title
CONSIDER APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR’S DECISION TO ISSUE A HISTORIC DEMOLITION OR RELOCATION PERMIT FOR 625 E. MARKET STREET
recommended action
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council discuss the Director’s decision and determine whether to appeal the decision to the Planning Commission.
body
Summary
On May 05, 2017, the applicant, L&B Environmental, on behalf of the owner, Creative Education Support Org., LLC, applied for a historic demolition or relocation permit to demolish a building located at 625 E. Market Street (P17-0358). On May 31, 2017, the permit was issued, and notice was provided to the applicant and members of the Cultural Heritage Board, as required by the Development Code. On June 7, 2017, Council member Fugazi filed an appeal of the decision. In accordance with the Code, the Council shall discuss the matter to determine if the Council should appeal the decision of the Director to the Planning Commission. If the Council decides to appeal the decision, it will be scheduled for an appeal before the Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION
Background
Stockton Municipal Code Section 16.220.105 provides that if a permit is sought to demolish or relocate a structure that was constructed or in place at least 50 years before the date of application for demolition or relocation, and that structure is not currently listed on any local, State or Federal register, the request shall be referred to the Director for a preliminary determination of whether the potentially historic resource may be demolished. The applicant submitted an architectural report from licensed architect Tom Bowe with WMB Architects (Attachment A - Architect’s Letter). The letter describes the structure’s eligibility as a historic landmark, as well as the architectural style and significance. The architect found no evidence of historic or architectural significance and concluded the site did not meet criteria to be considered historic. The Director determined that the structure is not listed on any of the applicable registers and that the building is not a potential historic resource and may, therefore, be demolished. A letter of determination was mailed to the applicant and members of the Cultural Heritage Board on May 31, 2017 (Attachment B - Director’s Decision). On June 5, 2017, the Director received a letter and supporting materials from Wesley Swanson, chair of the Cultural Heritage Board, documenting the potential historic eligibility of 625 East Market (Attachment C - Wesley Swanson Letter). Since the appeal, Architect Tom Bowe submitted a letter from Tod Ruhstaller, CEO of the Haggin Museum, further detailing the history of 625 East Market and supporting the determination that structure is not historically significant (Attachment D - Tod Ruhstaller Historical Significance Report)
Section 16.100.020 provides that any determination or decision rendered by the Director, except Site Plan Review, may be appealed to the Commission. This section further provides that the Council may appeal a decision rendered by the Director to the Commission or by the Commission to itself (Council), if:
a. A member of the Council files an appeal in compliance with Section 16.100.040(B) (Form of appeal);
b. The member of the Council requesting the appeal requests that the Council discuss the decision to determine if the Council should appeal the decision of the Commission to itself or the decision of the Director to the Commission; and
c. A majority of the Council members vote to consider appealing the decision.
Present Situation
This matter is before the Council because Councilmember Fugazi filed an appeal. In accordance with the requirements of SMC 16.100.020(B)(6)(b), the Council shall discuss the matter to determine if it should appeal the decision of the Director to the Planning Commission. If the Council decides to appeal the decision, it will be scheduled for an appeal on the merits before the Planning Commission. A motion and a majority vote are required by the Council to appeal the Directors decision.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
A discussion to determine whether to appeal the subject decision has no financial impact and will have no effect on the General Fund.
Attachment A - Architect’s Letter
Attachment B - Director’s Decision
Attachment C - Wesley Swanson Letter
Attachment D - Tod Ruhstaller Historical Significance Report