around windows on the second-story accented by a reclaimed ponderosa pine eyebrow on the south volume. 6 Primary Elevation of Proposed Single-Family Residence at 2642 Second Street: A ponderosa pine screen has been incorporated on the primary, street facing elevation adjacent to the main entry in order to add texture and finer-grain detail to the sections of smooth stucco on this elevation. This ponderosa screen also serves divide the expanse of glass on the ground floor of the street-facing elevation. The north volume features reclaimed ponderosa pine vertical siding and an overlay of wood boards turned to a 90-degree angle forming a `bris-soleil' type trellis for plantings. This wood cladding wraps around from the primary, east-facing elevation to the north elevation adjacent to the proposed driveway leading to the garage sited at the rear of the parcel. The applicant proposes an exterior stair on the inside, northwest corner of the house. This stair has been set back as far from the street as possible and has been designed so that the stair guardrail is located below the roofline to entirely eliminate its visibility from the street. The south elevation features sand finish stucco, aluminum framed fenestration and a horizontal ponderosa pine eyebrow extending the above the second floor windows to the rear of the building. A grass-crete driveway is proposed on the north side of the parcel that would lead to a two-car garage at the rear of the property. This one-story structure is also proposed with a ponderosa pine trellis element with- plantings and a wooden garage door. North Elevation of Proposed Single-Family Residence at 2642 Second Street (Massing of Recently-Approved New Construction on Adjacent Parcel to the South Shown in Background) South Elevation of Proposed Single-Family Residence at 2642 Second Street Historic District Design Guidelines and Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria The appellants state the proposed project does not comply with the criteria for issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness contained in SMMC. Section 9.36.140. All proposed work in the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District is subject to the procedures and criteria established in SMMC Chapter 9.40. It is important to note that SMMC Chapter 9.40 provides criteria specifically-tailored to the context of the Historic District in order to evaluate different types of projects that require a Certificate of Appropriateness in the Third Street District. For such projects, these criteria must be used in lieu of the findings applicable to properties located outside of the Third Street Historic District established in SMMC Chapter 9.36 cited by the appellants. The criteria relevant to the proposed project specifies that, `in the case of any proposed construction of a new improvement on any parcel located within the District boundaries, the exterior features of such new improvement and its placement on the property would not adversely affect and not be disharmonious with the District character as set forth in Section 9.36.290, and with the scale, materials and massing of the contributing structures within the District." While this criterion for issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness in the-Third Street Neighborhood Historic District does not require consistency with the District Design Guidelines, the Guidelines are still relevant. The Guidelines should be used to assist in the assessment of whether the applicable finding can be made. In this instance, the Design Guidelines were used to help assess whether the project is compatible with the 8 character of the District and with the scale, massing, and materials of Contributing Structures in the District in accordance with the applicable Certificate of Appropriateness criterion for new construction described above. The appellants' state that the Commission failed to strictly apply the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District Design Guidelines, and that the project's massing, style, building shape, and materials do not complement the surrounding contributing structures in the District as required in the District Design Guidelines. In contrast to the appellants' assertion, the following presents a discussion of how staff and the Commission both found that the proposed project does, indeed, meet the required Certificate of Appropriateness criterion for new construction and also complies with District Design Guidelines. Analysis of Project Design The way in which the new building visually relates to adjacent properties is an important aspect of staff review of new construction in the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District. A new building constructed in a historic district should respect and not detrimentally impact the character of the District. Compatibility is achieved by identifying and incorporating elements found in the historic district into the design of the new structure. The goal is not to imitate or duplicate a historic building, thereby creating a false sense of history, but to construct a new building that is compatible with its surroundings. In this instance, the project site is located on the west side of Second Street; this portion of the District presents a different visual experience in comparison to other sections of the District which possess a more significant concentration of contributing structures thereby creating a more cohesive sense of the District's historic context. A photo montage of the east and a west side of Second Street is presented in Attachment E. 9 For proposed new construction, the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District Guidelines state that "new buildings should be carefully designed to complement and not overwhelm the surrounding historic buildings" and suggest the following four criteria: • Use exterior materials traditionally found in the Third Street neighborhood, such as wood and stucco. • Maintain setbacks, heights, and overall building shapes that are similar to surrounding contributing buildings in the historic district. • Use windows and architectural details at the street level to create a pedestrian scale and a "neighbor-friendly" character. • Include a clearly defined main entrance that is oriented toward the street. Parking should be at the rear of the property." Compatibility with the Character of the District -Scale and Massing While the appellants state that the project is incompatible with the District's dominant architectural character found its California bungalows, the District does, in fact, possesses a variety of architectural styles that are described in both the section of the Municipal Code that addresses the character of the District (SMMC 9.36.290), as well as in the District Design Guidelines. Both of these describe the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District as possessing architectural significance to Santa Monica because the area displays a variety of architectural styles, from Victorian to Gothic, to American Colonial Revival, to California Craftsman, to Spanish Colonial Revival, which provide a visual representation of the Neighborhood's development through the 1930s. This description goes on to state that, in addition, "the neighborhood is dominated by bungalows; twenty-nine bungalows and one bungalow court are extant in the District." The criterion for issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness for new construction states that the project must be compatible with the scale, materials, and massing of contributing structures. No where in this language is a requirement that California bungalows are the only contributing structures with which compatibility must be achieved. The Municipal Code and the Design Guidelines both make it clear that there are a variety of architectural styles that help to define the significance of the District. 10 Furthermore, many Contributing Structures in the District are two-story structures including 231 Hill Street, 245 Hill Street, 2627 3rd Street, 2637 Third Street, and 2614 Second Street, and it is appropriate to allow two stories on this property, provided that the design of the proposed structure does not overwhelm nearby contributing properties. Therefore, it is appropriate to state that the proposed project's setbacks, simple rectangular volumes, flat roof, and low scale (20'-0") are characteristics that are consistent with the architecture of contributing structures in the Historic District. Specifically, the project's .overall building form, low overall building height and articulated building volumes are harmonious with the contributing structures that exhibit American Colonial Revival and Spanish Colonial Revival architecture (2545 2nd Street, 2546 3rd Street, 246 Beach Street, and 245 Hill Street, and 2637 3rd Street). Contributing Structures in the District: 245 Hill Street (left); 2545 Sewnd Street (center); and 231 Hill Street (right). Furthermore, the project design relates harmoniously to its placement within the historic district in that non-contributing parcels are adjacent to the subject property an site planning for the project incorporates sensitivity to the adjacent parcel to the south which is currently vacant but has been approved for a new 30'-0" tall two-story residence. The tallest portions of the proposed project comprised of the clerestory skylight stepped back from the street are sited adjacent to this parcel; the proposed project's driveway is adjacent to the parcels to the north which consist of a surface parking lot and two, ohe- story structures. 11 Compatibility with the Character of the District -Materials and Architectural Details The proposed project design incorporates extensive use of wood and stucco materials such as sand finish stucco, teakwood framed fenestration, and use of reclaimed ponderosa pine wood screens on the primary, street-facing and north elevations. This is consistent with the materials traditionally found in many of contributing structures in the District that are comprised of California Bungalow, Spanish Colonial Revival, and American Colonial Revival architectural styles. The proposed project incorporates carefully selected architectural elements that complement and reflect the District's character while also creating an understated backdrop for the historic architecture in the District. The project incorporates extensive wood architectural screen and trellis elements that create aneighbor-friendly character and also reflect in a contemporary but respectful and compatible manner the traditional wood cladding found in the District's California bungalow and American Colonial Revival architecture. The project also design incorporates extensive multi-pane fenestration that echoes the proportions and type of details found in the District's historic California bungalow and Victorian architecture. These windows provide a connection between the interior and exterior landscape as well as provide visual interest and create a pedestrian friendly environmental and scale as viewed from the street. District Design Guidelines for new construction state that projects should include a clearly defined main entrance that is oriented toward the street and that should be at the rear of the property. Accordingly, the project design incorporates a clearly defined main entrance that faces the street and is flanked by wood accents and a detached accessory garage is proposed at the rear of the property. Based on the whole of the record, staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Landmarks Commission's approval of Certificate of Appropriateness application 07CA- 009 for approval to demolish the existing non-contributing structure on site and 12 construct a new, single-family residence at 2642 Second Street, anon-contributing parcel located in the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District. Alternatives As an alternative to the staff recommendation, the Council may consider the following with respect to the pending appeal if supported by the full evidentiary records: 1. Denying the Appeal. 2. Remanding the application to the Landmarks Commission for reconsideration. Environmental Analysis The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 and Section 15331, Class 31 of the State Implementation Guidelines in that the project consists of the construction of a new single family residence and designed in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer. Public Outreach As required by the Municipal Code, the Third Street Neighborhood Citizen's Participation Committee (CPC) was notified of the application for and appeal of the Certificate of Appropriateness, including notice of all hearings. Additionally, this hearing has been noticed with on-site posting and mailed notice of hearing as required in SMMC Sub-section 9.40.040(b). Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact. 13 Prepared by: Roxanne Tanemori, AICP, Associate Planner Approved: n P. Fogarty Director, Planning an omm ity Development Forwarded to Council: Attachments A. Appellants' Appeal Statement B. Landmarks Commission Statement of Official Action, December 10, 2007 C. Landmarks Commission Minutes, October 8, 2007 and December 10, 2007 D. Landmarks Commission Staff Reports and Hearing Submittals, October 8, 2007 and December 10, 2007 E. .Property Owners' Statement Regarding the Appeal and Project Plans and Renderings 14 Additional attachments available in City Clerk's Office.