HomeMy WebLinkAboutHistorical File - 1924 Letter Regarding Tents Erected on Bea Historical File
Letter dated July 26, 1924 from Huntington Beach Company to City Council requesting
an ordinance to prohibit tents on the beach between the Pacific Electric right-of-way and
high tide and within the City limits.
Letter dated July 27,1966 from City Administrator to City Council regarding preservation
of a wooden oil derrick as a museum piece.
r
Letter dated December 4, 1975 from the President of the Historical Society regarding
preservation of the Los Patos water tower.
Request for Redevelopment Agency Action dated August 15, 1988 requesting approval of
the selection of Johnson Heumann Research Associates for the task of translating the
categories used to rank the structures in the 1986 Historic Resources Survey to National
Register categories.
Letter dated October 3, 1988 from the Historical Resources Board regarding 221 Third
Street - The Hine House, an early cottage.
Request to City Council, dated March 27, 1989, recommending the structure located at
511 Eleventh Street, built in 1905 and which is Colonial Revival in architectural style,be
relocated to the Bartlett park area east of the Newland Center.
Request for Redevelopment Agency Action dated May 15, 1989 regarding the historic
metal buildings at the southeast corner of Lake Street and Yorktown Avenue. (Tin
Buildings).
Request for City Council Action dated October 16, 1989 regarding the proposed
relocation of the historic structure at 628 10th Street, which is a single story Craftsman
Bungalow, to the Bartlett Park Historic Village Area.
g:record:histfile
'Apo
—
` T�I1 _G'.
.�
631 HIGGINS BUILDING
2ND AND MAIM STREETS
JAS. S. LAWSHE
MANAGER
hos ANGELES, CALIF.
July
Twenty-sixth, '"
1 9 2 4
/ ;Y t` t{S•
City Council,
Huntington Beach,
Cali o.f rnia.
Gentlemen:
There is a situation existing at Huntington Beach which
the Huntington Beach Company would like very much to rectify, but
we feel that it can not be done except with the cooperation of the
City Council.
The Huntington Beach Company and the Pacific Electric
Railway Company own the Ocean-front at Huntington Beach. There has
never been any attempt made on our part to prevent the free use of
this by the citizens of Huntington Beach and the visitors of the
town. We want this condition to continue, but every year sees the
coming of some people who construe this privilege as a license.
I refer particularly to the campers and people who move
in upon the beach and erect structures composed of canvas, boards,
or any material available, and occupy same for indefinite periods.
The result is that the beach front at Huntington Beach is a dis-
grace to the City. It is an eye-sore, and is causing a great deal
of unfavorable comment• to be passed upon our City.
The Huntington Beach Company has allowed the City to
erect sun-shelters and pavilions; pipe same with gas for the bene-
fit of picnickers. We did not contemplate however, the movijig in
of 'permanent or semi-permanent tenants on the Beach. I.Ve have
arranged with the City for an auto camp grounds, and it does not
seem right to us, or right tom the citizens of the town, or to the
O '
r
t
City Council No. 2
town as a municipality to allow camping or the erection of closed
tents upon the beach-front.
At the time of this writing there are a number of tents
erected in front of the Municipal Pavilion on our ground. ' Steps
should be taken immediately to remove same.
I trust that you will appreciate our position in this
matter and understand that we have only the interests of the whole
town and community at heart, and we believe by keeping such tents
and structures off of our beach-front, we are helping the town.
Will you not give this matter serious consideration and
cooperate with us by passing an ordinance prohibiting the erection
of any closed tents (shade shelters permitted) on the ocean-front?
With the City backing us up on this proposition we can keep the
beach front free from this unsightly condition; make it more en-
joyable for all, and let it be a credit to the City rather than an
eye-sore, as at present.
The district upon which this should apply °should be that
section lying between the Pacific Electric right-of-way and the
high-tide line and within the City Limits.
Very truly yours,
JSL/B `�
b
8-1 Agenda
�U�ITINGTpN
2lP�Rg
0 CITY OF X4,W9 •
— ----------------- ------------------
CALIFORNIA
Rib
CCpUNTY
July 27, 1966
fO 47
City Council
City of Huntington Beach -
tz
. Subject: Preservation of a
Wooden Oil Derrick as a Museum
Piece
Gentlemen:
As a result of the suggestion that one, old, wooden oil derrick
be preserved as a historic monument, the Staff has explored
the subject with respect to other oil producing cities.
We find that an association called the Petroleum Industry
Pioneers have been working on the establishment of oil museums
for several years. They have recently opened a public museum
in Bakersfield. Another large collection of items are stored
in Long Beach awaiting the construction of a museum there.
The cost of land and a building would probably be in excess
of $100, 000 which would have to be raised largely by donations.
We find the oil companies would be most cooperative in helping
to acquire the equipment for the exhibit. Because of the
size of oil drilling and pumping equipment,. the building to
house such an exhibit would have to be quite large.
At such time as a ULI Sub Committee for Cultural Development
is organized and assigned study projects, .this matter could be
included in their research.
oyl Miller
City Administrator
DM:bwo
HUNTINGTON BEACH LIBRARY
;:1. ��i��r>�r�rfi��rr rrr�rf��rr�frrrrr� ��<<sf�rrrrcs ��rr�f�i
7111 Talbert Street Huntington Beach, California 92647 (714) S36-S481
December 11, 1975
To The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Huntington,,f"ach., CA
Dear Council Members:.
A meeting of the Board of Directors of the Huntington
Beach Historical Society was called at the request of
Walter Johnson on Thursday, December 11, 1975, for
the purpose of discussing the preservation of the
Los Patos water tower. After considerable discussion,
the Board. voted three to two, with one abstention,
to recommend that the water tower be retained as an k .
HISTORICAL LANDMARK.
Enclosed please find a copy of our letter of
January 7, 1975, stating our position at that time.
Sincerely,
Rodney Jo e ,, President
Huntington Beach Historical
Society
RJ:ms
Enc: 1
REQUEST FO. REDEVELOPMENT i ENCY ACTION
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL
Date AUgLst 15, 1988
CITY CLF,RK
Submitted to: Honorable Chairman an a eve A ency Members
Submitted by:
Paul E. Cook, City Administrator
Prepared by: Douglas La Belle, Director of Community Developme
Subject: APPROVAL OF CONSULTANT FOR HISTORIC SURVEY REVISIONS
Consistent with Council Policy? Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments:
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
At your meeting of June 27, 1988, the Agency directed staff to
.proceed with various activities related to historic issues in the
Downtown Redevelopment area including retaining a consultant to
translate the rankings in the 1986 Historic Resources Survey.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the selection of Johnson Heumann Research Associates for the
task of translating the categories used to rank the structures in
the 1986 Historic Resources Survey to National Register categories .
ANALYSIS•
Background
On June 27, several historic issues were discussed resulting from
staff ' s proposal for a Downtown Historic Plan. In addition to
comments by the Historic Resources Board, Don Napoli from State
Office of Historic Preservation presented his assessment of historic
structures and the possibility of a historic commercial district in
the downtown area. Mr. Napoli also stated that the rankings of the
structures in the Historic Survey, A, B, C, etc. was not consistent
with State and Federal terminology and categories used to identify
important and/or significant historic structures (examples : of
local significance, of State significance or National
significance) . Napoli suggested that the City have the Survey
rankings translated to National categories in order to more
accurately assess historic structures in the downtown area.
Staff prepared Request for Proposals (RFP' s) and sent them to four
firms who had all submitted proposals (in 1985) for the Historic
Resources Survey. Those firms are: Sanchez Talarico Associates,
Inc. , Johnson Heumann Research Associates, Thirtieth Street
Architects, Inc. and Heritage Orange County, Inc. With the
exception of Heritage Orange County, Inc. , all the firms submitted
proposals.
P10/1/85
c
The tasks requested are as follows :
Task 1: Review existing data in the 1986 Historic Resources Survey
including field inspection of survey area and additional
data acquired since 1986, including demolition of any
structures identified in the 86 Survey.
Task 2 : Coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer
(SHPO) , National Park Service, City of Huntington Beach,
Thirtieth Street Architects (authors of 1986 Survey) and
the Historic Resources Board.
Contact the above agencies and firms . All State and
Federal requirements related to the requested revisions to
the survey document shall be incorporated into the revised
report .
Task 3 : Revise Level of significance ranking.
Revise the ranking system to correlate the level of
significance of buildings and structures to the geographic
area: local, state or national evaluation rakings used by
the national Park Service. The revisions will be based on
a level of significance ranking system based on windshield
survey and the existing significance criteria and
architectural data forms prepared by Thirtieth Street
Architects .
After review and careful consideration, staff has chosen Johnson
Heumann Research Associates as the recommended consultant . Johnson
Heumann, in contrast to the other firms, has in-house staff with
extensive and comprehensive experience in the field of historic
evaluation and studies . Johnson Heumann can begin the work the
first week in September, and complete the tasks in three to four
weeks, for a fee of $4000 .
In addition to recommending a firm to translate the Historic
Resources Survey ranking, staff has also implemented the following
procedures in regards to historic structures in the City:
1. Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. has agreed to review historic
structures in the downtown project area which are impacted by
redevelopment projects .based on the following criteria:
a. Architectural significance
b. Is it a candidate or contributor to the National Register
of Historic Places?
C. Is it a candidate and/or contributor to a local historic
district.
This review will enable the staff to make recommendations
regarding the structure' s significance and whether it remains
in place, is moved or demolished with recordation. The above
review will be in addition to any environmental documentation
through the CEQA process .
RCA - 8/15/88 -2- (1061d)
Once the translation of the Survey rankings is complete, the
continuance of this service by Thirtieth Street may not be
necessary.
2 . In response to the City Council ' s direction at the June 27,
1988 redevelopment meeting, there is now a 45-day postponement
on all demolition requests for structures listed in the 1986
survey and for potentially historic structures in areas
identified by the Historic Resources Board. All demolition
postponement agreements are copied and sent to both the
Historical Society and the Historic Resources Board (HRB) for
review. Because of concerns expressed by the Society and the
HRB, there are structures in the downtown where the
postponement of demolition has exceeded 45 days, 311 Walnut and
the former Safari Sams buildings are examples. These
structures will not be demolished until issues raised regarding
the importance of those structures can be resolved.
3 . Procedures are being developed by staff to identify the
appropriate application of environmental assessment and CEQA on
historic structures impacted by development/redevelopment .
FUNDING SOURCE:
Community Development Contract Services Fund
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
1. Choose the firm of Sanchez Talarico for the tasks discussed
previously.. Their fee would be $4000 and time frame to
complete the tasks would be 45 days .
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Johnson Heumann Research Associates ' Proposal
2. Sanchez Talarico ' s Proposal
3 . Thirtieth Street Architects ' Proposal
MA:DTB:gbm
RCA - 8/15/88 -3- (1061d)
JOHNSON HEUMANN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
H I S T O R I C A N D A R C H I T E C T U R A L C O N S U L T A N T S
July 19 , 1988
41
Ms. Diana Teran Blaisure, Assistant Planner
Department of Community Development �( 'f.. '' 1988
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street ° '��'r�'�r
Huntington Beach CA 92648 CEVELO A
NLAiN:VI"NG olVIS101j
RE: Request for Proposals to Evaluate a Historic
Resources Survey
Dear Ms. Blaisure:
Pursuant to your conversation of July 15, 1988, Johnson
Heumann Research Associates' proposal of July 8 , 1988
is revised as follows:
Task 1. Field inspection of the survey area and
the 556 resources identified by• the 1986
windshield survey.
Task 2. _ Review of the 1986 "File Documents" , in-
cluding the inventory forms and the photo-
graphs and/or other documentation of
non-inventoried sites.-
Task 3. Coordination with the Historic Resources
Board, Thirtieth Street Architects , and
the City to integrate new or explanatory
material into the survey results.
Task 4. Mapping of findings to verify existence,
- boundaries, and significance of potential
historic districts.
Task 5. Evaluation of survey by assignment of
National Register of Historic Places
Eligibility Status Categories and coordi
tion with the State Office of Historic
Preservation to verify results. It is
our experience that this may involve a
field inspection by representatives of
the National Register and Environmental
Review sections of the State Office.
Other conditions stated in our July 8 proposal remain
the same, with the following exceptions:
1. Our -fee for the project as amended will be
$4000. 00 (80 consultant hours at $50.00 per
hour) .
3103 LINDO STREET, LOS ANGELES, CA 90068 • (213) 851-8854
321 N. SIERRA BONITA, LOS ANGELES. CA 90036 • (213) 932-0493
July 19, 1988
Ms. Diana Teran Blaisure
City of Huntington Beach
Page 2
2 , Three to four weeks will be necessary to
complete the project , assuming meetings
with the HRB and the SOHP can be scheduled
in a timely manner.
. Johnson Heumann Research Associates generally requires
approximately two weeks notice in order to begin a new
project; however, an exceptionally heavy July agenda
and commitments to be out of town in August dictate
that bur next available -start-up -date would be Septem-
ber 1.
Sincerely,
Leslie Heumann
LH/dj
Cam) t 7lCEri nmmunity planning development processing environm impac'Lanalysls resource and project management
cssociCt es, inc
July 21, 1988
�t P4V E D
Ms. Diana Teran Blaisure
City of Huntington Beach 7 1 1988
Department of Community Development
2000 Main Street �F,:r r;:.=_vT of
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Y��,�,;`,.;,;r __ _ -?:•�f�iT
PLANNi?`6' J+v.-iJv
SUBJECT: HUNTINGTON BEACH HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY
REPORT REVISED PROPOSAL
Dear Ms. Teran Blaisure:
Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. is pleased to submit this proposal- for cultural resources
services to the City of Huntington Beach. Our firm will provide you with the necessary
information needed to translate the existing significance ranking system into the National
Register Criteria for Evaluation. This proposal is divided into five sections:iproposed Scope
of Services, Budget and Schedule, Project Qualifications, References, and Statement of Offer.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. will follow the National Register Criteria for Evaluation
developed by the National Park Service to revise the`existing- ranking system utilized by
Thirtieth Street Architects for the Huntington Beach Historic Resources Survey Report. The
federal criteria are the nationally recognized ranking system and are used to determine if
properties qualify for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. They are the
standards by which the National Register of Historic Places is maintained.
The following tasks will be performed:
Task 1: Review, Coordination, and Update
Task 1 will be divided into three integrated work efforts. Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc.
will review all existing data. Our firm will review the Huntington Beach Historic Resources
Survey Report and all additional information available from the City of Huntington Beach
and Thirtieth Street Architects. It is our understanding that the City and- the Historic
Resources Board has collected additional information subsequent to the completion of the
Survey Report. This information includes an updated list of structural demolitions within
the study area, additional architectural information, and correspondence with the State
Historic Preservation Officer.
The second work effort within Task 1 would involve coordination with various agencies,
organizations, groups, and firms. Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. will contact the State
Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), National Park Service, City of Huntington Beach,
550c newpor t center dnve
newport beach, ca. 92660
714 640-1700
Ms. Diana Teran Blaisure
July 21, 1988 _
Page Two
Thirtieth Street Architects, and the Historic Resources Board. The purpose of this effort is
to ensure that all State and Federal requirements related to the requested revisions to the
survey document are incorporated into the revised report.
Equally as important as our contact with State and Federal agencies is that Sanchez Talarico
Associates, Inc. coordinate our Scope of Services with the Historic Resources Board. It is
essential that the resources and knowledge of the Board be integrated into the revisions to
the Historic Resources Survey Report.
The third work effort within Task I will be to update the Survey Report. Sanchez Talarico
Associates, Inc. will conduct a windshield survey of the project study area in order' to
identify any changes which have taken place in since the report was completed in 1986.
Changes may include demolitions and rehabilitations. These structural changes will be
incorporated as an addendum to the Architectural Data Forms prepared" for the existing
report.
Task 2: Revise Level of Significance Ranking.
- Sanchez- Talarico Associates, Inc: -will- revised the` ranking system to correlate the level of
significance of buildings and structures to the geographic area: local, state, or national
evaluation rankings used by the National Park Service. The purpose of these revisions is to
standardize the Huntington Beach Historic Resources Survey to the ranking system used by
the State. It is our understanding that the City of Huntington Beach is not concerned at
this time to determine which structures are eligible for listing on the National Register of
Historic Places. Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. will revise the level of significance
ranking system based on our windshield survey and the existing significance criteria and
architectural data forms prepared by Thirtieth Street Architects.
Revisions to the Historic Resources Survey Report prepared by Sanchez Talarico Associates,
Inc. will be provided to the City as an addendum to the existing Survey Report.
Task 3: _Submittal of Draft Report. _-
Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. will submit five copies, of the draft Historic Resources
Survey Report to the City of Huntington Beach for review and comment.
Task 4: Report Revisions.
Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. will meet with the City to review any requested revisions
to the draft report that may be requested by the City, Historic Resources Board, or SHPO.
Ms. Diana Teran Blaisure
July 21, 1988
Page Five
Properties Survey Report (HPSR) in conjunction with the Environmental Assessment. The
HPSR assessed the potential impacts on historic structures and buildings associated with the
widening of Westminster Avenue. The HPSR is currently in review at SHPO.
REFERENCES
We believe that first hand conversations with persons who have worked with us are the
most valuable sources of insight about our professional capabilities. We encourage you to
contact the individuals listed below.
Mark Christoffels
City of Claremont
(714) 624-4531
Ann Huston
National Park Services
(415) 556-7741
- Robert Smith, Ph.D.
J. Ray Construction Company
(714) 660-8888
STATEMENT OF OFFER
This proposal shall constitute a firm offer to perform the work described herein under the
terms and conditions described herein. This offer will remain valid for a period of 60
days.
The Principal in the firm of Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. authorized to enter into this
contract and negotiate amendments to this contact is:
FRED TALARICO
SANCHEZ TALARICO ASSOCIATES, INC.
550C NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660
(714) 640-1700
red Talarico, Princips4'
s ,Li i bez NA.�i1co
—sty planning development processing environa trnpact analysts resource and pmlect management
as�o�ates, inc
July 21, 1988
Ms. Diana Teran Blaisure
City of Huntington Beach
Department of Community Development
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Dear Ms. Blaisure:
Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. is pleased to submit this proposal for the preparation of
historic resources services to the City of Huntington Beach. As you will notice, our
proposed work program represents a comprehensive approach to providing the City With
requested revisions to the City's-Historic Resources Survey Report.
Our firm is particularly well suited for this project. I am confident that you will find our
understanding of the project, technical approach and methodology, and scope of services to
be comprehensive and well founded. Based on our conversations with you, we have pro-
vided the scope of services needed to assemble a final package which will meet your
standards of quality, accuracy, and completeness.
In summary, I feel that you will find this proposal complete and responsive to -your needs.'`
We would appreciate the opportunity to interview for this project in order that you could
meet our project team and discuss our approach to the project in greater detail. If you have
any questions or require further information, please feel free to contact me at (714)
640-1700. Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with a proposal for this project.
Very truly yours,
SANCHEZ TALARICO ASSOCIATES, INC.
Dan C. Privitt
Project Manager
DCP:Ib - R E "•.IVE D
CEPARTMENT OF
00?A?+1UtilTY C,=V-_LCF?RENT
PLAN:,!,NG DI`JT_'�ION
550c newport center drive
newport beach, ca 92660
714 640-1700
Ms. Diana Teran Blaisure
July 21, 1988
Page Three
Task 5: Submittal of FInal Report.
Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. will submit one reproducible copy of the final report to
the City.
BUDGET AND SCHEDULE
Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. will complete the Scope of Services for a not-to-exceed fee
of $4,000.00 plus expenses. Attendance by the Project Manager at three meetings is
assumed. Requested attendance at additional meetings would be on a time-and-matetrial
basis. Expenses will include word processing, printing, phone, mileage, and other similar
items. We will bill on a time-and-materials basis. All invoices will include all labor noted
by title, expenses, and services rendered for the billing period.
Our firm is ready to commence work on the Scope of Services within five days of notice to
proceed. Completion of the scope to draft report can be completed in 45 days.
PROJECT QUALIFICATIONS
Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. is a multi-disciplinary firm specializing in environmental
impact assessments, community planning, cultural resource assessments, resource and project
management, specific area plans, zoning administration, and development processing. The
individuals assigned to this project have extensive professional experience and education in
the field of planning and cultural resources.
Mr. Fred Talarico, Principal of Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. will serve as Principal-in-
Charge for the project. Mr. Talarico has over 17 years of experience in the field of land
and environmental planning. Prior to the formation of Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc., he
served as Environmental Coordinator and Project Planner for the City of Newport Beach.
Ms. Dana C. Privitt will serve as Project Manager for the project. Ms. Privitt has over six
years of experience preparing environmental and cultural resources documents.--Ms.-Privitt -- - -
will be responsible for the preparation and overall management of the historic resources
report.
The projects listed below are historic resources projects that Mr. Talarico and Ms. Privitt
have completed.
Ms. Diana Teran Blaisure
July 21, 1988
Page Four
Padua Avenue and Towne Avenue FAU Wideninas Environmental Assessments and Historic
Reports. Prepared for the City of Claremont, these assessments analyzed the potential
impacts of the widening of two arterial highways at the intersection with Base Line Road.
The widening projects included improving intersection geometrics and signalizing intersec-
tions. Issues included impacts for noise, rural aesthetics, and historical properties. Two
adjacent properties which were eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic
Places required the preparation of the Federal 4(f) Evaluation to assess potential impacts of
the project. Other documents prepared related to historic properties were Requests for
Determination of Effect, Request for Determination of Eligibility, Historic Property Survey
Reports, and Preliminary Case Reports. ,
I!itzer Ranch Complex Historic American Buildings Survey (NABS), Sanchez Talarico
Associates, Inc., prepared photographic and written documentation for. the' Pitzer Ranch
Complex in the City of Claremont, California. The project was a condition of approval for
the widening of Padua Avenue and Towne Avenue at Base Line Road.
East Irvine Historical Site EIR. Prepared for the City of Irvine, this EIR addressed the
impacts of developing the historic East Irvine area into a complex containing a 150-room
motor inn, 3-4 restaurants, and specialty retail. The project is adjacent to-'the I-5 Freeway
and a future major arterial. It is also near the flight operations from the El Toro Marine
Corps Air Station. Major issues involved access onto adjacent arterials, parking, noise, land
use compatibility, aesthetics, and historical integrity.
East Irvine Historic Resources Documentation. Subsequent to the preparation of the East
Irvine EIR, Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. prepared the Historic Resources documentation
for East Irvine in Irvine, California. The documentation compiled a record of historically
and architecturally significant buildings through photographic, written, and graphic
documentation. East Irvine was the initial town established in which is now known as the
City of Irvine. The are contains several bungalow houses, a general store, hotel, blacksmith
shop, agricultural buildings, warehouse, and silos. Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. was also
responsible for the archaeological and historical archaeological assessments.
Santa Ana -Redevelopment Historic Reports Prepared for the City of Santa Ana, these
historic resources reports analyzed the potential impacts of proposed redevelopment in
downtown Santa Ana on historic resources. This document identified historical resources,
the effects of new development on the historical integrity of an eligible historic district, and
possible measures to minimize significant impacts.
Westminster Avenue Widening Historic Properties Survey Report Prepared for the Cities of
Santa Ana and Garden Grove, Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc. prepared the Historic
thirtieth
street _
architects RECEIVED
1r1C.
I m 1988
DEPART;MIENT OF
July 7, 1988 COMM-JNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
Ms. Diana Blaisure
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
re: Historic Survey Ranking Review
Dear Ms. Blaisure;
Thank you for your request for a proposal to be involved in the 6v uation of
properties surveyed in 1986. As you know, our firm and a large number of
local volunteers were involved in the original 1985-86 survey effort. Because
of our involvement in that study and our continuing interest in Huntington
Beach, we are very interested in working with you on the evaluation of the
survey findings.
As you know, the 4 category A-B-C-D system used in that study was developed
for use in the initial fieldwork overview of the study area. Its purpose was
to provide a basis for identifying those properties worthy of further research
and documentation. The State system uses eleven categories and, obviously,
provides a more detailed evaluation of the survey findings. Its use is
appropriate when all of the documentation is complete since it is only then
that background data have been compiled to make the detailed evaluation
possible and the various properties can be compared against one another.
The State Office of Historic Preservation recommends that the evaluation be
conducted by a board of evaluators whose members also have membership in
historic, civic improvement, preservation or architectural organizations and
have knowledge of the City's history and its built environment. We have
worked with such boards in cities such as Redondo Beach and Pasadena and can
help your Board become familiar with the State Is criteria. You should -be---
aware, however , that even in other cities which used such a board and
evaluated buildings by the State's system, the State re-evaluated these
findings and revised some of the ratings when they reviewed the results and
entered them on their computer.
Since the State is not funding this work, it is not a requirement that you
follow their procedures. The City may choose to have the survey evaluated
entirely by consultants or by consultants working with an evaluation committee
(or Historic Resources Board) . We are willing to work in either capacity and
have identified costs for either approach.
architecture historical rehabilitation - planning
2821 newport blvd. newport beach, california 92663 (714)673-2643
Cost Estimate* for
Evaluation of Historic Resources Survey
City of Huntington Beach
Consultant Board
evie Revie
A. Potentially $1,680.00 $2,880.00 (a) ,
Significant Buildings
(approximately 218)
B. Surveyed Buildings $2,340.00 $4,140.00 (b)
(approximately 363)
C. All Buildings $2,880.00 $5,400.00 (c)
(approximately 585)
*Costs include staff time by both Jill Sterrett and Diann Marsh, preparation
of a summary report and computer time to produce address lists showing all
buildings evaluated and their ratings. Reimbursable costs (such as
reproduction, postage and mileage) would be additional and are billed at 1.1
times actual costs.
(a) assumes 6 meetings of Board with consultants over a 3 month period.
(b) assumes 9 meetings of Board with consultants over a 4 to 5 month period.
(c) assumes 12 meetings of Board with consultants over a 6 month period.
A second aspect of the evaluation which will determine the scope of the work
is the number of resources that you wish to have evaluated. While your letter
implies that all 585 structures should be evaluated, the original survey work
determined that many of these were not significant. The City may choose to
have the evaluation focus on those 218 structures found to be potentially
significant (103 "A"s and "B"s and 115 "C"s in districts) . Or the City may
want the 363 structures on which survey forms were completed to be evaluated.
We have included a price for both options and for evaluation of the total
survey, if you wish.
For either approach, we propose that both Diann Marsh and myself be involved-,
in the evaluation. Since we both participated in the original study, we are `
familiar with the resources in the City and can complete the work quickly and
effectively.
APE OF SERVICES - CONSULTANT REVIEW
Task Meet with staff and the Historic Resources Board to
discuss the survey, uses of the survey since its completion and.
plans for future preservation activities.
Task 2: Obtain and review all completed survey forms and lists.
Conduct site visits where needed to supplement the photos and
other documentation on the forms. Evaluate according to State
rating system.
Task • Prepare a brief report summarizing the methodology used
and the results of the evaluation.
Task 4: Prepare computer address lists showing all buildings
evaluated and the ratings given. Provide to staff and Board for
review.
Task 5: Meet with staff and Historic Resources Board to discuss - -
the findings of the evaluation and to finalize any controversial
ratings. -
Time: Approximately 30 days from Task 1 to completion of Task 4.
SCOPE OF SERVICES - BOARD REVIEW
Task 1, 3, 4 and 5: These tasks would be essentially the same as
shown above.
Task 2 : Meet with the Historic Resources Board as needed to
review and evaluate the surveyed buildings. We estimate that one
orientation meeting will be needed (in combination with Task 1)
and that the Board will be able to evaluate 50-60 buildings during
a 2 to 3 hour meeting period (thus, the total number of meetings
needed will be dependent upon the number of buildings to be
evaluated) . We anticipate that Board members will also find it
necessary to review many of the buildings in the field between
meetings (particularly if buildings which were not photographed
are to be included) .
Time: Approximately 3 to 6 months, see notes on Cost Estimate
Chart.
Since we have provided several options, we would be glad to discus further
your needs for the evaluation to determine which option might be most
suitable. We can also structure a "combined" option which involves full
consultant review of all structures and limited Board review of the most
significant structures, if you wish.
We look forward to hearing from you and to the possibility of working with
Huntington Beach, once again.
Very truly yours,
All �awn Sterrett, AICP
Associate
Attached: Cost Estimate
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL A� ION -P/' N4 0�
Date October 24, 1988
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Submitted by: Robert Franz, Deputy City Administrator
Prepared by: Ed Thompson, Insurance and Benefits Manager
Subject: WAIVER OF INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS PURSUANT TO RESOLUTIO
NO. 5835 APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL,
-;L-q 19
Consistent with Council Policy? 94 Yes [ ] New Policy or Excepti
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative
STATEMENT OF ISSUE•
At the City Council meeting of August 15, 1988, the Council approved
the selection of Johnson Heumann Research Associates for the task of
translating the categories used to rank the structures in the 1986
Historic Resources Survey to National Register categories .
Pursuant to Resolution No. 5835, the staff requests a waiver of the
insurance requirements .
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends the City Council approve the request for a waiver
of the insurance requirement pursuant to Resolution No. 5835 .
ANALYSIS•
Staff is requesting a waiver of insurance requirements pursuant to
Resolution No. 5835, based on the limited exposure of the Consultant
to potential liability problems and the size of the contract (see
attachment) . Further, the Consultant possesses automobile liability
insurance, and a $1, 000, 000 umbrella liability insurance policy at
the residence/office of the Consultant . Also, there are no
employees retained by the firm and the Consultant agrees to
indemnify the City.
Consequently, the City Attorney has reviewed this request and along
with staff recommends that Council accept the Consultant ' s insurance
and waive the insurance requirements pursuant to Resolution 5835 for
this project.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Community Development Contract Services Fund.
if
PI O 5/85
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Deny the request to waive insurance requirements .
ATTACHMENTS•
1. Resolution No. 5835
MA:RL:gbm
RCA - 10/24/88 -2- (1450d)
LOV t It C C o VU IA e va'rS
i, Historic Resources Board
' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
HUNTINGTON BEACH Post Office Box 190 Huntington Beach, California 92648
October 3, 1988
Hon. John Erskine, Mayor
City of Huntington Beach, CA
Re: 221 3rd St. Huntington Beach. . .the Hine House
Dear John;
Sometime ago the Council requested that this early cottage be pre-
served. We still concur in that request. The cottage is now va-
cant, and Mr. Brennan assured me it would be fenced today, Oct. 3,
1988, to forestall vandalism. We need to make some preliminary
plans about the ultimate disposition of this and other structures
which may require moving to be preserved. I suggest, therefore,
that you appoint a planning committee to develop some guidelines .
Among the policies to be clarified are
o where will the structure be preserved? on site? new
location? temporary location?
o who will be responsible for the rehabilitation?
o what are available funding sources?
o how will the structure(s) be utilized?
The committee should represent a broad range of interests, and in-
clude at least
o City Council member
o Historic Resource Board member
o Historical Society representative
o Community Services representative
o Community Development representative
o Huntington Beach City School District representative
If you feel that a committee is unnecessary, the Historic Re-
sources Board will be happy to solicit ideas from the community
and make recommendations for your consideration.
Sincerely,
4G1
Barbara Milkovich, Chairman
Historic Resources Board
REQUEz 1,r FOR CITY COUNCIL. ACTION
RH 89-32
Date March 27, 19R9
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Submitted by: Paul Cook, City Administrator
Prepared by: Douglas La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Economic Development
ko
Subject: PROPOSED RELOCATION OF HISTORIC STRUCTU ITY COUNCIL
ELEVENTH STREET
19,_
Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes [ ] New Policy or Excep ion
CITY CLERK
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments:
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
The City has the opportunity to relocate a structure with historical significance. In
absence of such relocation, the structure will be demolished to make way for new
construction.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that staff be directed to relocate the structure to the Bartlett Park
area east of the Newland Center, and that $20,000 be appropriated from General Fund
unappropriated fund balance to effect such a relocation, and to secure the structure at
the new location.
ANALYSIS:
The property located at 511 Eleventh Street has been purchased by a developer. The
property is currently developed as a single family residence. The structure was build in
about 1905 and is Colonial Revival in architectural style. The house was the original
parsonage for the United Methodist Church and has been restored and maintained over the
years. The owner has offered to donate the structure to the City if the City would be
willing to relocate it in a timely manner. Since the owner is anxious to proceed with
development of the property, it is important that the structure be relocated as soon as
possible. The owner intends to demolish the structure around April 1, 1989, to begin new
construction. The Historic Preservation Committee, formed by Council in Fall 1988, is
recommending that the structure be relocated to the Bartlett Park immediately and that
the structure be secured at the new location. Once plans for the Bartlett Park Historic
Village are finalized, the residence can be permanently situated at the Park. This
structure will complete the Little Blue Church and other historic structures yet to be
designated.
FUNDING SOURCE:
General fund unappropriated fund balance.
PIO 5/85
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Do not approve funds to relocate structure.
ATTACHMENTS:
Photo Sheet
DLB/MA/REL:jr
(2310d)
Yw
Alt^
i
` [ � 1;'t..���$ 9r/•ii7' �f�s'S`�'"�C'�s�YR�-.r't�� L+r y.,, i ..;
tom:; '+,•
`�
S (1�• r
REQUEST FC RE ,LE �'MENT , 13 ACTION
APPROVERH 89-43
Date May 15, 1989
CI. Itffi
z
Submitted to: Honorable Chairman and Redevelopment Agency Members
Paul Cook, Executive Director4� u' C-4 m
Submitted by:
Prepared b Douglas La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Economic Development "
p y' YORKTOWN-LAKE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (TENTAT R°AC�r
Subject: 13920 & EIR NO. 89-3) TIN BUILDINGS - SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LAIC
STREET AND YORKTOWN AVENUE m T
cs�
Consistent with Council Policy? Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments:
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
On May 2, 1989, the Planning Commission continued Tentative Tract 13920 and
Environmental Impact Report 89-3 for 30 days. The EIR analyzes impacts of and
alternatives to the proposal by Pacific Coast Homes to demolish the historic metal
buildings at the southeast corner of Lake Street and Yorktown Avenue, and to create six
single-family residential lots. Among the Planning Commission's concerns is the
Redevelopment Agency's position on the project alternatives outlined in the EIR.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Redevelopment Agency find that the project alternatives as
outlined are not feasible and are not consistent with the objectives of the Yorktown-Lake
Redevelopment Project Area.
ANALYSIS:
EIR 89-3 analyzes the following alternatives to the proposed six-lot-single-family
subdivision:
1) No project;
2) Onsite retention and reuse of the structures;
3) Alternative locations for the subdivision; and
4) Relocation of the historic buildings.
The alternatives analysis suggests that the Agency could acquire the site, and/or relocate
the structures to another site. The alternatives, however, are not consistent with the
Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Plan for the following reasons:
1) The no-project alternative (preservation of the site as is) would allow the structures to
remain in a state of disrepair, and possibly dangerous to the public health, safety, and
welfare. A stated goal of the Redevelopment Plan is to eliminate blighting influences,
including deteriorating and obsolete buildings. The applicant's proposal for six, single-
family homes is a logical extension of the approved tract immediately to the south.
P10/1/85
2) At the time the Redevelopment Plan was adopted (1982), the Agency did not
anticipate rehabilitation of any structures within the Project Area. Where
economically feasible, the Agency may move structures to alternative locations.
3) A preliminary analysis by Keyser Marston of the reuse options outlined in the EIR,
versus planned development of single-family homes, shows that the reuse options
would not provide a return on investment. Development costs would exceed project
values by amounts ranging from approximately $600,000 to approximately $2.8
million.
4) A possible land swap alternative whereby the city would obtain the site in exchange
for land west of Lake Street is not feasible because the expansion of the Civic Center
parking lot is under construction west of Lake Street.
5) All uses within the Redevelopment Area are mandated to conform with existing zoning
and General Plan designations. Some reuse options however, such as multi-family
housing, would require a zone change to allow higher density. Similar high intensity
land use scenarios south of the Civic Center have-been consistently denied by the
Planning Commission and City Council over the past seven years.
6) The yearly tax increment revenue cap for the Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Area is
$250,000. The expansion of the Civic Center and related improvements have priority
at this time, and the Agency will not have sufficient funds available to undertake
acquisition or relocation of the metal buildings.
FUNDING SOURCE:
1) None required as a result of this action.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1) Defer action on this matter at this time.
PEC/DLB/LP:lp
4715h
• REQUESI FOR CITY COUNCIL ,ACTION
ED 89-2
Date October 16, 1989
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Submitted by: Paul E. Cook, City Administrator
Prepared by: Douglas N. La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Economic Developme
PROPOSED RELOCATION OF HISTORIC STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 628 { My a
Subject: LOTH STREET (CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 2,
BY CITY COUNCIL
Consistent with Council Policy? Yes [ ] New Policy or Ex(eption
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alter
STATEMENT OF ISSUE: ,
At your meeting of October 2nd, you considered a recommendation.fom staff to relocate- a
residential structure at 628 loth Street to the Bartlett Park Historic Village area. This
matter was continued to your meeting of October 16th for further review.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff would recommend that this matter be tabled.
ANALYSIS:
Staff and the Historic Issues Committee which is a working committee of staff and
representatives from various boards, commissions and committees initially recommended that
the structure be relocated to Bartlett Park and become a part of the ultimate Bartlett Park
Historic Village. This project is tentatively scheduled for completion in conjunction with the
development of Bartlett Park in calendar year 1990.
Staff in reviewing the matter further with the City's Historic Resources Board at their
meeting of October IIth, is now recommending that this matter be tabled. Generally the
Board felt that while the structure had historic significance there were other structures more
significant that probably would be available in the foreseeable future for the Historic
Village. Their action as outlined in the attached letter from the Historic Resources
Chairman is to not support the relocation of this structure to Bartlett Park. Based upon this
action, staff would recommend that the matter be tabled and accordingly following.Council's
action a demolition permit will be issued upon request to the property owner or their agent.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Not applicable.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Proceed with the relocation of the structure to Bartlett Park or another suitable site and
appropriate a sum not to exceed $30,000 to provide for said relocation.
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Letter from Jerry Person, Chairman Historic Resources Board
2) October 2, 1989 RCA.
DLB:jar
5943r
No 5/85
LA 3 Historic Resources Board
• L�R" CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
HUNTINGTONBEACH Post Office Box 190 Huntington Beach, California 92648
October 12 , 1989
Mayor Wes Bannister
and Council Members
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, Ca . 92648
Re : Structure at 628-10th Street
Dear Wes and Council Members ,
At our last meeting of the Historic Resources Board held on
October 11 , 1989, a lengthly discussion was held between Doug
La Belle and members of the board regarding the structure located
at 628-10th Street and its possible inclusion into the Bartlett
Park Historic Village. After this discussion a motion was made
by Doug Langevin, seconded by Maureen Rivers , regretfully, not
to accept the house for Bartlett Park Historic Village. The vote
not to accept the house was five yeas and one obstention.
• The boards consenus was although the dwelling in question
should be preserved by other means , if possible . There are
other more suitable structures , botb in historical significance
and examples of quality craftsmanship of the time that are
more applicable for what is envisionrd for the historic village .
Sincerely,
dierr 7Pe
Y
Chairman
cc: Doug La Belle
REQUEST- FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
` DN 1 O1),1j9
Date Octo r 2, 1989
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City ,Council
Member
Submitted by: Paul Cook, City Administrator
x
Prepared by: Douglas La Belle, Director, Ec omic Developmen
C m a
Subject: PROPOSED RELOCATION OF HI ORIC STRUCTURE LOCA A9�-62 n
10TH STREET N `;rn m
s�
Consistent with Council Policy? [A Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, RecommendatioC Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions,Attachments:
STATEMENT OF ISSUE•
The City has the opportunity to relocate a structure with historical
significance. In absence of such relocation, the structure will be
demolished to make way for new construction.
RECOMMENDATION•
It is recommended that staff be directed to relocate the structure
to the Bartlett Park area east of the Newland Center, and that a
maximum of $30, 000 be authorized to effect such a relocation, and to
secure the structure at the new location.
ANALYSIS•
The property located at 628 loth Street has been purchased by a
developer. The property is currently developed as a single family
residence. The structure was build in about 1917 and is a
single-story Craftsman Bungalow. The house was believed to be
constructed by the son of William and Mary Newland and has been
restored and maintained over the years . The owner has offered to
donate the structure to the City if the City would be willing to
relocate it in a timely manner. Since the owner is anxious to
proceed with development of the property, it is important that the
structure be relocated as soon as possible. The. Historic
Preservation Committee, formed by Council in Fall 1988, is
recommending that the structure be relocated to Bartlett Park
immediately and that the structure be secured at the new location.
Once plans for the Bartlett Park Historic Village are finalized, the
residence can be permanently situated at the Park. This structure
will complement the Little Blue Church, the church parsonage, and
other historic structures yet to be designated.
FUNDING SOURCE:
General Fund
P10 5/85
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Do not approve funds to relocate structure.
ATTACHMENTS:
Photo Sheet
DLB/MA/REL: lab
RCA 10/2/89 -2- (3673d)
, ,
i
i
5
�.�Y..
� � :;. �
i
rk:*
���� ��
��
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH
To PAUL E. COOK From ROBERT J. FRANZ
City Administrator Deputy City Administrator
Subject REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATION Date SEPTEMBER 22, 1989
FOR RELOCATION OF DOWNTOWN
HISTORICAL STRUCTURE
FIS 89-23
As requested under the authority of Resolution 4832, a Fiscal Impact Statement has been
prepared and submitted relative to the proposed relocation of a structure with historical
significance, from the present locale of 628 10th Street to the Bartlett Park area east of the
Newland Center. Anticipations are that an appropriation of $30,000 would be sufficient for
this project.
An affirmative response by the City Council would reduce the unaudited, undesignated
balance of the City's unappropriated General Fund to $2,166,000.
ZJ. FRA Z
Deputy City Administrator
RJF:sd
4775j