CITY OF POMONA
COUNCIL REPORT
September 12, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: James W. Makshanoff, City Manager
Submitted By: Anita Gutierrez, AICP, Development Services Director SUBJECT: APPEAL OF MINOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 18644-2022 RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended by the Historic Preservation Commission that the City Council adopt the following resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-166 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POMONA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING MINOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (MINCOA 18644-2022) TO LEGALIZE AN UNPERMITTED SIX-FOOT HIGH VINYL FENCE ON A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 418 KENOAK PLACE (APN: 8358-002-011) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The matter before the City Council is an appeal, by the project applicant, of the Historic Preservation decision on Minor Certificate of Appropriateness No. 18644-2022 (MINCOA). On August 3, 2022, the Historic Preservation Commission (“Commission”) denied the applicant’s appeal of staff’s decision to deny a request to legalize an unpermitted six-foot high vinyl fence, located at 418 Kenoak Drive. On August 23, 2022, the applicant filed an application to appeal the decision of the Commission (Attachment No. 3). A denial of the appeal would uphold the Commission’s decision.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There will be no impact at this time.
PUBLIC NOTICING REQUIREMENTS:
Pursuant to Section .5809-13, of the City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance (Historic Preservation), a notice of public hearing is required to be sent to the applicant and mailed to all owners of property located directly adjacent to and directly across the street from the subject site, at least ten days prior to the date of the public hearing. A notice was sent to the applicant, adjoining property owners on August 31, 2022 (Attachment No. 3).
PREVIOUS RELATED ACTION:
On June 29, 2022, the Planning Division issued a denial of MINCOA 18644-2022 to legalize the unpermitted vinyl fence based on Staff’s research that vinyl fencing is not consistent with our Historic Guidelines. On July 21, 2022, the owner filed an appeal of staff’s decision to the Historic Preservation Commission and on August 3, 2022, the Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the request to allow the legalization of the unpermitted vinyl fence. At this hearing, Planning Division Staff brought forward a recommendation to deny this request and the Commission denied the request to allow the vinyl fencing on a 4-2-0-0 vote. The applicant timely filed for an appeal to City Council on August 23, 2022. This report is included for your consideration as Attachment 4.
APPLICABLE CODE SECTION:
Pursuant to Historic Preservation Section .5809-13.G of the Pomona Zoning Ordinance, which establishes appeal procedures for a Major Certificate of Appropriateness, decisions of the Commission may be appealed to the City Council. In addition, the following code sections of the Pomona Zoning Code apply to the project:
1999 Historic Design Guidelines – Guidelines for Fence / Wall Alterations and Installations on Historic Properties 2021 Historic Design Guidelines – Guidelines for Craftsman Architecture Section .503-I Fences, Hedges and Walls of the Pomona Zoning Ordinance – Historic Properties ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
Pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no environmental determination is required for projects that will be rejected or disapproved by a public agency. However, should the proposed project be approved by the City Council, the project is covered by CEQA under Section 15331, Class 31 - Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation Activities and Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities).
DISCUSSION:
The City of Pomona’s 1999 Historic Guidelines for fence/wall alterations and installations state that repair or replacement of historic fences or walls should be accomplished with like materials and designs and that if historic fences or walls are already in place, they should be maintained in their original state to the greatest extent possible. In addition, the 2021 Historic Guidelines Architectural Styles Chapter outlines that wood fences are typical for the Craftsman Style. Vinyl fencing is not listed in the style as an acceptable material for fences and walls. Staff looked at alternatives to allow the vinyl fencing, such as only requiring the visible part of the fence to be made out of wood; however, the entire fence is visible from the street. Based on this research, Staff denied the application to legalize the vinyl fence. The applicant appealed staff’s decision.
Staff recommended that the Commission deny the appeal and uphold staff’s decision. The Commission heard the item, considered Staff’s recommendation at their August 3, 2022 meeting, and had a robust discussion on the matter. During the discussion, the owner of the property had brought to the meeting a document that states that fence installations do not require a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA). Staff clarified that the document the applicant was referencing was the original 1999 Guidelines (Attachment 5, Page 18) which is an out of date document that contradicts the Zoning Code, which was changed in 2009 (Attachment 6, Paged 17) and updated the Design Guidelines. In addition, Staff further clarified that both the 1999 and updated 2009 Guidelines state that repairing and replacement of fences installations should be accomplished with like materials and design. The Commission also asked Staff whether we have approved COA’s for vinyl fencing, which Staff confirmed that the City and Commission have consistently denied vinyl as an appropriate material in Historic Districts. The Commission determined the vinyl fencing is not historically appropriate and not consistent with Design Guidelines and denied the appeal, upholding the denial by staff with a 4-2 vote. The Commission gave the applicant one year to replace the vinyl fence with a wood fence.
Prepared by:
________________________
Lynda Ramos
Associate Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment No. 1 – Draft City Council Resolution No. 2022-166 (Deny appeal) Attachment No. 2 – Appeal Application and Letter Submitted by Applicant dated August 23, 2022 Attachment No. 3 – Public Hearing Notice
Attachment No. 4 – Historic Preservation Commission Public Hearing Report (with attachments) and Resolution 2022-012 dated August 3, 2022
Attachment No. 5 – 1999 Historic Guidelines, Page 1-19.
Attachment No. 6 – 1999 Historic Guidelines with change made to fences (Post 2009) Attachment No. 7 – Historic Preservation Commission minutes for August 3, 2022 Appeal of Denied MAJCOA No.18644-2022