Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-12-14- HSPB minutes Παγε 1 οφ 11 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS HISTORIC SITE PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING Minutes of Regular Meeting -Tuesday, December 14, 2004 8:15 a.m. Large Conference Room, City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 ROLL CALL Present This Meeting Present Yea-to-Date FY 2004-2005 Excused Absences To-Date William ABill@ Scott, Chair X 5 0 James Hayton, Vice Chair X 4 1 John Williams X 5 0 Jim Isermann X 5 0 Sidney Williams X 4 1 Kenny Cassady X 3 0 STAFF PRESENT: Doug Evans, Director of Strategic Planning Jing Yeo, Principal Planner Loretta Moffett, Senior Secretary * * * * * Chairman Scott called the meeting to order at 8:19 a.m. * * * * * * REPORT OF POSTING OF AGENDA: The Agenda was available and posted in accordance with state and local procedures for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Department of Planning Services Department counter by 4:00 p.m., Thursday, December 09, 2004. * * * * * * PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no public comments. * * * * * * APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Two sets of Minutes to approve: October 12 and November 9, 2004. Board members Isermann and J. Williams thanked staff for the corrections as noted for the October 12, 2004 Minutes. M/S/C (Isermann/Hayton) to approve the corrected Minutes of the October 12, 2004 meeting as now presented. (6 Yes, 0 No, 0 Absent, 0 Abstentions) Minutes from the November 9, 2004 meeting: Member Isermann referred to the Architectural Approval Item #5 for the Oasis Building, and stated that in the fifth paragraph where it talked about Member Sidney Williams suggesting contact be made with Eric Wright - - that was in reaction to his question about the logic or sensitivity of putting a 1940's theme restaurant into a 1923 building. Mr. Christian had talked about the lack of original drawings. Mr. Christian had also indicated he was open to reconsidering the theme of the restaurant. Those two points should be reflected in the Minutes. The approval of the Minutes from the November 9, 2004 meeting was held pending revision and will be presented again at the January 11, 2005 meeting for approval. CHAIRMAN=S REPORT: Chairman Scott commented that he understood Doug Evans was leaving the City of Palm Springs and moving to a sister city B thanked Director Evans for his 26 years of service to the City of Palm Springs and shepherding the HSP Board through many faces and phases. PUBLIC HEARING: N O N E Παγε 2 οφ 11 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS: 5. 3.0313: Application by Horizon Hotel for a new poolside bar at 21050 East Palm Canyon Drive, Zone R-2 and R-3, Section 23. Staff member Jing Yeo, advised that the client was running late but would proceed. Plans for a 300 square foot bar/pavilion beside the pool were displayed for Board view. A materials board was passed around showing wood trim, plaster cement, stucco for walls, and stain to match existing. This will go to Design Review after this Board=s actions. Staff recommends approval. This Abar@ replaces an unknown structure shown on the original plans, and is solely for guests= use and will not be open to the general public. Applicant will be getting a liquor license. LRS Architects from Oregon is the new architectural firm working on this addition and project. Applicant has talked with staff regarding an expansion to add additional rooms on the vacant parcel to the west, but this will come back to HSPB later, it is not an application as this time. Member S. Williams explained that this bar is replacing a shade structure to make the property more user friendly because it wasn=t really a social area previously. Chairman Scott reminded the Board that this property is not a designated historic site, but is listed in the new Historic Site Survey. Member Isermann stated he had specific questions for the applicant and the Board agreed to table this item until the applicant arrived. Applicant Rich Campbell, Manager of the Horizon Hotel, introduced himself and explained that the location where the bar is to be installed has always been used for recreation of one type or another, such as shuffleboard, paddleball court, and in the 80's there was a pavilion structure used for shade, conversation area, etc. The >A= leg of Building 3 is being mimicked and in looking at the drawing, it shows there are a few details inspired by William Cody=s original buildings. A Aspine@ runs through the building=s center and storage area, and also runs through all Cody=s buildings on property. At night time this will be closed to meet the environmental health department standards so flip-up sides will be installed to provide sun-cover during the day and will fit into a trellis work, (also inspired by and at the ends of all William Cody=s building on this property). The angles of 72 deg. and 108 deg. used repeatedly by William Cody on the property are also used in this project. Another important point was that no storage areas were built on this property, and through the years storage space was stuck in every place imaginable. This addition now allows real storage space that meets current codes. Internet wireless access will also be installed in that area in hopes it will become a Ahub@ for the complex. An application has been filed with the ABC for serving alcoholic beverages. It will be built whether or not the license is approved and will be used for continental breakfasts and other guest recreational functions. Because of the space size, weddings will be planned for the area and other catered events. Member J. Williams asked about the paint colors of the chocolate brown trim and the white walls and if all the buildings will be those colors as well? Mr. Campbell indicated that the brown is more of a charcoal color and the cream is more white ...the colors did not show very well on the samples. The colors will match the other buildings exactly. Member Isermann stated that he was very pleased with the design and asked about the research of restoring the Cody designs and how it was dealt with -- building something new on the site that is not a Cody design, and whether something is being done so that it stands out as not being a Cody design or if it is to look like the original complex? Παγε 3 οφ 11 Mr. Campbell explained that it will not look like it is part of the original complex. The project team looked at many of Cody=s designs and tried to incorporate them for good use of the features, such as the trellis that allowed storage of the sun screens and could be closed at night. The angles were re-used because Cody was so specific about them in how he laid bricks, window stops, etc., but the counter tops will not look like Cody=s. Member Hayton moved for approval of the bar structure as presented. M/S/C (Hayton/Isermann) 6 Yes, 0 No, 0 Absent, 0 Abstentions. AGENDA ITEM #1: TRAMWAY GAS STATION / VISITORS CENTER UPDATE Staff member Curt Watts reported that plans were displayed on the wall for Board viewing. Plans to the left were presented to this Board in October. Center colored plans incorporate revisions in response to Board comments, Design Review comments, and were also presented to the Planning Commission. Subsequent to those meetings, staff has had informal meetings with Board member Isermann regarding colors of the mock-up sign and additional modifications to the amphitheater seating area. The far right plans (not colored) incorporate additional changes as a result of the meeting with Mr. Isermann. Tom Doczi, Landscape Architect, walked the Board through the plans. In general, the overall revisions have been to: (1) move the amphitheater seating to the southeast that pulls them away from some support posts of the roof-line; (2) to eliminate some taller trees in the sight-line; (3) and to also incorporate a different grid patten in the patio seating area to be in keeping with the grid of the building roof-line. Since these final plans are not colored, it doesn=t show the switching of the patio color to grey (discussed in October) rather than going with the colored concrete. The third set of colored plans only incorporate the planting outside the perimeter wall, as well as the terrace seating, with a minimal amount of landscaping in the immediate vicinity. Even though the Planning Commission did approve the overall conceptual plan for the seating area and landscaping up to the new entry sign, there is now only firm funding for the first phase (terrace seating) and the immediate landscaping. That is the only portion being constructed within the next few months. Tom Doczi, Landscape Architect, advised that an engineering firm took grade elevations of the project. Initially, as shown in the center drawings, the concept was to develop the amphitheater with the stepped seating, then the patio area would be at grade or close to existing grade. Based on the spot these elevations, it has become more of a recessed amphitheater by stepping the grade down. There is an approximate two foot drop from the sidewalk at the building out to the perimeter wall. That grade has been taken advantage of to include the small seating area that faces the building; and also the patio area that is about three and a half feet below the finished floor. In the actual support columns in the final design, the concrete had not been brought up to the support columns. A circular element around those columns has now been created similar to the circular elements in the hardscape design in back of the building. These areas will be filled with a rock cobble. An item that will need to be addressed once into the actual construction is the depth of the center footing because the grade does drop down at that point. The field engineers will survey and verify that. The stepped area has brought the whole design within the roof-line of the actual structure. Trees have been deleted from the plant design that may have blocked some of the view. The perimeter planting is planned as part of this bid sequence. Some of the other landscaping may be an alternate bid item depending on available funding. Want to plant a couple of filifera palm trees during this phase; but depending on the budget, this landscape plan may have to be deferred. The goal is to look at the groups of palm trees and perhaps move them back closer to the building and perhaps have only one filifera palm on each side versus a cluster of palms. One of the items in the original plans was to develop a focal point to draw visitors to the entrance, but since that actual design element has not been determined, a cut-out in that area would contain some boulders and landscape treatment for additional color. As time goes on or in the next phase, that may turn into some type of monument or water feature. At this time, a Παγε 4 οφ 11 Aspace@ is being allowed for future design of that area=s hardscape. The perimeter planting is of major concern at this time, then as the budget allows a couple of the major plant areas. Chairman Scott supports the reduction in palm trees and moving them, and suggests when it=s time to implement the large plantings, to work with staff and Board representatives for help in locating the materials. Member Isermann expressed his approval with the changes being proposed, especially in terms of the amphitheater and scorelines that reflect the above steel >I= beams. The handicap pathway changes are much more sympathetic to the existing design. Mr. Doczi discussed the types of boulders to use in anchoring the amphitheater and that they will be set in place prior to the pouring of the concrete and will become the edges of the seating area. A grey granite boulder is being suggested for that area similar to what is seen coming down through the canyon. This will be more consistent with the existing look of the area. Member J. Williams asked about the large balls, the gate, etc. in the back of the building and asked what is to become of those items? He suggested they be removed from the site if they are not part of the proposal. Mr. Doczi advised that they are not part of the proposal at this time, and will be removed from the site. Member Hayton expressed his concern that he only had a one day notice to meet and had already scheduled workers on his job and could not attend as the other HSPB representative. The changes made to the amphitheater in keeping within the roofline are very important, but moving all the trees may need some additional attention. There is another desert tree that (unknown name) is malleable, shapeable, and the coloring would not take away from architectural elements. In the inset there is rather a stark dramatic roofline and the landscaping and hardscape has to be in keeping with that feeling. If a cutout is provided for some type of monument or landscape feature adjacent to the main structure, he would propose to see the water feature at the outer most point of the roofline. That was the original feature designed to go with the structure and that option would be nice to have based on funding. Lastly, the trees are very important for year-round visitors since summer time creates a burning hole and shade is needed. The spheres belong on that property. Children and people enjoy leaning against them, the Visitors Center has indicated people have an interest in them, and it doesn=t cost anything to shift them. It was part of a major tenant who had a lot to do with this building. That feature should remain. Member S. Williams suggested that the spheres be removed. They may be related to a previous tenant, but that is not what this is about; the integrity of the building is this Board=s main concern. Chairman Scott stated that he realizes Board members have different opinions, but feels the balls should be removed. It is also important not to have the trees in front of the building - it=s the drama of the roof reflected in the architectural photographs of the building that are so strong. New trees should be planted down toward the entrance sign where there is an existing grove. The roof itself will provide some shade, but if trees are planted in front, it affects the Aarchitectural swoop@ of the roofline. Member Cassady stated that when approaching the Visitors Center down Highway 111, the first thing a person sees is the AWelcome to Palm Springs@ sign and looking directly over that is the roofline of the building. When deciding the placement of the trees, he suggests the project team go back up Highway 111 and be sure that the trees are not moved from blocking one view to blocking another view. Παγε 5 οφ 11 Chairman Scott suggested this be left up to the two committee members from the Board and the staff to work with the City representatives to locate the trees and such. Member J. Williams asked about the funding to do only this, and if is there a plan to do more landscaping that includes additional trees at some future time? Would that come back to the Board? Curt Watts pointed out that the colored plans (center of the displayed plans) is the full extent of the landscaping with the revisions Mr. Doczi mentioned. The black and white drawings only show the landscaping around the terraced seating, and that is the part now being funded. Only the terrace seating and outside the perimeter wall will be landscaped during the next couple of months. There is a source of funds for the additional landscaping, but it is not in-hand yet. It=s part of an assessment district on another development project and funds are not available for spending. Member J. Williams summarized what is being asked of the Board at today=s meeting - - to approve what has been explained today. Future funding for additional landscaping would come back to the Board when those funds are available and the project is again moving toward completion. Curt Watts asked the Board for approval today of the complete conceptual plan for landscaping as it is shown -- with the knowledge that the only portion the Board will see being built during the next couple of months is the first phase area around the terrace seating and outside the perimeter area. That overall conceptual plan was reviewed and accepted by the Planning Commission. If this Board has some large differences, the fact that it is not being built yet would allow the project team to continue tweaking as being done with the physical placement of the trees. Staff is hoping this Board does not feel that pathways going to the entry sign with water-wise landscaping is not acceptable to the Board. Staff has assumed, based on prior comments, that this is the proper direction and this is the concept staff will follow going forward. Member J. Williams re-stated that Awhat staff is actually asking the Board to approve is the (middle colored drawings) overall conceptual drawings, but only the (right black & white drawings) would be executed at this time.@ Member Hayton explained that it is difficult to make a determination when looking at an aerial view when that is not the real view that people will have of a property or project. Chairman Scott pointed out that there are no trees in front of the roof in the photo of the Tramway Gas Station as shown in the Palm Springs Brief History and Architectural Guide. Several Board members expressed concern that the trees in the future implementation plan will block the view of the roofline. Director Evans pointed out that the overall plan shown on the middle lower right plans shows the diagram out to the sign. Board reviewed at the last meeting and asked staff to move one tree (close to the curb) back to allow a long sight distance to the building. Staff has tried to create some additional shade relief, and tie to our image of APalm@ Springs with the filifera palm trees; but recognizing the original use of this as a gas station, there was no ability to put trees anywhere in this area. By pulling the palm trees back, there will be about 80 to 90 percent of the roofline still visible, and the amphitheater will become a place for people to gather. Perhaps pulling the shade more around to the sides and back of building would create a place for people to congregate - - maybe even with a picnic table or other attraction. Over time people may spend more time at the facility and the point about making it comfortable for them is on point, but it=s not necessary to have all the visitors out in front of the building. Side and back areas have a lot of space. Παγε 6 οφ 11 Member Hayton agreed, he is comfortable with the hardscape as shown, but would not be comfortable without more consideration as to placement of the trees, except for the outer perimeter. Member J. Williams moved that the Board accept and approve the colored drawing (center of displayed drawings) and have the sub-committee work closely with staff and the project team to make sure that the view of the roofline is maximized when all the landscaping is implemented. M/S/C (J. Williams/Cassady) 5 Yes, 1 No, 0 Absent, 0 Abstentions. Chairman Scott pointed out that Member Hayton, who voted No, is also on the sub-committee to work with the project team and will have opportunity to make his ideas and comments known to the group during the implementation of the landscape project. Member Hayton indicated he would be very pleased to work on this committee and assist in any way possible, but needs more than a one day notice to attend meetings for the project. Director Evans asked if Board approval was for the overall concept and if that included the actual first phase of construction? Board Members agreed that it did. Curt Watts passed around samples and visuals of the sign and asked the Board to recall that the mock-up sign concept was presented in October for installation at the northeast corner outside the perimeter wall. Based upon this Board=s comments and comments from Design Review and the Planning Commission, there were modifications made to that presentation. Today=s presentation is a temporary mock-up of the suggested sign, so people have an opportunity to submit their input as to size of the letters, the font, etc. The Visitors Center is struggling with inadequate signage for the site. It is hoped that by installing the mock-up sign by the end of December, it will address the immediate issues and give people something to look at, respond with specific comments, and the project team can think about how it might be tweaked. The diagram being passed around shows the changes that occurred...one change made from the last meeting was to eliminate simulation of the block material. There was quite a bit of discussion about not trying to match the block in the building, so it was changed to a solid color treatment. There were discussions about whether or not this sign should match any of the colors on the site. After many discussions, the project team decided to go with the lighter colored base which is most similar to the perimeter wall. The letter panel background will be simulated to look like the brushed steel proposed for the permanent sign. Keeping the font that has always been discussed as a white lettering, the team looked at enlarging the size from seven inches to nine inches tall. The final consideration was to see how the font would work even though it may be smaller. The width of the sign was expanded to allow seven inch letters. The previous width would only allow five inch letters, if the team had kept the original rectangular format. The intent is that the sign will be installed at the end of the sidewalk area outside the perimeter wall. Design Review recommended the team explore a stenciled lettering that would project above the perimeter wall. The mock-up sign is still open to other ideas, but this project needs to move forward right now, and the project team wants Board input. The base of this mock-up sign is painted wood with some texturing. The final sign will probably be a stucco finish and will come back to the Board for complete review. A couple of Design Review members suggested the team make use of the curved portion of the perimeter wall and go with a stenciled lettering that would either be partly above the wall or fully above. There is a concern by some that it=s just far enough off the view corridor that it will not address the visibility needs of Visitors Center. It might look good in a photo, but will not serve the purpose, so having the mock-up in the suggested location, minimal treatments with cut-out letters, etc. can give a comparison of options. Visitors Center staff have indicated they would like to see the sign viewed from north and south bound traffic. If only the curve in the wall is utilized for the sign, that is not possible for north bound traffic and would Παγε 7 οφ 11 probably raise the question of something being added in another location on the site or just address southbound traffic. Chairman Scott asked about the prior discussions of having other information on the sign such as the reader board. Mr. Watts indicated that was in the original design concept, but was roundly rejected by all review groups. There is no intent at this point to do any kind of reader or message type board. A time and temperature panel was mentioned, but may be rejected at final review and that was a time and temperature panel. Member J. Williams asked how close the color of the base of the sign is to the color of the wall? Mr. Watts explained that it will be as close a match as possible, but the sign company does not have the exact color pallet for the mock-up. The intention is to match the perimeter wall color for the final sign. If everyone likes this sign, the team will proceed with a final process of getting this sign fully approved, constructed of permanent materials, and installed. This mock-up sign will probably stay up for several months. Member Cassady asked if this sign will be two-sided for north and south viewing and will it be set in off the curb far enough to allow the sidewalk? The current thinking for the next phase, assuming the sign works in that location, is if the sidewalk will be moved so it will mirror the curve in the wall. Member Hayton asked if the Visitors Center staff is happy with the plans for this mock-up sign. He feels this is a very important aspect. Being that this is a commercial operation, the idea for the future might be some type of sign that would have message re upcoming events, time, temperature, etc. That location is ideal for lots of visibility. Director Evans explained that while it is not written any where, the City does not encourage or approve temperature signs or displays for obvious reasons. It=s not conducive to visiting Palm Springs for visitors to pull into the Center in July and see a temperature sign that says it=s 120 degrees...they will leave. Member Isermann agreed that the mock-up sign is fine, but encouraged the team to do the mock-up of the free-standing letters on top of the wall as he and possibly others would like to see what that looks like. Chairman Scott thanked the project team and staff for their hard work, patience, and listening to everyone=s ideas and suggestions. The idea of a mock-up is a great opportunity for people to experience and view, and for the team to get their feedback so the permanent sign can be built and installed. AGENDA ITEM #2: MEDIA OUTREACH SUB-COMMITTEE UPDATE Chairman Scott indicated that Shev Rush sent a resignation letter indicating that his travel schedule will take all his time. Director Evans advised that he sent his resignation to the Mayor and City Council and there would have to be an advertising process and a ten-day notice period for the re-appointment of a new board member. Chairman Scott advised the Lee Husfeldt with the City of Palm Springs coordinates publicity and has offered to get information out that the Board wants to, so please work with her. Παγε 8 οφ 11 Board Member John Williams volunteered to assume this responsibility and will get in touch with Ms. Husfeldt to get something out to let the public know the Historic Site Survey is available. Cost will be approximately $25.00. Will check with Jing Yeo to get exact cost. AGENDA ITEM #3: HISTORIC SITE SURVEY UPDATE & DISCUSSION - STAFF No updates. AGENDA ITEM #4: HISTORIC SITE PLAQUE SURVEY UPDATE Member Rush has resigned his Board position. Start member Jing Yeo passed around mock-ups. Four of the plaques have gone out for bid and will be ordered as soon as the language and final costs are resolved. Those are The Willows, Fire Station No. 1, Ship of the Desert, and the O=Donnell House. Need Board to review and give feedback to staff. Staff has already sent feedback to company doing these plaques regarding the font and font sizes. There are a couple of irregularities compared to earlier plaques as this is a different company who gave a better bid on the four plaques. These plaques need to match as closely as possible to previous plaques. The materials match up, but the font is the question right now. Staff is working on the wording for the Ingleside Inn, a copy was passed around to the Board. This wording meets the maximum allowed on a 20" x 20" plaque and staff supports this wording but wants Board review and a motion to go forward with this Ingleside Inn plaque. The architect is unknown, but the correct opening date of the hotel was 1939. Member Isermann asked about the architects listed on the mock-up for the plaque for The Ship of the Desert...Webster and Wilson, and why does it say City of Palm Springs. Staff explained that the mock-up has to be corrected because the spacing of the text on that plaque is not in line with other plaques. Staff is working to resolve this. Prior residential plaques contained the City of Palm Springs on them since the description is a brief five lines. For the more narrative (20" x 20") plaques ACity of Palm Springs@ has not been engraved on them. Member Hayton reported that he visited the Cork >N Bottle. Twice the owner was not there and the third time it was chained and closed. It=s going through a change of ownership, he will approach the new owner and hopefully they will have a new attitude about plaquing the property. Will stay on top of this one and report back. Chairman Scott suggested the wording on the plaque for The Ship of the Desert read: ADesigned by@.... then list the architects since it reads that way on other plaques. Staff agreed that this could be added. Member Cassady pointed out the awkward wording of...@for the Berg Family of the Pierce Arrow Car...@ It should be Pierce Arrow Automobile Company, but if it is not changed, Acar@ should not be capitalized. Staff will review and revise. Member S. Williams asked about The Willows, in the second sentence it says that AThe Willows was restored in 1996 to operate as a small luxury hotel. The Home features a mountain waterfall and has finishes including mahogany doors, wood floors, wrought iron and handmade tiles.@ This is a little ambiguous, are those the original features or part of the restoration? The features that make it significant as a historic site are what should be listed on the plaque so that it doesn=t sound so much like >advertising.= Needs to be more specific as to what is historic and original. Staff will work with the owners for possible re-wording for the text on The Willows plaque. Member Isermann moved to approve the wording for the Ingleside Inn plaque with the correction of the word Acar@. (M/S/C Isermann/S. Williams) 6 Yes, 0 No, 0 Absent, 0 Abstentions. Παγε 9 οφ 11 Director Evans reported that staff had updated the list of designated historic properties for a running tally of properties that have plaques, do not have plaques, and where plaques have been ordered but not yet received or installed. One property has been noted that the plaque needs to be relocated and one property needs a new plaque location for better visibility. There are now two properties needing plaques, Cork >N Bottle and the Ingleside Inn. Staff will keep this updated for easier tracking. AGENDA #5: DISCUSSION OF CITY=S HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE (Chapter 8.05 PSMC), DUTIES, ACTIVITIES, ETC. Member J. Williams asked for clarification of the Ordinance. The Ordinance identifies Class 3 structures as structures that were built before 1945 or a year to be determined by the City Council. Is that year currently 1945? There have been two Class 3 structures that have recently come before the Board where Planning asked for a historical assessment before renovations were to take place. The question is ....is this Board authorized to request a historical assessment on a Class 3 site and more specifically, if it is a Class 3 site that appears on the Historic Survey...is this Board authorized to request a historical assessment or is that something Planning does? Director Evans explained that the current year is 1945, and under the Historic Site Preservation Ordinance it is silent on that issue pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). That particular state law does give guidance when to require surveys. Staff uses that and local knowledge to make that determination. It is Planning=s determination when and if a historical assessment is required or to be requested. If the Board updates the Ordinance, it might be an area to address, but flexibility is important. Sometimes the assessment is not important and only adds costs to the project. If a burden is added and word gets out, property owners may be reluctant to have their properties designated. This is a very delicate issue, and staff reviews applications based on the extent of renovations and on a case by case basis. Chairman Scott reported that now that the Historic Site Survey is accepted and available, this Ordinance needs to be updated to handle survey properties when they come before the Board, even though they may be less that 50 years old. This needs to be worked on in the coming year. AGENDA ITEM #5: PALM SPRINGS PRESERVATION BOARD - MEMBER SIDNEY WILLIAMS Member S. Williams asked about the Foundation supporting or helping to produce a guide for the preservation sites, and asked staff how to proceed. Will it be a team effort or how is the Foundation to proceed? Director Evans pointed out that it is the Board=s prerogative to craft that relationship and suggested a sub-committee of the Board because staff may not have the ability to actually produce a document, but they can assist with the research and location of information. Member S. Williams explained that appears to already have been taken care of... the October Minutes show that John Williams volunteered. Will proceed and bring back to the Board. The Foundation is in preparation for the Modernism Show that will be in February 2005. AGENDA ITEM #6: PALM SPRINGS HISTORICAL SOCIETY - MEMBER HAYTON Member Hayton attended the Pioneer Picnic at the O=Donnell Golf Course and spoke with Steve Nichols about the old Awater ditch@ and asked him about the potential age of the ditch. Nichols felt it was not really old. Others think that it may have been part of an early stone-lined water supply in the Chino Canyon area above Little Tuscany. It was originally used for drinking and irrigation of the Avillage@ and these were common in Tahquitz Canyon and also Snow Creek. Bob Tyler of the Coachella Architectural Society offered a lot of information but could not give the ditch an age. Will continue to review to see if it would fall within the Board=s purview since it is an old historical resource. Παγε 10 οφ 11 Concerned that this area will be in some development and this might be destroyed. Will bring a report back to the Board. The P.S. Historical Society will host an event in February. He will have information at the next meeting. AGENDA ITEM #7: PALM SPRINGS MODERN COMMITTEE - MEMBER JOHN WILLIAMS Member J. Williams reported that ModCom is presenting a Photographic Show at the Palm Springs Library in January 2005 of Stewart Williams= work, and Member S. Williams is assisting. Everyone is invited, it will be open the entire month of January. Also everyone is invited to attend the ModCom meetings every month, location is available on the web site at psmodcom.com Member J. Williams excused himself for a prior appointment and left the meeting at 9:30 a.m. AGENDA ITEM #9: ARCHITECTURAL & DESIGN COUNCIL - PALM SPRINGS DESERT MUSEUM - MEMBER ISERMANN Member Isermann reported that the next lecture is January 22, 2005 featuring artist Jorge Pardo talking about his work. It will be at the Palm Springs Desert Museum at 6 p.m. $5.00 for members and $10 for non-members. BOARD AND STAFF REPORTS: Member Hayton suggested that the Board and/or staff might visit The Villa in Cathedral City. That is one of the earliest buildings in the entire valley and a truly significant resource. Stated he was stunned to see how this property has been desecrated and what has been done to this building. Feels it is truly wonderful to see how this Board and staff review historic buildings in Palm Springs and what is allowed. Three Staff Reports: Colony Palms Hotel, Non-structural demolition - Staff reported that the non-structural interior demo permit was issued last week, reviewed the plans, Director Evans and Planner Yeo met the architect and applicant on site, walked through the property, saw the mural in the basement. Applicant will protect that mural during construction. This is phase 1 of the demolition which is primarily millwork, closets, etc. The exterior windows, doors, walls, etc. will remain. Director Evans indicated that they talked with one of the historic property owners about the Palms and some of it=s activities. Evidently the basement activities were very infrequent - - perhaps two sessions of cards . It was not something done all the time, the owner of the property in that era had a Cathedral City facility (The Dunes) where most of that activity occurred. The mural has been beat up over the years and will need restoration work. Staff asked them to protect it to keep anyone from adding to the wear and tear of it, there has been thoughtless destruction to parts of it. Nothing being done in the basement now, it=s pretty dank, there is no real defining characteristic other than the mural. Staff will continue trying to get information about earlier activities there. The entry is right out of the restaurant, almost have to go into the kitchen to get into the basement. It would make a wonderful wine cellar and banquet room for smaller groups, it could be spectacular for small groups or functions. Member S. Williams report that she had asked Stewart Williams about it and he had no knowledge of the basement, yet he designed the restaurant above it. Obviously it was kept Asecret@. Member Hayton went by and tried to view the property, but could not get access. Will call ahead next time. Oasis Hotel - non-structural demolition, staff also issued this interior demo permit last week, walked through with the architect and contractor prior to the permit. This phase involves closets and bathrooms. They are saving a couple of doors on the second floor. Staff will keep the Board updated. Παγε 11 οφ 11 Director Evans reminded the Board that this restoration will be similar to restoring a car, a lot of the interior will be peeled away along with some of the exterior and it=s unknown what will be found. The majority of the building that is distinguishable and represents the character is really thick concrete walls. Considering the condition of the roof and other parts, there will be a nice shell where the bathroom and fixtures can be rebuilt. All of it appears to have been changed over the years, there is not much distinguishing inside the building. The shell of the building is remarkable looking at it inside and outside - - it will not go anywhere. Chairman Scott cautioned the Board that there will be a lot of demolition, people will be surprised and curious, but with both these two properties, historic surveys and assessment have been done and there were a lot of as is photos taken, so the Board will know the important elements. Miller House Pool - Jing Yeo reported that staff had approved a new pool (see October 2003 minutes). At that meeting the Board had approved the new landscape plan with the pool in it. When it came to the Planning counter, staff checked to be sure the pool was in the same location and matched the approved plans. All matched and it was approved at the counter on submission. Chairman Scott asked if the remainder of the landscaping would be completed at time the pool was finished? Jing Yeo advised that the architectural approvals are valid for two years so the owner is slowly doing the landscaping. Director Evans advised that the Board=s Work Program will need to be discussed at the January 2005 meeting, approved in February, and submitted to Council by March 1. The current Work Program is in the Board notebook. The Board has had a very good year, need to think about the accomplishments for an update to the City Council. Look at all the things that have been done with the Historic Site Survey, the small brochure, the number of properties being worked on with designations, etc. This probably has been the most active year in the history of the Board. Jing Yeo will continue to represent staff at these Board meetings. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:48 a.m. The next meeting will be Tuesday, January 11, 2005 at 8:15 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Loretta Moffett Recording Secretary