Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-09-14 Historic Resources Board Summary Minutes City of Palo Alto Page 1 Call to Order/Roll Call Present: Chair Martin Bernstein; Board Member Margaret Wimmer, Beth Bunnenberg, Brandon Corey, Roger Kohler, Michael Makinen Absent: Vice Chair Bower Chair Bernstein: Welcome to the September 14th meeting of the Historic Resources Board. Would staff please call role? Ok, thank you so much. Oral Communications Chair Bernstein: First would be oral communications and the public may speak to any item, not on the agenda. I see no cards, thank you. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions Chair Bernstein: Any agenda changes, additions, and deletions today? Ms. Amy French, Chief Planning Official: None. Chair Bernstein: Thank you. City Official Reports 1. Historic Resources Board Meeting Schedule and Assignments Chair Bernstein: City official reports, Historic Resources Board meeting schedule, and assignments. Those are on our next page I believe. Ms. French: Yes, packet page four and you see the upcoming meetings; October 12th, we are going to have that meeting. We’ll probably give an update on the Eichler project – Eichler Guideline project and we may have another item – a project. Then we are going to have a meeting for sure on November 9th, that’s when we’re going to have the Eichler Guidelines for a full discussion. Then we are going to, of course, cancel Thanksgiving and Christmas dates; that’s November 23rd and the 28th of December. So, we will have the one meeting in December the 14th. So, we’re reserving the 26th and we may or may not have a meeting for October. Yeah, the next meeting we will have, the October 12th and we have a schedule for that. The 26th we’re waiting to see if we’re going to put something on that meeting. Board Member Corey: (Inaudible) Ms. French: October, next month. HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD MEETING MINUTES: September 14, 2017 City Hall/City Council Chambers 250 Hamilton Avenue 8:30 A.M. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Board Member Corey: Next month? You said the next meeting, the 20 –are we still having a meeting on the 28th of September? Ms. French: I’m sorry. Board Member Corey: Yeah, so (inaudible). Ms. French: We don’t have agenda items for the 28th at the moment and Chair Bernstein will be absent and I don’t know what other folks are up to but we don’t have anything at the moment. So, we may cancel that. Board Member Makinen: I may be absent also. Ms. French: Oh, thank you for letting us know. Board Member Makinen: (Inaudible) Chair Bernstein: We need your mic on. Board Member Makinen: I was waiting to see what she said about the – if we were going to have a meeting but… Ms. French: We don’t have any projects targeted for the 28th. We have a couple of projects that fell by the wayside as far as coming for prelim. Board Member Makinen: It sounds like it’s iffy. Ms. French: It’s iffy. Chair Bernstein: Thank you. Study Session 2. Discussion regarding May 2018 Historic Preservation Events, to Include CPF Conference, Historic Preservation Month, Educational Opportunity, and Submittal of CLG Grant Application for Modern Era Context Statement Chair Bernstein: Next is a study session, discussion regarding May 2018 Historic Preservation events. To include CPF Conference, Historic Preservation Month, educational opportunity and submittal of a Certified Local Government Grant application for Modern Era Context Statement. Shall staff have any comments for us on this agenda item? Ms. French: Just first to acknowledge the presence of Board Member Wimmer who is sitting where Board Member Bower’s name tag is so don’t let the public be confused. Good morning. This is pretty much a de-brief in a sense from the joint meeting that we had with the Council last month – at the end of last month. So, we just wanted to touch base with you on some things and have some – a brief conversation. The first item here is the California Preservation Foundation Conference, we are participating and Palo Alto is hosting here in May of next year and it’s May 17th thru the 20th. We think that is going to be an excellent opportunity for – educational opportunities for Council and for others in the community that may want to join and take a session for a day or workshop. I think they – we’ll have that capability to send our Council Members so that’s in the discussion of how would we present educational opportunities for Council and that’s a really good opportunity. Then we have at that conference, we’re going to –oh, and we had the kick-off meeting earlier. I know I attended part of it, Beth Bunnenberg attended, Martin attended and of course, Emily attended the entire meeting and we’re tracking that. Oh, I think Council Member Holman also attended so it was a very interesting session. They were throwing somethings out City of Palo Alto Page 3 and combining others in talking about tours versus sessions and this kind of thing. One – we actually have three sessions in Palo Alto that relate to project that we’ve done here; the Professorville Guidelines, the Eichler Guidelines that we're doing now, and then Gamble Garden. So, I don’t know if we want to talk more about those at all or more specifics on that but did – maybe the Board Members that were there would like to say something about their participation – I mean as next steps as far as that goes. Chair Bernstein: Beth, your light is on, go ahead. Board Member Bunnenberg: I handed out to you some – both a list of possible walking tours in that all of them have already been worked up. Many of you are familiar with PAS folders that had very nice walking tours and there are probably still (inaudible) around who have conducted these tours or if not, I think we could get them pretty easily. They are Professorville, Downtown Palo Alto Sampler, Barron Park, a fairly lengthy Homer Avenue tour which is close to downtown, College Terrance, and then there is the question about whether we would want to include some kind of Stanford tour because we are right here in the shadow of Stanford. Including that was the reason that Palo Alto was founded so just to bring up that. Then some wonderings about locations of whether CPF has chosen a hotel or what kind of gathering places might we have. We do have the Lucie Stern Center, we have Palo Alto High School’s new media center, we have City Hall, and then, of course, we have MacArthur Park which is one of our historic structures. So, just to put that out and see what the Board thinks. Chair Bernstein: I was going to ask the same question on if we have any venue locations picked out of where the kind of central gathering place might be? Ms. French: The Sheraton Hotel is offering rooms and conference facilities. When you say gathering places, you’re meaning an evening meal and reception and these kinds of things. Chair Bernstein: Yeah. Ms. French: You know I don’t know what’s in store there but MacArthur Park seems like nature. It’s right across the street from the Sheraton. Board Member Bunnenberg: (Inaudible)… Chair Bernstein: We need your light on. Board Member Bunnenberg: …want to show off some of our things like Lucie Stern Center and why I think it might be an interesting. Usually, there are buses that take people around and the whole logistics of that is quite something to figure out. Chair Bernstein: Yeah, great. Board Member Wimmer. Board Member Wimmer: Do we know if there’s a tentative schedule for the conference yet? I mean has the Foundation established a sort of a preliminary schedule and speakers and has that been – I’m sure they are working on that. I actually emailed someone to sign up or to be on part of the Committee or something but I haven’t gotten an email back but I mean – hopefully, we can assist with the conference and suggest things. I mean I think we should be a valuable resource to them, most definitely. Board Member Bunnenberg: Usually, they begin to have different tracks and if you’re interested in a particular area why you take one track and if you're interested in commercial buildings and – or natural features or whatever, why there might be a track for that. I haven’t seen anything of that nature. Chair Bernstein: Board Member Wimmer’ s comment that the HRB, I think would be a natural group to be involved in different track or whatever so as that gets developed, I think all the HRB members enthusiastically agree to be part of each different track in their own – with each of our own interests in which tracks we want to be involved. I think it was Council Member Holman who actually came up with a City of Palo Alto Page 4 title of the theme of – I forget what it was but I think her idea was suggested. There were several suggestions but I think hers was the one that got selected and I forget what it was. Ms. Emily Vance, Historic Planner: I think that – good morning everyone. I think the theme was something along the lines of deep roots and lasting legacy. Chair Bernstein: Yeah, something like that. Ms. Vance: I’m not entirely – I can’t remember it perfectly but it was something along those lines. Chair Bernstein: We had fun coming up with a name. Any other Board Members? Board Member Makinen. Board Member Makinen: Yes, I was going to suggest the same thing in that we probably need to have a pretty good definition of a theme before we start off on what our role is going to be and how we’re going to participate with them. I would encourage that we get the definition of the theme up pretty early. Chair Bernstein: Ok, sounds good. Board Member Bunnenberg: Oh, and one other thing is there was some time about the inclusion of things like the electronics industry – the growth of the electronic industry as another. Chair Bernstein: During our joint City Council and Historic Resources Board meeting we had – was that a couple weeks ago or three weeks ago? Ms. French: I believe it was August 28th. Chair Bernstein: Ok, yeah, something like that. The – one of the topics that came up during that joint meeting that was specifically Board Member – Council Member Wolbach, he was agreeing that the Council would appreciate a seminar that discusses things like compatibility, differentiation, the Secretary of Interior Standards, rehabilitation, and just other comments about building aesthetics, compatibility, proportion scale, and all the principles of design. I agree with that idea to have that kind of a seminar for City Council Members. I’ve had – I’ve heard City Council Members past and present comment that, Martin, we know the HRB is very well versed on these things but Council Members sometimes may not have the same level of training that we have. So, I think the seminar idea it – would be supported by Council Members and what I’d like to suggest is have the HRB – my first suggestion is have a subcommittee of HRB Members lead that seminar. So, the subcommittee would be up to three Members and we as a Board today can discuss – well maybe if we want all Board Members to be participating in that. If there’s a subcommittee, it would be – I would like to nominate as Chair, myself and then Margaret Wimmer, I think she said she would be interested in doing that. So, if it’s a subcommittee there would be three or if there’s – or if it’s the bull HRB discussing issues of compatibility, differentiation, design principles for design. How’s the Board feel about having the whole Board lead a seminar like that or just subcommittee? Board Member Corey: I think it’s worth – without volunteering others, I think it’s worth the whole Board. I (inaudible)… Board Member Makinen: I think the whole Board should be… Chair Bernstein: Ok. Board Member Makinen: I think if we – had one previous session where we talked about subcommittees and I guess my take on that was its teams that deprive some of the other Board Members opportunity if we have these subcommittees. I mean we’re a small group right here and I think we can get together and brainstorm it. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Chair Bernstein: How’s that sound for the rest of the Board Members? Board Member Wimmer: Martin, I just wanted to ask what are you envisioning in terms of how – what the format would be? Would it be during a City Council meeting that we would get – do or would it be a separate study session that’s exclusively focused on, on this? What kind of format do you think it would take? Chair Bernstein: That’s a good question. I’m thinking the more focused the meeting is so if there’s – if it’s with a regular City Council meeting, that means that City Council Members are going to have a packet agenda of 10, 12, 15 different subjects it seems like and maybe that dilutes the focus that I’m suggesting the HRB provide for the Council Members. If it can be somehow a separate seminar I guess but I guess that – does it need to be – I guess it’s still a public meeting I guess, no matter what kind of format I would imagine. Board Member Corey: I wonder if we could wrap this into the even in May and you could actually invite others from the public who are interested as well. Maybe even, without stepping too far, maybe even Members of the ARB who we seem to have conflicts with as far as the understanding and that way you can kind of make it a fun event for others but everybody would be welcome. Chair Bernstein: I think that’s a great idea. Staff, do you have any idea or comment about that suggestion? Ms. French: That was our idea too, to go ahead and have it in the month of May, not at a City Council meeting; as you say, they’ve got a lot to focus on. We may – we probably won’t get a quorum of Council Members but we can invite all Council Members and all ARB Members and announce it as a community meeting where there’s an opportunity to learn. So, it could be some kind of – no a Monday but a Tuesday, Wednesday or maybe not Wednesday. We can get this room and maybe a 5 o’clock time frame learning session for an hour and that kind of thing for during the month of May if we can swing it. It wouldn’t be during the three days of the conference because that would be too much but maybe the week before or the week after. Board Member Corey: We don’t – I was suggesting that because you could tie it in with the conference but otherwise, I think the dates – it doesn’t have to be May unless it was in – during the actual conference because there may be some interest. Maybe -- I don’t know... Ms. French: True. Board Member Corey: …maybe you can’t fit it in but it would be cool to roll in with that, I don’t know. Ms. French: So, if we had people in town already – I mean we’re going to have experts in town as well. Board Member Corey: We could actually have other people talk about it too. If there are experts and they want to mention cases or suggestions so it could be interesting. Ms. French: Yeah, we can’t offer cocktails in here but maybe out in the plaza here and then have some kind of a – yeah, that’s a nice (inaudible). Board Member Corey: I don’t know, I think it would be nice. Board Member Wimmer: I agree, I think it’s early enough maybe that we can have one – someone on our Board that could be a liaison between the Foundation. I mean I would be happy to contact them and maybe say this is what we think that could be a valuable workshop because you know, they have those – when we went last year in San Francisco they had those discussion panels, which I thought was kind of – which I’m sure they will have more things like that. Maybe they need topics, maybe this could be – we City of Palo Alto Page 6 could suggest this as a topic. I mean I definitely think it’s a great topic and it’s something that we all are trying to be aware of and follow in term of the Secretary of Interior Standards so I think that’s a great idea. Board Member Makinen: Yeah, panel discussions seem to work pretty good for topics like this. You could even invite somebody from the [SHIPO] Office to participate. I think that would provide an enhancement to the panel discussion. Get some recognized experts to talk on different parts of the subject. Ms. French: On the topic of coordinating with the organizers of this event, I know Council Member Holman might be – you might talk with her about her involvement. I’m sure she’s regularly keeping touch with this group so maybe you could talk about this with her as well. Board Member Wimmer: Yeah, because I – she also gave me the information of who to contact to be available for the Committee or part of the Committee but I haven’t heard back so I’ll email that group again, I think. Chair Bernstein: Fantastic, excellent, very good. Other than looking at approving minutes from other meetings, this is the only item on our agenda today. Any other comments or questions? Yeah. Ms. Vance: Just really quick to go back to the educational session and opportunity that we want to do. I think it’s important that we remember what this – where this came from, which was to educate our Council Members and now we’re lumping in ARB Members and it’s really about a local -- educating people who are in Palo Alto who are making decisions. I don’t want to – proposal was for a conference session in May and they’ve already gone through every single one. I’m wary of trying to shove another workshop or lecture or something onto CPF’s plate. My idea – my thinking was that this would be a really good kind of introduction for a preservation 101 for the community, for the people in Palo Alto, for ARB, for Council and that kind of thing. Maybe the day before the Council officially kicks off to kind off – before the conference or the week before. Certainly, in May, I like the idea of lumping everything in with preservation month as a whole but my thinking was that it was more of a general educational opportunity for people in Palo Alto who are making these kinds of decisions and not to try to overwhelm CPF with more things and pulling to many people in different directions. So, we don’t want to take – draw people away from other sessions and that kind of thing. Board Member Corey: Do they have a packed schedule at this point or do you… Ms. Vance: It’s – they had a lot of proposals and it does seem like it’s going to be a packed session, just for those few days that they’re going to be here. They haven’t made any official announcements and there’s kind of a skeleton track right now but I haven’t seen anything official about who’s going to be presenting what but it seems like they are pretty full. Board Member Corey: Ok, well I mean to Margaret’s point, it’s a way out so we could have influence but it’s a fair point. I still think it’s good – I don’t know, maybe we’d have – I don’t know maybe we have two separate ones or maybe we want one just for the City Council and the ARB but I don’t know, it seems like a fun opportunity. Yeah, I don’t know what’s on the session and maybe there’s thrilling stuff on the session that we can’t lose so that maybe the case… Ms. Vance: There are. Board Member Corey: …but it’s at least worth looking at or I still think. Ms. Vance: I agree, there are a couple different approaches to this but I think it’s definitely something that we need to do. However, that happens, we’ll kind of fleece that out. Ms. French: We could preliminary take a look at some – the three days leading up to the conference as a first pass to see if this room might be available. I know that there – the Wednesday of the 16th, this City of Palo Alto Page 7 would be the day before, that is not a Planning Commission meeting date so I don’t know what else might be in here but we could check. Board Member Corey: I guess my feeling is if we’re going to do it in town with this conference, then we want to do this as part of the conference and if not, then it could be January, December, it doesn’t – two- years out; it doesn’t matter, right? I mean like having it a week before and people aren’t around, I don’t know if that – you know what I’m saying? Ms. French: Right, it may not matter but it also is exciting because it is preservation month, the month of May… Board Member Corey: That’s fair, that’s fair. Ms. French: … that it might help focus people on the fact that it’s preservation month… Board Member Corey: That’s fair. Ms. French: …and then advertise the walking tours and what have you and we could wrap the concepts in and have brochures. Board Member Corey: That’s fair. Ms. French: You know build community excitement. Board Member Corey: I feel like it’s a missed opportunity if we didn’t have something like this but that’s just my opinion. Chair Bernstein: I was asked specifically by Council Members, Martin, we need this kind of education so I think as Historic Planner Vance was saying, let’s keep it focused to local government officials. A Council Member asked Martin, we need this education so that’s why I was thinking as close as we can keep it to HRB and Council Members. I mean that’s what they were asking me so good, alright, ok, we’ll pursue with that. Ms. French: On the preservation month, Emily is having some ideas having done fun things in other communities. She has some concepts that she’s going to talk about. Ms. Vance: Yeah, we might as well get started early. This is – we’ve had wonderful success with these – with the architectural scavenger hunt and experience prizes in other communities and I’d really like to do that here in Palo Alto. It’s a really – this is our month to kind of shine and to show what preservation can do economically, socially, and aesthetically. This is our kind of time so it’s a pretty exciting month for me and so as far as the architectural scavenger hunt, little details – little architectural details downtown. I would create an online form or print out, people fill out their answers, hand it in for the whole month and then these experience prizes are something that I would actually like for the Board to help with recommendations. It’s something – you don’t want to hand them something or give them a physical thing. You want to give them something – an experience that involves the built environment here in Palo Alto. So, things like a behind the scenes tours of important buildings or a walking tour or something that they walk away from with a greater understanding and a better appreciation. So, if there’s any kind of building or tour or special place that you think might be a good thing that we could offer, I’m all ears. Chair Bernstein: Thinking of the [Ross] building. Ms. Vance: That’s a great one because these are – yeah with the mural. These are places that people are curious about, they want to know what’s in there, what it’s like inside so these are kind of special opportunities for us to be able to give that to them. As far as local partnerships, we’re working with [PAS] City of Palo Alto Page 8 and [PAHA] are already well aware of this coming May and all the activities that are happening. So, I’ve already been reaching out to them and getting some help as well. Chair Bernstein: I often think about who are going to be the next owners of our historic buildings and particularly our residences. Those are going to be possibly the school children in the City of Palo Alto. Somehow reaching out to high schools, elementary schools and middle schools in Palo Alto and however that is reached out too. Is it – I mean is it the school administration, is it – how – what’s the – how do we connect with them and let them know hey, we have this architectural scavenger hunt and let children be involved in this. Ms. Vance: That’s a great point. In the past with the architectural scavenger hunts, a lot of people took their children with them and that’s a lot of fun to look around and look up instead of down. We got a lot of comments about kids having fun and getting excited when you see the picture and you can see where it is on the building. That’s a great point but we also – I know coloring sheets, coloring competitions for younger kids that we’ve done and I know – I think Los Gatos does an essay contest for – is it 7th grade? They do a history essay contest via the museum down there so there are other options that we could think about for me as well to get that younger audience in. I like that. Ms. French: Another way to involve the children of the community is we do have high schools that have community service. So, there might be somebody in high school that would like to participate and work with Emily to reach out and have some kind of segment at the high schools regarding history month preservation. Chair Bernstein: As far as the reaching – as far as connecting with the school, Emily is that something you would want to do or should we have a Board Member do that? Ms. Vance: Oh, I would be more than happy to do that in conjunction with a Board Member. I feel like that would be really fun. Chair Bernstein: Ok, excellent, fantastic. Ms. Vance: Maybe we could think about maybe some kind of little lecture or kind of conversation that Board Members and myself could do at the high school or something like that. Board Member Bunnenberg: There are a couple of high school history teachers that have been supportive in the past that would be good to check in with. Chair Bernstein: Board Member Makinen. Board Member Makinen: Yes, one of the things I’ve seen that works pretty good at things like Historic Preservation Month or even at CPF is a silent auction of architectural historical artifacts that are donated by members of the public and anybody who has an interest in it. That seems to spike a lot of interest, these silent auctions. Put them on a table and people can look at them. Ms. French: Like a corbel from a building or what… Board Member Makinen: Yeah, something like that; different things. Ms. French: We can solicit some of these buildings that are removed to donate their salvaged materials. Board Member Makinen: Yeah, something that is of interest. Chair Bernstein: I was smiling with familiarity with Historic Planner Vance’s comment about so people would look up rather than just straight. I’ve – architectural walking tours in San Francisco and the name of the tour is ‘I’ve never noticed that before’ and I’ve had people say we’ve been by this building millions City of Palo Alto Page 9 of times and I’ve never noticed that before because people all of sudden aren’t looking up so much. These are all excellent suggestions, are there any other comments? Board Member Makinen. Board Member Makinen: That’s because they have what I term thumb disease. People are so interested in working their thumbs so they have the most muscular thumbs in the world. Chair Bernstein: Exactly. Board Member Makinen: Cell phone zombies they are sometimes referred to. Chair Bernstein: Well, eventually we might have implants so that will take care of that problem. Other comments on this topic? I think we’ve ended out comments on this subject. Ms. French: The next topic is the Modern Era Context Statement overview. So, we – that’s another thing we are going to be sharing with you in the coming months. We have a deadline again, in May of next year to submit the grant. The Council did support this concept or supported in a study joint meeting format so really, we would need to go back to the Council and get their formal nine number votes or what have you. Chair Bernstein: Great photograph. Ms. French: Meanwhile, we have Emily who has picked up former staff member’s work and is massaging it to get it to the next level. So, Emily, did you want to talk about next steps? Ms. Vance: Sure, I can give you a little more information about what this Modern Era Context Statement would look like and kind of a timeline. So, May is the due date and we’re obviously going to have more conversations as we get closer to that time. The era is going to cover 1940-1970, which will pick up from the last big comprehensive survey that was done in Palo Alto. We will have obviously public workshops, similar to what we are doing with the Eichler Guidelines. As well as these kinds of fun events like our memory event with the Eichler’s as well so it will be kind of a similar idea as far as timelines. Can you go to the next one? Chair Bernstein: That’s a great photo by the way. Ms. Vance: Yeah, I want you to enjoy these photos too that I found. Chair Bernstein: Is the sign Hotel Presidents still – god, I need to – I’ve never noticed that before. Is that the… Ms. Vance: Is that still there, I’m not sure. Chair Bernstein: …the Hotel President sign, is it still there? Ms. Vance: I’m not sure if that’s still there. Way off in the back. Chair Bernstein: Oh, man that’s a great sign. Ms. Vance: So, we’re going to go beyond Eichler’s with our context statement. This is going beyond residential as well so we’re thinking about churches, commercial buildings, corporate campuses so think about the Research Park, certain architectural styles that we’ll be covering, expressionism, futurism, brutism, all that good stuff that we love. Then, of course, the church, which is first and for most. Ms. French: This was where my parents met and I’m wondering if that’s my dad next to the tree. City of Palo Alto Page 10 Chair Bernstein: Oh, my god. That’s a wonderful church, have people been inside that church building? It’s the glass windows there that provide a great little museum; it’s fantastic. I think it’s called a folded plate architectural structure there. It’s very interesting. Ms. French: This church is actually listed in – shown and featured in a book that I have that Council Member Holman had bought and provided to the department that shows some of these gems in California. Ms. Vance: Again, with the context statement, you’re going beyond just architectural style itself and looking at events and people and other – these broad patterns of history that will also be touched on so things like the 1960’s bohemian culture here in Palo Alto, car culture, counter-culture, communism; all of that stuff that was happening in the very turbulent era. So, I thought it was kind of interesting that Saint Mike’s, which I think is now Pete’s coffee downtown use to be this kind of hole in the wall little bar area where Joan [Bias] played, Jerry Garcia, Jefferson Airplane. It was this really kind of neat, groovy little spot; it’s a coffee shop now but it’s still there. So, there are all these little kinds of magical tidbits hidden around that the context statement will be sure to cover. Ms. French: This looks like Cuba. Ms. Vance: It does look like Cuba. So, that was just kind of a general overview of what this context statement is going to look like. Again, the deadline is in May and we’ll be kind assessing how – what we want from it as like deliverables and that sort of thing in the next following months. This is kind of where we are right now and it’s pretty – I mean it’s in great shape. Mathew Weintraub who was my predecessor did a really excellent job of creating a draft and we’ve just kind of gone in and fine-tuned it. Chair Bernstein: Excellent, thank you. Then I saw a next slide coming up on Mills Act. Ms. Vance: Sure, so I think Brandon, you expressed interest in discussing the next steps with Mills Act so I’m going to let you take it away or not. Board Member Corey: Well – yeah, this is a – well, I didn’t put the slide together. I think over – I think we had a – with the joint City Council meeting it seemed like they were pretty positive on us coming back with some sort of proposal for the Mills Act so I wanted to start that conversation and what we need to do next; kind of strike while the iron is hot because they did seem interested. I figured – I don’t know what the next steps would be. We did have a subcommittee on this and kind of had a proposal – an (inaudible) proposal and then we also had some data from several years ago. There was a packet that was put together by – I cannot… Ms. French: Denis (inaudible). Board Member Corey: Denis, you’re right, sorry. So, what – I was – I don’t know – (inaudible) Karen is not here today but what would be the next steps for us to try to take something like this back to the City Council. I don’t know if anybody has any thoughts on that. Chair Bernstein: Board Member Wimmer. Board Member Wimmer: Yeah, so this morning I emailed everyone a PDF which is something I found on the County of Santa Clara website and yeah, Amy if you could even pull it up. I thought it had some valuable information and we are in the County of Santa Clara so it might – it’s just a little – it’s a little presentation that they prepared with all of their percentages and numbers and how the program can benefit the County. So, I thought – I don’t know even know if we could pull it up and look at it but anyways, it’s in your email boxes. Sorry, it was a little late, I did it this morning but I think that’s an example of something that maybe we could adopt kind of a presentation like that. Whether it’s a PowerPoint or a PDF or something that just has – I mean it can be somewhat factual and it doesn’t have to be – I mean just our direction I think. Then maybe with that tool, we could present that to the Council. City of Palo Alto Page 11 I feel like sometimes we just need to capture all these ideas in one document – in a presentable document that we can leave with them and then they can review it over time. I think also, I was thinking maybe we could even come up with like an application form or something like how do we – how does – it’s great to put this information but how does this actually get to our community? How would they sort of finding this information and come to a point where they would actually get under a Mills Act contract? So, I think maybe we just show that bridge of how we present this to the community and how the first steps I guess. Also, to find some willing participants, I think – I thought it would be great to find two or three families or homeowners that would be interested in being the first with our pilot program. I was also wondering if Pat Di Cicco would even be interested because she owns a pretty significant historic [Kelson] in Palo Alto; Martin you do too. So, maybe we could – I mean I think she benefits from a Mills Act contract in Southern California so she is very adverse or she’s very knowledgeable about the system and how it works. She might a great person to contact and ask if she would be interested in participating in this program. Chair Bernstein: Subcommittee Members I think were Board Member Corey and Wimmer, was there a third? Bower I think, wasn’t he? Yeah. Board Member Bunnenberg. Board Member Bunnenberg: Yeah, may I comment on that. I’m sorry to say my corky computer would give me the subject headings but none of the research so if somebody has the whole thing, I would really appreciate a copy of it. I don’t know why or how. (Inaudible) (crosstalk) Board Member Corey: Do we… Female: (Inaudible) Board Member Corey: The other – the one question that I had was do we – I think that’s a great idea. I think both those – I mean having that bridge (inaudible) whose interesting in doing it is great and the PowerPoint summarizing ideas. Do we need any official proposal to – beyond something like that like a document or anything in details of what this means for the Council to approve a program like this? I’m just trying to figure out if there’s some formality where we have to – at some point, it sounded like we might – I think when we talked about this before, we might need to actually bring it to the City Council and have them approve it; here are code changes. Ms. French: (Inaudible) Can you repeat that? Sorry, I’m trying to load a PowerPoint. Board Member Corey: Yeah, no problem. I can give you minutes. I don’t want to… Ms. French: Ok, I'm used to multi-tasking but I’m not perfect in all of that. Board Member Corey: Wow. Ms. French: Yeah, you get to see the sausage. Ok, I put it right here. Board Member Wimmer: Yeah, I think I downloaded – this is dated February of 17 – 2017. I just downloaded it and I think can scroll down or – but this is something that’s provided by the County. I thought this was interesting for us to maybe page through and see what information they offer. I mean we’re in the County and maybe we could even… Board Member Corey: I know Los Gatos has a program and there are other Cities. Do you want me to re- ask my question, Amy? Ms. French: Yes, please, I am not ready. City of Palo Alto Page 12 Board Member Corey: My question was do we need any sort of formal document or anything to give to the Council or go to the Council to get anything approved in the City code? I know we had talked about that and I’m just – or… Ms. French: So, for us to have an ordinance, of course, and it’s in the – let’s say it’s in Chapter 16 or Title 16, which is the building code where the historic preservation ordinance is kept, then that would for sure go to Council; it’s a legislative act. If it’s in Title 18 where most people look for anything to do with development as far as – yeah, then that would have to go to the Planning Commission first and then Council. So, yeah preparing an ordinance we would first need to get direction from the Council to actually go and work on an ordinance so that would be the first step if we want an ordinance. For us to create forms, I think that’s an administrative thing we can do, no problem. If it’s creating a pilot program that has specific perimeters, that again, Council would have to weigh in on as a group in a more formal setting than that joint session we just had. Board Member Corey: Do we need an ordinance to actually do this then? Ms. French: That depends on what it is. Board Member Corey: Yeah, fair. Let me ask it this way if a resident right now wanted to come and apply for a Mills Act. I know we’ve talked about this before but it sounds like they aren’t able to but there’s – in clarity, would be actually need to get an ordinance for that to happen? Ms. French: No because we have a Mills Act and we didn’t have an ordinance for that to happen. I think somebody could come in and work… Board Member Corey: That was in the 70’s, right? Ms. French: 90’s, yeah. Board Member Corey: Alright, I’m sorry. Ms. French: So, because the County has – you know it’s about taxes so I think because the County website or what have you, I mean there are – it goes beyond the City as far as the resources. Even if we don’t have them, the County has them and they could come in and propose something. I mean I think the goal that we have had was to do a pilot program and eventually get to a point where there’s an ordinance. Chair Bernstein: Does staff know if there’s a requirement for Mills Act Palo Alto that has to be a Category One project – building, do you know? Ms. French: There’s no code what so ever. That is what Dennis Backlund had proposed in that 2006 or whenever that was and so I think that’s worth a discussion. I think it makes sense to not have anything less than significant come through this kind of a program. Ms. Vance: Right so that’s what – when we talked about tailoring the program specifically to what Palo Alto wants. These are the kinds of things that we would be looking at for that. Chair Bernstein: Margaret, thank you for researching that subject. Alright, so I’ll assume that the HRB subcommittee on Mills Act, the subcommittee still exists and it’s still intact so you’ll coordinate with each other on that; great. Any other slides coming up from – ok, great. Any other subjects today? Board Member Wimmer. Board Member Wimmer: I wanted to share with the Board this – there was a really great architectural tour that took place a couple weeks ago in San Jose. It was specifically a tour of the Wolfen Higgins houses that where all Spanish revival and I – at the tour I purchased this really great book that – it’s a City of Palo Alto Page 13 new book that just came out. I think it was only $35 but I thought it was – it could be a great resource so I have it and anyone can borrow it. It’s just got great examples of their architecture and what I found interesting was that there is a house here in Palo Alto that was designed by Wolfen Higgins and it’s the same house. So, this is a house that was on the tour, this is in San Jose but there’s a house in Palo Alto that’s this exact house that was built in 1925. I thought I marked the page, sorry and it’s at – it’s the Lillian and John Benfield House in Palo Alto and the address is 625 Hail. It’s kind of a small but it’s the exact same house as the one – sorry, yeah. Well, there’s this one – anyway, so I just thought wow, this is a pretty cool house. It’s a really good example of Spanish revival so I looked up that property and looked at the parcel report and it’s a Category Four. So, I thought there’s – I mean this should be a more significant category but it’s – I think that kind of calls to our want to review the categories and go over these potentially historic houses. I mean I think this is a good example of this very well know architecture firm that’s known in the Bay Area. So, if anyone would like to – I’m happy to share this book with anyone. It has some really great information and it also – they had also done another project in Palo Alto at 467 Forest and I haven’t had a chance to look at that but I think that would just be a neat fact – historic fact. I lead me to think that in our efforts to reassess the categories and try to work on our historic inventory, I know that there’s a lot of projects if you go to the parcel report. There’s some – under the historic statues it had been deemed eligible – I think in 87 there had been some research that went on that someone, a Committee or someone did a lot of great research but nothing really became of it. So, I thought maybe at some point, without having to go house by house through the whole City because that would be exhausting, maybe we decide that if a house has this deemed eligible back at that date. Maybe that should trigger some kind of staff review, which it might. It might do that but I don’t think it automatically does. If you go to remodel a house and it’s deemed eligible, you just kind of segue around it because I’ve had projects like that. Maybe if that deemed eligible is on the parcel report, that should be at – the City – we should say wait, you need to go through not a full-blown historic review but I think it could be just like a little huddle that they might have to jump over. So that we don’t miss maintaining or retaining a potentially really great historic house, I don’t know. I always thought that deemed eligible should -- we should pay attention to that now because that’s what, 20-year beyond or 30-years beyond when they actually deemed it eligible. Maybe it’s not eligible and not just deemed eligible. Ms. Vance: I can speak to this a little bit. Any property that has been deemed eligible, not potentially but actually full-blown deemed eligible for the National Register or the California Register, I do look at any kind of work. Not counting minor stuff or interior work but I do look at those and I do treat them – we do treat them as a historic resource at the City. Board Member Bunnenberg: Was that the Dames and Moore study that you’re thinking about because it has potentially National Register and potentially California Register but they always caution us to remember it says potentially. It has not been worked up or proven. Ms. Vance: Right, potentially eligible is essentially unevaluated but doing their windshield survey they thought that there could be something there that merits further research and evaluation but those aren’t… Board Member Bunnenberg: It is good information. Ms. Vance: Yes, it’s – but again, that was 20-years ago and at this point, it’s been so long since their windshield survey that made things potentially eligible but it’s an unevaluated resource and that’s how we treat them; if things are eligible, it’s a different story. Ms. French: What’s – as you know, what’s different about it, the deemed eligible ones, is the deemed eligible is not a category in our Chapter or Title – Chapter 1649 so there’s no requirement for HRB review. If a discretionary application where to come forward, then we have more hooks, shall we say, more leverage but if it’s simply a building permit, there’s a conversation with Emily and that’s where it ends. City of Palo Alto Page 14 Chair Bernstein: Thank you. Board Member Bunnenberg, your lights on. Board Member Bunnenberg: Oh, sorry. Chair Bernstein: Alright, any other topics for us to bring up on this agenda item? Action Items None. Approval of Minutes 3. Approval of Minutes of August 10 and August 24, 2017 MOTION Chair Bernstein: Alright, now we have minutes to review. The first is August 10, a motion to approve or amend? I’ll move approval of minutes for August 10th. Any discussion? Any second for the motion? Ok, any discussion? All in favor say aye? Ok, that passes. MOTION PASSES 6-0 WITH VICE CHAIR BOWER ABSENT Chair Bernstein: Next to the minutes of August 24th, any comments to amend? I do and that is on packet page 41. In the middle of the page Chair Bernstein and I’ll read what it says and then I’ll make my suggestion for a revision. ‘Can another possibility be that at one HRB hearing agenda item one is to have an application for reclassification for that Birge Clark design building and an application for the proposed project.’ I just wanted to clarify my thoughts on that, is that -- and get staff’s comment on that also. My clarification is that one application would be both the proposed project and classification so make that one application. Is that a possibility – administrative possibility? Ms. French: So, go from and to one? Chair Bernstein: Yeah. Ms. French: We can do that. MOTION Chair Bernstein: Ok, that would be my amendment for these minutes. Any other amendments before a motion to approve as amended? I’d like to move that these minutes are approved as amended. Any second? Failing a second. Ok, that’s been seconded by Board Member Makinen. All – any discussion? Board Member Bunnenberg, you have your light on. No? Ok, all in favor say aye? Thank you. MOTION PASSES 6-0 WITH VICE CHAIR BOWER ABSENT Chair Bernstein: I believe that finishes our agenda item today. Subcommittee Items 4. Mills Act Pilot Program Next Steps - Followup from August 28, 2017, HRB/CC Meeting Chair Bernstein: Now, next would be subcommittee items, pilot – Mills Act pilot program next steps. Any additional comments from the subcommittee. City of Palo Alto Page 15 Ms. French: This is a chance to say anything but, of course, one of our subcommittee members is Bower, who is not here today so the subcommittee won’t be meeting, just to clarify, today. Chair Bernstein: Ok, thank you for that. Board Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Chair Bernstein: Next is Board Member’s questions, comments, and announcements. I’ve got one question, I see at our places a letter regarding Castilleja property. Does staff have a copy of that letter? Ms. French: I do not. Chair Bernstein: Ok, there’s on here. I just found this at our At Places today. I guess one question is, let’s see, on the Castilleja property there is a historic listed structure, is that correct? Ms. French: Correct. Chair Bernstein: Will any changes to that property come before HRB, does staff know? Ms. French: To the structure that is listed, no… Chair Bernstein: Ok. Ms. French: …but the property, yes. That was originally targeted to come to this meeting as a preliminary review. The applicant – and to go to last week to the Architectural Review Board but the applicant withdrew this request or postponed it, at the very least, (inaudible) possibly a withdrawal for preliminary review. They are full on into a formal application already and they originally thought to come and have some feedback from both Boards but I think this is a very significant and controversial project. They are rethinking this – the step, the preliminary review and there’s already been, you may be aware, a scoping session on this, an environmental document is being prepared – a draft Environmental Impact Report but just to reassure you the chapel and the administration building is not scheduled for removal or modifications in the application. Chair Bernstein: Ok, thank you. Board Member Kohler. Board Member Kohler: It’s kind of interesting that I’m way down – almost out of Palo Alto and there are signs in my neighborhood of save the – what we were just talking about, Castilleja School. It’s very interesting. Chair Bernstein: I think we’ve – any other Board Member questions, comments, and announcements before we move toward adjournment? Seeing none, staff any other comments for… Board Member Kohler: I have one comment. Chair Bernstein: Yes. Board Member Kohler: David is recovering from his leg situation and is doing ok. MOTION Chair Bernstein: Oh, that’s good to hear, thanks. Alright, any move to adjourn? It’s been moved, seconded? I seconded. All approve – all in favor say yes. We’re done, thank you, we’re adjourned, thank you. Adjournment