sr-102709-1hc7®
c;~YOr City Council Report
Santa bionica~
City Council Meeting: October 27, 2009
Agenda Item:
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Eileen P. Fogarty, Director of Planning and Community Development
Subject: Statement of Official Action Denying Appeals of the Planning
Commission's Approval of a Variance and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
for the Property Located at 1012 Second Street
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached Statement of Official
Action denying Appeals 09APP-004, 09APP-005, and 09APP-006 and upholding the
decision of the Planning Commission to approve Variance 08-022 and Vesting Tentative
Parcel Map 08TM-008 to allow the construction of a four-unit condominium project that
includes retention and rehabilitation of an existing City Landmark designated Turn-of-
the-Century Victorian Cottage and construction of three new condominium units on the
rear of the parcel located at 1012 Second Street.
Executive Summary and Discussion
This staff report transmits for City Council certification of the Statement of Official Action
for Appeals 09APP-004, 09APP-005, and 09APP-006. After holding a public hearing on
September 22, 2009, the City Council denied Appeals 09APP-004, 09APP-005, and
09APP-006 and upheld the Planning Commission's approval of the proposed project.
The City Council's decision was based upon the findings and conditions contained in
the attached Statement of Official Action.
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact.
Prepared by: Tony Kim, Senior Planner
Attachments: A. Statement of Official Action
B. Notice of Exemption
ATTACHMENT A
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION
2
PROJECT INFORMATION
CASE NUMBER: Appeals 09APP-004, 09APP-005, and 09APP-006
LOCATION: 1012 Second Street
APPLICANT: Howard Laks Architects
APPELLANTS: Coalition to Protect Zoning on Second Street
David Green
Scott Taylor
PROPERTY OWNER: 1012 Second Street LLC
CASE PLANNER: Tony Kim, Senior Planner
REQUEST: Appeals of Planning Commission approval of Variance
08-022 and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 08TM-008 for
the property located at 1012 Second Street
CEQA STATUS: The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to
CEQA Guideline Section 15303 (b), Class 3 and Section
15331, Class 31 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Class 3
consists of projects located in and urbanized environment
designed for not more than six dwelling units. The.
proposed project consists of a request to create a four-
unit subdivision in an urbanized environment. Class 31
consists of projects limited to maintenance, repair,
stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation
conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources in
a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (1995),
Weeks and Grimmer. The Landmarks Commission
designated the sut~ect Turn-of-the-Century Victorian
3
Cottage as a City Landmark in September 2005 in
conjunction with their review of a proposed demolition
permit for all structures on the parcel at 1012 Second
Street. The proposed project retains and rehabilitates the
Landmark; the rear apartment building located at the rear
of the parcel proposed for demolition is not a historic
resource and was specifically excluded from the
Landmark Designation. The bases for the determination
that this project is categorically exempt is more fully
detailed in the Notice of Exemption filed with the Los
Angeles County Clerk's office on September 24, 2009,
incorporated herein by reference.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
September 22, 2009 Determination Date .
Appeals denied and Planning Commission approval of
Variance 08-022 and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map O8TM-008
upheld based on the following findings and subject- to the
X conditions below:
Appeals upheld and Planning Commission approval reversed
based upon the following findings:
Other:
EFFECTIVE DATES OF ACTIONS Se tember 22, 2009
EXPIRATION DATE OF ANY PERMITS September 22, 2011
GRANTED:
LENGTH OF ANY POSSIBLE 12 months for Variahce 08VAR-022
EXTENSION OF EXPIRATION DATES*: Three (3) years for Vesting Tentative
Parcel Map 08TM-008
Any request for an extension of the expiration date must be received in the City
Planning Division prior to expiration of this permit.
Each and all of the findings and determinations are based. on the competent and.
substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the
Project. All summaries of information contained herein or in the findings are based on
the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any
such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based ih part on that
fact.
4
VARIANCE FINDINGS
1. There are special circumstances or exceptional characteristics applicable to the
property involved, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, or
to the intended use or development of the property that do not apply to other
properties in the vicinity under an identical zoning classification. Specifically, the
existing improvement on site is a designated City Landmark building and its
retention on site creates special circumstances related to available parcel area
for new construction when compared to similarly sized lots under the same
zoning classification in the immediate area, and the design compatibility
requirements of complying with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties that would not be present if the building were not
a designated City Landmark and could be removed to accommodate new, by-
right development of up to six residential units on the entire site.
2. The granting of such variance will not be detrimental nor injurious to the property
or improvements in the general vicinity. and district in which the property is
located in that the proposed four-unit condominium project is consistent with
multi-family residential uses that are permitted in the R-3 (Medium Density
Multiple Residential) Zoning District and High Density Housing Land Use
Classification of the area. The proposed project includes retention of a
designated City Landmark Turn-of-the-Century Victorian Cottage on site and
does not exceed the maximum unit density permitted in the R-3 District (four
units are proposed where six units are permitted). The requested modifications to
development standards have been reviewed individually and will not be
detrimental to the property or improvements in the- general vicinity and district
because the scale, massing, and design of the new construction on is compatible
with the scale and character of the existing Landmark residence on site and the
surrounding neighborhood. More specifically, the site is adjacent to multi-story
buildings in all directions and is therefore generally consistent with the scale of
surrounding properties: the adjacent condominium building to the south is 4-
stories, approximately 45' in height, and 13,600 square feet; the adjacent
apartment building to the north is 3 '/z stories, approximately 38' in height, and
15,600 square feet; and the adjacent condominium building directly across the
alley is five stories, 50'-0" in height and 38,800 square feet. In addition, the
project site is directly adjacent to the R-4 Zoning District across 1st Court alley
where five stories and 50'-0" are permitted. Furthermore, the additional 3'-8" of
height and additional story requested will not be detrimental or injurious to
surrounding properties when analyzed in the context of the typical, by-right
development of a maximum 6-unit, 3-story plus-mezzanine, 40'-0" tall building
permitted in the R-3 District for the following reasons: the proposed project
incorporates less. square footage than would be permitted if the applicant
proposed multi-story construction immediately surrounding and above the historic
Cottage; and the proposed project retains a significant amount of undeveloped
air space surrounding the Cottage that serves to balance the. overall perceived
scale. and massing of the .new construction on site and limit potential shade
5
impacts proposed in conjunction with the requested modifications to development
standards such as the 3'-8" increase in height, additional building volume above
35'-0" and modification to the- required additional two-foot average side yard
setback.
3. The strict application of the provisions of this Chapter would result in practical
difficulties or unnecessary hardships, not including economic difficulties or
economic hardships. Specifically, the applicant's project, which incorporates
retention of a designated City Landmark residence as well as new construction
on site, does not allow the applicant to fully develop the site in accordance with
the Municipal Code and all of the objective. development standards due in part to
.the design requirements specified by the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
the Treatment of Historic Properties required for protection of the historic
resource, and the objective development standards for the Zoning District that
primarily contemplate redevelopment of the entire parcel for new construction.
The theoretical maximum square footage that could be built on a vacant parcel of
this size is approximately 9,610 square feet, assuming compliance with all
development standards. Retention of the Landmark building along with. a project
that complies with all development standards would result in a maximum of only
approximately 7,384 square feet on site (a loss of 2,226 square feet). The
applicant's proposal, with requested modifications, would result in a total of 8,421
square feet on site, which also includes the existing 886 square foot Landmark
Cottage. Therefore, through the requested modifications to development
standards such as building height, building volume, setbacks, and unexcavated
yard requirements, the applicant is able to recover approximately 1,189 square
feet (53%) of the 2,226 square feet that lost as result of retaining the Landmark
residence on site in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards.
4. The granting of a variance will not be contrary- to or in conflict with the general
purposes and intent of this Chapter, nor to the goals, objectives, and policies of
the General Plan. Specifically, the proposed Variance is consistent in principle
with the goals, objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the
adopted Land Use Element and. Historic Preservation Element of the City of
Santa Monica's General Plan. Land Use Element Policy 1.10.1 encourages the
development of new housing in all residential neighborhoods, while still
protecting the character and scale of neighborhoods. The proposed project is
consistent with this policy in that new residential units are proposed along with
the retention of an existing historic resource that contributes to the character of
the surrounding neighborhood. Land Use Element Policy 3.1.3 encourages the
retention of historic and architecturally significant resources and also states-that
the design of new buildings should respect the character of nearby historic
resources. The project is consistent with Policy 3.1.3 in that retention and
preservation of the existing Landmark Turn-of-the-Century Victorian Cottage is
proposed and the new construction on site is designed to be compatible with the
historic resource on site while not duplicating its design. Goal 3 of the Historic
Preservation Element calls for an increase in public awareness of the history of
6
Santa Monica and historic preservation in the City. The proposed project
supports this policy and goal in that the historically significant Turn-of-the-
Century Victorian Cottage will be retained on site and will continue to exemplify
an important element of the early years of Santa Monica's residential
development. Goal 5 of the Historic Preservation Element encourages the
promotion of preservation of historic and cultural resources through incentives
and technical assistance. Finally, the proposed project is consistent with purpose
of the Variance process established to allow discretionary review of requested
modifications to development standards in the Zoning Ordinance when "practical
difficulties, unnecessary hardships or results inconsistent with the general
purpose of the Zoning Ordinance would-occur from its strict literal interpretation
and enforcement. In this case, the proposed project is consistent with the
Variance procedure specifically established for projects that involve the retention
and preservation of designated Landmarks and Contributing Structures to an
adopted Historic District.
5. The variance would not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it
is to be .located in that the. proposed new construction the proposed new
construction on site expresses awell-defined, moderri design and form -that is
compatible with, yet differentiated from, the historic Turn-of-the-Century Victorian
Cottage on site. The siting, scale, proportions, and massing of the new
construction are designed to be compatible with the existing Landmark building
and with the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed increase in building height
does not overshadow adjacent residential properties (43'-8" where a maximum of
40'-0" is permitted in the R3 District). More specifically, the site is adjacent to
multi-story buildings in all directions and is therefore generally consistent with the
scale of surrouhding properties: the adjacent condominium building to the south
is 4-stories, approximately 45' in height, and 13,600 square feet; the adjacent
apartment building to the north is 3 '/z stories, approximately 38' in height, and
15,600 square feet; and the adjacent condominium building directly across the
alley is five stories, 50'-0" in height and 38,800 square feet. In addition, the
project site is directly adjacent to the R-4 Zoning District across 1st Court alley
where five stories and 50'-0" are permitted. The general streetscape along
Second Street between California and Washington Avenues primarily consists of
an eclectic mix of two- to four-story, post-WW-II multi-family buildings with little
building articulation and limited front, side, and rear yard setbacks, compared to
today's development standards. According to a review of building permits, of the
nineteen parcels on the block, only four parcels developed before WW-11 remain
(including the subject property); fifteen of the nineteen parcels were developed
after WW-II. The proposed project retains .and rehabilitates the Landmark
Cottage located at the street; this will serve to help preserve a part of the
neighborhood's character and also provide a visual representation of the early
history and development of Santa Monica's original Town Site. The design of the
new construction incorporates a significant amount of glazing. as well as
appropriate articulation and fourth floor stepbacks on the primary and secondary
elevations in order to highlight the existing Landmark Cottage rather than visually
7
compete with it. The new construction incorporates a primary roof form and
architectural details at each floor that exhibit a broad horizontality that reflects
characteristics of the existing Landmark Cottage. The proportions of the
balconies at the second and third stories also appropriately interpret the scale
and location of the recessed front porch entry, a key feature of the Landmark
Cottage. Finally, the proposed project is consistent with the High Density
Housing General Plan Land Use Classification for the area.
6. .The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed variance in that the
subject property is a legal parcel that is flat and has no -known geological
constraints that would limit or prevent its future development. Further, the
proposed four-unit condominium project does not exceed the maximum unit
density permitted i n the R-3 District where up to six residential units are
permitted.
7. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and
services to ensure that the proposed variance would not be detrimental to public
health and safety in that the subject property is located within a developed
urbanized environment that is adequately served by existing infrastructure, public
utilities and services. It is not anticipated that approval of the subject applicatioh
will create a need for additional utilities or services.
8. There will be adequate provisions for public access to serve the subject variance
proposal in that there is adequate pedestrian access to the site via a public
sidewalk on Second Street and there is a rear alley (1St Court) having a standard
right-of-way of twenty feet located adjacent to the rear of the subject parcel that
will provide vehicular access to off-street parking for the project. Furthermore, in
order to ensure that there will be adequate provisions for public access, project
Condition #59 specifies that project's construction mitigation program shall
specify that there shall be no alley closures except for the implementation of
necessary utility connections.
9. The strict application of the provisions of this Chapter would result in
unreasonable deprivation of the use or enjoyment of the property in that due to
the location of the existing City Landmark designated Turn-of-the-Century
Victorian Cottage and the requirement to retain and rehabilitate the structure on
site in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the.
Treatment of Historic Properties, without the requested modification to
development standards, practical use or enjoyment of the subject parcel
classification would not be possible consistent with the typical, by-right
development potential associated with other similarly-sized parcels in the same
neighborhood and zoning.
10. In addition to the other findings adopted in support of granting this Variance, the
granting of this Variance is essential and desirable to the public convenience and
welfare and is not in conflict with the General Plan nor materially detrimental or
8
injurious to property or improvements in the general vicinity and zoning district in
which the property is located. The granting of this Variance will facilitate the
retention and rehabilitation of an officially-designated. City Landmark by
accommodating a viable housing project that incorporates and achieves
rehabilitation of that City Landmark, as welt as the development of new housing
units with subterranean parking and other desirable amenities. The proposed
project is less than allowable density, is ho taller than several buildings in the
immediate area, and is less floor area than could be proposed were the one-story
cottage not being retained on site. The siting, scale, proportions, and massing of
the new construction are designed to be compatible with the existing Landmark
Cottage and with the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed increase in
building height does not overshadow adjacent residential properties (43'-8"
where a maximum of 40'-0" is permitted in the R3 District). More specifically, the
site is adjacent to multi-story buildings in all directions: the adjacent multi-family
building to the south is 45' in height; the adjacent building to the north is 38'-6" in
height; and the building directly across the alley is 51'-10" in height. The general
streetscape along Second Street between California and Washington Avenues
primarily .consists of an eclectic mix of two- to four-story, post-WW-II multi-family
buildings with little building articulation and limited front, side, and rear yard
setbacks, compared to today's development standards. According to City
Planning Staffs review of building permits, of the nineteen parcels on the block,
only four parcels developed before WW-II remain (including the subject property);
fifteen of the nineteen parcels were developed after WW-II. The proposed project
retains and rehabilitates the Landmark Cottage located near the street frontage;
this will serve to help preserve a part of the neighborhood's character and also
provide a visual representation of the early history and development of Santa
Monica's original townsite. The design- of the new construction incorporates a
significant amount of glazing as well as appropriate articulation and fourth floor
stepbacks on the primary and secondary elevations in order to highlight the
existing Landmark Cottage rather than visually compete with it. The new
construction incorporates a primary roof form and architectural details at each
floor that exhibit a broad horizohtality that reflects characteristics of the existing
Landmark Cottage. The proportions of the balconies at the second and third
stories also appropriately interpret the scale and location of the recessed front
porch entry, a key feature of the Landmark Cottage. Finally, the proposed
project is consistent with the High Density Housing General Plan Land Use
Classification for the area. With the exception of the specific relief addressed by
this Variance and the exemption from the Construction Rate Program for projects
involving retention and rehabilitation of historic landmarks, the project will be
subject to all of the normal development standards for new construction.
VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FINDINGS
1. The proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans as
specified in Government Code Section 65451. Specifically, while the subject
property is not located in an area governed by a specific plan as specified in
9
Government Code Section 65451, compliance with the City's General Plan is
required. For the purpose of subdividing the subject parcel, there are two
pertinent policies that must be evaluated with the map; those policies relate to
building height and unit density. As noted and shown on the subject map, the
project complies with applicable policies, as conditioned and subject to approval
of pending Variance 08VAR-022, including unit density and height standards for
the subject land use designation (High Density Housing).
2. The design or improvement of the .proposed subdivision is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans. Specifically, while the subject property is
not located in an area governed by a specific plan, compliance with the City's
General Plan is required. As noted and shown on the subject map, the proposed
improvements will not exceed land use designation limits to building height and
unit density; as conditioned and subject to approval of Variance 08VAR-022.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. Specifically, the
subject parcel is a standard-sized parcel located within an urbanized area
adequately served by existing roadways and infrastructure. The property is
physically able to accommodate the proposed development. More specifically,
the existing alley located at the rear of the subject property is a standard 20'-0" in
width and provides adequate vehicular site access. Furthermore, in order to
ensure that the site is adequately served by existing infrastructure, project
Condition #59 specifies that project's construction mitigation program shall
specify that there shall be no alley closures except for the implementation of
necessary utility connections.
4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
Specifically, the subject parcel is a standard-sized parcel located within an
urbanized area adequately served by existing roadways and infrastructure. More
specifically, the existing alley located at the rear of the subject property is a
standard 20'-0" in width and provides adequate vehicular site access.
Furthermore, in order to ensure that the site is adequately served by existing
infrastructure,. project Condition #59 specifies that .project's construction
mitigation program shall specify that there. shall be no alley closures except for
the implementation of necessary utility connections. Moreover. the type of
development and unit density is consistent with policies set forth in the City's
General Plan and other improvements in the general vicinity.
5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure
fish or wildlife or their habitat, in that the proposed subdivision is located in an
urbanized area that does not contain habitats or would otherwise injure fish and
wildlife.
6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement is not likely to cause
serious public health problems. The proposed subdivision is for a property
10
located in an urbanized area and is consistent with other similar improvements in
the area. As noted and shown on the map, the project complies with height and
unit density limitations set forth in the General Plan, as conditioned and subject
to approval of Variance 08VAR-022. The subdivision of the parcel does not have
the potential to disrupt the urban environment or othervvise-cause serious public
health problems.
7. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property
within the proposed subdivision in that there are no public easements located
within the proposed subdivision.
8. The proposed subdivision is consistent with any ordinance or law of the City of
Santa Monica. Specifically; the project has demonstrated compliance with
applicable unit density and height limitations set forth in the underlying land use
designation, as conditioned and subject to approval of Variance 08VAR-022.
Moreover, as conditioned, the project must comply with all applicable provisions
of the Zoning Ordinance, which will be comprehensively evaluated during the
City's plan check review process, prior to issuance of a building permit.
CONDITIONS
Administrative
1. The approval of this Tentative Parcel Map application shall expire if the rights
granted are not exercised within two years from the permit's effective date; the
approval of this Variance application shall expire if the rights granted are not
exercised within two years from the permit's effective date. Exercise of rights
shall mean issuance of a building permit to commence construction.
2. Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.450(4), if the Building Official determines
that another building permit has been issued less than fifteen months prior to the
date on which the building permit for this project has received all plan check
approvals and none of the relevant exceptions specified in 9.04.10.02.450(c) and
(e) apply, the Building Official shall place the project on a waiting list in order of
the date and time of day that the permit application received all plan check
approvals, and the term of this approval and other City approvals or permits
necessary to commence the project shall be automatically extended by the
amount of time that a project remains on the waiting list. However, the permit
shall also expire if the building permit expires, if final inspection is not completed
or a Certificate of Occupancy is not issued within the time periods specified in
SMMC Section 8.08.060. One one-year extension of the Variance may be
permitted if approved by the Director of Planning. Applicant is on notice that time
extensions shall not be granted if development standards or the development
process relevant to the project have chahged since project approval. Extension
requests to a subdivision map must be approved by the Planning Commission.
11
3. The tentative map shall expire 24 months after approval, except as provided in
the provisions of California Government Code Section 66452.6 and Subchapter
9.20.18 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. During this time period the final
map shall be presented to the City of Santa Monica for approval. No building
permit for the project will be granted until such time as the final map is approved
by the Santa Monica City Council.
4. Within ten days of City Planning Division .transmittal of the Statement of Official
Action, project applicant shall sign and return a copy of the Statement of Official
Action prepared by the City Planning Division, agreeing to the conditions of
approval and acknowledging that failure to comply with such conditions shall
constitute grounds for potential revocation of the permit approval. By signing
same, applicant shall not thereby waive any legal rights applicant may possess
regarding said conditions. The signed Statement shall, be returned to the City
Planning Division. Failure to comply with this condition shall constitute grounds
for potential permit revocation.
5. In the event permittee violates or fails to comply with any conditions of approval
of this permit, no further permits, licenses, approvals or certificates of occupancy
shall be issued until such violation has been fully remedied.
6. Applicant is advised that projects in the California Coastal Zone may need
approval of the California Coastal Commission prior to issuance of any building
permits by the City of Santa Monica. Applicant is responsible for obtaining any
such permits.
Conformance with Approved Plans
7. This approval is #or those plans. dated July 1, 2009, a copy of which shall be
maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall
be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions
of approval.
8. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of
Planning. A significant change in the approved concept shall be subject to
Planning Commission Review. Construction shall be in conformance with the
plans submitted or as modified by the Planning Commission,.. Landmarks
Commission or Director of Planning.
9. Project plans shall be subject to complete Code Compliance review when the
building plans are submitted for plan check and shall comply with all applicable
provisions of Article IX of the Municipal Code and all other pertinent ordinances
and General Plan policies of the City of Santa Monica prior to building permit
issuance.
12
Affordable Housing Obligation
10. Pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Chapter 9.56, the project is
subject to the City's Affordable Housing Production Program which requires a
three" unit development to pay an Affordable Housing Production fee. The
City's Affordable Housing Production fee is calculated based on the project's
floor area as defined by -SMMC Section 9.04.02.030.315. The fee will be
calculated prior to payment based on the requirements of the Affordable Housing
Production Program, Section 9.56.070 and shall be based on the affordable
housing unit base fee in effect at the time the affordable housing fee is paid to
the City. The fee must be paid in full prior to the City granting any approval for
the occupancy of the project, but no earlier than at the time of building permit
issuance.
~' Pursuant to SMMC 9.56.030 (c), a designated Landmark building that is
retained and preserved on-site as part of amulti-family. project shall not be
considered or included in the assessing any of the requirements under this
Chapter. Therefore, only the three new condominiums are counted for the
purposes of calculating the owner's affordable housing obligation.
Fees
11. A Park and Recreation Facilities Tax of $200.00 per residential unit shall be due
and payable at the time of issuance of a building permit for the construction or
placement of the residential unit(s) on the subject lot, per and subject to the
provisions of Section 6.80.010 et seq. of the Santa Monica Municipal Code.
12. Prior to issuance of a condominium license, the developer shall provide for the
payment of a Condominium Tax of $1,000 per planned salable unit pursuant to
Chapter 6.76 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code.
13. No building permit shall be issued for the project until the developer complies
with the requirements of Chapter 9.72 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, the
Child Care Linkage Program.
Cultural Resources
16. No demolition of buildings or structure built 40 years of age or older shall be
permitted until the end of a 60-day review period by the Landmarks Commission
to determine whether an application for landmark designation shall be filed. If an
application for landmark designation is filed, no demolition shall be approved until
a final determination is made by the Landmarks Commission on the application.
17. If any archaeological remains are uncovered during excavation or construction,
work in the affected area shall be suspended and a recognized specialist shall be
contacted to conduct a survey of the affected area at project's owner's expense.
13
A determination shall then be made by the Director of Planning to determine the
significance of the survey findings and appropriate actions and requirements, if
any, to address such findings.
Rent Control
18. Pursuant to SMMC Section 4.24.030, prior to receipt of the final permit necessary
to demolish, convert, or otherwise remove a controlled rental unit(s) from the
housing market, the owner of the property shall first secure a removal permit
under Section 1803(t), an exemption determination, an approval of a vested
rights claim from the Rent Control Board, or have withdrawn the controlled rental
unit(s) pursuant to the provisions of the Ellis Act.
CC&Rs
19. Prior to issuance of building permits, Condominium Association By-Laws and a
Declaration of CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The
CC&R's shall contain anon-discrimination clause as presented in SMMC Section
9.20.20.020 and such provisions as are required by SMMC Section
9.04.16.01.030(d) and (e).
20. No furniture shall be permitted on the rooftop decks above the second floor. This
condition shall also be reflected in the CC & R's.
Final Design
21. The applicant shall be required to post the property with apre-printed sign
consistent with the requirements of SMMC 9.32.180 within ten days after a
Certificate of Appropriateness application has been filed for review by the.
Landmarks Commission
22. Plans for final design, landscaping, screening, trash enclosures, and signage
shall be subject to review and approval by the Landmarks Commission.
23. The Landmarks Commission, in its review, shall pay particular attention to the
project's pedestrian orientation and amenities; scale and articulation of design
elements; exterior colors, textures and materials; window treatment; glazing; and
landscaping. Further, the Landmarks Commission shall carefully review the
design of the new structure to ensure that it serves as a backdrop to the
Landmark building.
24. The Landmarks Commission,. in .its review, shall pay particular attention to the
building's proposed fenestration on all elevations and the applicant's proposed
incorporation of glass block at the fourth floor.
14
25. The Landmarks Commission, in its review, shall require the applicant to provide
down-lighting for any proposed exterior light fixtures.
26. The Landmarks Commission, in its review, shall require the applicant to provide
additional landscaping along the side yards and alley, including taller trees for
screening.
27. Landscaping plans shall comply with Subchapter 9.04.10.04 (Landscaping
Standards) of the Zoning Ordinance .including use of water-conserving
landscaping materials, landscape maintenance and other standards contained ih
the Subchapter.
28. Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanical equipment shall be screened in
accordance with SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.130, 140, and. 150. Refuse areas
shall be of a size adequate to meet on-site need, including recycling. The
Landmarks. Commission in its review shalF pay particular attention to the
screening of such areas and equipment: More specifically, the Landmarks
Commission shall limit the placement of excessive mechanical equipment on the
roof; any rooftop mechanical equipment shall be minimized in height and area,
and shall be located in such a way as to minimize noise and visual impacts to
surrounding properties. Unless -otherwise approved by the Landmarks
Commission, rooftop mechanical equipment shall be located at least five feet
from the edge of the roof. Except for solar hot water heaters, no residential water
heaters shall be located on the roof.
29. No gas or electric meters shall be located within the required front or street side
yard setback areas. The Landmarks Commission in its review shall pay particular
attention to .the location and screening of such meters.
30. Prior to consideration of the project by the Landmarks Commission, the applicant
shall review disabled access requirements with the Building and Safety Division
and make any necessary changes in the project design to achieve compliance
with such requirements. -The Landmarks Commission, in its review, shall pay
particular attention to the aesthetic, landscaping, and setback impacts of any
ramps or other features necessitated by accessibility requirements.
31. As appropriate, the Landmarks Commission shall require the use of anti-graffiti
materials on surfaces likely to attract graffiti.
Construction Plan Requirements
32. Final building plans submitted for approval of a building permit shall include on
the plans a list of all permanent mechanical equipment to be placed indoors
which may be heard outdoors.
15
Demolition Requirements
33. Until such time as the demolition is undertaken, and unless the structure is
currently in use, the existing structure shall be maintained and secured by
boarding up all openings, erecting a security fence, and removing all debris,
bushes and planting that inhibit the easy surveillance of the property to the
satisfaction of the Building and Safety Officer and the Fire Department. Any
landscaping material remaining shall be watered and maintained until demolition
occurs.
34. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, applicant shall prepare for Building
Division approval a rodent and pest control plan to insure that demolition and
construction activities at the site do not create pest control impacts on the project
neighborhood.
Construction Period
35. .Immediately after demolition and during construction, a security fence, the height
of which shall be the maximum permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, shall be
maintained around the perimeter of the lot. The lot shall be kept clear of all trash,
weeds, etc.
36. Vehicles hauling dirt or other construction debris from the site shall cover any
open load with a tarpaulin or other secure covering to minimize dust emissions.
Immediately after commencing dirt removal from the site; the general contractor
shall provide the City of Santa Monica with written certification that all trucks
leaving the site are covered in accordance with this condition of approval.
37. Developer shall prepare a notice, subject to the review by the Director of
Planning and Community Development, that lists all construction mitigation
requirements, permitted hours of construction, and alley closures, and identifies a
contact person at City Hall as well as the developer who will respond to
complaints related to the proposed construction. The notice shall be mailed to
property owners and residents within a 200-foot radius from the subject site and
include property owners and residents immediately adjacent to and across the
alley from the subject property at least five (5) days prior to the start of
construction.
38. A sign shall be posted on the property in a manner consistent with the public
hearing sign requirements which shall identify the address and phone number of
the owner and/or applicant for the purposes of responding to questions and
complaints during the construction period. Said sign shall also indicate the hours
of permissible construction work.
16
39. A copy of these conditions shall be posted in an easily visible and accessible
location at all times during construction at the project. site. The pages shall be
laminated or otherwise protected to ensure durability of the copy.
Standard Conditions
40. Lofts or mezzanines shall not exceed 33.3% of the room below unless
compliance with the district's limits on number of stories can be maintained.
41. No fence, gate, or wall within the required front yard setback, inclusive of any
subterranean garage slab and fencing, gate, or railing on top thereof, shall
exceed a height of 42" above actual grade of the property.
42. Mechanical equipment shall not be located on the side of any building which is
adjacent to a residential building on the adjoining lot, unless otherwise permitted
by applicable regulations. Roof locations may be used when the mechanical
equipment is installed within asound-rated parapet enclosure.
43. Final approval of any mechanical equipment installation will require a noise test
in compliance with SMMC Section 4.12.040. Equipment for the test shall be
provided by the owner or contractor and the test shall be conducted by the owner
or contractor. A copy of the noise test results on mechanical equipment shall be
submitted to the Community Noise Officer for review to ensure that noise levels
do not exceed maximum allowable levels for the applicable noise zone.
44. Final parking lof layout and specifications shall be subject to the review and
approval of the Transportation Management Division.
45. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a copy of the recorded map shall be
provided to the City Planning Division.
46. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate
compliance with Subchapter 9.04.16 Condominiums.
47. Construction period signage shall be subject to the approval of the Landmarks
Commission.
48. The property owner shall insure any graffiti on the site is promptly removed
through compliance with the City's graffiti removal program.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (PWD)
Drainage
49. To mitigate storm water and surface runoff from the project site, an Urban Runoff
Mitigation Plan may be required by the Department of Public Works (PWD)
17
pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 7,10. Prior to submittal of landscape plans
for Architectural Review Board approval, the applicant shall contact PWD to
determine applicable requirements, which include the following:
• Non-stormwater runoff, sediment and construction waste from the
construction site and parking areas is prohibited from leaving the site;
• An sediments or materials which are tracked off-site must be removed the
same day they are tracked off-site;
• Excavated soil must be located on the site and soil piles should be
covered and otherwise protected so that sediments do not go into the
street or adjoining properties;
• Washing of construction or other vehicles shall be allowed adjacent to a
construction site. No runoff from washing vehicles on a construction. site
shall be allowed to leave the site;
• Drainage controls may be .required depending on the extent of grading
and topography of the site; and
• New development is required to reduce projected runoff pollution by at
least twenty percent through incorporation of design elements or
principles, such as increasing permeable surfaces, diverting or catching
runoff via swales, berms, and the like; orientation of drain gutters towards
permeable areas; modification of grades; use of retention structures and
other methods.
50. Automotive repair facilities and dealerships, parking areas and structures,
automotive paint shops, gas stations, equipment degreasing areas, and other
facilities generating wastewater with significant oil and grease content are
required to pretreat these wastes before discharging to the City sewer or storm
drain system. Pretreatment will require that a clarifier or oil/water separator be'
installed and maintained on site.. In cases where settleable solids are present (or
expected) in greater amounts than floatable oil and grease, a clarifier unit will be
required. In cases where the opposite waste characteristics are present, an
oil/water separator with automatic oil draw-off will be required instead. The
Public Works Department will set specific requirements. Building permit plans
shall show the required installation.
Hazardous Materials
51. Prior to the demolition of any existing structure, the applicant shall submit a
report from an industrial hygienist to be reviewed and approved as to content and
form by the Public Works/Environmental Programs Division. The report shall
consist of a hazardous materials survey for the structure proposed for demolition.
The report shall include a section on asbestos and in accordance with the South
Coast AQMD Rule 1403, the asbestos survey shall be performed by a state
Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC). The report shall include a section on lead,
which shall be performed by a state Certified Lead InspectorlAssessor.
Additional hazardous materials to be considered by the industrial hygienist shall
18
include: mercury (in thermostats, switches, fluorescent light); polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) (including light Ballast), and fuels, pesticides, and batteries.
Streets.
52. Unless otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works, all sidewalks
shall be kept clear and passable during the grading and construction phase of
the project.
53. Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving and driveways which need replacing or removal
as a result of the project as determined by the Department of Public Works shall
be reconstructed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. Approval
for this work shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
issuance of the building permits.
54. Street and/or alley lighting shall be provided on public rights of way adjacent to
the project if and as needed per the specifications and with the approval of the
Department of Public Works.
Off-site
55. All off site improvements required by the City Engineer shall be installed and be
designed and constructed to be as permeable as possible. Plans and
specifications for off site improvements shall be prepared by a registered civil
engineer and approved by the City Engineer.
56. A subdivision improvement agreement for all off site improvements required by
the City Engineer shall be prepared and a performance bond posted through the
City Attorney's office.
Environmental Mitigation
57. To mitigate solid waste impacts, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy,
project owner shall submit a recycling plan to the Department of Public Works for
its approval. The recycling plan shall include:
1) List of materials such as white paper, computer paper, metal cans, and
glass to be recycled;
2) Location bf recycling bins;
3) Designated recycling coordinator,
4) Nature and extent of internal and external pick-up service;
5) Pick-up schedule; and
6) Plan to inform tenants/ occupants of service.
19
58. Ultra-low flow plumbing fixtures are required on all new development and
remodeling where plumbing is to be added, including dual flush toilets, 1.0 gallon
urinals and low flow shower heads.
Construction Period Mitigation
59. A construction period mitigation plan shall be prepared by the applicant for
approval by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of a building
permit. The approved mitigation plan shall be posted on the site for the duration
of the project construction and shall be produced upon request.. As applicable,
this plan shall:
1) Specify the names, addresses, telephone numbers and business license
numbers of all contractors and subcontractors as well as the developer and
architect;
2) Describe how demolition of any existing structures is to be accomplished;
3) Indicate where any cranes are to be located for erection/construction;
4) Describe how much of the public street, alleyway, or sidewalk is proposed to
be used in conjunction with construction;
5) Set forth the extent and nature of any pile-driving operations;
6) Describe the length and number of any tiebacks which must extend under the
property of other persons;
7) Specify the nature and extent of any dewatering and its effect on any adjacent
buildings;
8) Describe anticipated .construction-related truck routes, number of truck trips,
hours of hauling and parking location;
9) Specify the nature and extent of any helicopter hauling;
10) State whether any construction activity beyond normally permitted hours is
proposed;
11) Describe any proposed construction. noise mitigation measures, including
measures to limit the duration of idling construction trucks;
12) Describe construction-period security measures including any fencing,
lighting, and security personnel;
13) Provide a drainage plan;
14) Provide a cohstruction-period parking plan which shall minimize use of public
streets for parking;
15) List a designated on-site construction manager;
16) Provide a construction materials recycling plan which seeks to maximize the
reuse/recycling of construction waste;
17) Provide a plan regarding use of .recycled and low-environmental-impact
materials in building construction;
18) Provide a construction period water runoff control plan;
19) Provide for adequate dust control during construction;
20) Specify that there will be no pile driving permitted during construction;
20
21) Specify that there shall be no alley closures except for the implementation of
necessary utility connections.
Final Map Requirements
60. In submitting required materials to the Santa Monica Engineering Division for a
final map, applicant shall provide a copy of the approved Statement of Official
Action.
61. The form, contents; accompanying data, and filing of the final subdivision map
shall conform to the provisions of SMMC Sections 9.20.12.010 through
9.20.08.090 and the Subdivision Map Act. The required Final Map filing fee shall
be paid prior to scheduling of the Final Map for City Council approval
62. One mylar and one blue-line copy of the. final map shall be provided to and
recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder prior to issuance of any building
permit fora condominium project pursuant to Government Code Section
66499.30. Applicant shall also provide the County with a copy of this Statement
of Official Action at the time the required copies of the map are submitted.
63. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the requirements of Santa Monica Municipal
Code Section 9.04.10.16.010 (d) shall have been met.
OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT
64. Street trees shall be maintained, relocated or provided as required in a manner
consistent with the City's Community- Forest Management Plan 2000, per the
specifications of the Open Space Management Division of the Community and
Cultural Service Department and the City's Tree Code (SMMC Chapter 7.40).
No street trees shall be removed without the approval of the Open Space
Management Division.
FIRE
65. A security gate shall be provided across .the opening to the subterranean garage.
If any guest parking space is located in the subterranean garage, the security
gate shall be equipped with an electronic or other system which will open the
gate to provide visitors with vehicular access to the garage without leaving their.
vehicles. The security gate shall receive approval of the Police and Fire
Departments prior to issuance of a building permit.
21
VOTE
Ayes: Councilmembers Bloom, Holbrook, McKeown, Shriver, Mayor Pro Tem
O'Connor, Mayor Genser
Nays: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Couneilmember Davis
NOTICE
If this is a final decision not subject to further appeal under the City of Santa Monica
Comprehensive and Zoning Ordinance, the time within which judicial review of this
decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedures Section 1094.6, which
provision has been adopted by the City pursuant to Municipal Code Section 1.16.010.
I hereby certify that this Statement of Official Action accurately reflects the final
determination of the City Council of the City of Santa Monica.
lo-a-g-o~
MARIA M. STEWA T, City Clerk Date
F:\CityPlanning\Share\COUNCIL\STOAS\2009\09APP-004,5,6 APPEAL STOA (1012 2nd St).doc
22
ATTACHMENT B
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
23
Notice of Exemption
Form D
To: Office of Planning and Research From: (Public Agency) Clty Of Santa Monica
P.O. Box 3044, Room 212 City planning Divisiori,1685 Main Street, Room 212
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044
Santa Monica, CA -90401
County Cierk {address)
County of Las Angeles
12400 E. Imperial Highway . ~
~P~'~ftrd~i, FdL~®
Norwalk, CA 90650
;; N
i'
.
,? 4 2009
Project Tine: 1012 Second Street -VAR 08-002, TM 0$-008 ~.~"~~IVGL~,.;;, +~uuivTt-CLERK
Project Location -Specific:
1012 Second Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90403 (located between Washington Avenue and California Avenue)
Project Location -City: Santa Monica. CA ProjectLocation -County: Los Angeles
Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of Project:
project is afour-unit residential condominium project that includes the retention and rehabiliation of an existing City Landmark .
designated Tum-of-the-Century Victorian Cottage and construction of three new condominium unfts on the rear of the parcel.
An enclosed breezeway will cronnect the cottage to a portion of the first story of the new structure. Afour--unit apartment building
located at the rear of the parcel will be demolished.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Santa Monica, City CounCll
Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: ttoward LakS, Howard Laks Architects -
ExempbStatus: (check one)
^ Ministerial (Sec. 21080(6x1);15268);
^ Declared Emergency {Sec. 21080(6)(3};'15269(a));
^ Emergency Pmect (Sec. 21080(6x4); 15269(bxc));
® Categorical Exemption. State Cype and section cumber:
^ Statutory Exemptions. State code number:
Class 3 [Section 15303(6}],Class 31 [Section 15331]
Reasons why project is exempt:
The bases for these exemptions are described herein (see attached} and further detailed in the September 22, 2009
City Council staff report and at the public hearing on that date.
Lead Agency Roxanne TanemorilTon Kim - ~ - (310) 458-8341
Contact Person: y Area Code/Telephone/Extension:
If filed by applican#:
I .Attach certified document of exemption fording. .
Z. Has a Notice of Exemption bean filed by the public agency approving the projeet? ^ Yes ^ No
Signature: ~ni ~„a,~__~'~n-a-(~ Date: ~'~R'~OR Title: ~tRF1ri~Nt, T'ta,ind~t~
~ Signed by Lead Agency Date received for filing at OPR:
^ Signed by Applicant
Revised 2005
28 R
Reasons why project is exempt:
The request to create afour-unit subdivision consisting. of the retention and rehabilitation of a
designated Landmark one-story coftage with construction of three new condominiums in the
rear of the property is exempt from the provisions of the Galifomia Environmental Quality Act
pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section 15303 (b), Class 3, and Section 15331, Class 31, of the
State CEQA Guidelines.
Class 3
Class 3 consists of cons#ruction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or
structures. In urbanized areas, this exemption applies td structures designed for not more than
six dwelling units. The. proposed project would develop afour-unit condominium in an urbanized
environment. As such, it squarely falls within this categorical exemption. Moreover, the
unusual circumstances exception does not apply for several. reasons.
First, the construction impac#s associated with this project are normal and common
considerations jn the development of any small condominium project. The fact that the property
backs onto an alley does not change this conclusion. The City's streets are on a grid system
with the vast majority of the City's residential parcels backing onto an alley. The subject alley is
a standard 20' wide alley. Consequently, this circumstance cannot set this project apart from
others in the exempt class. Moreover, the applicant has proposed a construction plan in which
the construction equipment will access the property from 2"d Street, not from the alley.
Relatedly, the potential presence of asbestos, lead and hazardous materials in the apartment
building located at the rear of the parcel that will be demolished as part of this project is not an
unusual circumstance. Instead, it too is a common and typical concerri with older buildings. The
State of California directly regulates asbestos. removal through its local Air Quali#y Management
Districts and has established notification and work practice requirements to limit asbestos
emissions from building demol'~fion and renovation activities, More _ specifically, .State law
requires -that a copy of the asbestos demolition notification form be provided to the City's
Building and Safety Division .prior to the issuance of permits for the.proposed project. This weli-
established regulatory program, and the potential presence of asbestos, lead, and hazardous
ma#erials in most older buildings demonstrates that this is not an uriusual~circumstance that
would negate application of this exemption.
Finally, the fact that multiple variances are sought for this project does not constitute unusual
circumstances. The request for multiple variances, is contemplated and invited by Santa Monica
Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.10.030(m). These specific variances. for the project are minor
in nature, were designed to off-set the loss of typical, by-right development potential associated
with retaining and preserving an existing landmark structure, and enable the applicant's project
to be in substantial pari#y with other property owners in the surrounding neighborhood with
respect to scale, proportion, massing, and buildable floor area. The development authorized by
these variances remains less than the by-right development that could have occurred without
the variance.
Class 31
Class 31 consists of projects limited to maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation,
restoration, preservation conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner
consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties
(1995), Weeks and Grimmer. The City of Santa Monica's Landmarks Commission designated
the subject Turn-of-the-Century Uctorian Cottage as a City Landmark in September 2005 in
conjunction with its review of a proposed demolition permit for ail structures on the parcel at
1012 Second Street. The apartment building proposed for demolition is not a historic resoutce
and was specifically excluded from. the Landmark Designation.
The proposed project preserves and rehabilitates the designated Landmark on site and
proposes new construction on the parcel in accordance with the Secretary bf the Interior's
Standards for the Treatmen# of Historic Properties. The City's historic consultant and the
applicant's historic consultant, who both meets the Secretary of Interior's Professional
Qualifications Standards, have verified the project's consistency with these standards and have
thoroughly documented: this analysis with written reports. Accordingly, the proposed
rehabilitation project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of the
historic resource and therefore qualifies for a Class 31 Categorical Exemption. Moreover, none
of the exceptions to this exemption apply here for several reasons.
First, the presence of a historic resource on the.properry, its relocation, and its alteration do not
constitute unusual circumstances which create environmental risks that do not exist for the
general class of exempt projects. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15331 specifically authorizes
the Lead Agency to utilize a Class 31 Categorical Exemption for projects tha# involve the
`maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation conservation, or
reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (1995), 1Neeks and Grimmer.' Projects that
have been determined by the Lead Agency to comply with the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for the Treatment of the Historic Properties and to be Categorically Exempt pursuant
to Class 31, necessarily involve a historic resource.. Since this exemption contemplates the
involvement of a historic resource in a project, its presence on the site which will be maintained
cannot constitute an unusual circumstance or otherwise support an exception to this exemption:
Simi4arly, alteration of a historic resource is a contemplated action in restoration, preservation,
and reconstruction projects. As such, there is no basis to conclude that it would constitute an
unusual circumstance since it does not differ from the general circumstances of projects
covered by this categorical exemption.
So too with respect to minor relocations as proposed here. White the relocation of a structure
must be undertaken with care and is not a feature . of "all hisiorical resource.
restoration/rehabilitation projects, it is certainly not an uncommon component of such projects,
particular as with the proposed project, where the historical resource is only being relocated five
feet forward on the site as part of the rehabilitation project. Such relocation projects have a long
history both in the C'dy and regionally.
Additionally, the.relocation of the cottage was specifically reviewed.by the City's consultant and
the applicant's consultant and they determined that it would meet the Secretary of Interior
Standards based on guidance found in Moving Historic Buildings by John Obed Curtis (National
Park Service, 1979), the nature of fhe structure (a one-story, massed-plan vernacular. cottage),
the procedure for relocation (as a single and intact unit); the specific planned relocation of the
resource on the same site, and the substantial change in the historic setting due to the adjoining
developments. Additionally, the planned relocation will allow the building to align with its
neighbors, improve its visibility from the street, and more closely approximate the historic
relationship between the buildings and the street. No contrary evidence was offered by a
qualified expert. Unsubstantiated opinion does not constitute evidence.
I Finally, there is no evidence of cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the
same place over time that is significant. The claim that there is a potentially significant
cumulative impact to other properties. and residents if other lots with historic single-family
dwellings in the neighborhood are given multiple variances from zoning regulations is offered
with no evidentiary support. There has been no identification of what specific cumulative
impacts would result. Moreover,-this project is only fFie second such project which has sought
the incentives offered by Section 9.04.20.10.030(m} since its adoption in October 2006. No
similarly-situated property or properties were identified in the neighborhood. Furthermore, the
fear of future actions that adecision-making body may take is speculative. All projects that
involve the retention and preservation of a designated historic stnacture and requested
modifications to development standards are subject to discretionary review where each
modification is evaluated on a case-by-case basis in light of property- and area-specific
ciroumstances. Each of these projects will be subject to review under the City's Landmark
Ordinance and must be undertaken in accordance with the Secretary of Interior's Standards
pursuant to both Section 9.04.20.10.030(m) and the Landmarks Ordinance.