Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-10-10- HSPB minutes CITY OF PALM SPRINGS HISTORIC SITE PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING CORRECTED - Minutes of Regular Meeting -Tuesday, October 10, 2006 at 8:15 a.m. Large Conference Room, City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 ROLL CALL Present This Meeting Present Year-to-Date FY 2006-2007 Excused Absences To-Date Sidney Williams, Vice Chair X 4 0 Jade Nelson, Vice Chair X 2 2 James Hayton X 3 1 John Williams X 4 0 Harold “Bud” Riley X 4 0 Brian Strahl X 2 0 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Ewing, Director of Planning Loretta Moffett, Administrative Assistant * * * * * 1. Chairperson Sidney Williams called the meeting to order at 8:15 a.m. Tuesday, Oct. 10, 2006 * * * * 2. ROLL CALL: Present: S. Williams, J. Nelson, J. Williams, B. Riley, B Strahl, and J. Hayton 3. 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 counter by 4:00 p.m., Thursday, October 5, 2006. NOTE: Audio Cassettes and DVDs of HSPB Meetings are available for review. Cassettes will be kept for six months only. DVDs of the meetings will be kept indefinitely. Minutes format is more action related than verbatim except where special interest or special meetings are involved. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 12, 2006 Minutes – Board Member Riley’s name was corrected, and page 6, The Parker Palm Springs was corrected. M/S/C (Riley/Hayton – 6 Yes, 0 No, 0 Absent, 0 Abstention) to approve September 12, 2006 Minutes as corrected. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS: (3 minutes) : Michael Stern read from a statement urging the Historic Site Preservation Board to recommend designation of the Santa Fee Federal Savings building at 300 South Palm Canyon Drive as a Historic Site. (copy attached) 6. REPORT OF THE CHAIR: Chairperson S. Williams reported that: (1) The Oasis “Loretta’s Hideaway” have submitted their plans for approval. (2) No report on the Washington Mutual Shade Structure (3) Asked if City Council responded to the Board’s inquiry about the October 17 Study Session? Staff has not heard back, the City Manager has been asked to bring to the Council’s attention – staff will follow-up. Appears the October 18 Council meeting will not include the HSPB as a Study Session item. HSPB can schedule a Study Session on own agenda. Staff recommends the Board have approval from the City Council. Historic Site Preservation Board Page 2 of 6 Minutes from the October 10, 2006 Meeting Board Vice Chair Jade Nelson commented that the Board had submitted a letter in March 2006 outlining HSPB’s interests and intent, and believes the Board should start discussing the revisions. Board member Bud Riley commented that with nothing to currently recommend to the City Council, it is important to meet, draft the revisions, and then provide the Council. Board members agreed to meet October 17, 2006 from 10 a.m. to noon in the Large Conference Room. Board members to review the report on writing ordinances and to research certain cities’ ordinances and bring back to the October 17 Study Session. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE 8. CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL REQUESTS: A. Case 3.0445: Our Lady of Solitude Catholic Church - Class 1 Historic Site Designation #15 Application to re-roof accessory buildings at 151 West Alejo Road Staff member Scott Taschner, Planning Technician, briefly described the project. Work has started, Building Department issued a Stop Work Order, rectory is nearly complete, the re-roof involved the three buildings surrounding the Church. It appears the Historic Designation was just for the Church (Sanctuary) itself. Color photo passed around. Staff reported that the re- roof will not change the appearance of the buildings, will not affect the historic designation within the site, and recommends that the Board approve the project. Board member John Williams asked if it was correct that the designation was ONLY for the Church? Feels better clarification is needed. Staff read from Resolution #15520 which states...”Our Lady of Solitude Catholic Church, located at 151 West Alejo Road at Belardo Road, shall be designated a Class 7 (now Class 1) Historic Site...the Church is located on the western ½ of Lots 1 and 3 of map recorded....” Board member Jade Nelson read from page 2 of the Staff Report...”On May 15, 1985, the Church was designated...” Feels this clarifies the question. John Skora, representative from the Diocese of San Bernardino, stated he was on the Parish Council when this designation occurred and there were concerns about which buildings were being designated. It was the Church Sanctuary only plus the walkway in between the Church and the Rectory with the two-foot thick arches. These were part of the original structure. Nothing else was designated. Chairperson Sidney Williams explained that one of the major concerns was that the roofing project was underway before a permit was applied for or issued. Board member John Williams asked for a staff report at the next meeting as to when all the buildings were built. There should be something in the permanent file stating that the Board has reviewed this and concluded that ONLY the Church and the walkway are designated. Staff read from the Church’s Gold Jubilee publication prepared in 1980...Mission Style Rectory was added in 1964, and the Parish Center was added in 1974. John Skora reported that the construction on the Church was started in 1928, completed in 1929, and 1979 was the 50-year anniversary. Historic Site Preservation Board Page 3 of 6 Minutes from the October 10, 2006 Meeting Board member John Williams asked that the Minutes reflect that the Church and the walkway beside the Church are the two designated structures. Board member James Hayton asked what jurisdiction the Board might have on other Historic designation where there were several buildings but only one or two designated as historic. Could owners renovate the other structures into styles not complementary to the designated buildings – perhaps this issue can be reviewed at the Study Session. Board member James Hayton moved for approval of the re-roof of Our Lady of Solitude Catholic Church three accessory buildings as outlined in application for Case 3.0445. Board member Bud Riley seconded the motion. Board member Brian Strahl stated that secondary buildings are important, but this work started without the Board’s review and/or approval and there should be some kind of penalty and consistent standards for everyone. Staff explained that when work is started without permits, there is a Stop Work Order placed on the project, it has to be brought into full compliance with the City Code, including any historic resource protection, before work can be re-started – plus the Building official can impose penalties up to double fees. John Skora, Church representative, reported discussing the request to de-classify with the Church’s attorney who is reviewing the matter to find what the City Attorney determined. M/S/C (Hayton/Riley - 6 Yes, 0 No, 0 Absent, 0 Abstentions) to approve the re-roof of Our Lady of Solitude Catholic Church’s three accessory buildings as outlined in application for Case 3.0445. 9. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Case 3.2986: Application for the demolition of three pre-1945 homes at 2609, 2641, and 2643 Morongo Trail, and one pre-1945 home at 2650 Anza Trail – Scott Taschner, Planning Technician Staff briefly described the project and that staff evaluated the buildings, found no historical significance to the style or characteristics of any of the four buildings and recommends approval of the demolition. Board member Jim Hayton commented that this is an important neighborhood to the City and would like to have this neighborhood designated as historic. Board Member Jade Nelson agreed with Mr. Hayton’s comments. Wants to see Historic Districts in Palm Springs and this should be one of them. Does not believe these four properties are significant enough to protect them. Several board members were concerned about the lack of security and apparent neglect of the buildings since they were vacated by the tenants. Owner reported that about eight months ago an asbestos report was done and the tenants Historic Site Preservation Board Page 4 of 6 Minutes from the October 10, 2006 Meeting moved, the asbestos was then removed and the structures boarded up. Owner indicated he has owned the property about two years and it has been seven months since they were occupied. Reported the City Council approved sub-division of five new single- family home lots on this property one and one-half years ago. Anza side of property was designated by the Council for sand and to be native to the area; however, the Morongo side was designated to have sidewalks. Owner prefers entire project to be native without sidewalks and wants to create ranch-style homes. Board member John Williams asked that if the Board were to designate a historic district would all the homes/properties within that district be subject to HSPB review? Staff believes that to be true, will review the language. Board member Jim Hayton commented that without seeing any renderings or landscape plans, it is difficult to allow 2630 Anza Trail to be demolished – would like to see what is being proposed as a replacement. He does not have an issue with the structures on Morongo Trail. Staff explained that demolition issue is not subject to future development. The issue is whether existing buildings have historic value. Board member Jade Nelson stated that when something of this nature is going to be demolished (80+ years old) Board should know about it one or two months in advance, not just a few days, so more extensive research can be done. Time frame is not adequate to make good decisions. Board member Brian Strahl asked about the setbacks. Concerned about holding this project up, the owner is following the rules and should not be held up. Board member Jade Nelson moved that the Board review this for one month and take a vote on the demolition at the next meeting in November. Staff explained that the action of the Board is to either issue a Stay of Demolition or not. The move to continue is effectively issuing a Stay of Demolition. Owner indicated the time of demolition was to take place immediately after this process was completed. Board member Jade Nelson rescinded earlier motion and moved that a Stay of Demolition be issued until the next HSPB meeting in November, 2006. Board member Jim Hayton seconded. Board member John Williams understands and agrees, but in this case it is not appropriate because the process was not followed, it is not fair for this developer who has good plans for the lots to hold up this project. Feels the Board can learn a lesson here and in the future have more time to look at these types of projects. Asked if this could be heard at the special meeting to be held October 17? Staff explained that whatever happens here can be appealed to the City Council, and since October 17 is not a regularly scheduled meeting, will have to check with the City Attorney to see if this can be heard and Board action taken at that time. Historic Site Preservation Board Page 5 of 6 Minutes from the October 10, 2006 Meeting Owner commented that he did not understand how they could go through the process, be approved by City Council for five lots through two public hearings, and if there is no significance in the structures, it is not fair to get this far and not be able to proceed. Board member Brian Strahl stated that the historical significance of these structures does not reflect the need to save these buildings. Cannot burden this owner because the process was not brought before this Board originally. Staff clarified that a Stay of Demolition can be issued for 120 days so any period shorter than that is conforming to the Code. Board member Jade Nelson re-stated his motion - - moved to issue a Stay of Demolition for a period of at least 35 days but no more than 60 days. Board member Jim Hayton seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: B. Strahl – No; J. Williams – No; J. Nelson – Yes; S. Williams No; J. Hayton – Yes; B. Riley – No. (Four (4) Yes – Two (2) No) – motion to issue a Stay of Demolition for a period of least 35 days but no more than 60 days failed. 10. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS: A. Media Outreach - John Williams reported several press coverages instances in the Desert and Press Enterprise. Jim Hayton showed an article in Automobile News about the Tramway Gas Station. B. Historic Site Plaque Update – Bud Riley commented on the letter written to the Cork ‘N Bottle, subsequent to that is an article in the paper about the City of Palm Springs offering to buy the property for part of a development. Jim Hayton met with owner and manager of the store and they do not want anything to do with plaquing the property. Article will be put in file. Jade Nelson could not find the plaque for La Plaza, did find the plaque for the Plaza Theatre – asked for help locating and if La Plaza was actually plaqued. C. HSPB Brochure Project – Jade Nelson reported a volunteer designer is working on the brochure and should have by the November meeting. D. P.S. Preservation Foundation – Jade Nelson – no updates -- information can be found at www.pspf.net E. P.S. Historical Society - James Hayton – the Pioneer Picnic will be held at the O’Donnell Golf Club, Saturday, November 18, 2006. Theme is “An Old-Fashion Hoedown”. Call 323-8297 for tickets and information. F. P.S. Modern Committee - John Williams – Will have their 5th Annual Architectural Preservation and Lifetime Achievement Awards Luncheon at The Parker Palm Springs on October 14, 2006 from noon to 2 p.m. Information is online at www.psmodcom.com G. Architecture & Design Council – Sidney Williams – The first season event will be a friend-raiser cocktail reception on October 21 at the Schindler House (1948) from 5:30 to Historic Site Preservation Board Page 6 of 6 Minutes from the October 10, 2006 Meeting 7:30 p.m. The $35.00 price includes the book on Palm Desert Art and Architecture published by the city of Palm Desert. H. Historic Preservation Ordinance Revision Project (a) Board has agreed to hold a special meeting October 17, 2006 from 10 a.m. to noon 11. OTHER: A. John Williams asked that the Stay of Demolition on the Bungalow be added to the November Agenda and is there any way to do an assessment to see if it can still be moved? Staff advised that the Stay can either be left in place or removed. Will get whatever status available from the Building Department, and the Fire Department is still investigating. Will report back at the next meeting. Board member Jade Nelson asked when the Stay of Demolition expires – November 10. Can it be discussed at the October 17, 2006 Special Meeting Agenda? Board member John Williams asked if a Special Meeting could be called to act on this Stay of Demolition? Board member Jade Nelson asked if John Raymond could report on the Bungalow at the next meeting? Staff advised that it could be done with proper notification and postings. Will confirm before making a commitment. Will advise by email to the Board. 12. ADJOURNMENT –There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:31 a.m. to a Special meeting on October 17, 2006, with the next regularly scheduled meeting to be November 14, 2006 in the Large Conference Room at City Hall. Respectfully submitted, Loretta Moffett, Recording Secretary