CITY OF POMONA
COUNCIL REPORT
November 6, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: James W. Makshanoff, City Manager
Submitted By: Anita Gutierrez, AICP, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: APPEAL OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECISION TO DENY MAJOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 21547-2023 FOR THE RETROACTIVE APPROVAL OF UNPERMITTED RENOVATIONS OF A DUPLEX ON A CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE LOCATED AT 607 N. GIBBS STREET AND 195 E. PASADENA STREET WITHIN THE LINCOLN PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is that the City Council adopt the following Resolution (Attachment No. 1):
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-182 – A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POMONA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING MAJOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (MAJCOA-021547-2023) FOR THE UNPERMITTED RENOVATION OF A DUPLEX AND RETROACTIVELY APPROVING THE REMOVAL OF ONE TREE AND THE REPLACEMENT OF ONE NON-HISTORIC WINDOW AND TWO ORIGINAL WINDOWS AT A CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE LOCATED AT 607 N. GIBBS STREET AND 195 E. PASADENA STREET WITHIN THE LINCOLN PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT (APN: 8336-017-008) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The matter before the City Council is an appeal, by the project applicant, of the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision on Major Certificate of Appropriateness No. 21547-2023. The application includes numerous requests to legalize unpermitted work to the property. Staff determined that nearly all the observed unpermitted alterations were either inconsistent with the architectural style or period of the home and surrounding neighborhood or adversely affected the character-defining features of the contributing resource, according to the Design Guidelines for alterations to structures within historic districts. Upholding the denial would require the applicant to reverse the alterations and return the home to its pre-altered state.
PUBLIC NOTICING REQUIREMENTS:
Pursuant to Section .5809-13, of the City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance (Historic Preservation), a notice of public hearing shall 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 public hearing. A notice of public hearing was sent to the applicant, tenants, and owners of adjoining properties on October 11, 2023 (Attachment No. 2).
PREVIOUS RELATED ACTION:
The applicant submitted the initial Major Certificate of Appropriateness application on December 7, 2021 (MAJCOA-017382-2021) to replace exterior like-for-like siding and replace the original wood windows with vinyl windows.
On January 25, 2022, before the Planning Staff could review the application, the Code Compliance Division issued a citation for unpermitted construction activity. The citation (Attachment No. 3) reads:
“No work, including exterior alteration and demolition, may be conducted on a designated historic landmark, without first obtaining a Certificate of Appropriateness from the City.” The citation also required the applicant to:
“Cease all building and construction activity until the Certificate of Appropriateness permit has been obtained.” It specifically states that “although the permit has been applied for, it must be processed and approved by Planning before work can be done.” This message was also reaffirmed in an email from Planning Staff to the applicant, explicitly stating that work cannot begin until the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness (Attachment No. 4). That same day, the applicant amended the request to replace the windows like for like adding the request to replace the garage doors and for the installation of multiple fences. Similarly, before Staff received a complete application or could finish the review, unpermitted construction on the contributing resource began without the benefit of any issued permits. Staff subsequently placed a hold on issuing any permits so all proposed work could be captured within the proposed project description. Additional amendments to the proposed work were received on April 28, August 2, and September 15, 2022. Simultaneously, unbeknownst to Staff, unpermitted work continued to take place. A more detailed timeline is described in the Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report (Attachment No. 5).
On January 24, 2023, Staff conducted a site visit and observed that multiple alterations to the contributing resource had taken place without any issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) nor any building permits from the Building and Safety Division. Nearly all completed work was inconsistent with the proposed work requested (changes were either not similar to what had been existing or were inconsistent with the Craftsman architectural style of the home). The unpermitted work includes:
Two doors on the north facade have been deleted;
Two windows on the north facade have been deleted;
Exposed rafters on eaves have been covered with fascia board; Window trim around all windows has been changed;
The Non-original sliding door at the rear of the house has been replaced with an asymmetrical, non-matching window; Wooden carriage doors on the street-facing garage have been replaced with aluminum mechanical garage doors; The house has been re-sided, and corner boards have been placed on facade corners; New metal and vinyl fencing that is inappropriate for the period and architectural style has been installed; New air conditioning units with wrought iron cages have been installed on the north side of units; One (1) mature tree has been removed;
Character-defining landscaping in the street facing front and side yards has been almost entirely removed; Several original single-hung or double-hung windows have been replaced with gridded windows not original to the home; Two large windows on the north facade have been replaced with smaller windows; The primary front doors on each unit have been replaced with new doors.
The project was scheduled for a public hearing at the Historic Preservation Commission Meeting on May 7, 2023. The Commission continued the item to the meeting on August 2, 2023.
On August 2, 2023, the Historic Preservation Commission held a public hearing concerning the requested Major Certificate of Appropriateness (COA). At this hearing, the Commission facilitated a broad discussion on each unpermitted change and found that most of the work executed adversely affects the contributing resource as the projects are incompatible with the period or architectural style of the duplex or surrounding neighborhood. Among the changes the Commission determined were appropriate include two new smaller bathroom windows that had replaced larger ones, so long as their style and trim matched those around the duplex. The Commission subsequently made a motion to approve Staff’s recommendation to deny the legalizing of a duplex's unpermitted renovation and retroactively approve removing one tree and replacing one non-historic window. The Commission expanded the recommended conditions to allow for two unpermitted window openings on the north façade to remain, but the windows are to be of a matching Craftsman style. Resolution No. 23-009 was approved on a 7-0-0-0 vote (Attachment 7).
On August 22, 2023, the property owner filed a request to appeal (Attachment No. 6) the decision of the Historic Preservation Commission, specifically the conditions that require the structure to be returned to their original state.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
Pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project meets the criteria for a Section 15331, Class 31(Historic Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation), in that the project is consistent with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities) in that the project consists of minor alterations to an existing structure. However, should the City Council deny the proposed project, no environmental determination will be required for projects that a public agency will reject or disapprove of, pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines.
DISCUSSION:
At the Historic Preservation Commission public hearing on August 2, 2023, Staff had determined that nearly all the observed unpermitted alterations were either inconsistent with the architectural style and period of the home and surrounding neighborhood or adversely affected the character-defining features of the contributing resource, according to the Design Guidelines for alterations to structures within historic districts. Per Staff’s recommendation, the Historic Preservation Commission could not make the required findings to approve a Major Certificate of Appropriateness.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment No. 1 – Draft City Council Resolution No. 2023-182 Attachment No. 2 – Notice of Public Hearing
Attachment No. 3 – Citation from Code Compliance Division dated January 25, 2023 Attachment No. 4 – Email from Staff to Applicant dated January 25, 2022 Attachment No. 5 – Historic Preservation Commission Staff Report with Attachments for August 2, 2023 Attachment No. 6 – Appeal Application and Letter Submitted by Applicant dated August 22, 2023 Attachment No. 7 – Approved Historic Preservation Commission Resolution No. 23-009 Attachment No. 8 – Staff Presentation
Appeal of Denied MAJCOA No. 21547-2023