Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
220412_Item 4.5_Council Report
RECOMMENDATION DATE: April 12, 2022 CATEGORY: Consent DEPT.: Community Development TITLE: Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Update: Scope of Work and Consultant Contract 1. Approve a midyear Capital Improvement Program project entitled "Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Update," and transfer and appropriate $430,000 from the Land Use Document Reserve in the Development Services Fund to the project. (Five votes required) 2. Approve the proposed scope of work for the City -initiated Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Update project. 3. Authorize the City Manager to execute a professional service contract with Page & Turnbull for the Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Update in an amount not to exceed $355,385. BACKGROUND City Council Malor Goals Work Plan In 2018, Senate Bill 50 (SB 50) was proposed but ultimately not enacted. This bill would have provided little discretion to local agency development approval of projects that strictly complied with objective standards. SB 50 would have allowed protection of some local historic resources identified prior to 2010 as well as all State and National Register resources. To enable the City to continue to preserve historic resources, the Council included in its Fiscal Year 2019-20 Major Goals a work item to update the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance, including updates to the City's Historic Register and incentives for property owners to improve and maintain such resources. Council further directed staff to work on the Downtown Precise Plan (Phase 1), which included a limited review of Areas A, G, and H, including design standards, minimal ground -floor land use changes, and to review whether the area, or portions thereof, could be considered a historic district. Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Update: Scope of Work and Consultant Contract April 12, 2022 Page 2 of 7 In a June 8, 2021 Study Session, Council received a report on the initial review by the historic consultant TrenorHL which found that, while downtown has some historic structures at the local, State, and Federal level, overall, there are relatively few qualifying buildings, and the downtown, as a whole, would not meet the criteria to create a downtown historic district at the State or Federal level. At the Study Session, Council expressed interest in a fresh look Citywide at the Historic Register, reviewing the downtown to see if portions could qualify as a downtown historic district at local, State, or Federal levels, and updates to the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance. The City Council included a project to update the Historic Preservation Ordinance as part of the Council Work Plan to implement the 2021-23 Strategic Roadmap There are several key reasons to update the Ordinance and the Register at this time: • Updates to the Ordinance and Register are occasionally necessary as the periods of historic significance and community goals pertaining to historic preservation change over time. • Updating the Register can streamline development review by reducing the need for historic studies on individual projects. • Since 2004, court cases have established that historic resources do not need to be on a register to be protected under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) when a discretionary permit or approval is required. CEQA may, therefore, require reviewing a project for potential historic status even if it is not on the local Register. This means that the City's Historic Ordinance, local Register, and procedures alone will not make clear the requirements that a property may be subject to, especially pursuant to CEQA. This project would update the Historic Ordinance and the Register to create a consistent and transparent set of procedures for all properties. (Staff would like to note that after this update, it would be necessary to update the Register from time to time since new resources can become historically significant as time passes). • Since 2017, State laws have been proposed, and some enacted, that require some development approvals to be ministerial, based on objective standards (i.e., SB 35) and without CEQA review. While those State laws provide some protection for historic resources, the properties would need to be on a Register to qualify as historic for purposes of State laws. • Updating the Ordinance provides the opportunity to establish a process and criteria for the designation of local historic districts, which is not currently included in the Ordinance. Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Update: Scope of Work and Consultant Contract April 12, 2022 Page 3 of 7 October 12, 2021 City Council Meeting At the October 12, 2021 City Council meeting (Attachment 1—October 12, 2021 Council Report), the City Council reviewed a framework for updating the Zoning Ordinance standards and procedures for the designation and preservation of historic resources (Mountain View City Code, Section 36.54.45 through Section 36.54.97), in preparation for a Request for Proposals (RFP). The City Council directed staff to issue the RFP. In addition, several Councilmembers acknowledged the engagement of community groups on the topic of historic preservation and requested a comprehensive, Citywide outreach process. They also expressed interest in including consultants with a track record of preservation in the RFP process. OUTREACH Staff reached out to several key interest groups, including Mountain View Historical Association and Livable Mountain View, regarding this project. Key points raised during these discussions included the following: • Identify the City's working-class roots. • Acknowledge that there are historic buildings that may have been modified or key sites that no longer have buildings. • Provide clarity on property -owner rights and incentives. • Provide objective analysis of historic resources. • Identify locations with more than a plaque—recreate the historic feel of the location. • The ordinance update should address potential loopholes that might allow actions contrary to the City's preservation and land use goals. • Preservation is important because you cannot recreate all the benefits that historic buildings provide. • Provide safeguards to prevent State preemption (this is discussed in greater detail in the Analysis section of the report). Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Update: Scope of Work and Consultant Contract April 12, 2022 Page 4 of 7 ANAI VSIS Staff released an RFP on November 1, 2021. In addition to the firms that had previously requested RFPs, staff reached out to Architecture + History and JRP Historical Consulting, two firms recommended by Livable Mountain View, and specifically inquired about their availability to work on the project. Both firms stated that the project scope is not within their firms' capacity at this time. Staff received proposals from five consultant firms and interviewed three. Based on proposals, interviews, and references, staff is recommending Page & Turnbull for this project. Page & Turnbull has expertise and specialization on Historic Preservation projects and bringing sites forward to the State Commission for Historic nomination. They also have a strong understanding of the region, serving as on-call Historic consultants for the City of Palo Alto Planning Department. In addition, they have significant experience conducting policy analysis, developing context statements, conducting surveys, and developing ordinances. Proposed Scope of Work The proposed Scope of Work is included in this report as Attachment 2 and is summarized below. Phase 1. Outreach (One to Three Months): The scope includes an intensive public outreach plan, including stakeholder meetings, a Downtown Committee meeting, and two community workshops. The first community workshop will be held early in the process to inform the community about the project, facilitate a discussion about the significant historical themes of the City, and to gather information and input. The second workshop will be held to present the Public Draft Historic Context Statement (HCS) and Ordinance framework and receive feedback from members of the community. Phase 2. Historic Context Statement (Eight Months): The project team will develop a Historic Context Statement to guide the assessment of potential historic resources throughout Mountain View and create a framework for future preservation efforts in the City. This task includes a review of existing documentation, historic research, community and stakeholder input, and a windshield survey. The document will focus closely on the history of the built environment in Mountain View and will identify important themes, patterns, trends, and property types that shaped the City's development. The historic context will summarize existing documentation, include a narrative history of Mountain View's built environment and cultural landscapes, discuss significant historic themes, identify property types, establish eligibility standards and integrity thresholds for Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Update: Scope of Work and Consultant Contract April 12, 2022 Page 5 of 7 property types, and establish a framework and criteria for evaluating the significance and integrity of individual properties. Phase 3. Updated Historic Preservation Ordinance (Seven Months): The project team will update the criteria and process for designating local historic districts and implementation of historic preservation incentives and may include various clarifications and updates to existing language and processes. Phases 2 and 3 will happen concurrently and are expected to be completed by the beginning of 2023. Phase 4. Citywide Survey and Update to the Historic Register (Nine to 10 Months): The project team will utilize the GIS database and mobile survey application to collect customized, geolocated cloud -based data during the survey. A two-tiered methodology will be conducted for the Citywide historic resources survey and Historic Register update. A reconnaissance -level survey of all (approximately 10,000) age -eligible properties (at least 45 years old) will be undertaken to prepare a list and maps of potential historic resources and districts. The project team will conduct an intensive -level survey of previously identified resources, Downtown Area H, and all properties that appear likely to be eligible as individual resources or districts during the reconnaissance -level survey. This intensive -level survey will identify properties that may be added to or removed from the Local Historic Register, potential historic districts, and properties that are eligible for the California Register and/or National Register. The City has previously identified 42 State- and National Register -eligible properties, and the project team anticipates identifying more resources during the proposed new survey. The survey results and methodology will be synthesized in a written Survey Report. This document will identify project objectives and the properties surveyed and will outline the research design. The report will conclude with the findings of reconnaissance and intensive surveys in a summary table, including recommendations on updates to the Historic Register. The Survey Report will include an Appendix with the survey forms prepared for eligible historic resources and districts. Phase 5. Study Sessions The project team will organize and facilitate two Study Sessions with the Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) and City Council, for a total of four Study Sessions. The first Study Sessions will discuss the issues and opportunities that have been identified regarding the Ordinance. The second round of Study Sessions will review the Public Draft Historic Context Statement and Ordinance framework. Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Update: Scope of Work and Consultant Contract April 12, 2022 Page 6 of 7 Phase 6. Final Adoption The project will also include EPC and City Council public hearings for formal EPC recommendation and Council adoption of the Historic Context Statement, Historic Preservation Ordinance, and Local Historic Register. Altogether, the phases are expected to take about two years and be completed by approximately June 2024. Outside this Scope: State Nomination One of the community groups, Livable Mountain View, raised concerns about State preemption over the City's local historic register. Specifically, they pointed to SB 50, which, though not ultimately adopted, could have explicitly excluded Local -Register properties from protections afforded to State- and National -Register properties. It should be noted that other State laws that require ministerial review of certain housing projects meeting objective standards, such as SB 9 and SB 35, do not exclude properties on local registers from protection, treating them the same as the State and National Registers. Based on this concern, the community group recommended that the scope be included to nominate all eligible properties to the State Register as part of this project. Nominating resources for the State and/or National Registers would entail additional documentation, staff time, and cost, which is not within the scope of work for this project. If the City Council is interested in adding this as a next phase for the Historic Register, staff recommends that Council consider doing so as part of their Fiscal Year 2023 to Fiscal Year 2025 Strategic Workplan. FISCAL IMPACT The costs of all tasks identified in this report are summarized below. Scope of Work $297,500 Contingency (20%) 58,000 Total Contract (Rounded) $355,500 Legal Support, Noticing, Translation, Other Costs 48,000 City Administration 26,500 TOTAL CIP REQUESTED $430.000 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Update: Scope of Work and Consultant Contract April 12, 2022 Page 7 of 7 There are adequate funds in the Land Use Documents Fee account to cover these costs. The Land Use Documents Fee is collected from new development for the purpose of updating major land use documents like the Zoning Ordinance. ALTERNATIVES 1. Do not approved the recommended Scope of Work and Consultant, and direct staff to issue a new Request for Proposals. 2. Modify the Scope of Work and budget as appropriate and authorize a contract with Page & Turnbull. 3. Provide other direction. PUBLIC NOTICING—Agenda posting. Prepared by: Elaheh Kerachian Senior Planner Eric B. Anderson Advanced Planning Manager EK-EBA/4/CAM 815-04-12-22CR 201728 Approved by: Aarti Shrivastava Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director Audrey Seymour Ramberg Assistant City Manager/ Chief Operating Officer Attachments: 1. October 12, 2021 Council Report 2. Scope of Work RECOMMENDATION Attachment 1 DATE: October 12, 2021 CATEGORY: Consent DEPT.: Community Development TITLE: Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Request for Proposals Direct staff to issue a Request for Proposals for an updated Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register. BACKGROUND The Zoning Ordinance includes standards and procedures for the designation and preservation of historic resources (Mountain View City Code Section 36.54.45 through Section 36.54.97) (Attachment 1— Historic Preservation Ordinance). This language was adopted in 2004 along with a Register of Historic Resources (Historic Register — Attachment 2). The City's Historic Preservation Ordinance (Ordinance) includes procedures for designating historic resources, procedures for approval of modifications to historic resources, and incentives. CEQA and Historic Resources The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides procedural protection for any structures deemed to be historic resources or of historic significance at the local, State, or national level. Therefore, the CEQA process requires assessment of whether a project includes a historic resource. Applications proposing demolition or a significant adverse change to a historic resource would be deemed to potentially cause a significant environmental impact under CEQA, which would require preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations if the impact could not be mitigated to a less -than -significant level. The City has discretion not to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which gives the City discretion to deny a project that would significantly impact a historic resource. Conversely, the City may adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations to approve a project despite the project's impact to historic resources; thus, the protections under Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Request for Proposals October 12, 2021 Page 2 of 5 CEQA are substantial, but not absolute, providing for the evaluation, disclosure, and due consideration of specific impacts prior to a City Council decision. Council Major Goals and Strategic Roadmap In Fiscal Year 2019-20, Council included in its Major Goals a work item to update the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance, including updates to the City's Historic Register of resources and incentives to property owners to improve and maintain such resources. In 2018, Senate Bill (SB) 50 was proposed (but ultimately not enacted), which provided little discretion to agencies if projects strictly complied with objective standards. Staff noted at that time that SB 50 would have protected historic resources identified prior to 2010, and any updates to the City's Historic Register after that would not be protected by the law. Council directed staff to work on the Downtown Precise Plan (Phase 1), which was a limited review of Areas A, G, and H, including design standards, minimal ground - floor land use changes, and to review whether the area, or portions thereof, could be considered a historic district under existing State and Federal definitions. In a June 8 2021 Study Session, Council received a report on the initial review by the historic consultant, TrenorHL, which found that, while downtown has some historic structures at the local, State, and national level, overall there are relatively few qualifying buildings, and it would not meet the criteria to create a downtown historic district. At the Study Session, Council expressed interest in a fresh look Citywide at the Historic Register, a downtown historic district, and updates to the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance. The City Council included a project to update to the Historic Preservation Ordinance as part of the 2021-23 Strategic Roadmap. ANALYSIS The purpose of a historic preservation ordinance is to establish local regulations for the protection of historic resources within the community and set forth criteria and procedures for identifying historic resources, incentivizing their preservation, and acting on requests for modifications of historic resources. An accompanying Register of Historic Resources acts as the list of identified historic resources that the historic preservation ordinance applies to. The City has established local criteria for what can be considered a historic resource. There are also separate State and National Register criteria which provide for evaluation Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Request for Proposals October 12, 2021 Page 3 of 5 of resources for State and national historic significance. Mountain View's current local criteria are as follows: a. Is strongly identified with a person who, or an organization which, significantly contributed to the culture, history, or development of the City of Mountain View; b. Is the site of a significant historic event in the City's past; Embodies distinctive characteristics significant to the City in terms of a type, period, region, or method of construction or representative of the work of a master or possession of high artistic value; or d. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to the City's prehistory or history. There are several reasons to update the City's Ordinance and Register: Updates to the Ordinance and Register are occasionally necessary as the periods of historic significance and community goals pertaining to historic preservation change over time. Updating the Register can streamline development review by reducing the need for historic studies on many projects. Since 2004, court cases have established that historic resources do not need to be on a register to be protected under CEQA. This means that reference to our local Register and procedures alone will not make clear the requirements that a property may be subject to. The project would update those procedures and the Register to provide greater consistency and transparency. Updating the Ordinance provides the opportunity to establish a process and criteria for the designation of local historic districts, which is not currently included in the Ordinance. Ordinance and Register Update Process Staff recommends the following process for updating the Ordinance and Register: 1. RFP. Staff will issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for qualified consultants to assist with the project. Review and selection of a consultant is expected to take approximately four months. Staff will return to Council in the first half of 2022 with Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Request for Proposals October 12, 2021 Page 4 of 5 a consultant selection, scope of work, and request to appropriate funds for the project. 2. Outreach Methodology. The RFP will include a specific request for outreach expertise and proposals for innovative outreach methods, such as virtual meetings and interactive tools. The project team will reach out to affected property owners, neighborhood and interest groups, and the general public. Outreach goals could include input for the Context Statement (see next), input on the existing Ordinance and opportunities for changes, and education about historic preservation laws and strategies. 3. Context Statement. A context statement will provide the foundation for preservation planning by establishing themes, geographical areas, and periods of significance. It will also identify important associated property types and establish eligibility criteria and integrity thresholds. 4. New Citywide Survey and Update to the Historic Register. To prepare this, the project team would review past surveys, the most recent of which was a Citywide comprehensive survey done in 2008, and conduct a new Citywide survey to identify additional resources that need to be added to or removed from the Historic Register. 5. Outreach. The project will include a significant outreach component to get public input on the framework for the Ordinance and inform property owners about the Historic Register and the benefits and requirements of owning a historic property. 6. Draft Updated Ordinance. The project team will review the City's existing Ordinance and propose modifications with updated procedures, criteria, etc., to align with current laws and best practices. 7. Study Sessions. The project team will check in with the Environmental Planning Commission and City Council to review the draft context statement/ Ordinance framework and draft Ordinance and Historic Register. 8. Adoption. The City will adopt the Context Statement, Ordinance, and updated Historic Register. Steps 3 and 4 can happen concurrently, and staff expects these steps will take approximately 10 to 12 months. Step 5, public outreach, will begin after that in order to receive input from the public on the context statement, framework for the Ordinance, and to provide updated information on the Historic Register. It is expected that Step 5 will take about two months. Steps 6 through 8 will take another six to eight months. Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Request for Proposals October 12, 2021 Page 5 of 5 Altogether, Steps 3 through 8 are expected to take about 18 to 22 months after the consultant is selected in the first half of 2022. Following the completion of the process above, surveys will be conducted periodically to update and maintain the Historic Register. FISCAL IMPACT An initial estimate of the total costs for this project are as follows: Outreach, Context Statement, Ordinance $100,000 CEQA 50,000 New surveys 200,000 Legal support 50,000 BASE TOTAL $400,000 There are adequate funds in the Land Use Documents Fee account to cover these costs. The Land Use Documents Fee is collected from new development for the purpose of updating major land use documents like the Zoning Ordinance. When staff returns to Council for approval of the contract with the selected consultant, staff will recommend that funds be appropriated from this source. PUBLIC NOTICING —Agenda posting. Prepared by: Eric Anderson Principal Planner Stephanie Williams Planning Manager/ Zoning Administrator EA-SW/6/ CAM/ 899-10-12-21CR 201259 Approved by: Aarti Shrivastava Assistant City Manager/ Community Development Director Audrey Seymour Ramberg Assistant City Manager/ Chief Operating Officer Attachments: 1. Historic Preservation Ordinance 2. Register of Historic Resources 9/24/21, 4:32 PM Mountain View, CA Code of Ordinances Attachment 1 DIVISION 15. - DESIGNATION AND PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC RESOURCES SEC. 36.54.45 - Designation and preservation of historic resources. SEC. 36.54.50. - Council findings. The city council finds and declares that the recognition, preservation, protectioand use of historical resources is in the best interest of the health, prosperitysocial and cultural enrichment and general welfare of the city and furthers general plan Goal G, which is to preserve and protect Mountain View's historic resources anelncourage their restoration. This program, by providing a system of voluntary compliancend available incentives, will increase the likelihood that historical resources aremaintained, restored, enhanced and protected and includes procedures for protection of the environment which, absent this program, may not exist. (Ord. No. 18.13, § 1, 12/10/13.) SEC. 36.54.55. - Definitions. For the purpose of this article, the following words shall have the meanings set forttn this section: a. "Character -defining feature" shall mean the distinctive, tangible and physical featurear elements which contribute to the overall character of a structure. b. "Exempt alteration" shall mean an alteration or modification that is determined btfie zoning administrator to have limited potential to affect the character-definin&atures of a historic resource and shall include modifications to the interior, change.10 landscaping and the repainting of previously painted surfaces, regardless of colorThe zoning administrator may also determine that the following changes are exempt: maintenance or repair of windows, doors, porch elements, chimneys and roofs with the same or similar designs and materials whether or not the change requires a buildingermit. c. "Historic resource" shall mean any building, structure, object or site that the cityouncil has designated for inclusion in the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources. d. "Mountain View Register of Historic Resources," or "Historic Register," or "RegisterjJr "Initial Register" shall mean the inventory of buildings, structures, objects andites designated by the city council as historic resources pursuant to the provisionmf this ordinance and adopted by council resolution as amended from time to time.The Mountain View Register of Historic Resources shall be the city's only "local registerof historical resources" under Public Resources Code § 5024.1. e. "Significant alteration" shall mean an alteration or modification to the exteric0hat is determined by the zoning administrator as having the potential to affect the:haracter-defining features of the building. It does not include removal of nonhistorid'eatures or additions that may exist on a historic resource. (Ord. No. 18.13, § 1, 12/10/13.) SEC. 36.54.60. - Preservation of resources. No person shall alter, modify, remove or destroy any historic resource designateoursuant to this article except in compliance with this article. 1/5 9/24/21, 4:32 PM (Ord. No. 18.13, § 1, 12/10/13.) SEC. 36.54.65. - Designation criteria. Mountain View, CA Code of Ordinances A building, structure, site or other improvement may be designated as a historic resource and placed on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources if the city council finds that it meets one or more of the following criteria: a. Is strongly identified with a person who, or an organization which, significantly contributed to the culture, history or development of the City of Mountain View; b. Is the site of a significant historic event in the city's past; c. Embodies distinctive characteristics significant to the city in terms of a type, period, region or method of construction or representative of the work of a master or possession of high artistic value; or d. Has yielded, or maybe likely to yield, information important to the city's prehistory or history. (Ord. No. 18.13, § 1, 12/10/13.) SEC. 36.54.70. - Designation process for Historic Register. a. Initial Register. The city council may, by resolution, adopt an "Initial Mountain View Register of Historic Resources." Owners of properties on the Register will be notified by certified mail within thirty (30) days of adoption of the ordinance providing for the designation and preservation of historic resources. If the council adopts a Historic Register, all properties, including those designated pursuant to this section, shall be included in the Register. b. Initiation by owner. The property owner may request designation of a building, structure or other improvement as a historic resource. Applications for designation must be accompanied by such historical and architectural information as is required to allow city staff to make an informed recommendation concerning the application. The application shall be filed with the community development department. Initiation of individual historic resource by the council. The council may initiate the designation by majority vote which will begin the review process. Within thirty (30) days of the initiation of the designation by the council, the city shall notify the property owner of such application. The application will be processed only if the property owner agrees in writing to such designation. d. Public hearings. 1. Public hearing before zoning administrator. For applications initiated pursuant to subsections "b." and "c." above, the zoning administrator shall hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 36.56 (Applications, Hearings and Appeals) to consider the application. The zoning administrator shall review the evidence in support of the application and determine whether the property meets the criteria for designation, and forward a recommendation to the city council on whether the property should be placed on the Register. 2. Public hearing before city council. Upon receipt of the zoning administrator's recommendation, the council shall hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 36.56 (Applications, Hearings and Appeals). The council shall review the evidence in support of the application and the recommendation of the zoning administrator and determine whether the property meets the criteria for designation and make a final decision on whether the property should be placed on the Register. (Ord. No. 18.13, § 1, 12/10/13.) 2/5 9/24/21, 4:32 PM Mountain View, CA Code of Ordinances SEC. 36.54.75. - Removal from Register. a. Removal from Initial Register. Within six (6) months of the adoption of this ordinance, any property owner may submit a request in writing, on a form approved by the community development director, that their property be removed from the Register. The application for removal shall be signed by all owners of the property. The director shall determine whether the request for removal is in compliance with this article and shall grant the request if it complies with the requirements of this article. b. Removal from Register. Properties remaining on the Register pursuant to Section 36.54.70.a, and following the six (6) month removal period, and properties entered on the Register pursuant to Section 36.54.70 "b.," "c." and "d.," shall remain on the Register and cannot be removed for ten (10) years from the initial designation. Every five (5) years thereafter, on the anniversary of the designation, properties may apply for removal. The application shall be submitted and reviewed consistent with subsection "a." above. c. Recapture of property tax incentive. The application for removal of the Historic Resource from the Register shall include a payment for property tax rebates, with interest. The city council, by separate action, shall designate the appropriate interest rate. d. Predemolition review. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit for any building, which had been designated as a historic resource pursuant to Section 36.54.70, the applicant shall meet with city staff to review the alternatives, incentives and options to demolition. The applicant shall be notified in writing of the time and place of the meeting within thirty (30) days of filing a complete application for a demolition permit. The council may, by resolution, require additional historic buildings, not otherwise designated, to go through this review process. (Ord. No. 18.13, § 1, 12/10/13.) SEC. 36.54.80. - Incentives and benefits. a. Historic resources are eligible for special incentives and benefits as determined and adopted by the city council. The availability of the following incentives and benefits is contingent upon the determination that the approval, exemption or benefit will protect and enhance the character -defining features or retention of the historic resource. 1. Variances pursuant to Section 36.46.351- 2. 6.46.35;2. Major floor area ratio exceptions pursuant to Section 36.14.90.b; 3. Setback and minor floor area exceptions pursuant to Section 36.14.80 and 36.14.90.a; 4. Exemptions from nonconforming uses and structures pursuant to Section 36.06.70; 5. Exceptions from requirements of the downtown precise plan; 6. Use of the State Historic Building Code; 7. Mills Act contracts; 8. Exemption from planning, building and historic preservation permit fees related to the historic resource, including, but limited to, the relocation, preservation and rehabilitation of the historic resource; 9. Credit for BMR program requirements, including BMR units and in -lieu fees, where the historic resource is preserved or rehabilitated as part of a residential development; 10. Credit toward park land dedication or fees in lieu thereof, and 3/5 9/24/21, 4:32 PM Mountain View, CA Code of Ordinances 11. Approval for condominium conversions of six (6) residential units or less in a single historic resource. b. The council may also, by resolution or on a case-by-case basis during a public hearing process, determine which of the following additional incentives and/or benefits are appropriate. The incentives and benefits thereby granted shall only be effective during the maintenance of the historic resource. 1. Historic building rehabilitation loan fund; and 2. Rebate of the City of Mountain View portion of the property tax during the designation period. The city's finance and administrative services director shall develop a procedure to facilitate this rebate. The rebate shall be based on the property owner's/property owners' application for the benefit and may be granted on a prospective basis only. (Ord. No. 18.13, § 1, 12/10/13.) SEC. 36.54.85. - Requirement of permit—Development review process. a. Applicability. No person shall make a significant alteration, redevelop, or relocate any structure or improvement, or any portion thereof, upon a property designated as a historic resource on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources without first obtaining a "historic preservation permit" or HP permit. An HP permit shall remain in effect for four (4) years from the date of approval. b. Exceptions. 1. Exempt alteration. A historic preservation permit shall not be required for an exempt alteration. The city council may, by resolution, adopt a list of alterations that are deemed to be exempt alterations. 2. Hazardous or unsafe conditions. Construction, alteration or demolition necessary to correct the unsafe or dangerous condition of any structure, or other feature or part thereof, where such condition has been declared unsafe or dangerous, in writing, by the chief building official or fire marshal and where said officials have declared the proposed measures necessary on an urgency basis to correct the condition. In no event shall any work be performed which is not absolutely necessary to correct the immediate danger created by the unsafe or dangerous condition, and such work shall be done with due regard for preservation of the appearance of the structure involved. 3. Ordinary repair and maintenance. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the ordinary repair and maintenance of any architectural feature of a designated historic resource. The owner of a designated historic resource shall keep and maintain in good condition and repair all exterior portions of the resource and all interior portions whose maintenance is necessary to prevent deterioration and decay of the exterior feature. 4. Special submittal requirements. The application shall be submitted to the community development department and, in addition to the application requirements of this division, shall contain information and documentation, including architectural drawings and specifications (site plan, elevations, floor plans and building materials); current photographs, sketches, drawings or other descriptive materials necessary to illustrate the proposed alteration; and any other information, which could include an historical assessment by a professional consultant, as determined to be necessary by the community development department for a complete and adequate application. c. Hearings and action. Applications for HP permits shall be initially reviewed by the development review committee. The development review committee shall forward a recommendation to the zoning administrator, who shall hold a duly noticed public hearing in accordance with Section 36.56 (Applications, 4/5 9/24/21, 4:32 PM Hearings and Appeals). Mountain View, CA Code of Ordinances d. Findings. The HP permit maybe approved or conditionally approved if the following findings are made: 1. The proposed significant alteration will not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of the historic resource. 2. The proposed significant alteration maintains and enhances the appearance of the community. (Ord. No. 18.13, § 1, 12/10/13.) SEC. 36.54.90. - National and California Register properties. Alterations to buildings which are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 36.54.85 "a.," "b.," "c.," "d." and "e.," and except that the city council shall determine whether to grant an HP Permit and the council must find that the alteration is in substantial compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. If an HP Permit is granted, any structure proposed to replace a historic resource shall be subject to design review and approval by the city council. (Ord. No. 18.13, § 1, 12/10/13.) SEC. 36.54.95. - Application of other laws. Nothing in this article shall be construed to abrogate the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or any other state, federal or local law relative to the preservation of historical resources or the environment. (Ord. No. 18.13, § 1, 12/10/13.) SEC. 36.54.97. - Appeals. Appeals to the zoning administrator or city council, as applicable, shall be filed and processed pursuant to Section 36.56 (Applications, Hearings and Appeals). (Ord. No. 18.13, § 1, 12/10/13.) 5/5 Attachment 2 MOUNTAIN VIEW REGISTER OF HISTORIC RESOURCES (Last Updated June 19, 2019) The following table represents those properties that remain on the Register after the April 12, 2005, voluntary removal deadline. Those properties that opted to be taken off the Register have also been included in the table for reference. MOUNTAIN VIEW REGISTER OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Property Off Register On Register Name Year Built Type 1 Ada Avenue, 177 1900 1 unit Bonita Avenue, 1181 2 (City Property Tax 1930 1 unit Rebate) Bush Street, 206 James Shower 3 (Mills Act) house 1890 1 unit 4 Bush Street, 445 Haven Mason 1930 1 unit house 5 Bush Street, 469 1934 1 unit 6 Bush Street, 537 Minton house 1911 1 unit 7 Bush Street, 560 Cutter house 1928 1 unit 8 Calderon Avenue, 445 Bakotich house 1880 1 unit 9 Calderon Avenue, 711 E.T. Johnson house 1900 1 unit 10 Calderon Avenue, 725 Willie Garliepp 1910 1 unit house 11 California Street, 696 McDonald house 1906 1 unit 12 California Street, 1560 1900 2 units 13 California Street, 1610 1900 3 units California Street, 1690 14 (Mills Act) 1920 1 unit 15 Castro Street, 124 Weilheimer Store 1874 commercial Rogers Building 16 Castro Street, 142-156 (Mountain View 1906 commercial (Mills Act) Hotel) Castro Street, 169-175 17 (City Property Tax Ames building 1903 commercial Rebate) 18 Castro Street, 191 Mockbee building 1906 commercial 19 Castro Street, 194-198 Jurian building 1913 commercial First National Bank 20 Castro Street, 200-206 (Odd Fellows 1913 fraternal (aka 819-823 Villa St.) building) Farmers & 21 Castro Street, 201 Merchants Bank 1905 commercial (aka 761 Villa Street) building 22 Castro Street, 228 Mountain View 1926 commercial Theater 23 275 Swall buildin 1904 commercial 24 Street, 279-299 ffatroStreet, Four Stores building 1922 commercial 2-786 West -1- MOUNTAIN VIEW REGISTER OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Off Register On Register Name Year Property Built Type Dana St.) 25 Castro Street, 298 Scarpa's Meat 1908 commercial Market Chiquita Avenue, 251 26 (City Property Tax 1915 1 unit Rebate) 27 Chi uita Avenue, 300 1905 3 units 28 Church Street, 334 Mancini house 1952 1 unit Church Street, 595 29 (Mills Act) 1930 1 unit 30 Church Street, 890 Masonic Temple 1925 fraternal _ Dana Street W., 762-786 Four Stores building 1922 commercial (aka 279-299 Castro St.) 31 Dana Street W., 996 1918 3 units 32 Diericx Drive, 2715 Levin Huff house 1925 1 unit (Mills Act) 33 Eldora Drive, 185 Dunshee house 1930 1 unit 34 Eunice Avenue, 655 Blue &Gold Kennel 1920 1 unit Club Franklin Street, 350 35 (Mills Act) 1905 1 unit 36 Franklin Street, 394 1890 1 unit (Mills Act) 37 Grant Road, 2221 1900 1 unit 38 Hope Street, 403 1915 1 unit (Mills Act) Hope Street, 425 39 (City Property Tax 1906 1 unit Rebate) 40 Hope Street, 582 St. Joseph's Church 1929 church 41 Latham Street, 1390 James Cochran 1912 1 unit (Mills Act) House Leslie Court, 280 - (aka 113 E. Middlefield 1925 1 unit Rd.) Lloyd Way, 1655 42 (City Property Tax 1920 1 unit Rebate) 43 Loreto Street, 302 1927 1 unit (Mills Act) 44 Loreto Street, 484 1924 1 unit (Mills Act) 45 MOaariposa Avenue, 201- Pierre Klein house 1920 1 unit 46 Mariposa Avenue, 336 Camp house 1900 1 unit (Mills Act) 47 Mariposa Avenue, 496 1920 1 unit (Mills Act) -2- MOUNTAIN VIEW REGISTER OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Property Off Register On Register Name Year Built Type First Church of 48 Mercy Street, 596 Christ Science 1930 church building 49 Mercy Street, 1074-1076 1925 1 unit Middlefield Road E., 50 113 1925 1 unit (aka 280 Leslie Ct.) 51 Miramonte Avenue, Sister's House 1927 convalescent 1855 52 Moffet Boulevard, 157 Adobe Building 1934 Public (on NRNP) facility Mountain View 53 Avenue, 372 (Mills 1905 1 unit Act) 54 Oak Street, 166 1900 1 unit Oak Street, 360 55 (Mills Act) 1924 1 unit 56 Palo Alto Avenue, 296 1915 1 unit 57 Palo Alto Avenue, 329 1925 1 unit 58 Palo Alto Avenue, 337 1930 1 unit 59 Palo Alto Avenue, 340 1900 2 units Palo Alto Avenue, 390 60 (Mills Act) 1930 1 unit 61 Pettis Avenue, 508 1920 1 unit 62 Pettis Avenue, 516 1920 1 unit 63 Pettis Avenue, 526 1920 1 unit 64 Pettis Avenue, 540 1920 1 unit 65 Pettis Avenue, 552 1924 1 unit 66 Pettis Avenue, 562 1920 1 unit (Mills Act) 67 Pettis Avenue, 572 1920 1 unit 68 Pettis Avenue, 604 1880 1 unit 69 Rengstorff Avenue, N. Immigrant house 1888 Public 771 facility 70 Rengstorff Avenue, N. Ambra Olive Oil 1930 commercial 987 Company 71 Saint Giles Lane, 2682 Escolle house 1913 1 unit Shoreline Boulevard S., 72 472 1910 1 unit (Mills Act) Shoreline Boulevard public 73 N., 3070 Rengstorff House 1867 facility (on NRNP) 74 Sleeper Avenue, 462 1900 1 unit 75 Sleeper Avenue, 992 1920 1 unit 76 1247 Springer Road Walter House 1920 1 unit Tyler Park Way, 1531 77 (Mills Act) 1925 1 unit -3- MOUNTAIN VIEW REGISTER OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Property L1 Off Register On Register Name Year Built Type 78 View Street, 322 McPheeters house 1910 1 unit (Mills Act) 79 View Street, 327 1925 1 unit 80 View Street, 344 Swall house 1908 1 unit 81 View Street, 392 Bates house 1904 5 units 82 View Street, 435 1890 1 unit 83 View Street, 459 1920 1 unit 84 Villa Street, 515 1890 1 unit _ Villa Street, 761 Bank Building 1905 commercial (aka 201 Castro Street) Villa Street, 819-823 First National Bank _ (aka 200-206 Castro St.) (Odd Fellows 1913 fraternal building) 85 Villa Street, 938 Weilheimer house 1905 commercial (on CRHR) 86 Villa Street, 1025 1904 1 unit Villa Street, 1043 87 (Mills Act) 1904 1 unit 88 Villa Street, 1609 1926 1 unit 89 Villa Street, 1643 1915 4 units 90 Villa Street, 1645 1915 1 unit 91 Villa Street, 1655 1915 1 unit 92 Villa Street, 1852 1890 1 unit Wright Avenue, 1074- 93 1076 1875 1 unit 94 Yosemite Avenue, 680 1 unit (Mills923 Mills Act) 47 TOTAL (44 privately -owned 47 TOTAL properties plus 3 city - owned properties) -4- Attachment 2 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK PHASE 1. OUTREACH Task 1.1: Outreach Tools The Page & Turnbull team will work with City Staff to provide outreach tools throughout the course of the project. The City will provide and manage a project page on the City's website or set up a separate website, and Page & Turnbull will contribute outreach material to include on the site. Page &Turnbull will prepare a Frequently Asked Questions document, which will be provided to the City to post on the website. Page & Turnbull will also work with the City to create a survey portal (using Survey Monkey, Google Forms, etc.) that can be accessed on the City's website that allows citizens to provide stories and cultural histories to inform the Historic Context Statement and suggestions for potentially historic properties and sites. In addition, Page & Turnbull staff will participate in one (1) in-person "pop-up," which will occur at a location and time where high attendance is anticipated, such as a largely attended farmer's market or Art & Wine Festival. Page & Turnbull will assist City staff with preparing hand-out materials to have on hand at the pop-up, and we will be available to answer questions. This will also be an opportunity for citizens to submit stories and cultural histories to inform the Historic Context Statement and suggestions for potentially historic properties and sites. Task 1.2 Workshop Materials The Page & Turnbull team will work with City Staff to host two community workshops to which area residents, property owners, and other community stakeholders will be invited. We will coordinate with City Staff to develop the meeting and invitations format and create graphics for outreach materials for each of the two community workshops. In preparation for the workshops, City Staff will be responsible for identifying any specific individuals to invite, publicizing the workshops through community news bulletins, the city websites, social media, and other public notification methods, printing/sending invitations, maintaining the response list, securing meeting locations, providing language translation, and other logistics. Page & Turnbull will develop the content of the workshops, including presentation materials. Task 1.3: Community Workshop #1: Introduction and Information Gathering Community Workshop #1 will be held early in the project effort to inform the community about the project and the tasks involved, including educating the public about how these steps advance the City's historic preservation program. The purpose of the workshop will also be to gather information from community members that may augment our formal research for the Historic Context Statement (HCS) and survey, and to facilitate a discussion about the significant historical themes of the city. Lastly, we will also seek early input about possible areas for improving the Ordinance. Since it is likely that the workshop will be conducted remotely, Page & Turnbull plans to use the Zoom meeting platform, including the Comment and Q&A features as well as Breakout Rooms. Through discussions with City Staff, we will determine the best methods for integrating remote participation, such as Mentimeter and/or hosting a Miro Board where members of the public can leave comments. Task 1.4: Community Workshop #2: Public Review Draft HCS, Survey, Ordinance, and Register Feedback After Page & Turnbull incorporates City Staff comments on the Administrative Drafts of the HCS and Ordinance framework into Public Drafts (see Phases 2 and 3 for more information), Page & Turnbull will host Community Workshop #2 to present the Public Draft HCS and Ordinance framework and receive feedback from members of the community. This workshop may be virtual or held in person. Comments received during Community Workshop #2 will be documented and added to the comments received from City Staff for incorporation into the Final Draft HCS and Ordinance. (Page & Turnbull and City Staff may decide that public comments may also be emailed to City Staff during the public comment period.) We anticipate that City Staff will coordinate the logistics for Community Workshop #2, similar to Community Workshop #1. This meeting will also present more detailed information about the Register and the benefits and requirements for owning a historic property (including design review and CEQA or Mills Act implications). Task 1.5: Community Stakeholders, Focus Groups, and OHP Page & Turnbull will participate in up to six (6) meetings with community stakeholders and citizen focus groups at various times during the project, as determined in consultation with City staff. This includes one (1) meeting with the Downtown committee. In addition, Page &Turnbull will interface with the California Office of Historic Preservation as needed, including possible email communication and one (1) meeting or conference call. PHASE 2. HISTORIC CONTEXT STATEMENT Page & Turnbull will develop a Historic Context Statement to guide the assessment of potential historic resources throughout Mountain View and create a framework for future preservation efforts in the City. The document will focus closely on the history of the built environment in Mountain View, and will identify important themes, patterns, trends, and property types that shaped the City's development. A discussion of eligibility and integrity thresholds for each property type will be a key component of the document. The document will be clearly organized for easy reference by planners and members of the public, and will be illustrated with photographs, maps, and other exhibits. The document's format will follow the standards for historic context statements developed by the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). Our work to complete the Mountain View Historic Context Statement will be conducted as follows: Task 2.1: Review Existing Documentation Page & Turnbull will review any previous reports, planning documents, or historic resource documentation about the City of Mountain View supplied by City Staff. This may include, but is not limited to, previous historic resource survey data, Historic Resource Evaluation reports, GIS data, and other relevant documents. Review of these materials will help focus our research and project efforts. Task 2.2 Historic Research Page &Turnbull will conduct historic research at local and online repositories as needed regarding the history and significance of the area. This includes, but is not limited to, the Mountain View Historical Association, Mountain View History Center at the Mountain View Public Library, Mountain View Planning & Building Department, Santa Clara County offices, San Jose Public Library California Room, and other relevant repositories. As mentioned above, Page & Turnbull will also gather information from area residents and property owners at the community workshop held at the start of the project. Task 2.3 Windshield Survey Page & Turnbull will conduct a windshield survey of property types in Mountain View in order to confirm development patterns, relevant historical themes, areas of potential historic resources, and architectural styles. Field work will include photography and notes, and the methodology will be summarized in the HCS. Task 2.4 Historic Context Statement Outline Based on the background review and survey results, Page & Turnbull will develop an outline for the HCS document. The outline will include the potential significant historic themes and subthemes, as well as likely property types associated with the themes. We will also recommend development periods for the HCS that best relate to the City's development history (likely up to approximately 1980). Page & Turnbull will submit the outline to the City for review and feedback. Task 2.5 Write Historic Context Statement Page & Turnbull will consolidate comments and information into a Historic Context Statement document. The historic context will summarize existing documentation, include a narrative history of Mountain View's built environment and cultural landscapes, discuss significant historic themes, identify property types, establish eligibility standards and integrity thresholds for property types, and establish a framework and criteria for evaluating the significance and integrity of individual properties. Based on our previous experience and Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) guidelines, we anticipate that the HCS will include: • Title Page • Table of Contents • Executive Summary • Project Background & Objectives o Definition of Geographic Area o Methodology & Research o Community Outreach • How To Use This Document o Frequently Asked Questions • Guidelines For Evaluation o Evaluation Criteria: National, State & Local levels • Historic Context o Historical Overview o Relevant Themes and Periods of Significance o Associated Property Types (for each theme) o Eligibility Criteria & Integrity Considerations (for each property type) • Selected Bibliography • Appendices (such as a list of potentially eligible properties or properties to consider for additional study) The Mountain View Historic Context Statement will be a working document, and drafts will be delivered as follows: Administrative Draft HCS • Submit to City Staff for review • Receive and log comments from City Staff Public Review Draft HCS • Incorporate comments on the Administrative Draft HCS from City Staff into the Public Review Draft HCS • Submit to City Staff for review and posting for public comment Final Draft HCS • Incorporate comments on the Public Review Draft HCS and the community into the Final Draft HCS • Submit to City Staff for review and adoption by Environmental Planning Commission and City Council Final Adopted HCS • Incorporate any comments on the Final Draft HCS from Planning Commission and City Council • Submit Final Adopted HCS PHASE 3. UPDATED HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE The updated Historic Preservation Ordinance will provide the legal framework for recognizing, protecting, and managing changes to the City's historic resources. Page & Turnbull will review the existing ordinance and discuss with the City in a study session (see Phase 5) what issues and opportunities have already been identified with regard to the ordinance. Page & Turnbull will utilize information garnered from the public during Task 1: Outreach, as well as knowledge of best practices, current laws, and ordinances in comparable cities, to draft an updated historic preservation ordinance with procedures and criteria. Updates will include criteria and process for designating local historic districts and implementation of historic preservation incentives and may include various clarifications and updates to existing language and processes. Other updates may include adding integrity criteria to the designation criteria, and other updates based on current preservation planning best practices. The Updated Historic Preservation Ordinance drafts will be delivered as follows, and will include rounds of comments and revisions similar to the HCS as described previously: • Administrative Draft Updated Ordinance • Public Review Draft Updated Ordinance • Final Draft Update Ordinance • Final Adopted Updated Ordinance. PHASE 4. CITYWIDE SURVEY AND UPDATE TO THE HISTORIC REGISTER Task 4.1: Pre -Fieldwork Research Page & Turnbull will review the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources (Register), the Citywide survey completed in 2008, and National Register nomination forms. Page & Turnbull may also review the Office of Historic Preservation Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) and other previous studies such as the General Plan EIR. As part of the development of the Historic Context Statement task, Page & Turnbull will review primary and secondary sources such as aerial and historical photographs, Sanborn Map Company fire insurance maps, and tract maps, which will additionally inform our understanding of citywide development for the purposes of the survey. This review of past survey data, historic evaluations, and archival materials will provide a baseline understanding of the City's existing and identified historic resources and overall city development patterns, to inform Page & Turnbull's approach to survey fieldwork. Task 4.2: GIS Database & Mobile Survey Application Setup Page & Turnbull will utilize GIS parcel data provided by the City and/or County Assessor to map properties that will be surveyed and build a customized mobile survey application for use in the field with tablets or mobile devices. This data will provide baseline property information including Assessor Parcel Number (APN), address, and year built. We understand that approximately 120 properties will need to be resurveyed, and that approximately 10,000 parcels in the City have buildings constructed before 1973 (approximately 2,000 of which are located in older neighborhoods near Downtown). We will use the Fulcrum app for this project, as it can collect customized, geolocated cloud -based data that can be exported to easily update the City's existing GIS data. Task 4.3: Reconnaissance -Level Survey Page & Turnbull will undertake a two-tiered methodology for conducting the citywide historic resources survey and Historic Register update. We will conduct a reconnaissance -level survey of all age -eligible (at least 45 years old) properties, using the Historic Context Statement's evaluative criteria as the basis of evaluation. This reconnaissance survey will be undertaken as a street -by - street windshield survey of all approximately 10,000 age -eligible properties. The effort will inform the methodology and approach to the intensive survey, and during this reconnaissance -level survey, Page & Turnbull will identify potential historic resources and historic districts. We will then prepare a list and maps of potential historic resources and districts for review by the City and for discussion at a Study Session (See Phase 5) to inform the efforts of the intensive survey and documentation Task 4.4. Task 4.4: Intensive -Level Survey Page & Turnbull will conduct an intensive -level survey of all properties with existing DPR 523 forms from the 2008 survey, additional properties currently listed in the Historic Register, Area H of the Downtown Precise Plan (six blocks including and surrounding the 100 to 300 blocks of Castro Street), and all properties that appear likely to be eligible individual historic resources and historic districts during the course of the reconnaissance -level survey. This intensive -level survey will identify properties that may be added to or removed from the Historic Register and properties that are individually eligible for the California Register and/or National Register. The intensive -level survey will utilize the HCS evaluation framework and will require additional property -specific historic research in some cases. All properties included in the intensive -level survey for individual evaluation will be documented using a customized mobile survey application and database, which will allow Page & Turnbull to record the following relevant information to prepare survey forms: Digital photograph • Assessor Parcel Number (APN) • Address • Year built • Property type • Architect or builder (if known) • Architectural style • Architectural features, materials, and alterations • Assessment of integrity • Development period and HCS significance theme • Statement of significance • List of character -defining features (if eligible) • California Historical Resource Status Code Page & Turnbull will prepare survey data forms for all properties surveyed during the intensive -level survey. California DPR 523 A, B, and L forms will be auto generated from a customized mobile survey application. These forms will include all data found in California DPR 523 forms with bullet -point architectural descriptions and a clear and concise record of historic information. Each form will include a statement of significance based on the development periods and themes established in the HCS and assessment of integrity. These forms will provide the information necessary to inform the City's project review and environmental review process and, where relevant, to inform individual property and/or historic district designation. Potential historic districts identified during the reconnaissance survey (including the 100 to 300 blocks of Castro Street) will be studied during the intensive level survey. Each age -eligible property within the identified district will receive a DPR 523A form with architectural description information. The intensive level survey will identify contributors and non -contributors as well as district boundaries. This information, along with an associated map, will be included in the Survey Report (see Task 4.5). Since historic district evaluative criteria for the Historic Register will be included in the Historic Preservation Ordinance update in Phase 3, formal designation of any identified historic districts will follow approval of the ordinance update. Task 4.5. Survey Report The survey results and methodology will be synthesized in a written Survey Report. This document will identify project objectives, the properties surveyed, and will outline the research design. The report will conclude with the findings of reconnaissance and intensive surveys in a summary table, including recommendations on updates to the Historic Register. The Survey Report will include an Appendix with the survey forms prepared for eligible historic resources and districts. The findings of the Citywide survey, including information on eligible and non -eligible properties, will be consolidated into a spreadsheet and/or GIS shapefile for the purposes of updating the City's GIS database. The Survey Report drafts will be delivered as follows, and will include rounds of comments and revisions similar to the HCS as described previously: • Administrative Draft Survey Report • Public Review Draft Survey Report • Final Draft Survey Report • Final Adopted Survey Report. PHASE 5. STUDY SESSIONS Task 5.1 Study Sessions with City Page & Turnbull will organize and facilitate two (2) study sessions each with the Environmental Planning Commission and City Council, for a total of four (4) study sessions. The first study sessions will discuss the issues and opportunities that have been identified with regard to the Ordinance. The second round of study sessions will review the Public Draft HCS and Ordinance framework. At the study session, we will facilitate a discussion and elicit feedback for incorporation into the final deliverables. We will also share the findings of the Reconnaissance -level survey (Task 4.3) via a list and maps of potential historic resources and districts and discuss the findings to inform the efforts of the Intensive -level survey (Task 4.4). Page & Turnbull will be available to participate either virtually or in person, and we will prepare presentations with key information and graphics to facilities the discussions. PHASE 6. ADOPTION Task 6.1 Final Historic Context Statement, Ordinance, and Updated Register Once Page & Turnbull has submitted the Final Draft HCS, Ordinance, and Updated Register, City staff will bring the documents to the Environmental Planning Commission and the City Council for adoption. Page & Turnbull will prepare a presentation and attend one hearing each for the Environmental Planning Commission and the City Council. City staff will gather any final comments from Environmental Planning Commission members, City Council, or members of the public, and provide those in writing to Page & Turnbull for incorporation into the Final report. PHASE 7. PROJECT MANAGEMENT Task 7.1 Project Set-up Page & Turnbull will execute the project contract and submit required documentation as needed. This task involves setting up the project accounting and other internal structures. Page & Turnbull will also prepare and send a draft Project Workplan and Schedule in anticipation of the Project Kick- off Meeting. Task 7.2 Project Management Project management will entail regular communication with City staff to coordinate upcoming milestones and issues to ensure that the project remains on schedule; internal review of all project deliverables; and budgeting, invoicing, and other management tasks throughout the project. Task 7.3 Project Kick-off Meeting Page & TurnbuII's team will meet with the City of Mountain View staff at the start of the project to discuss roles and responsibilities, align expectations about format and content of deliverables, and confirm the project schedule. ASSUMPTIONS AND EXCEPTIONS Page & Turnbull's scope incorporates the following assumptions and exceptions: Task 1.1 - City Staff will be responsible for identifying any specific individuals to invite, publicizing the workshops through community news bulletins, the city websites, social media, and other public notification methods, printing/sending invitations, and maintaining the response list, rather than Page & Turnbull. Task 4.4 - Page & Turnbull will provide survey data forms auto -generated from the Fulcrum mobile survey application and database instead of DPR 523 forms. BUDGET Pace & Turnbull Fee Per Total Hours Principal / Staff Member Architect Todd PM/CRS Dikas Arch. Historican Simonson Arch. Arch. Historican Historian Reiter TBD Phase Description Task Hourly Bill Rate $ 260 $ 170 $ 120 $ 115 $ 110 Outreach 1.1 Outreach Tools 6 20 30 30 1.2 Workshop Materials 4 8 16 20 1.3 Community Workshop #1 4 8 16 20 1.4 Community Workshop #2 1.5 Community Stakeholders, Focus Groups, and OHP 4 8 20 20 14 14 20 _. _.. _. _.. _. _Task _. 20 hours. per $ 43,070 302 person Task fee per person $ 32 8,320 $ 58 9,860 102 $ 12,240 110 $ 12,650 $ E;[Mr-TffiK9 M-1 2.1 Review Existing Documentation 2 6 6 2.2 Historic Research 2 20 24 2.3 Windshield Survey 2 8 8 2.4 Write HCS Outline 1 1 2 2 2.5 Write Draft Historic Context Statement 6 12 60 60 Administrative Draft HCS Submittal 22 2 2 2 City Staff Comment Period - - - 2 4 16 16 Public Review Draft HCS Submittal City Staff & Public Comment Period 12 12 Final Draft HCS Submital 2 4 2 Final HCS Submittal 1 2 Task hours per person 14 31 128 130 A $ 39,220 303 Task fee per person $ 3,640 $ 5,270 $ 15,360 $ 14,950 - Update Ordinance 3.1 Write Updated Ordinance Framework _ 4 10 32 32 1 2 2 Administrative Draft Updated Ordinance Submittal 1 City Staff Comment Period _ 4 - 8 - 8 - 3 Public Review Draft Updated Ordinance Submittal City Staff & Public Comment Period 3 Final Updated Ordinance Submittal 2 2 8 8 Final Adopted Updated Ordinance Submittal __. _. _. _. 1 _. _. 2 _. _. 2 _. _. _. _. Task hours. per person 10 18 52 52 $ 17,880 132 Task fee per person $ 21600 $ 3,060 $ 6,240 $ 5,980 $ UpdateCitywide Survey and Register 1 8 16 16 4.1 Pre-Fieldwork Research 4.2 GIS Data & Mobile Survey App Setup 1 24 8 4 4.3 Recon Survey (10,000 buildings) - - Windshield Survey of 10,000 buildings 1 4 40 40 40 Compile lists and maps for intensive survey 2 8 8 8 4.4 Intensive Survey - - - - Conduct Fieldwork (assume max 300 individual properties and 500 historic district properties) 1 4 65 65 65 4Conduct Property-Specific Research (assume max 300 properties) 166 166 166 Prepare Draft Survey Forms (incl peer review) 50 50 50 50 4.4 Write Survey Report 2 4 20 20 20 Administrative Draft Survey Report & DPRs Submittal 2 2 4 City Staff Comment Period - - - - - Public Review Draft Survey Report & DPRs Submittal 2 4 20 24 24 City Staff & Public Comment Period Final Draft Survey Report & DPRs Submittal 2 4 16 20 20 Final Survey Report & DPRs Submittal 2 2 12 16 16 Task hours per person 12 78 433 433 429 $ 165,325 1385 Task fee per person $ 3,120 $ 13,260 $ 51,960 $ 49,795 $ 47,190 =4 Study Sessions 5.1 Study Sessions with City (4) _.. _. _.. J Task hours per 12 12 24 12 2 person 12 12 24 12 2 $ 9,640 62 Task fee per person $ 3,120 $ 2,040 $ 21880 $ 1,380 $ 220 Adoption 6.1 Final HCS, Ordinance, and Updated Register 8 8 14 14 4 6 Task hours per person 8 8 14 14 4 48 Task fee per person $ 2,080 $ 1,360 $ 1,680 $ 1,610 $ 440 Project Management $ 7,170 1 3 7.1 Project Set-up 7.2 Project Management_ 7.2 Project Kick-off Meeting 4 2 20 3 4 4 Task hours per ', ', ', person 7 26 4 4 0 41 Task fee per person $ 1,820 $ 4,420 $ 480 $460 $ - $ 7,180 Contingency (20% of budget) Per Task Additional Services: Public Hearing: $2,500.00 Community Workshp: $6,650.00 Study Session: $2,400.00 Stakeholder/Focus Group Meeting: $1,700.00 In-Person Pop-Up: $4,150.00 DPR Form for One Property: $500.00 Task hours per person $ 57,900 Task fee per person $ ',, $ $ ExpensesE Fulcrum App Customization (DPR Forms) Travel; mileage; parking; printing of drafts, incidental printing, $ 3,000 materials, and services. $ 5,000 1 . • • • . $ 355,385 2273 Schedule Mountain View Historic Preservation Ordinance and Register Update --h ©mmmmmmmmmmm®mmm®mm®mmmm®mmm®®mmm®m mmmmmm MEMEMEMEMEMEMEME MOM mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mom No No mom mmmm mm®®mmmommmm®mmm®mmmmmmmm®mmm®®mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm®mmmmm MENEM MEMEMEMEMEMEMEMENN mm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmMMmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�mmmmm ,. HistoricCon�rtStatementlHCS) mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�_mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_mmm_m_m_m_m_ mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm:mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm UPtlate Ortlinance mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmMmmmmmmmmmmm EMIMM ammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm WEmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_mmm_m_m_m_m_ Cilywitle Survey antl UPtlate to the Historic Repis[er mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm`mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�ammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_mmm_mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_mmm_m_m_m_m_ 1,1„1„11„1„1„11„1,11,,,1„1„11„1,,",■„","„","„",","„","",,,","„" mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmr mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm © sntlyseaewne �MENEM mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_mmm_mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_fm_mmm_m_m_m_m_ M ME �atloPtion mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_mmm_mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_mmm_m_m_m_m_ M ME ProieotManaaement mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_mmm_mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_m_mmm_m_m_m_m_ mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm�mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmMmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm MEE�����������