Loading...
2012 01 19 HPC MinutesMINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING A Regular meeting held in the Study Session Room at the La Quinta City Hall 78 -495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA January 19, 2012 This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order at 3:02 p.m. by Chairperson Redmon. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call Present: Absent Staff Present: Commissioners Kevin Maevers, Maria Puente, and Peggy Redmon Commissioner Allan Wilbur Planning Director Les Johnson, Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen, and Secretary Monika Radeva II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Puente / Maevers to approve the minutes of December 15, 2011, with the following corrections: Page 2, Paragraph 8, should read: Chairperson Redmon asked who owned the site and if it had already been approved. Staff replied the site was owned by the City of La Quinta and it was currently in review for approval. Page 3, Paragraph 1, should read: There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wilbur /Puente to adopt Minute Motion 2011 -003 approving Historic Preservation Commission January 19, 2012 the Historical /Archaeological Resources Survey for the Washington Street Apartments project, as submitted with staff's recommendations. Unanimously approved. AYES: Commissioners Maevers, Puente, and Chairperson Redmon. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: Commissioner Wilbur. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Historic American Building Survey Report Conducted in Conjunction with the West Adobe HABS /HAER Program a request submitted by David Maman Design located at 81 -891 Avenue 58. Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Mr. Robert S. White and Mrs. Laura S. White, M.A., Archaeologists with Archaeological Associates, P.O. Box 180, Sun City, CA, introduced themselves. Mr. White said the HABS /HAER study was done as a mitigation measure to allow the applicant to demolish the building. He explained the report, consisted of two separate .parts. The HABS portion included additional research on the original family that lived there and some construction details. The HAER portion was the visual recordation of the building through the use of large format, black and white, photographs. He noted these were the type of photographs that were stipulated for this type of project by the Library of Congress and National Park Service. He said these photographs were also complemented with some medium format and digital photographs. Mr. White explained the scaling process for the drawings for each elevation of the building which consisted of taking actual on -site hand measurements and converting them into scaled field drawings which were then brought to a draftsman to be converted into a hand -drawn mylar. The mylar was given to the photographer to digitize them and to be printed on the appropriate paper as per the Library of Congress' specifications. Mr. White noted that the site plan, floor plan, courtyard plan, etc., were all to scale. He said the negatives, the prints, and the original drawings were included in the box and the appropriate materials were used to meet archival specifications per the established protocol by 2 Historic Preservation Commission January 19, 2012 the Library of Congress for large projects in the public sector that would be archived in Washington. Mr. White said there was no need for a consultation with the Federal Government as this was a local CEQA project and the structure was only found eligible for the California Registry Historical Resources at the local level. It was not National- register - eligible. Mrs. White showed and explained to the Commission the contents of the box containing information on the project that would be archived with the report. Commissioner Puente asked if the building had already been demolished. Staff replied it had not. Mr. White explained the applicant would be eligible to apply for a demolition permit through the City once the archiving project was completed. Discussion followed regarding the poor condition of the structure. Staff mentioned that the Code Compliance Department had cited the property for some maintenance violations and noted that its situation could be a potential safety hazard. Thus, the applicant was proceeding with the mitigation measures in order to be able to demolish it. Mr. White explained that because of the materials used to build the adobe, big bricks of soil, it could not be burned and the materials that could be re -used after its demolition were minimal. He said at the time the team was collecting the data on the structure, the applicant was allowed to demolish the detached garage and the swimming pool, as those were added -on, modern features that were not part of the original adobe and were potential safety and fire hazards. Commissioner Maevers said he visited the site and he found it to be a nuisance and a hazard as well. Mr. White said the team had recommended that there be a representative on site at the time of demolition as there were still some questions regarding the way the structure was built. Mr. White explained that there were two goals for this project, aside from creating the visual record. The first one was to identify who built the adobe and the second, who was the architect. He said the team was unable to identify the architect as no one could remember, or otherwise establish, whether or not an architect was ever involved. t.' Historic Preservation Commission January 19, 2012 He explained that Mrs. White had interviewed surviving members of the family who originally lived in the adobe and even they could not provide any more information. The only person that was identified was the individual who was contracted to have the adobe built, but nothing more. Based on an inscription located on the top of the chimney, the team believed the adobe was built in 1932. Discussion followed regarding the seclusion of the adobe as it was located far from the main road and no one even knew that it existed. Chairperson Redmon asked if there would be an addendum to the report to address any possible findings during the actual destruction process. Mr. White replied that the final step in this process was to prepare a report on the demolition. He also said that there were archaeological /paleontological and Native American monitoring stipulations for the project during its development. Mr. White said it was the team's goal to identify whether the adobe Walls were made out of individual bricks or if they were poured. He explained that it was difficult to tell as the walls had been plastered, but a plumbing repair, where most of the stucco had been removed, allowed them to determine that the walls were made out of individual bricks. However, the team still needed to determine whether the adobe was built on a concrete slab or if it was built in the more traditional California -style where a trench was dug and was lined with rock. He said this determination would have to be done after the demolition. General discussion followed regarding the extended and detailed research done by Archaeological Associates team, the difficulties they encountered, the individuals they talked to, etc. Chairperson Redmon said she was very pleased with the report and was happy to have such nice documentation of the site. Mr. White expressed his compliments to the photographer and the wonderful work he did on the project. Chairperson Redmon asked if there would be another report presented to the Commission after demolition. Staff replied there would be a report, but the project would not be presented to the Commission. 4 Historic Preservation Commission January 19, 2012 Staff explained the report would be available if the Commissioners would like to review it. Commissioner Maevers asked if there were significant findings during demolition, if they would be recorded and identified. Mr. White replied they would be and explained the process for doing that. Chairperson Redmon said she was very grateful for all the work done on the project and said she would like to know if, in fact, there were additional findings after demolition. Chairperson Redmon said the Commission did not have to vote on this project as the presentation was merely informational. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: Commissioner Puente said she had attended a couple of events put together by the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society. She briefly described the events and asked if they would qualify for any credits. Staff asked Commissioner Puente to forward whatever brochures and information she had available on the events, so that staff could determine if they were eligible for credits. Chairperson Redmon complimented Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker for keeping the Commissioners very well informed regarding different training opportunities locally available in order for them to be able to maintain their CLG certifications. Commissioner Maevers said he was looking forward to attending the Webinar on Tuesday, January 24, 2012, at La Quinta City Hall, titled "What Style Is It ?" He noted the webinar would also provide free AICP credits. Commissioner Puente presented a newsletter from the Indian Wells Historic Preservation Commission and asked staff if the HPC could do something similar, on an annual basis. Staff asked that Commissioner Puente provide a copy of the newsletter for review and offered to get back to her with an answer. Staff noted that the City of Indian Wells did not have an official Historic Preservation Commission such as La Quinta's Commission, and was more likely an organization similar to the La Quinta Historical Society. 5 Historic Preservation Commission January 19, 2012 Commissioner Puente asked if the Ethics Training would be available through the City. Staff replied the City Clerk's Department would notify the Commissioners if they needed to re -take it, as it only needed to be renewed every two years. Staff said the City Clerk's Department would also provide information regarding on -line training or classes available at the City. Commissioner Redmon asked if staff could give an update on putting together the Annenberg "Sunnylands" Estate tour. Staff replied the estate would not be open to the public until March 2012. Staff said the previous discussion was that if there was another agency that offered the tour, which was highly expected once the property was accessible, then the Commission could to join in. Staff mentioned that tours to the estate would also be available during the Annual Planning Association Conference in October 2012 which was scheduled to be held in Palm Springs, but in order to be able to sign up for those the Commissioners would have to register for the Conference first. VIII. PLANNING STAFF ITEMS: None IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Puente /Maevers to adjourn this Meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to the next Meeting to be held on February 16, 2012. This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was adjourned on January 19, 2012, at 3:48 p.m. Unanimously Approved. Monika R Secretary D