title
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 16, CHAPTER 16.220, SECTIONS 16.220.030 AND 16.220.100 OF THE STOCKTON MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO STRUCTURES OF MERIT
recommended action
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve a Resolution forwarding a recommendation to the City Council to adopt an ordinance amending Title 16, Chapter 16.220, Sections 16.220.030 and 16.220.100 of the Stockton Municipal Code relating to Structures of Merit.
body
Summary
Structures of Merit are a method of recognizing historic, architectural, archaeological, ecological, cultural, or aesthetic resources within the City of Stockton. This designation is one of several tools available to the Cultural Heritage Board to achieve the purposes laid out in Stockton Municipal Code Section 16.220.010. Recently, the Cultural Heritage Board considered and approved a Structure of Merit. During that process, staff discovered a lack of due process for property owners whose properties were subject to the designation. The proposed ordinance addresses that code omission in order to conform with other City Board/Commission/Council public consideration/decision-making procedures to promote the continued good work of the Cultural Heritage Board.
DISCUSSION
Background
Title 16, Division 7, Chapter 16.220 of the Stockton Municipal Code (SMC) is the Cultural Resources Chapter of the City’s Development Code. The purpose of this chapter is spelled out in SMC 16.220.010 and includes the following intentions:
• Appreciate the City’s Past
• Enhance Historic Sites
• Encourage Utilization of Structures
• Foster Pride
• Maintain Style and Character
• Preserve Architectural Styles
• Protect Against Adverse Effects
• Stabilize Values
SMC 16.220.100 “Structures of Merit” provides the criteria and procedure for designating properties deserving of official recognition as having historic, architectural, archaeological, ecological, cultural, or aesthetic resource significance. A Structure of Merit is a mechanism to recognize a significant resource that is not officially designated as a landmark and is not situated in a designated historic district. However, a Structure of Merit is not precluded from being located within a historic district.
Currently, SMC 16.220.100(B)(1) provides that Structures of Merit can be initiated by the Board although practice has been to accept applications from any person (Attachment A - CHB Nomination Form). The form is processed by staff and placed on a Cultural Heritage Board meeting agenda for review and decision. Per SMC 16.220.100.B, a public notice and hearing are not required, and the Board’s decision is final; no appeal procedures are codified.
The Structure of Merit designation imposes requirements different than those applied to a landmark and/or historical district designation. While a Structure of Merit designation establishes the same maintenance requirements as landmarks, historic sites, and structures in a historic preservation district (SMC section 16.220.120 [Cultural Resources - Maintenance]), it does not impose the Certificate of Appropriateness requirements at SMC 16.22.060 for proposed alterations. Maintenance requirements provided at SMC 16.220.120 include the following:
1. Maintain[ing] and keep[ing] in repair the structures and premises which shall be preserved against decay and deterioration by being kept free from the following structural defects:
a. Deteriorated or inadequate foundation, which jeopardizes its structural integrity;
b. Defective or deteriorated floor supports or any structural members of insufficient size to carry imposed loads with safety, which jeopardizes its structural integrity;
c. Members of external or interior walls, partitions, or other vertical supports that split, lean, list, or buckle due to defective material or deterioration which jeopardizes its structural integrity;
d. Fireplaces or chimneys which list, bulge, or settle due to defective material or deterioration or are of insufficient size or strength to carry imposed loads with safety which jeopardizes its structural integrity;
e. Deteriorated or crumbling exterior plasters, mortar, or stucco;
f. Lack of weather protection or ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roof, and foundations, including broken windows or doors;
g. Peeled paint, rotting, holes, and other forms of decay;
h. Lack of maintenance of the surrounding environment (e.g., accessory structures, fences, gates, landscaping, sidewalks, signs, and steps); or
i. Any deteriorated feature creating, or allowing the creation of, any hazardous or unsafe condition or conditions.
Present Situation
The procedural distinction between Structures of Merit and landmarks, historic sites, and structures in a historic preservation district is that the latter three provide due process for property owners and interested parties effected by the added maintenance requirements.
Both the United States Constitution and the California Constitution provide procedural safeguards in the form of due process to ensure that citizens are protected against a government’s adjudicatory decisions that deprive individuals of their property interests, including the use of one’s property. (See Horn v. County (1979) 24 Cal.3d 605, 612-13, 615.) The procedural protections required may vary depending on a number of factors, including the nature of the interest at stake. However, the most fundamental requirements of procedural due process are: (1) adequate notice, and (2) an opportunity to be heard before a fair and impartial hearing body.
Notice, under general principles of due process, must be of a type reasonably calculated to give the person with the property interest knowledge of the proceedings. The burden of obtaining notice cannot be unfairly placed on the affected citizens themselves. Once a government agency has provided adequate notice, it must also provide an opportunity for an affected citizen to be heard, to bring evidence, and to respond to evidence presented against them.
Although each hearing process may vary, the City must meet these fundamental requirements. Currently, the Board’s action does not include these requirements for the consideration of Structures of Merit.
In response to this Code omission, staff has prepared a draft ordinance (Attachment B - Proposed Ordinance (Redline Version)) that adds due process to the designation procedure and other cleanup items such as a clarification on initiation, requiring a resolution, and allowing an appeal. The following chart illustrates the proposed changes:
|
Code Section |
Summary |
|
16.220.030 Review Authority |
Addition of appeal hierarchy |
|
16.220.100.B.1 Procedure for Designation |
Clarification of who can nominate |
|
16.220.100.B.2 Notice and Hearing |
Addition of public notice and hearing requirement |
|
16.220.100.B.3 Board’s Action |
Addition of resolution requirement for designation |
|
16.220.100.B.4 Appeal |
Addition of appeal procedure. |
The proposed amendments to the Stockton Municipal Code will bring the Structure of Merit process in conformance with due process procedures and create consistency with public noticing and hearing requirements with all other designations provided via the Cultural Resources chapter.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to City Council for approval of the proposed Ordinance amending Title 16, Chapter 16.220, Sections 16.220.030 and 16.220.100, related to Structures of Merit.
Attachment A - CHB Nomination Form
Attachment B - Proposed Ordinance (Redline Version)