HomeMy WebLinkAboutHISTORICAL PRESERVATION ADMINISTRATION - 1976 - 1989 - HISTO REQUE;., FOR CITY COUNCIL-- ACTION
January 30, 1989
Date
Submitted to:
Honorable Mayor.and City Council Members .4
Submitted by: Paul E. Cook, City Administratorlf4-- OV�DB�'CI
Prepared by: Richard Barnard, Assistant to the City Admin' for
Subject: DESIGNATION OF A CITY HISTORIAN 19 "
�x
Consistent with Council Policy? [?:] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments:
Statement of Issue:
Bud Higgins served as the City Historian until his death in the early 1980's. The city has
been without a Council designated City Historian since that time. Alicia Wentworth,
former City Clerk, has been very interested in the history of Huntington Beach, and has
indicated an interest in serving in the capacity of City Historian.
Recommendation:
Appoint Alicia Wentworth as the City Historian
Analysis:
The City Historian would be responsible for keeping various historical memorabilia and
maintaining a history of the City of Huntington Beach. Information that would be
maintained would include booklets, pamphlets, and various literature about the City of
Huntington Beach.
During Alicia's tenure as City Clerk, she was very active and very interested in collecting
vital statistics about the city. She was responsible for creating a historical data book on
the City of Huntington Beach. Also, historical memorabilia concerning Huntington Beach
has been collected by her over the years. Alicia has shown a keen interest in Huntington
Beach history. Currently, she is writing a bi—monthly articles about the history of
Huntington Beach in the local newspaper the Huntington Beach News. She is very
interested in seeing that the information concerning the history of Huntington Beach is
protected and maintained so that future generations of Huntington Beach can have an
appreciation of the way in which the city of Huntington Beach has grown.
Funding Source:
No funds required.
Alternative Action:
Consider appointing another individual to serve as the City Historian.
PEC/RB:paj
PIO 5/85 -
6q
RE016 FOR CITY CO IL/
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY A TION
Date June 27, 1988
Submitted to:
Honorable Mayor/Chairman and City Council/Redevelopment Agency Members
Submitted by:
Paul E. Cook, City Administrator/Executive Director,
Prepared by: Douglas N. La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Community Developme6&
Subject: RECOMMENDATIONS ON A DOWNTOWN HISTORIC IMPLEMENTATION
Consistent with Counc-1Policy? i Yes New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments:
cviy
U
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
1
Transmitted for your consideration is a staff report for a Downtown Historic Plan. This
concept will be a further implementation of the Downtown Village concept and should be
done in a manner which is compatible and harmonious with the proposed new
redevelopment projects.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Approve the following elements for a Downtown Historic Implementation Plan:
1) Retain important historic structures with significant historic character. The
Worthy buildings, the Shank House, Standard Market, Arthur Young Building
(VW repair) at 303 Third, and the Post Office are candidates for retention and
restoration.
2) Continue to proceed with the rehabilitation of the second block of Main Street,
west side, with facade improvements. The rehabilitation work should be done in
a manner sensitive to the historic elements of the block, and should incorporate
materials consistent with both historic and the Downtown Design Guidelines in
order to achieve a harmonious blend in the proposed new project.
3) Investigate 3D/International's recommendation for the development of an
historic square where structures can be moved, rehabilitated and in some cases
re-adapted to commercial or office and professional use and hire a consultant
to design the area. The consultant and Historic Resources Board should be
involved in the recommendations of candidate buildings for relocation to the
square.
4) Pursue the Thirtieth Street Architects recommendation of two historic
residential districts. The Wesley Park area, for example, retains a sense of
historic character with many homes in good repair. An ordinance could be
developed that formally identifies a district and establishes incentives that
would enable the City to work with property owners to maintain the character
and viability of the district.
PIO 4/84
5) Continue with the staff established procedure in response to demolition
requests for potentially historic structures. Any demolition request for
structures listed in the 1986 Survey must be held or postponed for 30 days in
order to provide the Historic Resources Board and the Historical Society an
opportunity to investigate, document and possibly save the structure. In
addition, the Historic Resources Board has identified and mapped additional
areas in the City that may contain historic structures. Staff has established a
-day postponement on demolition requests for these areas. Both the
Historical Society and the Board are notified of the demolition requests and
given an opportunity to contact the owner and document the structure.
ANALYSIS:
In 1985, the Historical Society requested the City. Council to approve a survey for the
downtown area to identify the remaining historical resources. With a large volunteer
force assisting Thirtieth Street architects, the consultant hired by the City to conduct and
evaluate the survey, the Historic Resources Survey was completed in 1986.
The Historic Resources Board was established in 1987 with the purpose of advising the
Council about historic issues and suggesting further action in response to
recommendations included in the survey. The Board's first action was to request the City
Council to approve the survey and forward it to the State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) for official recordation. Council approved the survey in November 1987 and it
was subsequently forwarded to SHPO.
The ,Historic Resources Survey stated that the State of California requires that 65 percent
of a potential historic district must retain its historic character (unaltered buildings) in
order to be eligible for National Register consideration. The survey did not identify
enough buildings to create an "eligible" district. They further stated, however, that many
buildings would "require only minimal rehabilitation in order to contribute to a district,"
and therefore, identified a potential downtown boundary.
An alternative to a Downtown Historic District was prepared by 3D/I in 1986 as part of
the Main-Pier Redevelopment Master Plan. In addition to emphasizing that the area
needed a sense of place and community, they also recommended the development of a
historic square or oldtown. This historic square would be bounded by Main, Olive, Orange
and Third Streets. The "Square" would retain the post office at the northeast corner of
Main and Olive and eventually become an area where other historic structures could be
moved as needed because of redevelopment activity.
The Historic Resources Board has submitted another alternative for Council consideration
for the establishment of an historic plan for the downtown redevelopment area. The first
phase of this plan includes the following components:
a. Hire an historic consultant to translate the A, B, C, etc. ranking used in the 1986
Survey to terminology recognized by the Federal Government and State Historic
Preservation Office. Terms such as: local significance, regional significance, etc.
The consultant could also review the Downtown Historic Resources Survey for the
establishment of a possible historic commercial district in the downtown and
recommend if there is a potential district candidate for the National Register of.
Historic Places. This study may also entail the preparation of Federal
documentation nominating a district for the National Register.
RCA - 6/27/88 -2- (0838d)
b. Establish an historic commercial district in the downtown area. The Board feels
this would encourage further revitalization of historic structures in the downtown,
retaining continuity and character contributing to the village concept, and also
would enable property owners to utilize tax incentives applicable to restored
historic structures. A component of establishing the District would be to adopt
historic design and development guidelines.
Now that the Downtown redevelopment plans are moving forward, and the City Council
has adopted a Village concept theme, an historic implementation plan can be developed
and integrated into the City's redevelopment program for the downtown area.
Revitalization, economic viability and historic considerations are important contributions
to the enhancement' of the community. Concurrent with these goals, the City can be
sensitive to historic architectural style and the retention of important historic structures
while improving the area for current and future residents as ,well as visitors.
Viability of a structure or an area is an important consideration in a historic as well as
redevelopment plan. The old commercial area primarily in the first three blocks of Main
Street contains structural, economic, seismic and historic issues that need attention.
Attempting to establish a National Register Historic Commercial District with
questionable candidates elevates historic needs above the other issues that are being
addressed in the downtown area. The City must work towards la balance of issues and
programs and move forward with the viable programs that are now in place. Staff is,
therefore, not recommending that the City pursue creation of a commercial historic
district in the downtown.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Main—Pier Redevelopment Project Area Tax Increment funds and Community
Development Block Grant funds, as appropriate.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
1. Approve the Historic Resources Board Downtown Historic Plan which includes hiring a
historic consultant to: .
Fba) Refine data in the 1986 Historic Resource Survey;
) Analyze and make recommendation for a historic commercial district in the
downtown;
c) Make recommendations and prepare necessary documents for a National Register
LdDistrict; and
) Establish design and development guidelines for the district.
2. Expand the 1986 Historic Resources Survey to include the remaining areas of the City
that may contain historic structures.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Active Downtown Redevelopment Area Projects
2. Historic Resources Board letter to Mayor Erskine dated June 20, 1988.
3. 1986 Historic Resources Survey
DLB/DTB:gbm
RCA — 6/27/88 —3— (0838d)
va
Kl-
cl
G V is
���NM+'�I ';6. �i�tse,,r�;(v i�'�.n� 1 r• <i3rIP�y1. ..y,�'�'�' 'v d4� � 3��._"-' S�
;x ��//��� ',n �4s' ` "}e,���� �",»,t^sy.,�,�'��.' • „ 'yid
fi
1 '� ' J. ".a4.• n.. � �a�. -.'eFhtY1�'.. 7cSti:Z?.: v!'n'!S;1`sM'�,f.1.++n�•`Pif E{ .1,.,�r
N•� ' jet' VT
`� Main
low
N
^`
�1
h
a�
i. ite Historic Resources Board
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
HUNTINGTON BEACH Post C flce Box 190 Huntington Beach, California 92648
June 20, 1988
Mayor John Erskine
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Subject: HISTORIC PRESERVATION WITHIN DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON BEACH
Dear John:
Enclosed is our proposal for the documentation of historic districts within the city and'a
map which suggests the boundaries of the historic commercial district, a first priority in
revitalizing downtown Huntington Beach.
In the last few weeks, there has been a great deal of concern and confusion about the
City's responsibilities to address historic issues in planning for redevelopment of the
downtown. We, too, are perplexed by the difference in interpretation of the significance
of structures between the findings of the initial survey and those of the state officer, Don
Napoli. While we are inclined to rely on the advise of Mr. Napoli, we agree that it is
appropriate to take time immediately to clarify a number of issues.
Therefore, once again, we strongly recommend the hiring of a new outside consultant to
review both the initial study and Mr. Napoli's suggestions. This consultant would be
charged with interpreting and/or revising the rating scale for historically significant
districts and structures within the city, with preparing nominations to the National
Register of Historic Places for qualified areas and buildings and informing the board, staff
and, ultimately, council of the financial and cultural advantages of acknowledging
tangible historic resources within the City.
Once these concerns have been addressed and the districts, where appropriate, have been
designated, council can proceed confidently with the redevelopment and revitalization of
the historic commercial core. Recognition of an historic area does not mean that
buildings within it cannot be removed if necessary. it does mean that there may be
additional financial incentives available for sensitive restoration of structures within the
district. It does mean that the city can take advantage of a major cultural resource for
educational and promotional activities to draw tourists and residents to the downtown.
Finally, it means that council has another design option to utilize as it proceeds with its
new village concept for the downtown.
Page Two
June 21, 1988
Historic Preservation Within Downtown Huntington Beach
The members of the Board will be happy to assist in locating new consultants, and to
review their findings for council. We will also be able to gather public input to the study
as requested by the consultants when they begin to identify historic areas and structures.
This is an opportunity to explore the history of our community and preserve its physical
reminders. Let's take advantage of an unexpected turn of events to create a positive
climate of understanding within our community.
Sincerely,
Barbara Milkovich
Chairman, Historic Resources Board
cc: City Council
Planning Commission
Paul Cook
Doug La Belle
Mike Adams
Dan Brennan
City Clerk
Bitii:jr
Attachments:
1. Proposal for Documentation of Historic Districts
2. Proposed Historic District
(0819d-2)
PROPOSAL FOR DOCUMENTATION OF HISTORIC DISTRICTS
FOR INCLUSION IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
WHAT:
o Hire outside consultant with experienced architectural historians and historians on
staff to:
Review initial survey and subsequent information;
Establish exact boundaries for historic districts identified by the historic
survey in 1986;
Submit nominations to the National Register;
Provide public information on the advantages of identifying historic districts
and structures.
WHERE:
o Study to cover area of initial survey. Priority to be given to commercial core.
WHEN:
o Effort to locate consultant to begin immediately and study be completed as soon
as practical.
ANTICIPATED
RESULTS:
o Continuation of effort begun in initial survey.
o Development of important cultural resource within the community to attract
tourists.
o Clear understanding of and establishment of rating scale for future evaluation of
historic districts and structures.
o Addition of historic design options.
o Availability of new financial resources for revitalization of redevelopment areas.
o Compliance with CEQA and National Historic Preservation Act.
COST:
o To be determined when scope of study is identified.
(0819d-3)
4 �
4sio,6c- bi%+ric
� um �
r \AA v�
_� ' - I 3a�f i�� 30�•
0LY6
i D� • d-I
I,t,� � �
c 2a� I
VAL
I • !22
IISo O
qW 1
PC 4�
REQUES FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
RH 86-22.
Date MArrh 7, 19RR
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
f _ _
Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator
Prepared by: Douglas N. La Belle, Deputy City Administrator
1 '
Subject: HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY STATUS REPORT
CITY C $Iz
Consistent with Council Policy? [A Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments:
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
Transmitted for the City Council's consideration is a request for conceptual approval on
establishing an area for local historic significance within the Downtown Core.
RECOMMENDATION:
Direct staff to explore the possibility of establishing areas of local historic resources
within the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area as a part of the preparation of an
overall master plan for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area..
ANALYSIS:
At the City Council meeting of February 18, 1986, the Council approved a 30-day review
period in which to review the issuance of demolition permits for selected buildings in
the downtown area. This action followed a request from the Historical Society that the
results of the historical resources survey be known before demolition permits are issued.
The Downtown Core area was the first area studied in the survey and the inventory
evaluated 72 buildings within that area. The preliminary findings indicate that the
downtown commercial area does not have a sufficient number of historic buildings to
meet the state's criteria for historic districts (65% of the structures); therefore, it
would not be eligible for National Register consideration as it stands. The consultant
recommends that the city explore the various possibilities of creating local historically
significant areas and identifying landmark structures and analyzing the econmically
feasible alternatives for these buildings. Staff is requesting additional information and
documentation on these buildings. Staff recommends that the Redevelopment Agency
study the feasibility of establishing an historic element within the overall master plan
for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Not applicable.
'ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
1. Continue pending further information.
CW T/DLB/MA:lp
2142h
PIO 5/85
4.1
4yrwej dur,nq fo-t4 "t
L� CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 86-10
VIJCOUNCIL ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH -
To Honorable Mayor and From Charles W. Thompson,
City Council Members City Administrator
Subject HISTORICAL RESOURCES SURVEY Date February 3, 1986
STATUS REPORT
On July 15, 1985 the City Council authorized the funding of a Historic Resources Survey for the
City. This action resulted after a request by the Huntington Beach Historical Society. At the
meeting of October 21, 1985 Council approved the hiring of .Thirtieth Street Architects to
conduct the survey.
Following their selection, Thirtieth Street Architects participated in a number of meetings with
the City staff and the Historical Society. A special committee was created to oversee the .
project made up of City staff and members of the Histroical Society. A kickoff meeting was
conducted for the survey on December 2, 1985. On the following Saturday the first volunteer
workshop was held, a total of 25 people attended. Prior to the workshop a windshield survey
was performed by the consultant and select members of the review committee. The windshield.
survey is the first step which establishes the buildings in need of further analysis. The buildings
so identified in the windshield survey are then analyzed on an individual basis by the workshop
volunteers. This information is completed and cataloged for further analysis . and
recommendation.
The survey team has set up an office in the City's Main Library Annex. Diann Marsh along with
volunteers from the Historical Society will be staffing the office. The survey will concentrate
on gathering information and documenting the downtown commercial area over the next two
months. The entire survey should be completed by the end of May 1986. This information can
then be used by the City Council and Redevelopment Agency to plan future action steps in the
.implementation of downtown redevelopment.
Res Hy submitted,
Charles W. Thompson -
City Administrator
CWT/MA:ajh
1929h
y H SfV n,cC�Z /o 4*Reile
REQUES t FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
RH 85-34
Date Julv 12 1985 Zo
0
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator 4qp
G
Prepared by: Douglas N. La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Redevelopm
Subject: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE PREPARATION/OVA HI ORI
RESOURCES SURVEY
Consistent with Council Policy? bQ Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Action , ttachments:
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
Transmitted for the City Council's consideration is a request from the Huntington
Beach Historical Society and Antiguities Commission for the preparation of a historic
resources survey.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize staff to prepare a request for
proposals and to commit staff time and funding as appropriate, not to exceed $15,000,
to conduct a historic resources survey for the city of Huntington Beach, with special
emphasize on the Downtown area, as a cooperative effort with the assistance of the
"Huntington Beach Heritage Committee" of the Historical Society.
ANALYSIS:
The Huntington Beach Historical Society and Antiquities Commission has requested that
a historic resources inventory be conducted in the Downtown area. The Society is
requesting that a survey be done at this time to increase the awareness of the existence
and value of any historical structures.
Staff has met with representatives of the Historical Society on several occasions and
would concur that additional review and exploration of historically significant
structures is warranted and should be a part of the comprehensive planning process.
Staff recommends that the City/Agency take the lead in this effort by contracting for
services which will not only identify any historically significant structures, but will also
identify the means by which these structures or elements of the old Downtown area can
be preserved in the character of the new development anticipated to occur within the
Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area, for the city's consideration.
.This study should be done in a timely manner so that the information will be available
to the Council prior to any final actions being taken on development projects within the
Downtown area.
PIO 4/84
t
RH 85-34
Page Two
July 12, 1985
FUNDING SOURCE:
Community Development Block Grant Funds.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Conduct the survey with volunteers from the Historical Society and city staff. This
alternative, however, could not be done in a manner as timely, and may not be able to
identify all the various options which the city could implement to preserve these
resources.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Letter from the Historical Society.
CWT/DLB/MA:lp
1061h
D
JUL 8 1985
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
The Newland House Q 19820 Beacb Boulevard July 8 , 1985
Mayor Ruth Bailey
City of Huntington Beach
Dear Mrs. Bailey:
In 1972, the City Council commissioned a scientific resources survey and
inventory to investigate the paleontological, archaeological and histori-
cal physical resources of the city from prehistoric times up to about
1920. Necessarily, the discussion of each era was brief. It limited
its historical analysis to only one structure, known, or believed to have
existed, in each of three time periods. Interestingly enough, although
a number of representative structures were available for investigation
in the downtown, the study does not seem to have considered this area.
In 1972, a time limit of 1920 was valid since a structure must be 50 yrs.
old to be considered "historic". However, a major growth period, and an
influential period in the history of the city began with the discovery of
oil in 1920. Many structures, commercial and residential, merit consid-
eration from this period now, in 1985, which would not have qualified
earlier for recognition.
For this reason as well as the narrow scope of historic investigation in
the earlier study, the Historical Society established an internal commit-
tee, designated "Huntington Beach Heritage" , to investigate the feasi-
bility of a new study to be ordered by the City Council and performed
largely by volunteers, working with a professional historic survey
coordinator. The report of the committee was received with a great deal
of enthusiasm at our June meeting and is being presented to you on
July 15, 1985.
It is the desire of the Society, and others within the community, that a
new historic resourses survey be undertaken at once, before the city
looses touch with its history. The purpose is not to delay future pro-
jects, but to record fragile elements of daily life in Huntington Beach
history. Its goal is to make community members and owners, alike, aware
of the existance and value of historical structures in the downtown, as
well as of the alternatives available for their future use. We believe
that recognition and evaluation of historic structures during planning
efforts will preserve elements of the city's past for its residents
enjoyment and add to the developing sense of pride and continuity with-
in the community.
Sin erely YOPUTS,
Huntin on Beacb Historical Society and Antiquities Commission
Kiel�yL osie, y 9
President 525-A Main Street 0 Huntington Beacb, California 92648
j.
PROPOSED CALIFORNIA HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA
June 28, - 1985
WHAT Identify homes and other structures which
illustrate the development of the original com-
munity and serve as visible reminders of the
past .
WHERE The original city, now know as "downtown" :
roughly from Lake St . to Goldenwest St . on
PCH; inland on Goldenwest St . to Clay St. ;
across on what would be Clay St . to lake St .
WHY The history of Huntington Beach is not well
known nor appreciated by many of its residents.
A project of this nature would focus attention
on the heritage and give newer residents a
foundation with which to identify their resi-
dential location as well as a sense of be-
longing to a fascinating city.
Future plans for the area include the utili-
zation of bloc grant monies and potentially
other federal funds . When these are used,
their effect on historic sites must be con-
sidered. A completed survey would expedite
rehabilitation of affected properties .
Tax and loan benefits are available to owners
of historic structures within designated his-
toric districts to assist with rehabilitation
projects . Historic building codes may be
utilized to salvage buildings which cannot
comply with modern codes, but can be made
safe , when an area or structure is recognized.
WHEEN The survey should be made as soon as practical
since plans are being developed for the area
and the historical resources have not been
fully identified for serious consileration.
Proposed Inventory (survey) page 2
HOW LONG Ex_.,erts saz-gest six month tl- one ;dear for onmpletion
of tuhle survey. Some of the Initial inventory seems
to have been done , independently, so it is possible
that to project will take less time .
FUNDING
MANPOWER Depending on complexity and % olurteer services ,
the total cost has been est_?-,-ated at about $1 5, 000. 00 .
Federal funds , . in terms of natchirg grants, are
competitively available . A,plication for these should
be made by Nov. 1 , 1985 , for 1986 fundin The
city' s share of the cost can be cash anUor volunteer
hours and donated services.
Approximately fifteen volunteers are needed to
conduct the survey. Part time volunteer office
staff is also recommended. r-1 professional team
provides volunteer training, conducts field checks ,
provides architectural and historical expertise ,
and compiles a final document , suitable for publi-
cation.
A review board, composed of community members ,
makes final recommendatons to the City Council on
structures or neighborhoods to be designated
"historic" . -
Potential expertise on Staff:
Diana Blaizer, Planning Department
Potential Consultants outside City Staff:
R & R Clayton
P.O . Box 16201
Irvine 92713
(714)261-2600
Diann Marsh
321 N. Philiadelphia
Anaheim, CA 92805
(714)52o-4033
Additional Resource - State and County
Rob Selway, Orange Co. Historical Commission
County Admun. Offices
Santa Ana
(714)834-4741
Don Napoli, Survey Coordinator
State Office of Historic Preservation
F.C. --lox 2�50
tiacramento, CA 95811
(916) 322-9615
Community Interest
Historical Society
Clara Barton Chapter, DAR
Private Individuals
Proposed Inventory (survey) page 3
END RESULT Documentation of tangible history of
Huntington Beach.
Greater az-oreciation of the value of older
neighborhoods within the city.
Awareness of the presence of irreplacable
resources within the city.
HISTORICAL SOCIETY CONTACT
Arlene Howard 536-3449
Barbara i:7ilkovich 897-9766
ATTACHMENTS Project area map
Sample survey sheet
• > .Ser _ Site Mo. Yr.
State of California—The Resour Agency E
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION o LITM Q. NR SHL_
51
Lat Lon Era Sg
HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY 1
N Adm_ T2 _T3_ Car_HABS____HAER -
IDENTIFICATION
1. Common name:
2. Historic name, if known:
3. Street or rural address
City: ZIP: County:
4. Present owner, if known: Address:
City: ZIP: Ownership is: Public ❑ Private ❑
5. Present Use: Original Use:
Other past uses:
DESCRIPTION
6. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of a site or structure and describe any major alterations from its original
condition:
7. Locational sketch map (draw and label site and 8. Approximate property size:
surrounding streets, roads, and prominent landmarks): Lot size (in feet) Frontage
NORTH
Depth ,
or approx.acreage
9. Condition: (check one)
a. Excellent ❑ b. Good ❑ c. Fair ❑
d. Deteriorated ❑ e. No longer in existence ❑
10. Is the feature a. Altered? ❑ b. Unaltered? ❑
11. Surroundings: (Check more than one if necessary)
a. Open land ❑ b. Scattered buildings n
c. Densely built-up ❑ d. Residential
e. Commercial ❑ f. Industrial ❑
g. Other ❑
12. Threats to site:
a. None known ❑ b. Private development L.J
c. Zoning ❑ d. Public Works project ❑
e. Vandalism ❑ f. Other ❑
NOTE: The following(Items 14-19)are;or structures only.
14. Primary exterior building material: a. Stone ❑ b. Bricfc ❑ C. Stucco ❑ d. Adcbe _, e, Wood
f. Other ❑
15. is :i:e structure: a. On its original =ire. o. r. U _J
16. Year of initial construction This date is: a. Factual ❑ b. Estimated r
17. Architect (if known):
18. Builder (if known):
19. Related features: a. Barn ❑ b. Carriage house ❑ c. Outhouse i d. Sheds) e. Formal garden(s) __J
f, Windmill ❑ g. Watertower/tankhouse ❑ h. Other ❑ 1. None Li
SIGNIFICANCE
20. Briefly state historical and/or architectural importance(include dates,events, and persons associated with the site when known):
21. Main theme of the historic resource: (Check only one): a. Architecture ❑ b. Arts& Leisure ❑
c. Economic/Industrial ❑ d. Exploration/Settlement ❑ e. Government ❑ f. Military ❑
g. Religion ❑ h. Social/Education ❑
22. Sources: List books,documents,surveys,personal interviews,and their dates:
23. Date form prepared: By (name):
Address: City ZIP:
Phone: Organization:
(State Use Only)
_ iQ 61 1 'urt,. K..nop
V iurlo O I.�
1 ,
II g �, <<I I '
fi 1 ,
a 4_ -
_.. Cwl t i del ..
1 »
GAS ®"O'_ • � -_ ° � ♦ / CM rl tMr W ¢ r•w�►JM
i. / ` I � �) �I T l Ir as f 1. 1 _ •
u- 'JtI„tea K,w u
SEACA FF 1 --
I / v[IAGE 1 OE u�rxE
[NJ - _.—.. --._. __. N 1 rant .1'M
n
i \ v ) (� � r► Er IcIv1C , -- •� srR 6 _ .� 1,•ca• -_-.
O I - °
OQ 1
se AU" M sawI't o �� ) ,,rr, w •r[,`.�,.
\� M IOE d �+.r ► ° ��
All NI fli"I (p� 111LL���, l r
1 l_� •yy IaA ti C. 1E [I NNr All W:� Q�/dtr� IJ rO�fiW 0.1FP[[
Jrisrl
- ` 'J} i 1 cfO �I R r 1
PQ
r / a a +i: S f
1 1 tM
_ '1, �
`. l it.ISM IAAIN A
s u 0
' n6.•w 1[Ni Irr11F r4m j O
PR
i • r aa• aM.LLN
C 1
,i, et i T
1 [
Olk yK
Proposed Historical 'S"'■^ tna 7R
j :\ wT
Building Study Area \ ry
Gs commu"Ify
PARK
o
OCCAN — I r a\ w
•i I & \ �1 MVIr II I _
/ Ni3
7'
7`
�• C1TV OF HHUMbi lUT+1l BEACH �
I NTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION
To DAVID ROWLANDS From WALTER W. JOHNSON
CITY ADMINISTRATOR LIBRARY DIRECTOR
Subject CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING Date January 2, 1976
HISTORICAL LANDMARKS
In discussing the criteria with representatives of the
State Advisory Board on national parks, historical sites,
building and monuments, the following is offered for
evaluation of sites or buildings.
1. Should have "state-wide" significance.
Anthropological
Cultural
Military
Political
Architectural
Economical
Scientific
Technical
Religious
2. Research should be done to substantiate historical
proof and bibliographic evidence should accompany the
research.
3 . If an architectural landmark, it should be a prototype
of an outstanding example of a period style or a most
notable work. If it is reconstructed or rehabilitated,
it should not be considered unless it is the only one
of its type surviving in the region.
4. Should be at least 50 years old.
We have written to the Historical Resource Conservation
Department of Parks and Recreation for further information.
Unless the Los Patos water tower is a point of historical
interest, which no one to my knowledge has been able to
substantiate, its value lies in being an easily identifiable
landmark and a point from which directions can be readily
given.
cc: Rod Jones
[�'
�
t��11�T 6TONBEACH LitA��
�,/ rfj��r�rr�fr (rr�►( ��� �tirc'r /t��%S'(�(I/Y'+P•S' ('/!I('/'
7111 Talbert Street Huntington Beach, California 92647 (714) 536.5481
January 2, 1976
t
Mr. Rodney, Jones, Chairman
Huntington Beach Historical & Antiquities Commission
6321 Shields Drive
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
Dear Rod:
In addition to the criteria recently sent to you to serve as
guidelines for the Commission in determining sites, buildings,
structures, and objects that possess integrity of location,
design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and associa-
tion which may make them worthy of consideration, I am taking
the liberty of sending you the following criteria used by the
National Park System and National Historic Landmarks.
A. That they are associated with events that have made signi-
ficant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
B. That they are associated with the lives of persons signi-
ficant to our past.
C. That they embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,
period, or method of construction, or that represent the
work of a master or that possess high artistic values, or
that represent a significant and distinguishable entity t.
whose components may lack individual distinction.
D. That they yield, or may be likely to yield, information
. important -,in prehistory or history.
E. A religious property deriving primary significance from
architectural or artistic distinction or historical impor-
tance.
F, A building or structure removed from it-s original location
but which is significant primarily for architectural value,
or which is the surviving structure most importantly asso-
ciated with a' hstoric person or event.
G. A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding
importance if there is no other appropriate site or building
directly associated with his productive life.
H. A cemetery which derives its primary significance from graves
of persons of transcendent importance, from age, from dis-
tinctive design features, or from association with historic
events.
s Rodney Jones, C airman page 2 January 2 , 1976
I. A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a
suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner
as a part of a restoration master plan, and when no other
building or structure with the same association has survived.
J. A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age,
tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own
historical significance.
K. A property achieving significance within the past 50 years
if it is of exceptional importance.
Sincerely,
Walter W. Johnson
Library Director
WWj:ms
cc: Bud Belsito