HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-03-14 Historic Resources Board Agenda Packet_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the
time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided
that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to two minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Historic Resources Board
Regular Meeting Agenda: March 14, 2019
Community Meeting Room
250 Hamilton Avenue
8:30 AM
Call to Order / Roll Call
Oral Communications
The public may speak to any item not on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,2
Agenda Changes, Additions, and Deletions
The Chair or Board majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management.
City Official Reports
1. Historic Resources Board Meeting Schedule and Assignments
Study Session
Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,3
2. Historic Resources Board Retreat: HRB Discussion of the Following Potential Topics:
(1) Comprehensive Plan Policies and Programs Related to Historic Preservation; (2)
Mid‐Century Modern Context Statement; (3) Historic Building Code; (4) Community
Outreach Regarding Palo Alto's HP Program
Action Items
Public Comment Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Ten (10) minutes, plus ten (10) minutes rebuttal. All
others: Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,3
Approval of Minutes
Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,3
3. Approval of the draft Minutes of the February 14, 2019 Historic Resources Board
Meeting
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the
time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided
that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to two minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Subcommittee Items
Board Member Questions, Comments or Announcements
Adjournment
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the
time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided
that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to two minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Palo Alto Historic Resources Board
Boardmember Biographies, Present and Archived Agendas and Reports are available online:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/architectural/default.asp. The HRB Boardmembers
are:
Chair David Bower
Vice Chair Brandon Corey
Boardmember Martin Bernstein
Boardmember Roger Kohler
Boardmember Michael Makinen
Boardmember Deborah Shepherd
Boardmember Margaret Wimmer
Get Informed and Be Engaged!
View online: http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city‐of‐palo‐alto/ or on Channel
26.
Show up and speak. Public comment is encouraged. Please complete a speaker request card
located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Board
Secretary prior to discussion of the item.
Write to us. Email the HRB at: hrb@cityofpaloalto.org. Letters can be delivered to the Planning
& Community Environment Department, 5th floor, City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA
94301. Comments received by 2:00 PM the Thursday preceding the meeting date will be
included in the agenda packet. Comments received afterward through 3:00 PM the day before
the meeting will be presented to the Board at the dais.
Material related to an item on this agenda submitted to the HRB after distribution of the
agenda packet is available for public inspection at the address above.
Americans with Disability Act (ADA)
It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a
manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an
appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs,
or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329‐2550 (voice) or by emailing
ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least
24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service.
Historic Resources Board
Staff Report (ID # 10170)
Report Type: City Official Reports Meeting Date: 3/14/2019
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650) 329-2442
Summary Title: HRB Meeting Schedule & Assignments
Title: Historic Resources Board Meeting Schedule and Assignments
From: Jonathan Lait
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Historic Resources Board (HRB) review and comment as appropriate.
Background
Attached is the HRB meeting schedule and attendance record for the calendar year. This is
provided for informational purposes. If individual Boardmembers anticipate being absent from
a future meeting, it is requested that be brought to staff’s attention when considering this item.
No action is required by the HRB for this item.
Attachments:
Attachment A: 2019 HRB Meeting Schedule Assignments (PDF)
2019 Schedule
Historic Resources Board
Meeting Schedule & Assignments
Meeting Dates Time Location Status Planned
1/10/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular Held with ARB
1/24/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular Cancelled
2/14/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
2/28/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular Cancelled
3/14/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular Retreat
3/28/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
4/11/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
4/25/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
5/09/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
5/23/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
6/13/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
6/27/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
7/11/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
7/25/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
8/08/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
8/22/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
9/12/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
9/26/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
10/10/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
10/24/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
11/14/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
11/28/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Cancelled
12/12/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular
12/26/2019 8:30 AM Council Chambers Cancelled
2019 Subcommittee Assignments
January February March April May June
July August September October November December
Historic Resources Board
Staff Report (ID # 10043)
Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 3/14/2019
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650) 329-2442
Summary Title: HRB Retreat
Title: Historic Resources Board Retreat: HRB Discussion of the
Following Potential Topics: (1) Comprehensive Plan Policies
and Programs Related to Historic Preservation; (2) Mid-
Century Modern Context Statement; (3) Historic Building
Code; (4) Community Outreach Regarding Palo Alto's HP
Program
From: Jonathan Lait
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Historic Resources Board (HRB) discuss any or all of the following
potential topics. The order may be rearranged; however, attending staff will arrive for Item 3 at
10 am. A break prior to Item 3 is suggested if other items are completed before 10 am.
(1) Comprehensive Plan Policies and Programs Related to Historic Preservation;
(2) Mid-Century Modern Context Statement;
(3) Historic Building Code; and
(4) Community Outreach Regarding Palo Alto's HP Program.
Background/Discussion
On February 14, 2019, the HRB discussed including the above four potential topics on the
agenda for the March 2019 HRB retreat. Staff’s brief presentation to the HRB on February 14th
included a presentation of the 2017–2030 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Policies relevant to
historic preservation. The slides showing these policies are attached to this report (Attachment
A). Draft February 14th HRB meeting minutes are provided with the March 14th HRB packet.
Item 1: Implementation of Comprehensive Plan Policies
The HRB may wish to discuss implementation of Comprehensive Plan policies related to historic
preservation (Attachment A). The Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) held a public
hearing February 13, 2019 to learn the status of policy implementation presented by Planning
and Community Environment (PCE) staff. The PTC staff report is viewable here:
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/68953. Draft minutes from the
February 13th PTC meeting are viewable here:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/69664 The PTC intends to form a
subcommittee to monitor Comprehensive Plan implementation progress during the coming
year, to assist the PTC in recommending any Comprehensive Plan changes.
On the City Council consent calendar of March 4, 2019, Item 6 allowed Council to authorize the
transmittal of the 2018 Annual Comprehensive Plan and Housing Element Progress Report to
the State of California's Office of Planning and Research and the Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)”. A Council memo transmitting an updated attachment
(https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=62489.71&BlobID=69620)
supplemented the main report containing the staff recommendation:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=60751.24&BlobID=69492
Item 2: Draft Mid-Century Modern Context Statement
The HRB may wish to review the attached draft proposal (Attachment B, drafted in 2017-2018).
May 2019 is the next deadline for submitting a grant proposal to the State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO). However, the City Council would need to authorize staff to submit the grant
along with approval of in-kind contribution of staff and consultant services related to the grant
proposal. Since the historic planner position and other key PCE Department positions are still
vacant, the HRB Liaison may not have the bandwidth to pursue a SHPO grant in 2019. However,
the HRB may wish to recommend staff begin the necessary steps to pursue this grant to meet
the 2020 deadline.
Item 3: State Historic Building Code (SHBC)
Staff requested assistance from the City’s historic preservation consultant (Page and Turnbull)
and to the City’s Chief Building Official (CBO). The CBO plans to attend the HRB retreat to
participate in this discussion topic. Page and Turnbull (P&T) staff shared the SHBC wording of
the below paragraph, for a discussion as to what qualifies for the SHBC and confirmed an
interpretation used by preservationists. P&T staff confirmed with their colleagues that it is up
to the jurisdiction to decide whether a building is considered qualified – the first sentence in
the below paragraph is key. Typically a building that is found eligible for the NRHP qualifies for
use of the SHBC. It is probable that properties eligible for the California Register of Historical
Resources (CRHR) also qualify for use of the SHBC. Also, as noted in bold italicized text in the
below paragraph, properties on a city inventory are also considered to qualify.
"18955. For the purposes of this part, a qualified historical building or structure is any structure
or property, collection of structures, and their related sites deemed of importance to the history,
architecture, or culture of an area by an appropriate local or state governmental jurisdiction.
This shall include historical buildings or structures on existing or future national, state or local
historical registers or official inventories, such as the National Register of Historic Places, State
Historical Landmarks, State Points of Historical Interest, and city or county registers or
inventories of historical or architecturally significant sites, places, historic districts, or landmarks.
This shall also include places, locations, or sites identified on these historical registers or official
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3
inventories and deemed of importance to the history, architecture, or culture of an area by an
appropriate local or state governmental jurisdiction."
The CBO provided the HRB Liaison with the current version of the California Historical Code
(Attachment C) as adopted by Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 16.04.350. The CBO
provided an excerpt from the SHBC that defines a qualified historical building or property and
noted that Palo Alto also needs to consider what is outlined in PAMC Chapter 16.49 (Historic
Preservation). Attachment D provides both Section 16.04.350 and Chapter 16.49. In the below
paragraph, in bold italicized text, properties determined eligible for national and state registers
and eligible for local inventories qualify for use of the SHBC.
“As defined in Health and Safety Code Section 18955, a “Qualified Historical Building or
Property” is any building, site, object, place, location, district or collection of structures, and their
associated sites, deemed of importance to the history, architecture or culture of an area by an
appropriate local, state or federal governmental jurisdiction. This shall include historical
buildings or properties on, or determined eligible for, national, state or local historical registers
or inventories, such as the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical
Resources, State Historical Landmarks, State Points of Historical Interest, and city or county
registers, inventories or surveys of historical or architecturally significant sites, places or
landmarks.”
Item 4: Community Outreach Regarding Palo Alto's HP Program
Staff had noted during a presentation to the HRB on February 14th that staff had performed
outreach to the SILVAR realty group in the fall of 2018. The power point used for the
presentation (Attachment E) contained outreach on new policy 7.2 and other information. The
City staff also updated City webpages in 2018. The historic preservation page is found at this
URL: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pln/historic_preservation/default.asp Copies
of the City’s historic preservation webpages (Attachment F) will be provided at places for this
discussion about how the HRB and City staff can improve outreach to the community.
Report Author & Contact Information HRB1 Liaison & Contact Information
Amy French, AICP, Chief Planning Official Amy French, AICP, Chief Planning Official
(650) 329-2336 (650) 329-2336
amy.french@cityofpaloalto.org amy.french@cityofpaloalto.org
Attachments:
Attachment A: 2030 Comprehensive Plan Policies Related to Historic Resources (PDF)
Attachment B: Draft Modern Era Context Statement Grant Application (DOCX)
Attachment C: 2016 CA CHBC (PDF)
Attachment D: PAMC 16.04.350 and 16.49 (PDF)
Attachment E: SILVAR Fall 2018 Presentation on Historic (PDF)
1 Emails may be sent directly to the HRB using the following address: hrb@cityofpaloalto.org
2030 CP Pending Preservation Related Policies/Programs
•L2.4.6 Explore changing the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) ordinances for both
buildings of historic significance and for seismic retrofits so that transferred development
rights may only be used for residential capacity. Pending (M$P)
•L4.10.2 Create regulations for the California Avenue area that encourage the retention or
rehabilitation of smaller buildings to provide spaces for existing retail, particularly local,
small businesses. Pending (S$$P)
•L6.1.1 Promote awards programs and other forms of public recognition for projects of
architectural merit that contribute positively to the community. Staff is considering historic
preservation awards. Pending (L$P)
•L7.1.1 Update and maintain the City’s Historic Resource Inventory to include historic
resources that are eligible for local, State, or federal listing. Historic resources may consist of
a single building or structure or a district. Pending ($$P)
•L7.1.2 Reassess the Historic Preservation Ordinance to ensure its effectiveness in the
maintenance and preservation of historic resources, particularly in the University
Avenue/Downtown area. Pending ($$P)
•L7.12.1 Review parking exceptions for historic buildings in the Zoning Code to determine if
there is an effective balance between historic preservation and meeting parking needs.
Pending (L$P)
2030 CP Preservation Related Policies – Pending/Ongoing
L7.2 If a proposed project would substantially affect the exterior of a potential historic
resource that has not been evaluated for inclusion into the City’s Historic Resources
Inventory, City staff shall consider whether it is eligible for inclusion in State or federal
registers prior to the issuance of a demolition or alterations permit. Minor exterior
improvements that do not affect the architectural integrity of potentially historic
buildings shall be exempt from consideration. Examples of minor improvements may
include repair or replacement of features in kind, or other changes that do not alter
character‐defining features of the building. Ongoing
L7.8.1 Promote and expand available incentives for the retention and rehabilitation of
buildings with historic merit in all zones and revise existing zoning and permit regulations
to minimize constraints to adaptive reuse. Pending (M$P)
L7.8.2 Create incentives to encourage salvage and reuse of discarded historic building
materials. Ongoing
L7.8.3 Seek additional innovative ways to apply current codes and ordinances to older
buildings. Use the State Historical Building Code for designated historic buildings. Pending
(R$P)
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
1. PROJECT SUMMARY
Summarize in one or two sentences the purpose of the proposed project. A more
detailed description will be completed under Project Scope. Indicate if your
proposed project addresses State Preservation Plan goals and warrants
consideration for bonus points.
The project will produce the Midcentury Era Context Statement for the City of
Palo Alto, which will be used to identify and evaluate resources associated with
significant events, persons and designs during the period of 1940-1970. The project
meets Goals I and V of the Statewide Historic Preservation Plan, and it is eligible for
up to 10 Bonus Points because it will document themes, contexts, and resources of
the recent past, as described further below.
2. PROJECT SCOPE
(60 Points) In 2 pages or less clearly and concisely describe the proposed
project. Be sure to answer the questions for each section below within the
narrative:
NEED (25 Points): What local historic preservation needs does the
proposed project address? How does the proposed project relate to the
local government’s preservation plan? Why is the proposed project a
priority? How will the proposed project benefit the community? How does
the project relate to the Statewide Historic Preservation Plan?
The Midcentury Era Context Statement will research and document an important
period in the recent history of Palo Alto. As the National Trust states, the significant
buildings and sites of the Modern Movement are “among the most underappreciated
and vulnerable aspects of our nation’s heritage.” Many of these structures are under
threat of demolition from both intense development pressure and a widespread lack
of awareness of their significance and role in our shared history. A comprehensive
context statement will help us tell the story of Modern Palo Alto and the nascent
Silicon Valley while both promoting and protecting those “most vulnerable” of
resources.
From 1940 to 1970, Palo Alto doubled its urban area through expansion and
development, primarily southward. The annexed land was transformed into
residential suburbs, commercial plazas and institutional properties which provide
much of south Palo Alto with its distinctive modern character. Midcentury
developments in south Palo Alto included several housing tracts and a shopping
mall built out by the influential modernist Joseph Eichler, who constructed his firm’s
headquarters there. Also during the midcentury period, Stanford University was
responsible for major new developments on the west side of Palo Alto; these
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
developments include the 700-acre Stanford Research Park, one of the first
university-affiliated business parks and which played a major role in the
development of Silicon Valley, the Stanford Hospital and the Stanford Shopping
Center. It was also at this time that the controversial Oregon Expressway came into
existence, leading to the newly created Stanford Research Park, and helping solidify
“drive-in culture” in Palo Alto. Downtown midcentury developments included new
construction and renovated storefronts along the older commercial corridors, as
well as new residential and office high-rises on redeveloped sites, such as the Palo
Alto City Hall.
While some formal recognition of midcentury resources in Palo Alto has occurred –
most notably, the National Register listing of the 1940 Southern Pacific Railroad
Depot in 1996 and the Eichler-built Green Gables and Greenmeadow historic
districts in 2006 – Palo Alto’s midcentury themes and contexts have not yet been
comprehensively researched, organized and recorded. The most recently completed
Palo Alto historical resource survey was finished in 2001 and researched contexts
and evaluated properties up to the 1940s only. Furthermore, the Stanford Research
Park: Framework for Historic Resources Evaluation, developed in 2016 through a
partnership between Stanford’s Land, Building and Real Estate department and the
City of Palo Alto, provides some contextual information on the development of the
Research Park but is limited in its scope and application. The current lack of
documentation and understanding of midcentury contexts and properties in Palo
Alto hinders efforts to identify, evaluate, and protect important resources.
Palo Alto is currently experiencing pressures to redevelop midcentury properties of
all types. Recent development proposals have sought to demolish or substantially
alter properties ranging from smaller Eichler-built homes and modern commercial
buildings, to more massive structures and groupings of structures, such as church
campuses and corporate office parks, which variously express styles such as
Midcentury Modernism, Expressionism, and Brutalism and possibly Futurism. It is
expected that pressures to remove and alter midcentury properties will only
increase over time.
Beyond architecture, there are historic sites in Palo Alto associated with social
movements and greater historic trends that are largely unidentified, such as the
Communist radical group, Venceremos, headquartered in Palo Alto, 1940s
apartments associated with “Golden Gate Fever” and the plethora of sites connected
with the burgeoning tech scene. Another example includes Palo Alto’s older
storefronts and boarding houses which hosted a unique and notable social
movement during the early and mid-1960s and which greatly influenced the shape
of American culture. Fostered by the intellectual and progressive atmosphere of
Palo Alto, the movement was bohemian and arts-based, involving young and
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
innovative writers, poets, and musicians who developed their crafts, created social
networks and ultimately emerged from Palo Alto to help found San Francisco’s
Haight-Ashbury scene and the Summer of Love. Currently, extant properties
associated with Palo Alto’s 1960s bohemian culture are largely unknown and at risk.
The project will meet the need for information by producing a research document
that will provide a contextual framework for property owners, the general public
and the City to use in identifying and evaluating midcentury resources, appreciating
and understanding their significance and mitigating potential impacts early in the
design and development process. The context statement will be used as a tool to
guide resource surveys, to prepare nominations for historic registers and to conduct
evaluations and project reviews of properties developed within or associated with
the Mid-Twentieth Century period.
The project meets Statewide Historic Preservation Plan Goal I by conveying the
broad scope of what is considered a historical or cultural resource; by increasing the
recordation of resources that reflect the uniqueness of California; and by increasing
the number of contexts focused on post-World War II California. It also relates to
over-arching Goal V by developing technical assistance that provides guidelines for
identifying and evaluating cultural resources. The project would also meet the
needs of several local Goals and Policies, as outlined in the City of Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan. This includes Goal L-7 as the recordation of these resources
and the context statement will assist in the preservation of Palo Alto’s historic
resources; Policy L-54 is met through supporting the goals and objectives of the
Statewide Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan for California; and Policy L-53
is met by actively seeking state and federal funding for preservation.
ACTIVITIES (15 Points): What activities will be necessary tasks to
complete the proposed project? Who will be responsible for doing what?
How does the proposed project remedy the identified preservation needs?
Is the proposed project the most efficient, cost effective way of addressing
those needs? How will the public be involved?
A qualified historic preservation professional or preservation firm (Consultant) that
has demonstrated experience successfully completing context statements in
California and, ideally, possesses experience researching and/or documenting
modern resources will be hired to conduct the following project activities:
Preparation of a Modern Era Context Statement which includes:
o Draft and final context statement outline
o Preparation of up to two administrative drafts and a final draft
context statement
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
Limited reconnaissance field survey including photography
Review of existing National Register inventory forms, State of California
inventory forms, historic resource evaluation reports, etc.
Research of original source materials and archival research, including both
primary and secondary sources
Conduct two (2) public workshops
Present findings at a public educational event and to the Historic Resources
Board (HRB)
City staff will manage the consultant; provide property data and basic mapping
analyses for the consultant’s use; review and approve work products; coordinate
with City bodies and OHP; administer the CLG grant; update the website; and assist
with HRB and public outreach events.
Developing the Midcentury Era Context Statement is the most efficient and cost
effective way to meet the need for information about midcentury contexts,
properties, events, people and design. See below for public involvement discussion.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT (10 Points): How will the public be involved in
the project? How will the product(s) be made available to the public?
Public involvement will occur throughout the project. During the research stage, the
City/Consultant will solicit information and comments from the public regarding
important events, persons and architecture associated with the period of 1940-1970
in Palo Alto through community workshops. The draft context statement will be
made available to the general public for review and comment for a minimum of 60
days prior to consideration of adoption, and information will be presented at
community workshops. The City will consider adoption of the context statement at
public hearings.
The City will make the final adopted context statement widely available online and
in printed form. A final public educational event will occur where the City and
Consultant will present on the findings of the context statement research.
DELIVERABLES (10 Points): What product(s) will be derived from the
project? Will the product(s) be in draft or final adopted form? How will the
product(s) be used by the local government?
The final work product will be an organized, annotated report of historical, cultural,
and architectural contexts of the midcentury period, 1940-1970, in Palo Alto. The
document will provide guidance that is consistent with evaluating resources
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
according to the criteria and standards of the California and National Registers. The
context statement will be prepared in accordance with National Register Bulletin 24,
“Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning”, and with guidance
from OHP’s “Writing Historic Contexts” and “Preferred Format for Historic Context
Statements”. The City will adopt the final context statement for use in conducting
resource surveys, identifying potential resources during project reviews, evaluating
individual properties and preparing nominations to historic registers. The City will
also consider implementing recommendations for future surveys and resource
evaluations which may result from the project. Other deliverables include:
The City of Palo Alto’s Historic Preservation webpage will be updated to
reflect the adoption of the context statement and a new page will be built to
showcase the Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto;
A Public Educational Event (lecture, film screening, etc.) to be put on by the
City and Consultant;
Informational brochure on Midcentury resources in Palo Alto to be made
available online and in print.
3. ADMINISTRATION
(15 points): Demonstrate that project personnel and methods are clear and
appropriate to achieving project objectives.
PERSONNEL (5 Points): List names and/or experience of individuals and
organizations necessary to implement your project. Include current
resumes for key project personnel.
The City’s consultant will meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards in History and/or Architectural History. The consultant
will possess a strong background in conducting historical research, identifying
significant events, patterns, and trends, and writing context statements, as well as
demonstrated knowledge of and interest in California’s mid-twentieth-century
history and architecture. The City will request OHP’s approval of the consultant
selection prior to contract execution.
Emily Vance is the City of Palo Alto’s Historic Preservation Planner and meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in Architectural
History (resume attached).
Amy French is the City of Palo Alto’s CLG Coordinator and Chief Planning Official
(resume attached).
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
SCHEDULE (5 Points): Create a schedule/calendar for major project
activities. It should be realistic and achievable. Distinguish between
consultant and local government’s activities.
Activity Timeframe
Prior to October 1, 2018 City conducts RFP process and selects
consultant (pending OHP approval)
October 1, 2018 City executes consultant contract
October-November 2018 Consultant conducts field survey and
research, Community Workshop #1
November 2018
Consultant prepares draft outline of the
context statement and submits to City for
review and comment (City provides
comments within 14 days)
December 2018-January 2019
Consultant prepares 1st draft (50%) and
submits to City (City provides comments
within 14 days)
February-March 2019
Consultant responds to comments,
prepares 2nd draft (75%) and submits to
City staff (City provides comments within
14 days)
April 2019
Consultant responds to comments,
prepares final draft and submits to City
staff
May-June 2019
60-day public review period, Community
Workshop #2 and informational
presentation at HRB
July 2019 HRB public hearing
August 2019 Public Educational Event
September 2019 City Council hearing
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
4. BUDGET
(15 points) Show that budget is reasonable to accomplish major project tasks
and activities and that budget items are necessary to accomplish project
activities. Provide a sufficiently detailed budget to show basis for cost items
including a breakdown of staff and volunteer hours by task. Indicate how these
numbers were calculated.
A. Federal funds (Grant) requested CLG’s matching share
$45,000 (check, may just be 40,000) $30,000
B. Source of Non-Federal Match
Note: In-kind Match activities must directly relate to proposed project
Donor
Source
Kind
Amount
City of Palo Alto
General Fund
Cash
$15,000
Donor
Source
Kind
Amount
City of Palo Alto
General Fund
Services (Salaried Employees)
$10,195
Donor
Source
Kind
Amount
City of Palo Alto
General Fund
Supplies (etc.)
$4,805
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
C. (Use a separate sheet to show detail if necessary.)
Cost Categories Rate used to
Calculate Cost
Cash
From
Grant
Other
Cash
In-Kind
Services
Contracted Services
Work product
preparation
$60,000
Fixed Fee $45,000 $15,000
Salaried Employees
Historic Preservation
Planner
80 hrs @ $44.48/hr $3,558
+ Fringe @ 70.8% $2,519
Senior Planner/
GIS Analyst
24 hrs @ $53.33/hr $1,280
+ Fringe @ 70.8% $906
Administrative
Assistant
16 hrs @ $41.51/hr $996
+ Fringe @ 70.8% $705
Supplies, copying,
postage, etc.
$4,805
Matt’sEstimate $4,805
Newspaper
Advertisements 3 ads @ $350 each $1,050
Totals $45,000 $15,000 $15,000
5. BONUS POINTS:
(Up to 10 points) If you are applying for bonus points, describe how the proposed
grant project will carry out one or more of the goals of the State Historic
Preservation Plan related to the preservation and stewardship of resources
associated with historic ethnic and cultural diversity; resources of the recent past;
preservation incentives; cultural landscapes; archaeology; or for projects
involving the survey, inventory, and digitization of historic site information on
cultural resources located in areas with a high potential for natural disasters.
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
The project is eligible for Bonus Points because it will document themes, contexts,
and resources of the recent past (1940-1970). Specifically, it will expand
California’s post-World War II contexts; it will identify potential modern era
resources for further study that are not adequately identified at the present time
and that reflect California’s uniqueness; and it will facilitate future surveys, resource
evaluations and designations of modern era resources in Palo Alto. In these ways,
the project is eligible for up to 10 Bonus Points.
6. DEVELOPMENT POINTS
(5 points) Indicate if the CLG is entitled to Development Points and why.
The City of Palo Alto received a CLG grant in 2015-2016 for the creation of design
guidelines for the Professorville National Historic District and is not entitled to
receive Development Points in 2016-2017, per the CLG Grants Manual.
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
Examples of Midcentury Resources in Palo Alto
First Methodist Church (1963) by Carlton Arthur “Art” Steiner
Fairchild Building (1957) – CA Landmark “First Commercially Practicable Integrated
Circuit”
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
Hewlett-Packard HQ (1957)
525 University (1966) – Building where Alza was founded
City of Palo Alto
Draft CLG Grant Application – Midcentury Era Context Statement for Palo Alto
St. Michael’s Alley – 436 University (1920) – counter-culture hole in the wall where
Joan Baez, Jefferson Airplane and Jerry Garcia played in their early days
414 California Avenue (1958)
IMPORTANT NOTICE
Act now to keep your code up-to-date.
The purchase of this code includes a
free subscription for all State-issued
supplements and errata.To receive
these important updates through
2019,you MUST register online
www.iccsafe.org/CAL16
Effective January 1,2017
For Errata and Supplement effective
dates see the History Note Appendix
2016 California Historical Building Code
California Code of Regulations,Title 24,Part 8
First Printing:July 2016
ISBN:978-1-60983-655-9
Published by
International Code Council
500 New Jersey Avenue,NW,6tb Floor
Washington,D.C.20001
1-888-422-7233
PRINTED IN THE U.S.A.
PREFACE
This document is Part 8 of thirteen parts of the official triennial compilation and publication of the adoptions,amendments and
repeal of administrative regulations to California Code ofRegulations,Title 24,also referred to as the California Building Stan-
dards Code.This part is known as the California Historical Building Code.
The California Building Standards Code is published in its entirety every three years by order of the California legislature,with
supplements published in intervening years.The California legislature delegated authority to various state agencies,boards,
commissions and departments to create building regulations to implement the State’s statutes.These building regulations,or
standards,have the same force of law,and take effect 180 days after their publication unless otherwise stipulated.The California
Building Standards Code applies to occupancies in the State of California as annotated.
A city,county,or city and county may establish more restrictive building standards reasonably necessary because of local
climatic,geological or topographical conditions.Findings of the local condition(s)and the adopted local building standard(s)
must be filed with the California Building Standards Commission to become effective and may not be effective sooner than the
effective date of this edition of the California Building Standards Code.Local building standards that were adopted and
applicable to previous editions of the California Building Standards Code do not apply to this edition without appropriate
adoption and the required filing.
Should you find publication (e.g.,typographical)errors or inconsistencies in this code or wish to offer comments toward
improving its format,please address your comments to:
California Building Standards Commission
2525 Natomas Park Drive,Suite 130
Sacramento,CA 95833-2936
Phone:(916)263-0916
Email:cbsc@dgs.ca.gov
Web page:www.bsc.ca.gov
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The 2016 California Building Standards Code (Code)was developed through the outstanding collaborative efforts of the
Department of Housing and Community Development,Division of State Architect,Office of the State Fire Marshal,Office of
Statewide Health Planning and Development,California Energy Commission,California Department of Public Health,Califor-
nia State Lands Commission,Board of State and Community Corrections,and the California Building Standards Commission
(Commission).
This collaborative effort included the assistance of the Commission’s Code Advisory Committees and many other volunteers
who worked tirelessly to assist the Commission in the production of this Code.
Governor Edmund G.Brown Jr.
Members of the California Building Standards Commission
Secretary Marybel Batjer -Chair
Steven Winkel -Vice-Chair
Raj Patel
Elley Klausbruckner
Larry Booth
James Barthman
D.Malcolm Carson
Cheryl Roberts
Erick Mikiten
Kent Sasaki
Peter Santillan
Jim McGowan —Executive Director
Michael L.Nearman -Deputy Executive Director
For questions on California state agency amendments,please refer to the contact list on page v.
Hi2016CALIFORNIAHISTORICALBUILDINGCODE
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS,TITLE 24
California Agency Information Contact List
Board ofState and Community Corrections
www.bscc.ca.gov (916)445-5073
Local Adult Jail Standards
Local Juvenile Facility Standards
California Building Standards Commission
www.bsc.ca.gov (916)263-0916
California Energy Commission
www.energy.ca.gov Energy Hotline (800)772-3300
Building Efficiency Standards
Appliance Efficiency Standards
Compliance Manual/Forms
California State Lands Commission
www.slc.ca.gov (562)499-6312
Marine Oil Terminals
California State Library
www.library.ca.gov (916)653-5217
Department ofHousing and Community Development
www.hcd.ca.gov (916)445-9471
Residential—Hotels,Motels,Apartments,
Single-Family Dwellings;and
Permanent Structures in Mobilehome &
Special Occupancy Parks
(916)445-3338
Factory-Built Housing,Manufactured Housing &
Commercial Modular
Mobilehome—Permits &Inspections
Northern Region-(916)255-2501
Southern Region-(951)782-4420
(916)445-9471
Employee Housing Standards
Department ofPublic Health
www.dph.ca.gov (916)449-5661
Organized Camps Standards
Public Swimming Pools Standards
Department of Consumer Affairs:
Acupuncture Board
www.acupuncture.ca.gov (916)515-5200
Office Standards
Board ofPharmacy
www.pharmacy.ca.gov (916)574-7900
Pharmacy Standards
Bureau ofBartering and Cosmetology
www.barbercosmo.ca.gov (800)952-5210
Barber and Beauty Shop,
and College Standards
Bureau ofElectronic and Appliance Repair,
Home Eurnishings and Thermal Insulation
www.bearhfti.ca.gov (916)999-2041
Insulation Testing Standards
Structural Pest Control Board
www.pestboard.ca.gov (800)737-8188
Structural Standards
Veterinary Medical Board
www.vmb.ca.gov (916)515-5220
Veterinary Hospital Standards
Division ofthe State Architect
WWW.dgs.ca.gov/dsa (916)445-8100
Access Compliance
Eire and Life Safety
Structural Safety
Public Schools Standards
Essential Services Building Standards
Community College Standards
State Historical Building Safety Board
Alternative Building Standards
Office ofStatewide Health Planning andDevelopment
www.oshpd.ca.gov (916)440-8356
Hospital Standards
Skilled Nursing Facility Standards &
Clinic Standards
Permits (916)654-3362
Office ofthe State Fire Marshal
osfm.fire.ca.gov (916)445-8200
Department ofFood and Agriculture
WWW.cdfa.ca.gov
Meat &Poultry Packing Plant Standards
Rendering &Collection Standards (916)900-5004
Dairy Standards (916)900-5008
Code Development andAnalysis
Fire Safety Standards
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE V
HOW TO DETERMINE WHERE
CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE
Symbols in the margins indicate where changes have been
made or language has been deleted.
1 1
This symbol indicates that a change has been made.
^This symbol indicates deletion of language.
VI 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
PART 8 CONTAINS ALTERNATIVE REGULATIONS
FOR QUALIFIED HISTORICAL BUILDINGS
The California Historical Building Code (CHBC)is unique
among state regulations.The authoring of the original CHBC
required state agencies promulgating regulations for building
construction to work in harmony with representatives of other
design and construction disciplines.The result was a totally
new approach to building codes for historical structures,
which maintains currently acceptable life-safety standards.
These regulations are also unique in that they are perfor-
mance oriented rather than prescriptive.The provisions of the
CHBC are to be applied by the enforcing authority of every
city,county,city and county,or state agency in permitting
repairs,alterations and additions necessary for the preserva-
tion,rehabilitation,relocation,related construction,change of
use or continued use of a qualified historical building.
The authority for use of the CHBC is vested in Sections
18950 through 18961 of the Health and Safety Code.Section
18954 states,“The building department of every city or
county shall apply the provisions of alternative building stan-
dards and building regulations adopted by the CHBC Board
pursuant to Section 18959.5 in permitting repairs,alterations
and additions necessary for the preservation,restoration,
rehabilitation,moving or continued use of an historical build-
ing or structure.A state agency shall apply the alternative
building regulations adopted by the CHBC Board pursuant to
Section 18959.5 in permitting repairs,alterations and addi-
tions necessary for the preservation,restoration,rehabilita-
tion,moving or continued use of an historical building or
structure.”
However,be aware that in order to use the CHBC,the struc-
ture under consideration must be qualified by being desig-
nated as an historical building or structure.Section 18955
states,“For the purposes of this part,a qualified historical
building or structure is any structure or collection of struc-
tures,and their associated sites deemed of importance to the
history,architecture or culture of an area by an appropriate
local or state governmental jurisdiction.This shall include
structures on existing or future national,state or local histori-
cal registers or official inventories,such as the National Reg-
ister of Historic Places,State Historical Landmarks,State
Points of Historical Interest,and city or county registers or
inventories of historical or architecturally significant sites,
places,historic districts or landmarks.”
The regulations of the CHBC have the same authority as state
law and are to be considered as such.Liability is the same as
for prevailing law.
The intent of the CHBC is to save California’s architectural
heritage by recognizing the unique construction problems
inherent in historical buildings and by providing a code to
deal with these problems.
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE vil
HISTORICAL PREFACE
The background of the California Historical Building Code
can be traced to December 1973,when the State Department
of Parks and Recreation published the California History
Plan,Volume I,in which Recommendation No.11 was pro-
posed by the then California Landmarks Advisory Committee
(later to become The State Historical Resources Commis-
sion).This proposal expressed a need for a new building code
to meet the intent of protecting the public health and safety
and also retain “enough flexibility to allow restoration of a
Historic feature while still retaining its Historic integrity.”
No.1 1 of this History Plan supported this need by stating that
“...restoration ...is frequently made difficult by unneces-
sarily rigid interpretation of building ...codes.”
In March of 1974,the Landmarks Committee by resolution
recommended that the Director of the State Department of
Parks and Recreation and the State Architect initiate a study
to develop this needed code.These two officials accepted this
concept and jointly called a statewide meeting in Sacramento
on May 14th of that year.Attending were representatives
from both the public and private sectors,such as members of
the building industry,design professions,local and state
building officials,and others interested in this problem.
Out of this open conference,a steering committee was
formed to explore in depth the ways and means of imple-
menting the new historical building code concept.This ad
hoc committee was chaired by a representative from the Cali-
fornia Council,American Institute of Architects and com-
posed of a comprehensive cross section of the professional
organizations and government agencies concerned with
design and code enforcement.
Meetings began late in 1974 and continued into early 1975.
By April of that year,a legislative subcommittee of the ad
hoc group drafted a sample bill for the proposed code and
requested that it be carried by Senator James R.Mills,Presi-
dent Pro Tempore of the Senate.After further development
and refinement,the enacting legislation to create the authority
for the code and an advisory board to prepare regulations to
implement it (SB 927,Mills)was supported by both the legis-
lature and the public.It was signed by the governor in Sep-
tember 1975,and became effective January I,1976.
The members of the advisory board,which were required by
law to include local and state building officials,individuals
from the building industry and design professions,as well as
representatives from city and county governments,were
appointed and held their first session in Sacramento,February
24,1976.This Board’s duties included the preparation of
code regulations and the review of specific historic building
cases,when officially requested by governing bodies.
Several of the Board’s members were a part of the original ad
hoc steering committee and thus provided a continuity and
smooth transition from the inception of the code’s philosophy
to its pragmatic implementation in these performance-ori-
ented regulations.
The first comprehensive regulations were codified in August
and October 1979,after years of careful deliberation.Those
regulations allowed all jurisdictions to utilize them at their
discretion in replacing or modifying details of prevailing pre-
scriptive codes.
Changes made in law in 1984 and 1991,and to the code,
make the application of the California Historical Building
Code statutes and regulations applicable for all agencies and
at the discretion of the owner for local jurisdictions when
dealing with qualified historical buildings.
These current performance regulations were adopted by the
Board on June 23,1998,and approved by the California
Building Standards Commission on December 12,2013.
viii 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 8-1 ADMINISTRATION 1
Section
8-101 Title,Purpose and Intent 1
8-102 Application 1
8-103 Organization and Enforcement 1
8-104 Review and Appeals 2
8-105 Construction Methods and Materials 2
8-106 SHBSB Rulings 2
CHAPTER 8-2 DEFINITIONS 3
Section
8-201 Definitions 3
CHAPTER 8-3 USE AND OCCUPANCY 5
Section
8-301 Purpose and Scope 5
8-302 General 5
8-303 Residential Occupancies 5
CHAPTER 8-4 FIRE PROTECTION 7
Section
8-401 Purpose,Intent and Scope 7
8-402 Fire-resistive Construction 7
8-403 Interior Finish Materials 7
8-404 Wood Fath and Plaster 7
8-405 Occupancy Separation 7
8-406 Maximum Floor Area 7
8-407 Vertical Shafts 7
8-408 Roof Covering 7
8-409 Fire Alarm Systems 8
8-410 Automatic Sprinkler Systems 8
8-411 Other Technologies 8
8-412 High-rise Buildings 8
CHAPTER 8-5 MEANS OF EGRESS 9
Section
8-501 Purpose,Intent and Scope 9
8-502 General 9
8-503 Escape or Rescue Windows and Doors 10
8-504 Railings and Guardrails 10
CHAPTER 8-6 ACCESSIBILITY II
Section
8-601 Purpose,Intent and Scope 11
8-602 Basic Provisions 11
8-603 Alternatives 11
8-604 Equivalent Facilitation 12
CHAPTER 8-7 STRUCTURAL REGULATIONS ...13
Section
8-701 Purpose,Intent and Scope 13
8-702 General 13
8-703 Structural Survey 13
8-704 Nonhistorical Additions and Nonhistorical
Alterations 13
8-705 Structural Regulations 13
8-706 Lateral Load Regulations 14
CHAPTER 8-8 ARCHAIC MATERIALS AND
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION..15
Section
8-801 Purpose,Intent and Scope 15
8-802 General Engineering Approaches 15
8-803 Nonstructural Archaic Materials 15
8-804 Allowable Conditions for Specific Materials....15
8-805 Masonry 15
8-806 Adobe 16
8-807 Wood 16
8-808 Concrete 16
8-809 Steel and Iron 16
8-810 Hollow Clay Tile 17
8-811 Veneers 17
8-812 Glass and Glazing 17
CHAPTER 8-9 MECHANICAL,PLUMBING AND
ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS ..19
Section
8-901 Purpose,Intent and Scope 19
8-902 Mechanical 19
8-903 Plumbing 20
8-904 Electrical 21
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 8-10 QUALIFIED HISTORICAL
DISTRICTS,SITES AND
OPEN SPACES 23
Section
8-1001 Purpose and Scope 23
8-1002 Application 23
8-1003 Site Relations 23
APPENDIX A 25
HISTORY NOTE APPENDIX 27
X 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
CHAPTER 8-1
ADMINISTRATION
Note:The California Historical Building Code,Part 8 of Title 24,governs for all
qualified historical buildings or properties in the State of California.
SECTION 8-101
TITLE,PURPOSE AND INTENT
8-101.1 Title.These regulations shall be known as the Caii-
fornia Historical Building Code and will be referred to herein
as “the CHBC.”
8-101.2 Purpose.The purpose of the CHBC is to provide
regulations for the preservation,restoration,rehabilitation,
relocation or reconstruction of buildings or properties desig-
nated as qualified historical buildings or properties (Chapter
8-2).The CHBC is intended to provide solutions for the pres-
ervation of qualified historical buildings or properties,to pro-
mote sustainability,to provide access for persons with
disabilities,to provide a cost-effective approach to preserva-
tion,and to provide for the reasonable safety of the occupants
or users.The CHBC requires enforcing agencies to accept
solutions that are reasonably equivalent to the regular code
(as defined in Chapter 8-2)when dealing with qualified his-
torical buildings or properties.
8-101.3 Intent.The intent of the CHBC is to facilitate the
preservation and continuing use of qualified historical build-
ings or properties while providing reasonable safety for the
building occupants and access for persons with disabilities.
SECTION 8-102
APPLICATION
8-102.1 Application.The CHBC is applicable to all issues
regarding code compliance for qualified historical buildings
or properties.The CHBC may be used in conjunction with the
regular code to provide solutions to facilitate the preservation
of qualified historical buildings or properties.The CHBC
shall be used by any agency with jurisdiction and whenever
compliance with the code is required for qualified historical
buildings or properties.
1 .The state or local enforcing agency shall apply the pro-
visions of the CHBC in permitting repairs,alterations
and additions necessary for the preservation,resto-
ration,reconstruction,rehabilitation,relocation or con-
tinued use of a qualified historical building or property
when so elected by the private property owner.
2.State agencies.All state agencies shall apply the provi-
sions of the CHBC in permitting repairs,alterations and
additions necessary for the preservation,restoration,
rehabilitation,safety,relocation,reconstruction or con-
tinued use of qualified historical buildings or proper-
ties.
8-102.1.1 Additions,alterations and repairs.It is the
intent of the CHBC to allow nonhistorical expansion or
addition to a qualified historical building or property,pro-
vided nonhistorical additions shall conform to the require-
ments of the regular code.See Chapter 8-2.
8-102.1.2 Relocation.Relocated qualified historical
buildings or properties shall be sited to comply with the
regular code or with the solutions listed in the CHBC.
Nonhistorical new construction related to relocation shall
comply with the regular code.Reconstruction and resto-
ration related to relocation is permitted to comply with the
provisions in the CHBC.
8-102.1.3 Change of occnpancy.For change of use or
occupancy,see Chapter 8-3,Use and Occupancy.
8-102.1.4 Continued use.Qualified historical buildings or
properties may have their existing use or occupancy con-
tinued if such use or occupancy conformed to the code or
to the standards of construction in effect at the time of
construction,and such use or occupancty does not consti-
tute a distinct hazard to life safety as defined in the CHBC.
8-102.1.5 Unsafe buildings or properties.When a quali-
fied historical building or property is determined to be
unsafe as defined in the regular code,the requirements of
the CHBC are applicable to the work necessary to correct
the unsafe conditions.Work to remediate the buildings or
properties need only address the correction of the unsafe
conditions,and it shall not be required to bring the entire
qualified historical building or property into compliance
with regular code.
8-102.1.6 Additional work.Qualified historical buildings
or properties shall not be subject to additional work
required by the regular code,regulation or ordinance
beyond that required to complete the work undertaken.
Certain exceptions for accessibility and for distinct haz-
ards exist by mandate and may require specific action,
within the parameters of the CHBC.
SECTION 8-103
ORGANIZATION AND ENFORCEMENT
8-103.1 Authority.The state or local enforcing agency,pur-
suant to authority provided under Section 18954 of the Health
and Safety Code,shall administer and enforce the provisions
of the CHBC in permitting repairs,alterations and additions
necessary for the preservation,restoration,reconstruction,
rehabilitation,relocation or continued use of a qualified his-
torical building or property.
8-103.2 State enforcement.All state agencies pursuant to
authority provided under Section 18954 and Section 18961 of
the Health and Safety Code shall administer and enforce the
CHBC with respect to qualified historical buildings or prop-
erties under their respective jurisdiction.
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 1
ADMINISTRATION
8-103.3 Liability.Prevailing law regarding immunity of
building officials is unaffected by the use and enforcement of
the CHBC.
SECTION 8-104
REVIEW AND APPEALS
8-104.1 State Historical Building Safety Board (SHBSB).
In order to provide for interpretation of the provisions of the
CHBC and to hear appeals,the SHBSB shall act as an appeal
and review body to state and local agencies or any affected
party.
8-104.2 SHBSB review.When a proposed design,material
or method of construction is being considered by the enforc-
ing agency,the agency chief,the building official or the local
board of appeals may file a written request for opinion to the
SHBSB for its consideration,advice or findings.In consider-
ing such request,the SHBSB may seek the advice of other
appropriate private or public boards,individuals,or state or
local agencies.The SHBSB shall,after considering all of the
facts presented,including any recommendation of other
appropriate boards,agencies or other parties,determine if,for
the purpose intended,the proposal is reasonably equivalent to
that allowed by these regulations in proposed design,material
or method of construction,and it shall transmit such findings
and its decision to the enforcing agency for its application.
The Board may recover the costs of such reviews and shall
report the decision in printed form,copied to the California
Building Standards Commission.
8-104.2.1 State agencies.All state agencies with owner-
ship of,or that act on behalf of state agency owners of,
qualified historical buildings or properties,shall consult
and obtain SHBSB review prior to taking action or making
decisions or appeals that affect qualified historical build-
ings or properties,per Section 18961 of the Health and
Safety Code.
8-104.2.2 Imminent threat.Where an emergency is
declared and a qualified historical building or property is
declared an imminent threat to life and safety,the state
agency assessing such a threat shall consult with the
SHBSB before any demolition is undertaken,per Section
18961 of the Health and Safety Code.
8-104.3 SHBC appeals.If any local agency administering
and enforcing the CHBC or any person adversely affected by
any regulation,rule,omission,interpretation,decision or
practice of the agency enforcing the CHBC wishes to appeal
the issue for resolution to the SHBSB,either of these parties
may appeal directly to the Board.The Board may accept the
appeal only if it determines that issues involved are of state-
wide significance.The Board may recover the costs of such
reviews and shall make available copies of decisions in
printed form at cost,copied to the California Building Stan-
dards Commission.
8-104.4 Local agency fees.Local agencies,when actively
involved in the appeal,may also charge affected persons rea-
sonable fees not to exceed the cost of obtaining reviews and
appeals from the Board.
SECTION 8-105
CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND MATERIALS
8-105.1 Repairs.Repairs to any portion of a qualified histor-
ical building or property may be made in-kind with historical
materials and the use of original or existing historical meth-
ods of construction,subject to conditions of the CHBC.(See
Chapter 8-8.)
8-105.2 Solutions to the California Historical Building
Code.Solutions provided in the CHBC,or any other accept-
able regulation or methodology of design or construction and
used in whole or in part,with the regular code,or with any
combination of the regular code and the CHBC,shall be
allowed.The CHBC does not preclude the use of any pro-
posed alternative or method of design or construction not spe-
cifically prescribed or otherwise allowed by these
regulations.Any alternative may be submitted for evaluation
to the appropriate enforcing agency for review and accep-
tance.The enforcing agency may request that sufficient evi-
dence or proof be submitted to substantiate any claims that
may be made regarding such solutions.Any alternative
offered in lieu of that prescribed or allowed in the CHBC
shall be reasonably equivalent in quality,strength,effective-
ness,durability and safety to that of the CHBC.
SECTION 8-106
SHBSB RULINGS
8-106.1 General.Rulings of the SHBSB (i.e.,formal
appeals,case decisions,code interpretations and administra-
tive resolutions,etc.)that are issues of statewide application
are required to be submitted to the California Building Stan-
dards Commission in printed form.These rulings may be
used to provide guidance for similar cases or issues.
2 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
CHAPTER 8-2
DEFINITIONS
SECTION 8-201
DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of the CHBC,certain terms and phrases,
words and their derivatives shall be construed as specified in
this chapter.Additional definitions and/or terms may appear
in the various other chapters relative to terms or phrases pri-
marily applicable thereto.Any reference to “authority having
jurisdiction”does not necessarily preclude the appellate pro-
cess of Section 8-104.3.
ADDITION.A nonhistorical extension or increase in floor
area or height of a building or property.
ALTERATION.A modification to a qualified historical
building or property that affects the usability of the building
or property,or part thereof.Alterations include,but are not
limited to,remodeling,renovation,rehabilitation,reconstruc-
tion,historical restoration,changes or rearrangement of the
structural parts or elements,and changes or rearrangements in
the plan configuration of walls and full-height partitions.
BUILDING STANDARD.Any guideline,regulation or
code that may be applied to a qualified historical building or
property.
CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURE.Those visual
aspects and physical elements that comprise the appearance
of a historical building or property,and that are significant to
its historical,architectural and cultural values,including the
overall shape of the historical building or property,its materi-
als,craftsmanship,decorative details,interior spaces and fea-
tures,as well as the various aspects of its site and
environment.
CULTURAL RESOURCE.Building,site,property,object
or district evaluated as having significance in prehistory or
history.
DISTINCT HAZARD.Any clear and evident condition that
exists as an immediate danger to the safety of the occupants
or public right of way.Conditions that do not meet the
requirements of current regular codes and ordinances do not,
of themselves,constitute a distinct hazard.Section 8-104.3,
SHBC appeals,remains applicable.
ENFORCING AGENCY,Authority Having Jurisdiction,
Local Agency with Jurisdiction.An entity with the responsi-
bility for regulating,enforcing,reviewing or otherwise that
exerts control of or administration over the process of grant-
ing permits,approvals,decisions,variances,appeals for qual-
ified historical buildings or properties.
EXIT LADDER DEVICE.An exit ladder device is a perma-
nently installed,fixed,folding,retractable or hinged ladder
intended for use as a means of emergency egress from areas
of the second or third stories.Unless approved specifically
for a longer length,the ladder shall be limited to 25 feet
(7620 mm)in length.Exit ladders are permitted where the
area served by the ladder has an occupant load less than 10
persons.
FIRE HAZARD.Any condition which increases or may
contribute to an increase in the hazard or menace of fire to a
greater degree than customarily recognized by the authority
having jurisdiction,or any condition or act which could
obstruct,delay,hinder or interfere with the operations of fire-
fighting personnel or the egress of occupants in the event of
fire.Section 8-104.3,SHBC appeals,remains applicable.
HISTORICAL FABRIC OR MATERIALS.Original and
later-added historically significant construction materials,
architectural finishes or elements in a particular pattern or
configuration which form a qualified historical property,as
determined by the authority having jurisdiction.
HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE.Importance for which a
property has been evaluated and found to be historical,as
determined by the authority having jurisdiction.
IMMINENT THREAT.Any condition within or affecting a
qualified historical building or property which,in the opinion
of the authority having jurisdiction,would qualify a building
or property as dangerous to the extent that the life,health,
property or safety of the public,its occupants or those per-
forming necessary repair,stabilization or shoring work are in
immediate peril due to conditions affecting the building or
property.Potential hazards to persons using,or improve-
ments within,the right-of-way may not be construed to be
“imminent threats”solely for that reason if the hazard can be
mitigated by shoring,stabilization,barricades or temporary
fences.
INTEGRITY.Authenticity of a building or property’s his-
torical identity,evidenced by the survival of physical charac-
teristics that existed during the property’s historical or
prehistorical period of significance.
LIFE-SAFETY EVALUATION.An evaluation of the life-
safety hazards of a qualified historical building or property
based on procedures similar to those contained in NFPA 909,
Standard for the Protection of Cultural Resources,Appendix
B,Fire Risk Assessment in Heritage Premises.
LIFE SAFETY HAZARD.See Distinct Hazard.
PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE.The period of time when a
qualified historical building or property was associated with
important events,activities or persons,or attained the charac-
teristics for its listing or registration.
PRESERVATION.The act or process of applying measures
necessary to sustain the existing form,integrity and materials
of a qualified historical building or property.Work,including
preliminary measures to protect and stabilize the property,
generally focuses upon the ongoing maintenance and repair
of historic materials and features rather than extensive
replacement and new construction.New exterior additions
are not within the scope of this treatment;however,the lim-
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 3
DEFINITIONS
ited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical,electrical and
plumbing systems and other code-related work to make prop-
erties functional is appropriate within a preservation project.
QUALIFIED HISTORICAL BUILDING OR PROP-
ERTY.As defined in Health and Safety Code Section 18955
as “Qualified Historical Building or Property.”Any building,
site,object,place,location,district or collection of structures,
and their associated sites,deemed of importance to the his-
tory,architecture or culture of an area by an appropriate local,
state or federal governmental jurisdiction.This shall include
historical buildings or properties on,or determined eligible
for,national,state or local historical registers or inventories,
such as the National Register of Historic Places,California
Register of Historical Resources,State Historical Landmarks,
State Points of Historical Interest,and city or county regis-
ters,inventories or surveys of historical or architecturally sig-
nificant sites,places or landmarks.
RECONSTRUCTION.The act or process of depicting,by
means of new construction,the form,features and detailing
of a nonsurviving site,landscape,building,property or object
for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific
period of time.
REGULAR CODE.The adopted regulations that govern the
design and construction or alteration of nonhistorical build-
ings and properties within the jurisdiction of the enforcing
agency.
REHABILITATION.The act or process of making possible
a compatible use for qualified historical building or property
through repair,alterations and additions while preserving
those portions or features which convey its qualified histori-
cal,cultural or architectural values.
RELOCATION.The act or process of moving any qualified
historical building or property or a portion of a qualified his-
torical building or property to a new site,or a different loca-
tion on the same site.
REPAIR.Renewal,reconstruction or renovation of any por-
tion of an existing property,site or building for the purpose of
its continued use.
RESTORATION.The act or process of accurately depicting
the form,features and character of a qualified building or
property as it appeared at a particular period of time by the
means of the removal of features from other periods in its his-
tory and reconstruction of missing features from the resto-
ration period.The limited and sensitive upgrading of
mechanical,electrical and plumbing systems and other code-
required work to make properties functional is appropriate
within a restoration project.
STRUCTURE.That which is built or constructed,an edifice
or a building of any kind,or any piece of work artificially
built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite
manner.
TREATMENT.An act of work to carry out preservation,
restoration,stabilization,rehabilitation or reconstruction.
4 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
CHAPTER 8-3
USE AND OCCUPANCY
SECTION 8-301
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
8-301.1 Purpose.The purpose of the CHBC is to provide
regulations for the determination of occupancy classifications
and conditions of use for qualified historical buildings or
properties.
8-301.2 Scope.Every qualified historical building or prop-
erty for which a permit or approval has been requested shall
be classified prior to permit issuance according to its use or
the character of its occupancy in accordance with the regular
code and applicable provisions of this chapter.
SECTION 8-302
GENERAL
8-302.1 Existing use.The use or character of occupancy of a
qualified historical building or property,or portion thereof,
shall be permitted to continue in use regardless of any period
of time in which it may have remained unoccupied or in other
uses,provided such building or property otherwise conforms
to all applicable requirements of the CHBC.
8-302.2 Change in occupancy.The use or character of the
occupancy of a qualified historical building or property may
be changed from or returned to its historical use or character,
provided the qualified historical building or property con-
forms to the requirements applicable to the new use or char-
acter of occupancy as set forth in the CHBC.Such change in
occupancy shall not mandate conformance with new con-
struction requirements as set forth in regular code.
8-302.3 Occupancy separations.Required occupancy sepa-
rations of more than one hour may be reduced to one-hour
fire-resistive construction with all openings protected by not
less than three-fourths-hour fire-resistive assemblies of the
self-closing or automatic-closing type when the building is
provided with an automatic sprinkler system throughout the
I I
entire building in accordance with Section 8-410.2.Doors
equipped with automatic-closing devices shall be of a type
which will function upon activation of a device which
responds to products of combustion other than heat.
Required occupancy separations of one hour may be omit-
ted when the building is provided with an automatic sprinkler
system throughout.
8-302.4 Maximum floor area.Regardless of the use or char-
acter of occupancy,the area of a one-story qualified historical
building or property may have,but shall not exceed,a floor
area of 15,000 square feet (1393.5 m^)unless such an
increase is otherwise permitted in regular code.Multistory
qualified historical buildings (including basements and cel-
lars)shall be in accordance with regular code requirements.
Exception:Historical buildings may be unlimited in floor
area without fire-resistive area separation walls:
1 .When provided with an automatic sprinkler,or
2.Residential occupancies of two stories or less when
provided with a complete fire alarm and annuncia-
tion system and where the exiting system conforms
to regular code.
8-302.5 Maximum height.The maximum height and num-
ber of stories of a qualified historical building or property
shall not be limited because of construction type,provided
such height or number of stories does not exceed that of its
historical design.
8-302.5.1 High-rise buildings.Occupancies B,F-1,F-2
or S in high-rise buildings with floors located more than
75 feet above the lowest floor level having building access
may be permitted with only the stories over 75 feet pro-
vided with an automatic fire sprinkler system if:
1.The building construction type and the exits con-
form to regular code,and
2.A complete building fire alarm and annunciation
system is installed,and
3.A fire barrier is provided between the sprinklered
and nonsprinklered floors.
8-302.6 Fire-resistive construction.See Chapter 8-4.
8-302.7 Light and ventilation.Existing provisions for light
and ventilation which do not,in the opinion of the enforcing
agency,constitute a safety hazard may remain.See Section 8-
303.6 for residential requirements.See Section 8-503 for
Escape or Rescue Windows and Doors.
SECTION 8-303
RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCIES
8-303.1 Purpose.The purpose of this section is to provide
regulations for those buildings designated as qualified histori-
cal buildings or properties and classified as residential occu-
||
pancies.The CHBC requires enforcing agencies to accept any
reasonably equivalent alternative to the regular code when
||
dealing with qualified historical buildings and properties.
8-303.2 Intent.The intent of the CHBC is to preserve the
integrity of qualified historical buildings and properties while
maintaining a reasonable degree of protection of life,health
and safety for the occupants.
8-303.3 Application and scope.The provisions of this sec-
tion shall apply to all qualified historical buildings used for
human habitation.Those dwelling units intended only for dis-
play,or public use with no residential use involved,need not
comply with the requirements of this section.
8-303.4 Fire escapes.See Chapter 8-5.
8-303.5 Room dimensions.Rooms used for sleeping pur-
poses may contain a minimum of 50 square feet (4.6 m^)floor
area,provided there is maintained an average ceiling height
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 5
USE AND OCCUPANCY
of 7 feet (2134 mm).Other habitable rooms need only be of
adequate size to be functional for the purpose intended.
8-303.6 Light and ventilation.Windows in habitable rooms
shall have an area of 6 percent of the floor area,or 6 square
feet (0.56 m^),whichever is greater.Windows in sleeping
rooms shall be openable (see Section 8-503).Residential
occupancies need not be provided with electrical lighting.
8-303.7 Alteration and repair.The alteration and repair of
qualified historical buildings or properties may permit the
replacement,retention and extension of original materials and
the continued use of original methods of construction,pro-
vided a life-safety hazard is not created or continued.Alter-
ations and repairs shall be consistent with the CHBC.
The amount of alterations and repairs is not limited,pro-
vided there is no nonhistorical increase in floor area,volume
or size of the building or property.
8-303.8 Exiting.See Chapter 8-5.
6 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
CHAPTER 8-4
FIRE PROTECTION
SECTION 8-401
PURPOSE,INTENT AND SCOPE
8-401.1 Purpose.The purpose of this chapter is to provide
I I
regulations for fire protection of qualified historical buildings
or properties.The CHBC requires enforcing agencies to
I I
accept any reasonably equivalent alternatives to the regular
code when dealing with qualified historical buildings or prop-
erties.
8-401.2 Intent.The intent of the CHBC is to preserve the
integrity of qualified historical buildings or properties while
maintaining a reasonable degree of fire protection based pri-
marily on the life safety of the occupants and firefighting per-
sonnel.
8-401.3 Scope.This chapter shall apply when required by the
provisions of Section 8-102.
SECTION 8-402
FIRE-RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION
8-402.1 Exterior wall construction.The fire-resistance
requirement for existing exterior walls and existing opening
protection may be satisfied when an automatic sprinkler sys-
tem designed for exposure protection is installed per the
CHBC.The automatic sprinklers may be installed on the
exterior with at least one sprinkler located over each opening
required to be protected.Additional sprinklers shall also be
distributed along combustible walls under the roof lines that
do not meet the fire-resistive requirement due to relationship
to property lines as required by regular code.Such sprinkler
systems may be connected to the domestic water supply on
the supply-main side of the building shut-off valve.A shut-
off valve may be installed for the sprinkler system,provided
it is locked in an open position.
8-402.2 One-hour construction.Upgrading an existing
qualified historical building or property to one-hour fire-
resistive construction and one-hour fire-resistive corridors
shall not be required regardless of construction or occupancy
when one of the following is provided:
1 .An automatic sprinkler system throughout.See Section
I I
8-410 for automatic sprinkler systems.
2.An approved life-safety evaluation.
3.Other alternative measures as approved by the enforc-
ing agency.
8-402.3 Openings in fire-rated systems.Historical glazing
materials and solid wood unrated doors in interior walls
required to have one-hour fire rating may be approved when
operable windows and doors are provided with appropriate
smoke seals and when the area affected is provided with an
automatic sprinkler system.See Section 8-410 for automatic
sprinkler systems.
SECTION 8-403
INTERIOR FINISH MATERIALS
New non-historical interior wall and ceiling finishes shall
conform to the provisions of the regular code.Existing non-
conforming materials used in interior walls and finishes may
be surfaced with an approved fire-retardant to increase the
rating of the natural finish to within reasonable proximity of
the required rating.For wood lath and plaster walls,see Sec-
tion 8-404.
Exception:When an automatic sprinkler system is pro-
vided throughout the building,existing finishes shall be
approved.
SECTION 8-404
WOOD LATH AND PLASTER
Wood lath and plaster walls may be considered in accordance
with codes,standards and listings published prior to 1943
whereby a wood stud wall assembly with gypsum or lime
plaster on hand split or sawn wooden lath obtains a one-half-
hour fire-resistive rating.This rating may be increased for
interior walls to as much as one hour by filling the wall with
mineral fiber or glass fiber.
SECTION 8-405
OCCUPANCY SEPARATION
See Chapter 8-3.
SECTION 8-406
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA
See Chapter 8-3.
SECTION 8-407
VERTICAL SHAFTS
Vertical shafts need not be enclosed when such shafts are
blocked at every floor level by the installation of not less than
2 full inches (5 1 mm)of solid wood or equivalent construc-
tion to prevent the initial passage of smoke and flame.Auto-<
matic sprinkler systems or other solutions may be considered
on a case-by-case basis,in lieu of enclosure of vertical shafts
and stairwells.
SECTION 8-408
ROOF COVERING
Existing or original roofing materials may be repaired or
reconstructed subject to the following requirements:
1.The original or historical roofing system shall be
detailed or modified as necessary in order to be capable
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 7
FIRE PROTECTION
of providing shelter while preserving the historical
materials and appearance of the roof.
2.Wooden roof materials may be utilized where fire resis-
tance is required,provided they are treated with fire-
retardant treatments to achieve a Class “B”roof cover-
ing rating.Wood roofing in state designated Urban
Wildland and High Fire Zones shall be permitted when
installed in class “A”assemblies.
3.Jurisdictions that prohibit wood roofing materials for
application as roof coverings and roof assemblies shall
submit documentation for the adoption.Express Terms,
statement of reasons and minutes of the action by the
adopting authority Health and Safety Code,Section
18959(f).
SECTION 8-409
FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS
Every qualified historical building or property shall be pro-
vided with fire alarm systems as required for the use or occu-
pancy by the regular code or other approved alternative.
SECTION 8-410
AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMS
8-410.1 Every qualified historical building or property which
cannot be made to conform to the construction requirements
specified in the regular code for the occupancy or use,and
which constitutes a distinct fire hazard (for definition of “dis-
tinct hazard,”see Chapter 8-2),shall be deemed to be in com-
pliance if provided with an automatic sprinkler system or a
life-safety system or other technologies as approved by the
enforcing agency.(“Automatic”is defined in the regular
code.Sprinkler System is defined in this section.)
8-410.2 When required by the CHBC,an automatic sprinkler
system is defined by the following standards as adopted by
the State Fire Marshal (for nonhazardous occupancies).
>1.Buildings of four stories or less:NFPA 13R.
>2.For floors above the fourth,NFPA 13.
>3.Buildings with floors above 75 feet,NFPA 13.
4.When the building is free standing or with property line
separation,two floors and 1500 sf per floor or less,
>NFPA 13D.
5.For exterior wall and opening protection.As required
I I
by this chapter.
Exception:When the automatic sprinkler systems are
used to reach compliance using this code,in three or more
occasions,NFPA 13D standard shall be increased to
NFPA 13R standard,or NFPA 13R standard shall be
increased to a NFPA 13 standard.
8-410.3 Automatic sprinkler systems shall not be used to sub-
stitute for or act as an alternate to the required number of
exits from any facility.(See Chapter 8-5 for exiting require-
ments.)
8-410.4 An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided in
all detention facilities.
SECTION 8-411
OTHER TECHNOLOGIES
Fire alarm systems,smoke and heat detection systems,occu-
pant notification and annunciation systems,smoke control
systems and fire modeling,timed egress analysis and model-
||
ing,as well as other engineering methods and technologies
may be accepted by the enforcing agency to address areas of
nonconformance.
SECTION 8-412
HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS
Qualified historical buildings having floors for human occu-
pancy located more than 75 feet above the lowest floor level
having building access shall conform to the provisions of the
regular code for existing high-rise buildings as amended by
the CHBC.
8 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
CHAPTER 8-5
MEANS OF EGRESS
SECTION 8-501
PURPOSE,INTENT AND SCOPE
8-501.1 Purpose.The purpose of this chapter is to establish
minimum means of egress regulations for qualified historical
buildings or properties.The CHBC requires enforcing agen-
cies to accept reasonably equivalent alternatives to the means
of egress requirements in the regular code.
8-501.2 Intent.The intent of these regulations is to provide
an adequate means of egress.
8-501.3 Scope.Every qualified historical building or portion
thereof shall be provided with exits as required by the CHBC
when required by the provisions of Section 8-102.
SECTION 8-502
GENERAL
8-502.1 General.The enforcing agency shall grant reason-
able exceptions to the specific provisions of applicable egress
regulations where such exceptions will not adversely affect
life safety.
8-502.2.Existing door openings and corridor widths of less
than dimensions required by regular code shall be permitted
where there is sufficient width and height for the occupants to
pass through the opening or traverse the exit.
8-502.3 Stairs.Existing stairs having risers and treads or
width at variance with the regular code are allowed if deter-
mined by the enforcing agency to not constitute a distinct
hazard.Handrails with nonconforming grip size or extensions
are allowed if determined by the enforcing agency to not con-
stitute a distinct hazard.
8-502.4 Main entry doors.The front or main entry doors
need not be rehung to swing in the direction of exit travel,
provided other means or conditions of exiting,as necessary to
serve the total occupant load,are provided.
8-502.5 Existing fire escapes.Existing previously approved
fire escapes and fire escape ladders shall be acceptable as one
of the required means of egress,provided they extend to the
ground and are easily negotiated,adequately signed and in
good working order.Access shall be by an opening having a
minimum width of 29 inches (737 mm)when open with a sill
no more than 30 inches (762 mm)above the adjacent floor,
landing or approved step.
8-502.6 New fire escapes and fire escape ladders.New fire
escapes and fire escape ladders which comply with this sec-
tion shall be acceptable as one of the required means of
egress.New fire escapes and new fire escape ladders shall
comply with the following:
1.Access from a corridor shall not be through an inter-
vening room.
2.All openings within 10 feet (3048 mm)shall be pro-
tected by three-fourths-hour fire assemblies.When
located within a recess or vestibule,adjacent enclosure
walls shall be of not less than one-hour fire-resistive
construction.
3.Egress from the building shall be by a clear opening
having a minimum dimension of not less than 29 inches
(737 mm).Such openings shall be openable from the
inside without the use of a key or special knowledge or
effort.The sill of an opening giving access shall not be
more than 30 inches (737 mm)above the floor,step or
landing of the building or balcony.
4.Eire escape stairways and balconies shall support the
dead load plus a live load of not less than 100 pounds
per square foot (4.79 kN/m^)and shall be provided with
a top and intermediate handrail on each side.The pitch
of the stairway shall not exceed 72 degrees with a mini-
mum width of 18 inches (457 mm).Treads shall not be
less than 4 inches (102 mm)in width,and the rise
between treads shall not exceed 10 inches (254 mm).
All stair and balcony railings shall support a horizontal
force of not less than 50 pounds per lineal foot (729.5
N/m^)of railing.
5.Balconies shall not be less than 44 inches (1118 mm)in
width with no floor opening other than the stairway
opening greater than %inch (15.9 mm)in width.Stair-
way openings in such balconies shall not be less than
22 inches by 44 inches (559 by 1118 mm).The balus-
trade of each balcony shall not be less than 36 inches
(914 mm)high with not more than 9 inches (287 mm)
between balusters.
6.Eire escapes shall extend to the roof or provide an
approved gooseneck ladder between the top floor land-
ing and the roof when serving buildings four or more
stories in height having roofs with less than 4 units ver-
tical in 12 units horizontal (33.3 percent slope).Fire
escape ladders shall be designed and connected to the
building to withstand a horizontal force of 100 pounds
(445 N)placed anywhere on the rung.All ladders shall
be at least 15 inches (381 mm)wide,located within 12
inches (305 mm)of the building.Ladder rungs shall be
%inch (19.1 mm)in diameter and shall be located 12
inches (305 mm)on center.Openings for roof access
ladders through cornices and similar projections shall
have minimum dimensions of 30 inches by 33 inches
(762 by 838 mm).
The length of fire escapes and exit ladder devices
shall be limited to that approved by the building official
based on products listed by a recognized testing labora-
tory.
7.The lowest balcony shall not be more than 18 feet
(5486 mm)from the ground.Fire escapes shall extend
to the ground or be provided with counterbalanced
stairs reaching to the ground.
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 9
MEANS OF EGRESS
8.Fire escapes shall not take the place of stairways
required by the codes under which the building was
constructed.
9.Fire escapes shall be kept clear and unobstructed at all
times and maintained in good working order.
SECTION 8-503
ESCAPE OR RESCUE WINDOWS AND DOORS
Basements in dwelling units and every sleeping room below
the fourth floor shall have at least one openable window or
door approved for emergency escape which shall open
directly into a public street,public way,yard or exit court.
Escape or rescue windows or doors shall have a minimum
clear area of 3.3 square feet (0.31 m^)and a minimum width
or height dimension of 1 8 inches (457 mm)and be operable
from the inside to provide a full,clear opening without the
use of special tools.
SECTION 8-504
RAILINGS AND GUARDRAILS
The height of railings and guard railings and the spacing of
balusters may continue in their historical height and spacing
unless a distinct hazard has been identified or created by a
change in use or occupancy.
10 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
CHAPTER 8-6
ACCESSIBILITY
SECTION 8-601
PURPOSE,INTENT AND SCOPE
8-601.1 Purpose.The purpose of the CHBC is to provide
alternative regulations to facilitate access and use hy persons
with disabilities to and throughout facilities designated as
qualified historical buildings or properties.These regulations
require enforcing agencies to accept alternatives to regular
code when dealing with qualified historical buildings or prop-
erties.
8-601.2 Intent.The intent of this chapter is to preserve the
integrity of qualified historical buildings and properties while
providing access to and use by persons with disabilities.
8-601.3 Scope.The CHBC shall apply to every qualified his-
torical building or property that is required to provide access
to persons with disabilities.
1 .Provisions of this chapter do not apply to new construc-
tion or reconstruction/replicas of historical buildings.
2.Where provisions of this chapter apply to alteration of
qualified historical buildings or properties,alteration is
defined in California Building Code (CBC),Chapter 2,
Definitions and Abbreviations.202 -A.Alter or Alter-
ation.
8-601.4 General application.The provisions in the CHBC
apply to local,state and federal governments (Title II enti-
ties);alteration of commercial facilities and places of public
accommodation (Title III entities);and barrier removal in
commercial facilities and places of public accommodation
(Title III entities).Except as noted in this chapter.
SECTION 8-602
BASIC PROVISIONS
8-602.1 Regular code.The regular code for access for people
with disabilities (Title 24,Part 2,Vol.1,Chapter IIB)shall
be applied to qualified historical buildings or properties
unless strict compliance with the regular code will threaten or
destroy the historical significance or character-defining fea-
tures of the building or property.
8-602.2 Alternative provisions.If the historical significance
or character-defining features are threatened,alternative pro-
visions for access may be applied pursuant to this chapter,
provided the following conditions are met:
1.These provisions shall be applied only on an item-by-
item or a case-by-case basis.
2.Documentation is provided,including meeting minutes
or letters,stating the reasons for the application of the
alternative provisions.Such documentation shall be
retained in the permanent file of the enforcing agency.
SECTION 8-603
ALTERNATIVES
8-603.1 Alternative minimum standards.The alternative
minimum standards for alterations of qualified historical
buildings or facilities are referenced in Section 202.5 of the
2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design,as incorporated
and set forth in federal regulation 28 CFR Pt.36.
8-603.2 Entry.These alternatives do not allow exceptions for
the requirement of level landings in front of doors,except as
provided in Section 8-603.4.
1 .Access to any entrance used by the general public and
no further than 200 feet (60 960 mm)from the primary
entrance.
2.Access at any entrance not used by the general public
but open and unlocked with directional signs at the pri-
mary entrance and as close as possible to,but no further
than 200 feet (60 960 mm)from,the primary entrance.
3.The accessible entrance shall have a notification sys-
tem.Where security is a problem,remote monitoring
may be used.
8-603.3 Doors.Alternatives listed in order ofpriority are:
1.Single-leaf door which provides a minimum 30
inches (762 mm)of clear opening.
2.Single-leaf door which provides a minimum 29'^f
inches (749 mm)clear opening
3.Double door,one leaf of which provides a mini-
mum 29V2 inches (749 mm)clear opening.
4.Double doors operable with a power-assist device
to provide a minimum 29 V2 inches (749 mm)clear
opening when both doors are in the open position.
8-603.4 Power-assisted doors.Power-assisted door or doors
may be considered an equivalent alternative to level landings,
strikeside clearance and door-opening forces required by the
regular code.
8-603.5 Toilet rooms.In lieu of separate-gender toilet facili-
ties as required in the regular code,an accessible unisex toilet
facility may be designated.
8-603.6 Exterior and interior ramps and lifts.Alternatives
listed in order of priority are:
1.A lift or a ramp of greater than standard slope but no
greater than 1:10,for horizontal distances not to exceed
5 feet (1525 mm).Signs shall be posted at upper and
lower levels to indicate steepness of the slope.
2.Access by ramps of 1:6 slope for horizontal distance
not to exceed 13 inches (330 mm).Signs shall be
posted at upper and lower levels to indicate steepness
of the slope.
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 11
ACCESSIBILITY
SECTION 8-604
EQUIVALENT FACILITATION
Use of other designs and technologies,or deviation from par-
ticular technical and scoping requirements,are permitted if
the application of the alternative provisions contained in Sec-
tion 8-603 would threaten or destroy the historical signifi-
cance or character-defining features of the historical building
or property.
1.Such alternatives shall be applied only on an item-by-
item or a case-by-case basis.
2.Access provided by experiences,services,functions,
materials and resources through methods including,but
not limited to,maps,plans,videos,virtual reality and
related equipment,at accessible levels.The alternative
design and/or technologies used will provide substan-
tially equivalent or greater accessibility to,and usabil-
ity of,the facility.
3.The official charged with the enforcement of the stan-
dards shall document the reasons for the application of
the design and/or technologies and their effect on the
historical significance or character-defining features.
Such documentation shall be in accordance with Sec-
tion 8-602.2,Item 2,and shall include the opinion and
comments of state or local accessibility officials,and
the opinion and comments of representative local
groups of people with disabilities.Such documentation
shall be retained in the permanent file of the enforcing
agency.Copies of the required documentation should
be available at the facility upon request.
Note:For commercial facilities and places of public
accommodation (Title III entities).
Equivalent facilitation for an element of a building or
property when applied as a waiver of an ADA accessibility
requirement will not be entitled to the Federal Department of
Justice certification of this code as rebuttable evidence of
compliance for that element.
12 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
CHAPTER 8-7
STRUCTURAL REGULATIONS
SECTION 8-701
PURPOSE,INTENT AND SCOPE
8-701.1 Purpose.The purpose of the CHBC is to provide
alternative regulations to the regular code for the structural
safety of buildings designated as qualified historical build-
ings or properties.The CHBC requires enforcing agencies to
accept any reasonably equivalent alternatives to the regular
code when dealing with qualified historical buildings or prop-
erties.
8-701.2 Intent.The intent of this chapter is to encourage the
preservation of qualified historical buildings or structures
while providing standards for a minimum level of building
performance with the objective of preventing partial or total
structural collapse such that the overall risk of life-threaten-
ing injury as a result of structural collapse is low.
8-701.3 Application.The alternative structural regulations
provided by Section 8-705 are to be applied in conjunction
with the regular code whenever a structural upgrade or recon-
struction is undertaken for qualified historical buildings or
properties.
SECTION 8-702
GENERAL
8-702.1 The CHBC shall not be construed to allow the
enforcing agency to approve or permit a lower level of safety
of structural design and construction than that which is rea-
sonably equivalent to the regular code provisions in occupan-
cies which are critical to the safety and welfare of the public
at large,including,but not limited to,public and private
schools,hospitals,municipal police and fire stations and
essential services facilities.
8-702.2 Nothing in these regulations shall prevent voluntary
and partial seismic upgrades when it is demonstrated that
such upgrades will improve life safety and when a full
upgrade would not otherwise be required.
SECTION 8-703
STRUCTURAL SURVEY
8-703.1 Scope.When a structure or portion of a structure is to
be evaluated for structural capacity under the CHBC,it shall
be surveyed for structural conditions by an architect or engi-
neer knowledgeable in historical structures.The survey shall
evaluate deterioration or signs of distress.The survey shall
determine the details of the structural framing and the system
for resistance of gravity and lateral loads.Details,reinforce-
ment and anchorage of structural systems and veneers shall
be determined and documented where these members are
relied on for seismic lateral resistance.
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
8-703.2 The results of the survey shall be utilized for evaluat-
ing the structural capacity and for designing modifications to
the structural system to reach compliance with this code.
8-703.3 Historical records.Past historical records of the
structure or similar structures may be used in the evaluation,
including the effects of subsequent alterations.
SECTION 8-704
NONHISTORICAL ADDITIONS AND
NONHISTORICAL ALTERATIONS
8-704.1 New nonhistorical additions and nonhistorical alter-
ations which are structurally separated from an existing his-
torical building or structure shall comply with regular code
requirements.
8-704.2 New nonhistorical additions which impose vertical or
lateral loads on an existing structure shall not be permitted
unless the affected part of the supporting structure is evalu-
ated and strengthened,if necessary,to meet regular code
requirements.
Note:For use of archaic materials,see Chapter 8-8.
SECTION 8-705
STRUCTURAL REGULATIONS
8-705.1 Gravity loads.The capacity of the structure to resist
gravity loads shall be evaluated and the structure strength-
ened as necessary.The evaluation shall include all parts of
the load path.Where no distress is evident,and a complete
load path is present,the structure may be assumed adequate
by having withstood the test of time if anticipated dead and
live loads will not exceed those historically present.
8-705.2 Wind and seismic loads.The ability of the structure
to resist wind and seismic loads shall be evaluated.Wind
loads shall be considered when appropriate,but need not
exceed 75%of the wind loads prescribed by the regular code.
The evaluation shall be based on the requirements of Section
8-706.
8.705.2.1 Any unsafe conditions in the lateral-load-resist-
ing system shall be corrected,or alternative resistance
shall be provided.When strengthening is required,addi-
tional resistance shall be provided to meet the minimum
requirements of the CHBC.The strengthening measures
shall be selected with the intent of meeting the perfor-
mance objectives set forth in Sectio 8-701.2.The evalua-
tion of structural members and structural systems for
seismic loads shall consider the inelastic performance of
structural members and their ability to maintain load-car-
rying capacity during the seismic loadings prescribed by
the regular code.
8.705.2.2 The architect or engineer shall consider addi-
tional measures with minimal loss of,and impact to,his-
13
STRUCTURAL REGULATIONS
torical materials which will reduce damage and needed
repairs in future earthquakes to better preserve the histori-
cal structure in perpetuity.These additional measures shall
be presented to the owner for consideration as part of the
rehabilitation or restoration.
SECTION 8-706
LATERAL LOAD REGULATIONS
8-706.1 Seismic forces.Strength-level seismic forces used to
evaluate the structure for resistance to seismic loads shall be
based on the /^-values tabulated in the regular code for similar
lateral-force-resisting systems including consideration of the
structural detailing of the members where such /^-values
exist.Where such /^-values do not exist,an appropriate R-
value shall be rationally assigned considering the structural
detailing of the members.
Exceptions:
1.The forces need not exceed 0.75 times the seismic
forces prescribed by the regular code requirements.
2.For Risk Category I,II or III structures,near-fault
increases in ground motion (maximum considered
earthquake ground motion of 0.2 second spectral
response greater than 150 percent at 5 percent damp-
ing)need not be considered when the fundamental
period of the building is 0.5 seconds in the direction
under consideration.
3.For Risk Category I or II structures,the seismic base
shear need not exceed 0.30W.
4.For Risk Category III or IV structures,the seismic
base shear need not exceed 0.40W.
8-706.1.1 When a building is to be strengthened with the
addition of a new lateral force resisting system,the R
value of the new system can be used when the new lateral
force resisting system resists at least 75 percent of the
building’s base shear regardless of its relative rigidity.
8-706.1.2 Evaluation and seismic improvement of unrein-
forced masonry bearing wall buildings shall comply with
the California Existing Building Code (CEBC),Appendix
Chapter A1 2013 Edition,and as modified by the CHBC.
Exceptions:
1.Alternative standards may be used on a case-by-
case basis when approved by the authority having
jurisdiction.It shall be permitted to exceed the
strength limitation of 100 psi in Section A108.2
of the CEBC when test data and building config-
uration supports higher values subject to the
approval of the authority having jurisdiction.
8-706.1.3 All deviations from the detailing provisions of
the lateral-force-resisting systems shall be evaluated for
stability and the ability to maintain load-carrying capacity
at the expected inelastic deformations.
8-706.2 Existing building performance.The seismic resis-
tance may be based upon the ultimate capacity of the struc-
ture to perform,giving due consideration to ductility and
reserve strength of the lateral-force-resisting system and
materials while maintaining a reasonable factor of safety.
Broad judgment may be exercised regarding the strength and
performance of materials not recognized by regular code
requirements.(See Chapter 8-8,Archaic Materials and Meth-
ods of Construction.)
8-706.2.1 All structural materials or members that do not
comply with detailing and proportioning requirements of
the regular code shall be evaluated for potential seismic
performance and the consequence of non-compliance.All
members that would be reasonably expected to fail and
lead to collapse or life threatening injury when subjected
to seismic demands shall be judged unacceptable,and
appropriate structural strengthening shall be developed.
8-706.3 Load path.A complete and continuous load path,
including connections,from every part or portion of the struc-
ture to the ground shall be provided for the required forces.It
shall be verified that the structure is adequately tied together
to perform as a unit when subjected to earthquake forces.
8-706.4 Parapets.Parapets and exterior decoration shall be
investigated for conformance with regular code requirements
for anchorage and ability to resist prescribed seismic forces.
An exception to regular code requirements shall be permit-
ted for those parapets and decorations which arejudged not to
be a hazard to life safety.
8-706.5 Nonstructural features.Nonstructural features of
historical structure,such as exterior veneer,cornices and dec-
orations,which might fall and create a life-safety hazard in an
earthquake,shall be evaluated.Their ability to resist seismic
forces shall be verified,or the feature shall be strengthened
with improved anchorage when appropriate.
8-706.5.1 Partitions and ceilings of corridors and stair-
ways serving an occupant load of 30 or more shall be
investigated to determine their ability to remain in place
when the building is subjected to earthquake forces.
8-706.5.2 Seismic forces used to evaluate and improve
nonstructural components and their anchorage,where
required,shall comply with ASCE 41 or need not exceed
0.75 times the seismic forces prescribed by the require-
ments of the regular code.
2.CEBC Section A102.2 shall not apply to Quali-
fied Historical Buildings in Risk Category III
buildings and other structures whose primary
occupancies are public assembly with an occu-
pancy load greater than 300.
14 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
CHAPTER 8-8
ARCHAIC MATERIALS AND METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
SECTION 8-801
PURPOSE,INTENT AND SCOPE
8-801.1 Purpose.The purpose of the CHBC is to provide
regulations for the use of historical methods and materials of
construction that are at variance with regular code require-
ments or are not otherwise codified,in buildings or structures
designated as qualified historical buildings or properties.The
CHBC require enforcing agencies to accept any reasonably
equivalent alternatives to the regular code when dealing with
qualified historical buildings or properties.
8-801.2 Intent.It is the intent of the CHBC to provide for the
use of historical methods and materials of construction that
are at variance with specific code requirements or are not oth-
erwise codified.
8-801.3 Scope.Any construction type or material that is,or
was,part of the historical fabric of a structure is covered by
this chapter.Archaic materials and methods of construction
present in a historical structure may remain or be reinstalled
or be installed with new materials of the same class to match
existing conditions.
SECTION 8-802
GENERAL ENGINEERING APPROACHES
Strength values for archaic materials shall be assigned based
upon similar conventional codified materials,or on tests as
hereinafter indicated.The archaic materials and methods of
construction shall be thoroughly investigated for their details
of construction in accordance with Section 8-703.Testing
shall be performed when applicable to evaluate existing con-
ditions.The architect or structural engineer in responsible
charge of the project shall assign allowable stresses or
strength levels to archaic materials.Such assigned strength
values shall not be greater than those provided for in the fol-
lowing sections without adequate testing,and shall be subject
to the concurrence of the enforcing agency.
SECTION 8-803
NONSTRUCTURAL ARCHAIC MATERIALS
Where nonstructural historical materials exist in uses which
do not meet the requirements of the regular code,their contin-
ued use is allowed by this code,provided that any public
health and life-safety hazards are mitigated subject to the
concurrence of the enforcing agency.
SECTION 8-804
ALLOWABLE CONDITIONS
FOR SPECIFIC MATERIALS
Archaic materials which exist and are to remain in qualified
historical buildings or structures shall be evaluated for their
condition and for loads required by this code.The structural
survey required in Section 8-703 of the CHBC shall docu-
ment existing conditions,reinforcement,anchorage,deterio-
ration and other factors pertinent to establishing allowable
stresses,strength levels and adequacy of the archaic materi-
als.The remaining portion of this chapter provides additional
specific requirements for commonly encountered archaic
materials.
SECTION 8-805
MASONRY
For adobe,see Section 8-806.
8-805.1 Existing solid masonry.Existing solid masonry
walls of any type,except adobe,may be allowed,without
testing,a maximum ultimate strength of nine pounds per
square inch (62.1 kPa)in shear where there is a qualifying
statement by the architect or engineer that an inspection has
been made,that mortar joints are filled and that both brick
and mortar are reasonably good.The shear stress above
applies to unreinforced masonry,except adobe,where the
maximum ratio of unsupported height or length to thickness
does not exceed 13,and where minimum quality mortar is
used or exists.Wall height or length is measured to support-
ing or resisting elements that are at least twice as stiff as the
tributary wall.Stiffness is based on the gross section.Shear
stress may be increased by the addition of 10 percent of the
axial direct stress due to the weight of the wall directly above.
Higher-quality mortar may provide a greater shear value and
shall be tested in accordance with Appendix A,Chapter A1 of
the California Existing Building Code (CEBC)2010 edition,
and as modified by the CHBC.
8-805.2 Stone masonry.
8-805.2.1 Solid-backed stone masonry.Stone masonry
solidly backed with brick masonry shall be treated as solid
brick masonry as described in Section 8-805.1 and in the
2009 lEBC,provided representative testing and inspection
verifies solid collar joints between stone and brick and that
a reasonable number of stones lap with the brick wythes as
headers or that steel anchors are present.Solid stone
masonry where the wythes of stone effectively overlap to
provide the equivalent header courses may also be treated
as solid brick masonry.
8-805.2.2 Independent wythe stone masonry.Stone
masonry with independent face wythes may be treated as
solid brick masonry as described in Section 8-805.1 and
the CEBC,provided representative testing and inspection
verify that the core is essentially solid in the masonry wall
and that steel ties are epoxied in drilled holes between
outer stone wythes at floors,roof and not to exceed 4 feet
(1219 mm)on center in each direction,between floors and
roof.A reinforcing element shall exist or be provided at or
near the top of all stone masonry walls.
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 15
ARCHAIC MATERIALS AND METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
8-805.2.3 Testing of stone masonry.Testing of stone
masonry shall be similar to the 2010 CEBC requirements
for brick masonry,except that representative stones which
are not interlocked shall be pulled outward from the wall
and shear area appropriately calculated after the test.
8-805.3 Reconstructed walls.Totally reconstructed walls
utilizing original brick or masonry,constructed similar to
original,shall be constructed in accordance with the regular
code.Repairs or infills may be constructed in a similar man-
ner to the original walls without conforming to the regular
code.
SECTION 8-806
ADOBE
8-806.1 General.Unburned clay masonry may be con-
structed,reconstructed,stabilized or rehabilitated subject to
this chapter.Alternative approaches which provide an equiv-
alent or greater level of safety may be used,subject to the
concurrence of the enforcing agency.
8-806.2 Moisture protection.Provisions shall be in-place to
protect adobe structures from deterioration due to moisture
penetration.Adobe shall be maintained in reasonably good
condition.Particular attention shall be given to moisture con-
tent of adobe walls.Unmaintained walls or ruins shall be
evaluated for safety based on their condition and stability.
Additional protection measures may be appropriate subject to
the concurrence of the enforcing agency.
8-806.3 Height to thickness ratio.Unreinforced new or
I I
existing adobe walls meeting these criteria need not be evalu-
ated for out of plane failure.Where existing dimensions do
not meet these conditions,additional strengthening measures,
such as a bond beam,may be appropriate.Existing sod or
rammed earth walls shall be considered similar to the extent
these provisions apply.
1.One-story adobe load-bearing walls shall not exceed a
height-to-thickness ratio of 6.
2.Two-story adobe buildings or structures’height-to-
thickness wall ratio shall not exceed 6 at the ground
floor and 5 at the second floor,and shall be measured at
floor-to-floor height when the second floor and attic
ceiling/roof are connected to the wall as described
below.
8-806.4 Nonload-hearing adohe.Nonload-bearing adobe
partitions and gable end walls shall be evaluated for stability
and anchored against out-of-plane failure if necessary.
8-806.5 Bond beam.Where provided,a bond beam or equiv-
alent structural element shall be located at the top of all adobe
walls,and at the second floor for two-story buildings or struc-
tures.The size and configuration of the structural element
shall be sufficient to provide an effective brace for the wall,
to tie the building together and to connect the wall to the floor
or roof.
8-806.6 Repair or reconstruction.Repair or reconstruction
of wall area may utilize unstabilized brick or adobe masonry
designed to be compatible with the constituents of the exist-
ing adobe materials.
8-806.7 Shear values.Existing adobe may be allowed a max-
imum strength level of twelve pounds per square inch (82.7
kPa)for shear.
8-806.8 Mortar.Mortar may be of the same soil composition
as that used in the existing wall,or in new walls as necessary
to be compatible with the adobe brick.
SECTION 8-807
WOOD
8-807.1 Existing wood diaphragms or walls.Existing wood
diaphragms or walls of straight or diagonal sheathing shall be
assigned shear resistance values appropriate with the fasten-
ers and materials functioning in conjunction with the sheath-
ing.The structural survey shall determine fastener details and
spacings and verify a load path through floor construction.
Shear values of Tables 8-8-A and 8-8-B.
8-807.2 Wood lath and plaster.Wood lath and plaster walls
and ceilings may be utilized using the shear values referenced
in Section 8-807.1.
8-807.3 Existing wood framing.Existing wood framing
members may be assigned allowable stresses consistent with
codes in effect at the time of construction.Existing or new
replacement wood framing may be of archaic types originally
used if properly researched,such as balloon and single wall.
Wood joints such as dovetail and mortise and tenon types
may be used structurally,provided they are well made.Lum-
ber selected for use and type need not bear grade marks,and
greater or lesser species such as low-level pine and fir,box-
wood and indigenous hardwoods and other variations may be
used for specific conditions where they were or would have
been used.
Wood fasteners such as square or cut nails may be used
with a maximum increase of 50 percent over wire nails for
shear.
SECTION 8-808
CONCRETE
8-808.1 Materials.Natural cement concrete,unreinforced
rubble concrete and similar materials may be utilized wher-
ever that material is used historically.Concrete of low
strength and with less reinforcement than required by the reg-
ular code may remain in place.The architect or engineer shall
assign appropriate values of strength based on testing of sam-
ples of the materials.Bond and development lengths shall be
determined based on historical information or tests.
8-808.2 Detailing.The architect or engineer shall carefully
evaluate all detailing provisions of the regular code which are
not met and shall consider the implications of these variations
on the ultimate performance of the structure,giving due con-
sideration to ductility and reserve strength.
SECTION 8-809
STEEL AND IRON
The hand-built,untested use of wrought or black iron,the use
of cast iron or grey iron,and the myriad of joining methods
16 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
ARCHAIC MATERIALS AND METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
that are not specifically allowed by code may be used wher-
ever applicable and wherever they have proven their worth
under the considerable span of years involved with most
qualified historical buildings or structures.Uplift capacity
should be evaluated and strengthened where necessary.Fixed
conditions or midheight lateral loads on cast iron columns
that could cause failure should be taken into account.Existing
structural wrought,forged steel or grey iron may be assigned
the maximum working stress prevalent at the time of original
construction.
SECTION 8-810
HOLLOW CLAY TILE
The historical performance of hollow clay tile in past earth-
quakes shall be carefully considered in evaluating walls of
hollow clay tile construction.Hollow clay tile bearing walls
shall be evaluated and strengthened as appropriate for lateral
loads and their ability to maintain support of gravity loads.
Suitable protective measures shall be provided to prevent
blockage of exit stairways,stairway enclosures,exit ways
and public ways as a result of an earthquake.
deterioration or corrosion.New or supplemental anchorage
shall be provided as appropriate.
8-811.2 Anchorage.Brick veneer with mechanical anchor-
age at spacings greater than required by the regular code may
remain,provided the anchorages have not corroded.Nail
strength in withdrawal in wood sheathing may be utilized to
its capacity in accordance with code values.
SECTION 8-812
GLASS AND GLAZING
8-812.1 Glazing subject to human impact.Historical glaz-
ing material located in areas subject to human impact may be
approved subject to the concurrence of the enforcing agency
when alternative protective measures are provided.These
measures may include,but not be limited to,additional glaz-
ing panels,protective film,protective guards or systems,and
devices or signs which would provide adequate public safety.
8-812.2 Glazing in fire-rated systems.See Section 8-402.3.
SECTION 8-811
VENEERS
8-811.1 Terra cotta and stone.Terra cotta,cast stone and
natural stone veneers shall be investigated for the presence of
suitable anchorage.Steel anchors shall be investigated for
TABLE8-8A
STRENGTH VALUES FOR EXISTING MATERIALS
EXISTING MATERIALS OR CONFIGURATIONS OF MATERIALS'STRENGTH LEVEL CAPACITY
x14.594 for N/m
1.Horizontal diaphragms^
1.1 Roofs with straight sheathing and roofing applied directly to the sheathing
1 .2 Roofs with diagonal sheathing and roofing applied directly to the sheathing
1.3 Floors with straight tongue-and-groove sheathing
1 .4 Floors with straight sheathing and finished wood flooring with board
edges offset or perpendicular
1.5 Floors with diagonal sheathing and finished
300 lbs per foot for seismic shear
750 lbs per foot for seismic shear
300 lbs per foot for seismic shear
1,500 lbs per foot for seismic shear
1,800 lbs per foot for seismic shear
2.Crosswalls^'^
2.1 Plaster on wood or metal lath
2.2 Plaster on gypsum lath
2.3 Gypsum wallboard,unblocked edges
2.4 Gypsum wallboard,blocked edges
Per side:600 lbs per foot for seismic shear
550 lbs per foot for seismic shear
200 lbs per foot for seismic shear
400 lbs per foot for seismic shear
3.Existing footings,wood framing,structural steel and reinforcing steel
3.1 Plain concrete footings
3.2 Douglas fir wood
3.3 Reinforcing steel
3.4 Stmctural steel
=1,500 psi (10.34 MPa)unless otherwise shown by tests^
Allowable stress same as D.F.No.U
f=40,000 lbs per square inch (124.1 N/mm^)maximum
f =33,000 lbs per square inch (137.9 N/mm^)maximum
'Material must be sound and in good condition.
^Shear values ofthese materials may be combined,except the total combined value shall not exceed 900 pounds per foot (13,140 N/m).
^Stresses given may be increased for combinations of loads as specified in the regular code.
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 17
ARCHAIC MATERIALS AND METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
TABLE 8-8B
STRENGTH VALUES OF NEW MATERIALS USED IN CONNECTION WITH EXISTING CONSTRUCTION
NEW MATERIALS OR CONFIGURATIONS OF MATERIALS STRENGTH LEVEL CAPACITY'
1 .Horizontal diaphragms^
1.
1
'V32 inch minimum plywood sheathing fastened directly over existing
straight sheathing with edges ofplywood located on center of individual
sheathing boards and fastened with minimum #8x 1V4 inch wood screws
or nails with helical threads 0.13 inch min.diameter and IV4 inch min.
length at 4 inch centers all panel edges and 12 inch centers each way in
field.
1.2 Same plywood and attachments as 1.1 fastened directly over existing
diagonal sheathing.
1.3 inch plywood sheathing fastened directly over existing straight or
diagonal sheathing with ends and edges on centers ofindividual sheathing
boards and fastened with #6 wood screws or nails with helical threads
0.13 inch minimum diameter and 1 V4 inch min.length at 6 inch centers
tall panel edges and 12 inch centers each way in field.
1,500 lbs per foot
1,800 lbs per foot
900 lbs per foot
2.Shear walls:
Plywood sheathing applied directly over wood studs.No value shall be
given to plywood applied over existing plaster or wood sheathing
100 percent of the value specified in the regular code for
shear walls
3.Crosswalls:(special procedure only)
3.1 Plywood sheathing applied directly over wood studs.No value shall be
given to plywood applied over existing plaster or wood sheathing
3.2 Drywall or plaster applied directly over wood studs
3.3 Drywall or plaster applied to sheathing over existing wood studs
133 percent ofthe value specified in the regular code for
shear walls
100 percent ofthe values in the regular code
50 percent of the values specified in the regular code
4.Tension bolts
a.Bolts extending entirely through unreinforced masonry walls secured
with bearing plates on far side of a three-wythe-minimum wall with at
least 30 square inches (19 350 mm^)of area'*'^
b.All thread rod extending to the exterior face of the wall installed in
adhesive*
5,400 lbs (24,010 N)per bolt'’
2,700 lbs (12,009 N)per bolt for two-wythe walls^
3,600 lbs (16,014 N)per bolt
5.Shear bolts
Bolts embedded a minimum of 8 inches (203 mm)into unreinforced
masonry walls and centered in a 2V2-inch-diameter (63.5 mm)hole filled
with dry-pack or nonshrink grout.Through bolts with first 8 inches (203
mm)as noted above and embedded all thread rod as noted in Item 4.b^’*
V2 inch (12.7 mm)diameter =1050 lbs (4671 N)^
Vg inch (15.9 mm)diameter =1500 lbs (6672 N)*
%inch (19 mm)diameter =2250 lbs (10,008 N)*^
6.Infilled walls
Reinforced masonry infilled openings in existing unreinforced masonry
walls.Provide keys or dowels to match reinforcing.
Same as values specified for unreinforced masonry walls
7.Reinforced masonry
Masonry piers and walls reinforced per the regular code Same as values specified in the regular code*
8.Reinforced concrete
Concrete footings,walls and piers reinforced as specified in the regular code
and designed for tributary loads
Same as values specified in the regular code*
‘Values are for strength level loads as defined in regular code standards.
^Values may be adjusted for other fasteners when approved by the enforcing authority.
^In addition to existing sheathing value.
Bolts to be '/2-inch (12.7 mm)minimum diameter.
^Other bolt sizes,values and installation methods may be used provided a testing program is conducted in accordance with regular code standards.Bolt spacing
shall not exceed 6 feet.(1830 mm)on center and shall not be less than 12 inches (305)mm)on center.
^Other masonry based on tests or other substantiated data.
^Embedded bolts to be tested as specified in regular code standards.
^Stresses given may be increased for combinations ofloads as specified in the regular code.
^Adhesives shall be approved by the enforcing agency and installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations.All drilling dust shall be
removed from drilled holes prior to installation.
18 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
CHAPTER 8-9
MECHANICAL,PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS
SECTION 8-901
PURPOSE,INTENT AND SCOPE
8-901.1 Purpose.The purpose of the CHBC is to provide
regulations for the mechanical,plumbing and electrical sys-
tems of buildings designated as qualified historical buildings
or properties.The CHBC requires enforcing agencies to
accept any reasonable equivalent solutions to the regular code
when dealing with qualified historical buildings or properties.
8-901.2 Intent.The intent of the CHBC is to preserve the
integrity of qualified historical buildings or properties while
providing a reasonable level of protection from fire,health
and life-safety hazards (hereinafter referred to as safety haz-
ards)for the building occupants.
8-901.3 Scope.The CHBC shall be applied in conjunction
with the regular code whenever compliance with the regular
code is required for qualified historical buildings or proper-
ties.
8-901.4 Safety hazard.No person shall permit any safety
hazard to exist on premises under their control,or fail to take
immediate action to abate such hazard.Existing systems
which constitute a safety hazard when operational may
remain in place,provided they are completely and perma-
nently rendered inoperative.Safety hazards created by inop-
erative systems shall not be permitted to exist.Requirements
of the regular code concerning general regulations shall be
complied with,except that the enforcing agency shall accept
solutions which do not cause a safety hazard.
8-901.5 Energy conservation.Qualified historical buildings
or properties covered by this part are exempted from compli-
ance with energy conservation standards.When new nonhis-
torical lighting and space conditioning system components,
devices,appliances and equipment are installed,they shall
comply with the requirements of Title 24,Part 6,The Califor-
nia Energy Code,except where the historical significance or
character-defining features are threatened.
SECTION 8-902
MECHANICAL
8-902.1 General.Mechanical systems shall comply with the
regular code unless otherwise modified by this chapter.
8-902.1.1 The provisions of the CHBC shall apply to the
acceptance,location,installation,alteration,repair,reloca-
tion,replacement or addition of any heating,ventilating,
air conditioning,domestic incinerators,kilns or miscella-
neous heat-producing appliances or equipment within or
attached to a historical building.
8-902.1.2 Existing systems which do not,in the opinion of
the enforcing agency,constitute a safety hazard may
remain in use.
8-902.1.3 The enforcing agency may approve any alterna-
tive to the CHBC which would achieve equivalent life
safety.
8-902.2 Heating facilities.All dwelling-type occupancies
covered under this chapter shall be provided with heating
facilities.Wood-burning or pellet stoves or fireplaces may be
acceptable as heating facilities.
8-902.3 Fuel oil piping and tanks.Fuel oil piping and tanks
shall comply with regular code requirements except that the
enforcing agency may waive such requirements where the
lack of compliance does not create a safety or environmental
hazard.
8-902.4 Heat-producing and cooling equipment.Heat-pro-
ducing and cooling equipment shall comply with the regular
code requirements governing equipment safety,except that
the enforcing agency may accept alternatives which do not
create a safety hazard.
8-902.5 Combustion air.
8-902.5.1 All fuel-burning appliances and equipment shall
be provided a sufficient supply of air for proper fuel com-
bustion,ventilation and draft hood dilution.
8-902.5.2 The enforcing agency may require operational
tests for combustion air systems which do not comply with
applicable requirements of the regular code.
8-902.6 Venting of appliances.
8-902.6.1 Every appliance required to be vented shall be
connected to an approved venting system.Venting sys-
tems shall develop a positive flow adequate to convey all
combustion products to the outside atmosphere.
8-902.6.2 Masonry chimneys in structurally sound condi-
tion may remain in use for all fuel-burning appliances,
provided the flue is evaluated and documentation provided
that the masonry and grout are in good condition.Terra
cotta chimneys and Type C metallic vents installed in con-
cealed spaces shall not remain in use unless otherwise mit-
igated and approved on a case-by-case basis.
8-902.6.3 The enforcing agency may require operational
tests for venting systems which do not comply with appli-
cable requirements of the regular code.
8-902.7 Ducts.
8-902.7.1 New ducts shall be constructed and installed in
accordance with applicable requirements of the regular
code.
8-902.7.2 Existing duct systems which do not comply with
applicable requirements of the regular code and do not,in
the opinion of the enforcing agency,constitute a safety or
health hazard may remain in use.
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 19
MECHANICAL,PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS
8-902.8 Ventilating systems.
8-902.8.1 Ventilating systems shall be installed so that no
safety hazard is created.
8-902.8.2 Grease hoods and grease hood exhaust systems
shall be furnished and installed in accordance with appli-
cable requirements of the regular code.Existing systems
which are altered shall comply with the regular code.
8-902.9 Miscellaneous equipment requirements.
8-902.9.1 The following appliances and equipment shall
be installed so that no safety hazard is created:warm air
furnaces,space heating equipment,vented decorative
appliances,floor furnaces,vented wall furnaces,unit heat-
ers,room heaters,absorption units,refrigeration equip-
ment,duct furnaces,infrared radiant heaters,domestic
incinerators,miscellaneous heat-producing appliances and
water heaters.
8-902.9.2 Storage-type water heaters shall be equipped
with a temperature-and pressure-relief valve in accor-
dance with applicable requirements of the regular code.
SECTION 8-903
PLUMBING
8-903.1 General.Plumbing systems shall comply with the
regular code unless otherwise noted.
8-903.1.1 The provisions of the CHBC shall apply to the
acceptance,location,installation,alteration,repair,reloca-
tion,replacement or addition of any plumbing system or
equipment within or attached to a historical building.
8-903.1.2 Existing systems which do not,in the opinion of
the enforcing agency,constitute a safety hazard may
remain in use.
8-903.1.3 The enforcing agency may approve any alterna-
tive to these regulations which achieves reasonably equiv-
alent life safety.
8-903.2 Residential occupancies.
8-903.2.1 Where toilet facilities are provided,alternative
sewage disposal methods may be acceptable if approved
by the local health department.In hotels,where private
facilities are not provided,water closets at the ratio of one
for each 15 rooms may be acceptable.
8-903.2.2 Toilet facilities are not required to be on the
same floor or in the same building as sleeping rooms.
Water-flush toilets may be located in a building immedi-
ately adjacent to the sleeping rooms.When alternative
sewage disposal methods are utilized,they shall be located
a minimum distance from the sleeping rooms or other
locations as approved by the local health department.
8-903.2.3 Kitchen sinks shall be provided in all kitchens.
The sink and countertop may be of any smooth nonabsor-
bent finish which can be maintained in a sanitary condi-
tion.
8-903.2.4 Hand washing facilities shall be provided for
each dwelling unit and each hotel guest room.A basin and
pitcher may be acceptable as adequate hand washing facil-
ities.
8-903.2.5 Hot or cold running water is not required for
each plumbing fixture,provided a sufficient amount of
water is supplied to permit the fixture’s normal operation.
8-903.2.6 Bathtubs and lavatories with filler spouts less
than 1 inch (25.4 mm)above the fixture rim may remain in
use,provided there is an acceptable overflow below the
rim.
8-903.2.7 Original or salvage water closets,urinals and
flushometer valves shall be permitted in qualified histori-
cal buildings or properties.Historically accurate reproduc-
tion,nonlow-consumption water closets,urinals and
flushometer valves shall be permitted except where histor-
ically accurate fixtures that comply with the regular code
are available.
8-903.3 Materials.New nonhistorical materials shall comply
with the regular code requirements.The enforcing agency
shall accept alternative materials which do not create a safety
hazard where their use is necessary to maintain the historical
integrity of the building.
8-903.4 Drainage and vent systems.Plumbing fixtures shall
be connected to an adequate drainage and vent system.The
enforcing agency may require operational tests for drainage
and vent systems which do not comply with applicable
requirements of the regular code.Vent terminations may be
installed in any location which,in the opinion of the enforc-
ing agency,does not create a safety hazard.
8-903.5 Indirect and special wastes.Indirect and special
waste systems shall be installed so that no safety hazard is
created.Chemical or industrial liquid wastes which may det-
rimentally affect the sanitary sewer system shall be pretreated
to render them safe prior to discharge.
8-903.6 Traps and interceptors.Traps and interceptors shall
comply with the regular code requirements except that the
enforcing agency shall accept solutions which do not increase
the safety hazard.Properly maintained “S”and drum traps
may remain in use.
8-903.7 Joints and connections.
8-903.7.1 Joints and connections in new plumbing systems
shall comply with applicable requirements of the regular
code.
8-903.7.2 Joints and connections in existing or restored
systems may be of any type that does not create a safety
hazard.
8-903.8 Water distribution.Plumbing fixtures shall be con-
nected to an adequate water distribution system.The enforc-
ing agency may require operational tests for water
distribution systems which do not comply with applicable
requirements of regular code.Prohibited (unlawful)connec-
tions and cross connections shall not be permitted.
8-903.9 Building sewers and private sewage disposal sys-
tems.New building sewers and new private sewage disposal
systems shall comply with applicable requirements of the
regular code.
20 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
MECHANICAL,PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS
8-903.10 Fuel-gas piping.Fuel-gas piping shall comply with
the regular code requirements except that the enforcing
agency shall accept solutions which do not increase the safety
hazard.
SECTION 8-904
ELECTRICAL
8-904.1 General.Electrical systems shall comply with the
regular code unless otherwise permitted by this code,or
approved by the authority having jurisdiction.
8-904.1.1 The provisions of the CHBC shall apply to the
acceptance,location,installation,alteration,repair,reloca-
tion,replacement or addition of any electrical system or
portion thereof,the premise wiring,or equipment fixed in
place as related to restoration within or attached to a quali-
fied historical building or property.
8-904.1.2 Existing systems,wiring methods and electrical
equipment which do not,in the opinion of the enforcing
agency,constitute a safety hazard may remain in use.
8-904.1.3 The enforcing agency may approve any alterna-
tive to the CHBC which achieves equivalent safety.
8-904.1.4 Archaic methods that do not appear in present
codes may remain and may be extended if,in the opinion
of the enforcing agency,they constitute a safe installation.
8-904.2 Wiring methods.
8-904.2.1 Where existing branch circuits do not include an
equipment grounding conductor and,in the opinion of the
enforcing agency,it is impracticable to connect an equip-
ment grounding conductor to the grounding electrode sys-
tem,receptacle convenience outlets may remain the
nongrounding type.
8-904.2.2 Ground fault circuit interrupter (GECI)pro-
tected receptacles shall be installed where replacements
are made at receptacle outlets that are required to be so
protected by the regular code in effect at the time of
replacement.Metallic face plates shall either be grounded
to the grounded metal outlet box or be grounded to the
grounding-type device when used with devices supplied
by branch circuits without equipment grounding conduc-
tors.
8-904.2.3 Grounding-type receptacles shall not be used
without a grounding means in an existing receptacle outlet
unless GECI protected.Existing nongrounding receptacles
shall be permitted to be replaced with nongrounding or
grounding-type receptacles where supplied through a
ground fault circuit interrupter.
8-904.2.4 Extensions of existing branch circuits without
equipment-grounding conductors shall be permitted to
supply grounding-type devices only when the equipment
grounding conductor of the new extension is grounded to
any accessible point on the grounding electrode system.
8-904.2.5 Receptacle outlet spacing and other related dis-
tance requirements shall be waived or modified if deter-
mined to be impracticable by the enforcing agency.
8-904.2.6 Eor the replacement of lighting fixtures on an
existing nongrounded lighting outlet,or when extending
an existing nongrounding lighting outlet,the following
shall apply:
1.The exposed conductive parts of lighting fixtures
shall be connected to any acceptable point on the
grounding electrode system,or
2.The lighting fixtures shall be made of insulating
material and shall have no exposed conductive parts.
Exception:Lighting fixtures mounted on electri-
cally nonconductive ceilings or walls where
located not less than either 8 feet (2438 mm)ver-
tically or 5 feet (1524 mm)horizontally from
grounded surfaces.
8-904.2.7 Lighting load calculations for services and feed-
ers may be based on actual loads as installed in lieu of the
“watts per square foot”method.
8-904.2.8 Determination of existing loads may be based
on maximum demand recordings in lieu of calculations,
provided all of the following are met:
1 .Recordings are provided by the serving agency.
2.The maximum demand data is available for a one-
year period.
Exception:If maximum demand data for a one-
year period is not available,the maximum
demand data shall be permitted to be based on the
actual amperes continuously recorded over a
minimum 30-day period by a recording ammeter
connected to the highest loaded phase of the
feeder or service.The recording should reflect
the maximum demand when the building or space
is occupied and include the measured or calcu-
lated load at the peak time of the year,including
the larger of the heating or cooling equipment
load.
3.There has been no change in occupancy or character
of load during the previous 12 months.
4.The anticipated load will not change,or the existing
demand load at 125 percent plus the new load does
not exceed the ampacity of the feeder or rating of the
service.
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 21
22 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
CHAPTER 8-10
QUALIFIED HISTORICAL DISTRICTS,SITES AND OPEN SPACES
SECTION 8-1001
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
8-1001.1 Purpose.The purpose of this chapter is to provide
regulations for the preservation,rehabilitation,restoration
and reconstruction of associated historical features of quali-
fied historical buildings,properties or districts (as defined in
Chapter 8-2),and for which Chapters 8-3 through 8-9 of the
CHBC may not apply.
8-1001.2 Scope.This chapter applies to the associated histor-
ical features of qualified historical buildings or properties
such as historical districts that are beyond the buildings them-
selves which include,but are not limited to,natural features
and designed site and landscape plans with natural and man-
made landscape elements that support their function and aes-
thetics.This may include,but will not be limited to:
1.
Site plan layout configurations and relationships
(pedestrian,equestrian and vehicular site circulation,
topographical grades and drainage,and use areas).
SECTION 8-1003
SITE RELATIONS
The relationship between a building or property and its site,
or the associated features of a district (including qualified his-
torical landscape),site,objects and their features are critical
components that may be one of the criteria for these buildings
and properties to be qualified under the CHBC.The CHBC
recognizes the importance of these relationships.This chapter
shall be used to provide context sensitive solutions for treat-
ment of qualified historical buildings,properties,district or
their associated historical features,or when work to be per-
formed secondarily impacts the associated historical features
of a qualified historical building or property.
2.Landscape elements (plant materials,site structures
other than the qualified historical building,bridges and
their associated structures,lighting,water features,art
ornamentation,and pedestrian,equestrian and vehicu-
lar surfaces).
3.Functional elements (utility placement,erosion control
and environmental mitigation measures).
SECTION 8-1002
APPLICATION
8-1002.1 The CHBC shall apply to all sites and districts and
their features associated with qualified historical buildings or
qualified historical districts as outlined in 8-1001.2 Scope.
8-1002.2 Where the application of regular code may impact
the associated features of qualified historical properties
beyond their footprints,by work performed secondarily,
those impacts shall also be covered by the CHBC.
8-1002.3 This chapter shall be applied for all issues regarding
code compliance or other standard or regulation as they affect
the purpose of this chapter.
8-1002.4 The application of any code or building standard
shall not unduly restrict the use of a qualified historical build-
ing or property that is otherwise permitted pursuant to Chap-
ter 8-3 and the intent of the State Historical Building Code,
Section 18956.
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 23
24 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
APPENDIX A
CHAPTER 8-6
TABLE 1—PROVISION APPLICABILITY
Title II
Public Entities
Title III
Private Entities
Title III
Barrier Removal
SECTION 8-601 PURPOSE,INTENT,SCOPE
8-601.1 Purpose.The purpose of the CHBC is to provide alternative regulations to facili-
tate access and use by persons with disabilities to and throughout facilities designated as
qualified historical buildings or properties.These regulations require enforcing agencies
to accept alternatives to regular code when dealing with qualified historical buildings or
properties.
8-601.2 Intent.The intent of this chapter is to preserve the integrity of qualified historical
buildings and properties while providing access to and use by persons with disabilities.
8-601.3 Scope.The CHBC shall apply to every qualified historical building or property
that is required to provide access to persons with disabilities.
1.Provisions of this chapter do not apply to new construction or reconstruction/
replicas of historical buildings.
2.Where provisions of this chapter apply to alteration of qualified historical buildings
or properties,alteration is defined in California Building Code (CBC),Chapter 2,
Definitions and Abbreviations.202 -A.Alter or Alteration.
8-601.4 General application.The provisions in the CHBC apply to local,state and fed-
eral governments (Title II entities);alteration ofcommercial facilities and places ofpublic
accommodation (Title III entities);and barrier removal in commercial facilities and places
of public accommodation (Title III entities).Except as noted in this chapter.
Applies Applies Applies
SECTION 8-602 —BASIC PROVISIONS
8-602.1 Regular code.The regular code for access for people with disabilities (Title 24,
Part 2,Vol.l,Chapter 1 IB)shall be applied to qualified historical buildings or properties
unless strict compliance with the regular code will threaten or destroy the historical signif-
icance or character-defining features of the building or property.
8-602.2 Alternative provisions.If the historical significance or character-defining fea-
tures are threatened,alternative provisions for access may be applied pursuant to this
chapter,provided the following conditions are met:
1.These provisions shall be applied only on an item-by-item or case-by-case basis.
2.Documentation is provided,including meeting minutes or letters,stating the reasons
for the application of the alternative provisions.Such documentation shall be
retained in the permanent file of the enforcing agency.
Applies Applies Applies
Section 8-603 —ALTERNATIVES
8-603.1 Alternative minimum standards.The alternative minimum standards for alter-
ations of qualified historical buildings or facilities are referenced in Section 202.5 of the
2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design,as incorporated and set forth in federal regu-
lation 28 CFR Pt.36.
Applies Applies Applies
8-603.2 Entry.These alternatives do not allow exceptions for the requirement of level
landings in front of doors,except as provided in Section 8-603.4.
1 .Access to any entrance used by the general public and no further than 200 feet (60
960 mm)from the primary entrance.
2.Access at any entrance not used by general public but open and unlocked with
directional signs at the primary entrance and as close as possible to,but no further
than 200 feet (60 960 mm)from,the primary entrance.
3.The accessible entrance shall have a notification system.Where security is a
problem,remote monitoring may be used.
Applies Applies Applies
(continued)
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE 25
APPENDIX A
TABLE 1—PROVISION APPLICABILITY—continued
Title II
Public Entities
Title III
Private Entities
Title III
Barrier Removal
8-603.3 Doors.Alternatives listed in order of priority are:
1.Single-leaf door which provides a minimum 30 inches (762 mm)of clear opening.
2.Single-leaf door which provides a minimum 29'^!^inches (749 mm)clear opening.
3.Double door,one leaf of which provides a minimum 29V2 inches (749 mm)clear
opening.
4.Double doors operable with a power-assist device to provide a minimum 29Vj
inches (749 mm)clear opening when both doors are in the open position.
Exception:Alternatives in this section do not apply to alteration of commercial
facilities and places of public accommodation (Title III entities).
Does not
apply
Does not
apply
Applies
8-603.4 Power-assisted doors.Power-assisted door or doors may be considered an
equivalent alternative to level landings,strikeside clearance and door-opening forces
required by regular code.
8-603.5 Toilet rooms.In lieu of separate-gender toilet facilities as required in the regular
code,an accessible unisex toilet may be designated.
8-603.6 Exterior and interior ramps and lifts.Alternatives listed in order of priority are:
1.A lift or a ramp of greater than standard slope but no greater than 1:10,for
horizontal distances not to exceed 5 feet (1525 mm).Signs shall be posted at upper
and lower levels to indicate steepness of the slope.
2.Access by ramps of 1:6 slope for horizontal distance not to exceed 13 inches (330
mm).Signs shall be posted at upper and lower levels to indicate steepness of the slope.
Applies
Applies
Applies
Applies
Applies
Applies
Applies
Applies
Applies
SECTION 8-604 —EQUIVALENT EACILITATION
Use ofother designs and technologies,or deviation from particular technical and scoping
requirements,are permitted if the application of the alternative provisions contained in
Section 8-603 would threaten or destroy the historical significance or character-defining
features of the qualified historical building or property.
1.Such alternatives shall be applied only on an item-by-item or case-by-case basis.
2.Access provided by experiences,services,functions,materials and resources
through methods including,but not limited to,maps,plans,videos,virtual reality
and related equipment,at accessible levels.The alternative design and/or
technologies used will provide substantially equivalent or greater accessibility to,
and usability of,the facility.
3.The official charged with the enforcement of the standards shall document the
reasons for the application of the design and/or technologies and their effect on the
historical significance or character-defining features.Such documentation shall be
in accordance with Section 8-602.2,Item 2,and shall include the opinion and
comments of state or local accessibility officials,and the opinion and comments of
representative local groups of people with disabilities.Such documentation shall
be retained in the permanent file of the enforcing agency.Copies of the required
documentation should be available at the facility upon request.
Note:For commercial facilities and places of public accommodation
(Title III entities).
Equivalent facilitation for an element of a building or property when applied as a waiver
of an ADA accessibility requirement will not be entitled to the Federal Department of
lustice certification of this code as rebuttable evidence of compliance for that element.
Applies Waivers
If a builder
applies for a
waiver of an
ADA
accessibility
requirement for
an element of a
building,he or
she will not be
entitled to
certification’s
rebuttable
evidence of
compliance for
that element.
This limitation
on the
certification
determination
should be noted
in any
publication of
Chapter 8-6 if
certification is
granted.
Applies
Notes:The regular code for Chapter 8-6 is contained in Title 24,Part 2,Vol.l,Chapter IIB,which contain standards for new construction.
Provisions ofthis chapter may be used in conjunction with all other provisions of the regular code and ADA regulations.
26 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
HISTORY NOTE APPENDIX
California Historical Building Code
Title 24,Part 8,California Code of Regulations (CCR)
HISTORY:
For prior history,see the History Note Appendix to the Cali-
fornia Historical Building Code,2013 Triennial Edition,
effective January 1,2014.
1.(SHBSB 01/15)-Repeal the 2013 California Histori-
cal Building Code,CCR,Title 24,Part 8 and adopt the
2016 California Historical Building Code approved by
the California Building Standards Commission on Jan-
uary 17,2016.Published on July 1,2016 and effective
on January 1,2017.
2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
28 2016 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE
SILVAR 11/9: Palo Alto Residential/Historic
Five years past and pending units
Palo Alto’s Historic Preservation Program and Guidelines
Historic Properties and Historic Survey 1998-2000
Review Bulletin and Long-Term Practice - Unevaluated SFRs
New Policy 7.2 – Review of Potentially Eligible Prior to Demolition
Inventory Designations and Code Incentives for Preservation
Past Five Years New Housing Units - Building Permits
Data By Request: From
June 2013 to June 2018,
Building Permits were
issued for 400 new housing
units in Palo Alto
Pending – Building Permits not yet issued
Data by Request – SFR and MFR:
*378 pending units
•approved,
•in process IR or ARB,
•preliminary reviews
Palo Alto’s Historic Preservation Ordinance and
Palo Alto’s Preservation Program
We aim to protect, preserve, interpret , & celebrate shared historic resources
including historic districts and hundreds of individually significant resources
•Resources in 1978 Inventory, Downtown, Professorville, Category 1s &2s
•Four National Register Districts (Ramona, Professorville, GM and GG)
•CLG, HRB advisory ‐designate, review and promote historic resources
•PAMC Chapter 16.49 Preservation Ordinance ‐unchanged since 1980s
•Long‐term housing policy –no demo of homes prior to building permit
•PAMC zoning incentives and exceptions (FAR, basements, subdivisions)
•Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation
•Online Parcel Reports: Notes on historic (include Survey Update 2000)
•Online photos/Cubberley K7 ‐archives Palo Alto Historical Association
•Comprehensive Plan November 2017, EIR Mitigation Measure/Policy 7.2
•Design Guidelines: Downtown, Professorville and Eichler Neighborhoods
•Single Family Individual Review Program (two‐story homes, discretionary)
•Building Permit Reviews (alterations to historic properties/eligible homes)
•CEQA review (SFRs exempt, unless demo historic resource)
•HREs and DPRs (Short form HREs prepared by City’s consultant)
Webpages:
Palo Alto Historical Association website: http://www.pahistory.org/
PCE department webpage, start at: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org
Professorville Historic District
Guidelines October 2016 –staff uses to evaluate modifications and new homes, along with
IR Guidelines when two‐story homes and second floor additions are proposed
Eichler Neighborhood Design Guidelines
•Council adopted Eichler Neighborhood Design Guidelines in April 2018, with
resolution noting no Eichler is individually significant (see next slide)
•Compatibility criteria and advice to retain architectural character
•Scopes of work include additions, façades, moving/lifting, and new construction
Note: Council directed staff to come back with Eichler Zone ‘opt‐in’ code, like SSO
Historic Properties – Historic Districts and Inventory
Historic District: Per ordinance, “a collection of buildings in a geographically definable area
possessing a significant concentration or continuity of buildings unified by past events, or
aesthetically by plan or physical development. A district should have integrity of design,
setting, materials, workmanship and association. *The collective value of a historic district
taken together may be greater than the value of each individual building. **All structures/
sites within a historic district are categorized as significant on the historic inventory.”
Notes: *The italicized sentence is used in consideration of Eichler tracts.
**The last sentence is for Professorville and Ramona Street between University & Hamilton.
Palo Alto Historic Properties: Historic Properties are eligible or listed, either individually or
as a contributing structure in a district, on the Palo Alto Historic Inventory, California
Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historic Places. These registers
and inventory provide different management guidelines and incentives for listed properties.
Nomination and Upgrade of Inventory Category: A nomination to the local, state or national
register generally requires review by the Historic Resources Board. An upgrade to a higher
inventory category also requires HRB review and Council action. Inventory category 1‐4
properties can use many incentives in zoning code and the historic building code.
Inventory Categories: Palo Alto’s ordinance defines a ‘Historic structure/site’ as Historic
Inventory categories 1, 2, 3 or 4, and all structures within historic districts.
Historic Inventory: Local Categories 1- 4 (16.49.020)
Category 1: A Category 1 resource is defined as an "Exceptional building" which
means any building or group of buildings of preeminent national or state
importance, meritorious work of the best architects or an outstanding example of
the stylistic development of architecture in the United States. An exceptional
building has had either no exterior modifications or such minor ones that the
overall appearance of the building is in its original character”
Category 2:A Category 2 resource is defined as a “Major building” which means
“any building or group of buildings of major regional importance, meritorious
works of the best architects or an outstanding example of an architectural style or
the stylistic development of architecture in the state or region. A major building
may have some exterior modifications, but the original character is retained”
Category 3 or 4:A Category 3 resource is defined as a “contributing building,”
which means “any building or group of buildings which are good local examples of
architectural styles and which relate to the character of a neighborhood grouping
in scale, materials, proportion or other factors. A contributing building may have
had extensive or permanent changes made to the original design, such as
inappropriate additions, extensive removal of architectural details, or wooden
facades resurfaced in asbestos or stucco”
Survey 1998–2000 Eligible/Potentially Eligible Resources
•“Windshield survey” of viewable homes (if obscured by vegetation, omitted)
•Homes w/obvious Architectural Integrity =‘potentially eligible’ resources lists
•D&M researched 400+ homes and prepared ‘DPR’ forms (DPR = California
Department of Parks and Recreation) to document findings for those homes
•165 homes deemed eligible for National and Cal Register (forms went to OHP)
•235 homes deemed ineligible for National Register (still possible Cal Register)
•Many more potentially eligible homes weren’t evaluated; 1,750 of these are
still standing. 100+ were demolished in past 7 years, more in the prior 12 years.
•16 years operating by policy/process bulletins with no Comp Plan/code changes
•Review Process Bulletin identified resources by review types (Groups A and B)
•Bulletin note at bottom about other types = property needing evaluation before
demolition is allowed w/discretionary application.
2016 Bulletin Group A and B Resources Review Process
Bulletin: Group A and Group B Resources Review
•GROUP A: ‘Group A’ Resources subject to City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance
•GROUP B: These are technically subject to CEQA review with discretionary apps –
SISR consistency reviewed, referral to HRB possible if impacts historic resource
Bulletin: Potentially Eligible Properties
•Last bullet conveyed planning staff treatment of the potentially eligible properties
as shown on parcel reports (as well as other 45 years old + unevaluated SFR properties )
•In January 2018, due to 2017 Comp Plan EIR and new Policy 7.2 written to implement an
EIR mitigation measure, staff began to adjust how we look at potentially eligible properties
Prior to Comp Plan 2017 Update
Palo Alto’s long‐time practice/Bulletin policy has been no CEQA evaluation of
new two‐story homes replacing 50+ year old homes previously unevaluated in
single family residential zones (reflecting hesitation to re‐open an old wound).
Comprehensive Plan update (effective December 2017) and EIR Mitigation
Resulting policy caused staff in early 2018 to begin to fully consider the historic
merit of the potentially eligible properties coming through discretionary
processes (IR, HIE, Variance).
Policy L‐7.2:If a proposed project would substantially affect the exterior of a
potential historic resource that has not been evaluated for inclusion into the
City’s Historic Resources Inventory, City staff shall consider whether it is
eligible for inclusion in State or federal registers prior to the issuance of a
demolition or alterations permit. Minor exterior improvements that do not
affect the architectural integrity of potentially historic buildings shall be
exempt from consideration. Examples of minor improvements may include
repair or replacement of features in kind, or other changes that do not alter
character‐defining features of the building.)
Comprehensive Plan Update 2017 Policy 7.2
Criteria for Designation of Historic Resources
If a owner wishes to have his or her property designated to take advantage
of exceptions and incentives, the criteria for designation in PAMC 16.49 are:
(1) The structure or site is identified with the lives of historic people or
with important events in the city, state or nation;
(2) The structure or site is particularly representative of an architectural
style or way of life important to the city, state or nation;
(3) The structure or site is an example of a type of building which was once
common, but is now rare;
(4) The structure or site is connected with a business or use which was
once common, but is now rare;
(5) The architect or building was important;
(6) The structure or site contains elements demonstrating outstanding
attention to architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship.
Zoning Code Exceptions and Incentives
For locally designated historic homes, PAMC provides for:
•Floor Area exemptions (attics up to 500 sf, basements with high FF not counted)
•Minimum lot size exceptions ( min 4,000 sf or 80% of min. in larger lot zones)
•Home Improvement Exceptions yield up to 250 sf bonus floor area for homes having
designation of categories 1‐4 (cats 3 and 4 bonus was recently added)
In the Downtown, there is a significant bonus floor area and transferrable
development rights are available when a historic rehabilitation is carried out
Subdivision Incentive for Historic Preservation
•Small flag lots, not normally allowed in the R‐1 zone, can be
created, where historic preservation covenant is placed on home
•Can be tricky ‐code was written for a specific situation ‐when the
flag lot to be created already has a home on it; not worded to
allow new flag where there’s no home. Also worded such that
there are two homes existing on one lot, rear home is historic.
•The ordinance may soon change to allow flag lots when there is a
historic home near the front and owner wishes to create a flag lot
at the rear to build a home where no home currently exists.
Incentives - Historic Building Code
Historic Resources Board
Staff Report (ID # 10171)
Report Type: Approval of Minutes Meeting Date: 3/14/2019
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650) 329-2442
Summary Title: February 14, 2019 Draft Minutes Approval
Title: Approval of the draft Minutes of the February 14, 2019 Historic
Resources Board Meeting
From: Jonathan Lait
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Historic Resources Board (HRB) adopt the attached meeting minutes.
Background
Attached are minutes for the following meeting(s):
February 14, 2019
Attachments:
Attachment A: HRB draft minutes Febraury 14 2019 (PDF)
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Call to Order/Roll Call
Present: Chair David Bower; Vice Chair Brandon Corey, Board Member Margaret Wimmer, Roger
Kohler, Michael Makinen, Martin Bernstein, Deborah Shepherd
Absent:
Chair Bower: [video started mid-sentence] … 2019. Could you call roll, please?
Ms. Amy French, Chief Planning Official: Yes, Happy Valentine’s Day.
Chair Bower: Oh, yes, thank you.
Ms. French: I believe our support staff will be calling roll.
Chair Bower: Thank you and to reiterate Happy Valentine’s Day to everyone.
Oral Communications
Chair Bower: Next on our agenda is the oral communications, open to anyone to speak about anything
other than agendize topics. I don’t think we have any cards.
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
Chair Bower: We’ll move onto agenda changes, additions, or deletions? I don’t think there are any.
Ms. French: No changes.
Selection of Chair and Vice Chair
[The Board moved to City Official reports]
Ms. Robin Ellner: Excuse me, can I interject real quick? Underneath there’s the selection of Chair and Vice
Chair.
Chair Bower: Sorry, I can’t hear you.
Ms. Ellner: Selection of Chair and Vice Chair under your changes, additions, and deletions. It’s in the fine
print.
Chair Bower: In the fine print. Where is it?
Board Member Corey: Right there, the Chair… (interrupted)
HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES: February 14, 2019
City Hall/City Council Chambers
250 Hamilton Avenue
8:30 A.M.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Chair Bower: Oh yeah, sorry, just moved right by that. We’re going to entertain motions to nominate people
to be Chair and Vice Chair. Any nominations?
Ms. French: I’m sorry, I’m getting distracted. Please repeat that.
Chair Bower: So, we’re moving onto election of Chair and Vice Chair.
Ms. French: Thank you.
Chair Bower: So, I just asked for nominations for people. Ok, so we’re not going to have a Chair or Vice
Chair.
Board Member Wimmer: I think David and Brandon are doing a fabulous job and maybe they would like to
continue for another year.
Board Member Makinen: Yeah and I’d also like to – we had such an abbreviated schedule last year, why
don’t we just continue on with what – where we are?
Board Member Kohler: Sounds good to me.
Chair Bower: I’d be happy to continue as Chair. Brandon… (interrupted)
Vice Chair Corey: I’d be happy to continue as Vice Chair as well.
Chair Bower: So, in order to formalize that we need a nomination. I think we do each separately. Amy can
tell us that when she’s done.
NOMINATION
Board Member Wimmer: I would like to nominate David Bower as Chair for the upcoming 2019 year.
Chair Bower: Amy, we need to do these separately presumably?
Ms. French: Yes.
Chair Bower: Is there a second?
Board Member Makinen: I’ll second it.
Chair Bower: Alright, any discussion? I think we already had the discussion. All in favor? Opposed? None.
CHAIR BOWER WAS VOTED 7-0 TO BECOME CHAIR
Chair Bower: I’ll nominate Brandon as Vice Chair for next year. Second?
Board Member Makinen: Second.
Chair Bower: Ok, discussion? No, I don’t see any. All in favor? Opposed? None. Ok, so housekeeping
completed.
VICE CHAIR COREY WAS VOTED 7-0 TO BECOME VICE CHAIR
Vice Chair Corey: Congratulations, Chair Bower.
[The Board moved down to City Official Reports Number One]
City of Palo Alto Page 3
City Official Reports
1. Historic Resources Board Meeting Schedule and Assignments
Chair Bower: So, first item is the HRB meeting schedule and assignments, that’s on Page 5 of our Packet.
[The Board moved back up to the selection of Chair and Vice Chair]
Chair Bower: Now let’s move to meeting schedule and assignments. I think the only thing I’d like to say
about that is it’s important for our planning to know when people will not be here so that we can be sure
we have a quorum for meetings. So, if you know of meeting dates that you will not be able to attend that
are listed on this – on Page 5, could you please contact Robin and let her know so that she’ll understand
who is and is not coming.
2. City Official Reports: Update on Draft Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan and
ITT Site Study.
Chair Bower: Next item is the update on the draft Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan and ITT
Study. Amy, you have a report or some information for us.
Ms. French: Yes, ever so briefly. There’s a one-and-a-half-page report in your packet and the chief reason
to put that in your packet was to alert you to the fact that the City’s website contains some documents that
you might want to have a look at. They’ve reached out to Planning for feedback on these documents. So,
if you, as members of the community and HRB Members, individually would like to make comment on that
set of documents then feedback from the community is solicited. I don’t have much more than that on that
particular item.
Chair Bower: I have mentioned before, I went out to that site maybe 2-years ago? Maybe 3-years ago with
Phil Bobel who’s in Public Works to look at the buildings and discuss ways to clean up the site. It had been
really abandoned without protections. The building that remains had most of the window glass broken and
they have since protected the building better. They’ve got a fence up so that you can’t get a car close to it
or a vehicle. They’ve painted the building and I think they’ve actually covered all the glass. It’s remarkably
well preserved despite the fact that it was effectively abandoned and so I encouraged Phil to first, do a
historic resources evaluation which sadly was not done prior to clean. This report describes the several
features that were removed from the site that actually would have been significant and should have been
preserved, in my opinion. At any rate, it is a space that is now stabilized and some of the more interesting
features are still there. The building being a prominent one and there’s even one of the Klystron tube power
generators – signal generators that still pretty much intact. It would be a very interesting space to develop
as community space, Baylands space. Not unlike the Sea Scout Building which was in equally bad shape
before it was renovated and taken over by or leased – I think it’s leased to a conservation group? Yeah.
Anyway, it’s worth noting that at least this – what remains of these buildings is stabilized. I’m hoping that
in the Baylands Plan that they – that these buildings will remain and that they’ll be refurbished and put into
some use that will benefit all of us and also preserves some of our history. Roger, you have a – wanted to
show people. That’s a – I think this is Palo Alto Daily from June 2018?
Board Member Kohler: 2017, June.
Chair Bower: June 2017, it’s an article with pictures. Most important, I think all of us have seen the picture
of the transmission tower, which is over 600-feet tall, was removed years ago but it’s – the anchors, these
gigantic concrete anchors still remain there. It’s pretty interesting to walk around the space and think of
what that must have been like. I remember seeing it from Bay Shore and it was an impressive structure.
3. Review and Discussion of Potential Topics for an HRB Retreat and Annual Reports
Including Certified Local Government (CLG) Annual Report and Comprehensive Plan
Annual Update Report
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Chair Bower: Let’s move on to Item Three then, review and discussion of topics for an HRB retreat, annual
reports including the Certified Local Government Annual Report and Comprehensive Plan Annual Update
Report. Amy?
Ms. French: Thank you. We’ll go through these, I have a fairly long PowerPoint to help with this. Robin
Ellner is upstairs making copies of the draft CLG Annual Report that I was busily preparing last night. I do
still have some need for feedback from you all on the training that you have attended before tomorrow
when I need to send it off. I’ll be doing that first thing in the morning. This is just an overview for the
public that might not know these things about Certified Local Government. Commission Members do have
qualifications to do this type of work so I just threw that on there. This is one of the documents I have to
provide for each member sayings, are you a professional in one of the disciplines here because I think we
have to have a minimum number of members that do have these qualifications. This is some – these are
some accomplishments that I look back on the year. The reporting period is October 2017 through
September 2018 and as Board Member Shepherd noted she was – she had done some training before the
– before she was put onto the Board. Back in May, she was appointed but the work that she has done, the
training that she has been too during – can fall outside of the reporting period for the purpose of reporting
in this report. The first thing I have here is an accomplishment is the Mills Act Program subcommittee work
and we can talk about that at potentially the retreat. We have a couple of folks on the subcommittee. So
that was something that happened during the reporting period. The Eichler Guidelines were adopted by
City Council as voluntary but nevertheless, they were adopted. In that, we did quite a bit of outreach and
the HRB was involved in coming to those outreach meetings and we had several meetings here in the
Chambers on those guidelines. We had the May 2018 CPF Conference and HRB Members attended and
supported and participated so that was something of note. We had the Comprehensive Plan was updated
at the end of 2017 and I think we never talked about that much here at this Board but that happened.
There were historic preservation policies that were in that Comp Plan update and added as a result of an
Environmental Impact Report mitigation measure. You’ve – we’ve talked a little bit about Policy 7.2 and
this is the policy that focuses on and that we’re doing these historic resource evaluations for those
properties that were not fully evaluated during the Dames and Moore Survey of 1998 and that hadn’t gone
fully to the state. I did have a presentation to the SILVAR, Silicon Valley Realty Association, back in – this
last fall on Policy 7.2 to make sure the community is aware of what we’re doing. Also, in 2018 we had
updates to our Zoning Ordinance that added Category 3 and 4 resources from the historic resource
inventory into the Home Improvement Exceptionlanguage that allows for bonuses for these resources. Prior
to that, it was only available to Categories 1 and 2. So this was a suggestion from the HRB and it came to
pass so it’s now an incentive for historic preservation of those Category 3 and 4 homes. The other change
that happened this year was the ADU, Accessory Dwelling Units, Junior Accessory Dwelling Units, I’ll talk
about that next. This is a win when we do have a historic resource and there is an accessory dwelling unit,
we do have this verbiage in our code that we look – the Director has the authority to look at the Secretary
of Interior Standards related to these accessory dwelling units. So that’s in our code, Chapter 18.42 and
then the other one is related to Eichler neighborhoods. This is for accessory dwelling units in Eichler tracts,
we are saying no taller than the primary residences for attached ADUs. Again, this came directly out of
comments made by the HRB, so we listened, we put it in the code, consider your work important there in
the past year. Here’s another slide that talks about the goals and so these are things that I have put out
there in the Annual Report. I don’t know if you’ve got the copy but this is – so you don’t have to look while
we’re sitting here. I’m trying to – the idea is that the HRB does have a public hearing about the Annual
Report and so this is it because it’s due tomorrow so I’m giving you the cliff notes. The 18.12 – one of the
things that didn’t go through when we took the Eichler Guidelines was we had made the suggestion that
Council adopts – direct us to prepare an ordinance that says, we are going to use the Eichler Guidelines
when there’s a two-story house coming into an Eichler tract. They didn’t, they adopted it as voluntary, so
we’re kind of left in this situation where we are – we know about the guidelines, we talk to people about
the guidelines but even in a discretionary individual application they’re not exactly bound – we are not
exactly bound to follow the guidelines. There are some areas where the Individual Review Guidelines and
the Eichler Guidelines have areas of conflict. I would like to have that resolved so that’s just my wish list.
I’m the hearing officer for individual reviews so it would be helpful to me to bring that forward again so
this is my wish list. Draft an Eichler Zone Ordinance, so this was a direction the City Council gave to Staff
City of Palo Alto Page 5
at the time they were adopting the Eichler Guidelines. Is to come back with an Eichler Zone that similar to
the single-story overlay, that a neighborhood could opt in and impose upon themselves. Then follow the
Eichler Guidelines and this could even be for single-story homes. So, this is something that’s on our plate,
when do we get to it, it may not be for a while but there it is. Then we do have an application on file that
is requesting -- you may remember about the Subdivision Incentive for historic preservation which is
complicated but it basically allows a new flag lot in the R-1 Zone only when there’s a historic resource, in
the inventory, on that flag lot to be created. Well, the language of the code doesn’t include if the resources
is in the front portion of that lot that would be split. So, it’s – there are situations out there that – and we
have one that’s interested – that would like the front home to be the historic home and have the rear parcel
not have the historic home. So, this is something we’re looking at and so here’s some other ones. Basically,
if you have comments on the ITT Building site for the Baylands Conservation Plan those are solicited. The
Castilleja School project, I’m the Planner for that, and so that is getting ready with a draft Environmental
Impact Report that we’re looking to publish in March. We will be coming to the Board as a whole but just
to give you the heads up and we’ll be seeking comments on that. The next one is a carryover from last
reporting period. We had – Emily had put on there that we would like to have nomination of the Lou Henry
Hoover House, the Girl Scout House, and we didn’t. Emily left, we never managed to get into that so I’m
hoping with a hire of a new Historic Planner we can pursue that. It involves working with the property
owner. The City owns the land but then there’s the property itself the building which is owned by the Girl
Scouts. Then Policy 7.2 which is the one that says we should be studying to make sure before we issue a
Demolition Permit that the home is not California Register eligible. So that’s the policy coming from the
Comp Plan that I have been dealing with this year or last year, 2018, and ongoing. Then there’s the final
one here that I thought you all might want to have on there is to forward the Council your subcommittee
proposal of the Tailored Mills Act Program. This was from the work that Emily had done with the
subcommittee last year that you might want to include in this goal for this coming year. This is just why
do we do this CLG, Certified Local Government? We want to be in good standing because then we can
apply for grants. The last time we did grants was the Professorville Guidelines. We didn’t use a grant for
the Eichler Guidelines, we found the money elsewhere. We have waiting at the ready a Mid-Century Context
Statement grant proposal that Matt worked on, our past Historic Planner, and Emily. It’s basically ready to
submit for a grant. The next grant submittal period is in May and so we might want to talk about that at
our retreat. Then the other – I guess I’m a little long winded this morning but I thought I’d put some
content here for you. The Comp Plan Implementation Update went to the Planning Commission last night.
This is going to be a yearly update to say how are we doing with the programs that are in the Comp Plan
that was adopted in the end of 2017. These are all the different elements of the Comprehensive Plan and
the Land Use Element is where there are historic preservation programs and policies. This is just – I
borrowed two slides from last night’s presentation so you can see there are 418 programs and we have 16
percent completed and 120 remaining pending programs in the Implementation Plan. Among those pending
are – this is a – there’s kind of a nomenclature about that. If anyone cares to look on this at some point
that are – that talk about hey, some of these are routine, some of these are in progress, some of these are
short term, some of these are long term. This is the nomenclature and then in the Annual Report update,
we have notations as to whether they’re pending or they’re complete or ongoing. We have preservation
related policies and programs in the Implementation Plan and these are all the ones that are pending. So,
they haven’t been embarked upon yet and I can go back to these at some point. Then these are pending
and ongoing so you can see there’s two ongoing and one of them is this Policy 7.2 that we’ve been busily
following. Then the other one is incentives to encourage salvage and reuse of discarded historic material
so everything else is pending. Then I come to the last slide which is our next retreat, we usually have an
annual treat or we try too. March 14th is the next date that we’re looking at for the Board meeting. If
everyone’s available on this date we can target a retreat and we can start working on that. The potential
retreat topics I put on the screen just because we’re talking about them today at least. The Mills Act
subcommittee, the – if you want to talk further about these policies and programs and the Comp Plan, get
an overview and discussion. Then we have this potential for the grant if we want to pursue that and then
you might have other topics. If you would like to discuss whether you are available for a retreat on March
14th, that would be great, and if not then we’ll seek another date.
Chair Bower: Well, that’s a lot of information, thank you for all of that. Can I ask a question about the Lou
Henry Hoover House? That’s the President’s house at Stanford, isn’t it?
City of Palo Alto Page 6
Ms. French: No, the Lou Henry Hoover House is the Girl Scout House over at – near the Junior Museum
and Zoo.
Chair Bower: Oh, ok, right.
Ms. French: You had seen this last year when we came through with the Junior Museum and Zoo. Those
of you who were on the Board last year saw the work there.
Chair Bower: Ok because there is the Hoover House on Stanford and I was confused.
Ms. French: Well there’s Hoover the guy and the president and there’s Lou Henry. She was the founder of
the Girl Scouts here… (interrupted)
Chair Bower: Right, just clarifying. You managed to hit all the topics I had on my list for the retreat. I think
we might want to – well, it’s an overwhelming list really when you look at the amount of… (interrupted)
Ms. French: Oh, the goals list?
Chair Bower: Yeah, well – right but I think that Mills Act subcommittee Report is close to being done with.
I think we have another meeting and we certainly can talk about that. The Comp Plan -- I’m most interested
in the Mid-Century Context Grant – Statement Grant because that’s a once a year opportunity. That’s mostly
done, it’s my understanding, and I think we want to make sure we can make that application deadline. So
maybe we should talk about what Board actions we need to take and then put that on our next meeting
agenda. So, we can move that forward because I know that it’s not just our decision, it’s a City decision.
Ms. French: Yes, it’s Council decision. Also, we have to look into budget -- you know in a year where we’re
concerned about budget it’s not always something that is an immediate yes. We usually offer in-kind
services as part of our contribution to match the funding but there’s other expenses we need to look
carefully at that.
Chair Bower: So, did anyone else on the Board have other topic suggestions? Margaret.
Board Member Wimmer: I did. I think it would be really informative and interesting if we could take a look
at the Historic Building Code. I mean the State of California has the California Residential Code, the Electrical
Code, the Plumbing Code, and Mechanical Code but they also have a Historic Building Code. The code
section is only about – it’s not very long and I have a copy of it. Not with me but I think it would be a really
great exercise just to – I can make copies for everyone so that we should each have a copy of it. I mean
I’ve been meaning to do that for a while but maybe we could even look through it ourselves, just review it
ourselves. I don’t know if we – I mean maybe Martin could lead us or Roger could lead us in moving
through the code issues and discussing certain topics. I know that the Historic Building Code should allow
some kind of concessions when doing preservation work and it would be neat for us to recognize what
those concessions are.
Chair Bower: It’s a pretty powerful tool in historic renovation because it allows non-compliant features to
remain. The one that I can think of that’s most significant is handrail height which now is what, 42-inches?
Board Member Wimmer: Now we’re required to have 3-feet 6-inches but… (interrupted)
Chair Bower: Right, 40… (interrupted)
Board Member Wimmer: …the Historic Building Code might differ from that.
Chair Bower: Right, well it allows the building official to make the determination. My understanding is they
can make the determination that if it’s less than the current codes but still deemed to be safe then it can
City of Palo Alto Page 7
remain because that’s a big deal in theaters. It’s actually in the – both my daughter’s homes have non-
compliant rails.
Board Member Wimmer: I think also maybe there’s some energy allowances because a lot of historic houses
have single-glazed wood windows. Then they don’t want the double-glazed wood windows or double-glazed
new windows because it really takes away from the historic look. I think it would be an interesting topic.
Chair Bower: Well, we can add it to the list.
Board Member Wimmer: Maybe too much to combined with all this in one day but I definitely think it’s
worth us going through just for self-education.
Chair Bower: Well, if we don’t set it as a goal, there’s no opportunity to achieve it so I would just add that
to the list.
Ms. French: I was going to say; the window issue definitely comes up quite a bit. I have an on-going
conversation with Page and Turnbull, our consultant, and those folks that are coming through the process
how best to deal with windows. So, I think that would be a good one, I can even ask Page and Turnbull to
come and be apart of a conversation. Then I was thinking also, I could see if our Chief Building Official is
available for a retreat to come and have a dialog.
Board Member Makinen: I had one further suggestion under other topics. I think we should probably look
at community outreach to a more aggressive community outreach program that we currently have. Looking
at places like Pasadena, I think they are more actively involved with the community and I think there’s a
lot we could do to improve our community outreach program here. To get them educated and sensitives
to historic properties, historic preservation in general.
Chair Bower: Absolutely. I completely agree, especially considering how much misinformation exists about
historic preservation. So that’s an equally good topic, we can add that.
Board Member Makinen: I think Pasadena is one of the gold standards for outreach on community
involvement. I think we should look at that and see what we can learn from their programs.
Chair Bower: Martin.
Board Member Bernstein: Tagging off Chair Bower’s comments about some of the powerful tools available
for historic… (interrupted)
Chair Bower: Building Code.
Board Member Bernstein: … Building Code is that the use of archaic building materials. So, for example, if
there’s some interior plaster walls that actually have some sheer value and the Historic Building Code
actually allows some of those archaic materials that would not meet code today to actually remain. That
could help in terms of if there’s any proposed changes to an outside – to the exterior of a building that
from a historical point of view you can still keep it structurally and then, therefore, helps also maintain
historic character and historic facades.
Chair Bower: Right. Three years ago, at the California Preservation Foundation Conference in San Francisco
at the Presidio, several of us saw a demonstration of reinforcing brick walls. So that they have sheer value
of a new wall by applying an epoxy and carbon fiber mesh to the face of the wall. It (inaudible) them, holds
them together, and allows those walls to stay in place without having it be either replaced or a new sheer
wall built inside. It was a remarkable technologic advance for these old buildings that are primarily brick.
There were all kinds of them on the Presidio so lots of that.
City of Palo Alto Page 8
Board Member Bernstein: Brief question, does any Board Member or Staff knows does the Historic Building
Code apply to any historic structure or it must be Category 1? It has to be a listed structure, I think. I’m
not exactly sure where it applies.
Ms. French: I believe it’s anything on our inventory as well as a National Register which we have some that
aren’t on our inventory. National Register eligible and California Register eligible but we can delve into
those details in the retreat if we want to have that as the topic.
Board Member Bernstein: Great, thanks.
Vice Chair Corey: I guess my only – I would like to follow up on the Mills, we already have this on the list.
Are there too many items on our list at this point?
Chari Bower: Well, we always, in my experience, my short 13-years’ experience on this Board have too
many items on the list. I think we could prioritize the list but I think it’s important just to have as many
things our list as we want to consider and then we will get to them as we can. I think the Mills Act
subcommittee report is going to eventually come before the Board. So that’s probably not the highest
priority because that’s the furthest along so we can certainly touch on it. We can, I hope by that time,
publicize this so let’s set the date because I think that will be important. If March 14th works for Board
Members then I would say that’s – sooner the better. Martin, does that work?
Board Member Bernstein: Yes.
Chair Bower: Roger? (inaudible)
Vice Chair Corey: It works for me.
Chair Bower: I see lots of heads – in fact, everybody seems to think that’s a good date so let’s set that for
now. We won’t have a meeting in two weeks, correct? So that will be our next meeting and we’ll just
advertise that as the retreat and we’ll determine where it will be. In here in the Council Chambers?
Ms. French: I mean the easy place is here because we already have it reserved but I could certainly have
it – the room in the back we could have some treats and (interrupted)
Chair Bower: Sure, although it kind of liked the community room out in the lobby…
Ms. French: There’s that.
Chair Bower: … because it’s a little less formal and I think it’s more inviting for a retreat environment if
that’s possible…
Ms. French: Let me see if it’s available.
Chair Bower: … we could see but this is fine. Alright, so March 14th. Any other comments on all of the
material that Amy (interrupted)
Ms. French: I guess if you want to make comments now about the – I know you have it just at your places
now but I kind of breezed through the Annual Report for the Certified Local Government. If there’s
something in there that you see that you want to get back to me today on, you want to read that more at
your leisure today and let me know if there’s something that is horribly missed. Also, if you have not gotten
back to me about – or Robin, about your – the training during this period, we would want to know about
those. I can go back and look. I mean I have gone back as you’ll see and I have stated that for each and
every one of you, you went to the Palo Alto Conference. Some of you told me three days and some I just
wrote two days but you know, let me know if I’m wrong on that. I mean that’s (interrupted)
City of Palo Alto Page 9
Chair Bower: That’s a critical element in this report.
Ms. French: Yeah, I think that’s just to be able to say yes, we have a critical number of folks who have
been doing their training. If you didn’t, that’s fine too, I think.
Chair Bower: I mean that’s two days over three days at that conference is well beyond the minimum. I
think it’s a single training session, isn’t it?
Ms. French: Yeah, it’s a pretty low bar.
Chair Bower: Ok so Board Members please check that and just confirm – actually, you don’t need to confirm
if there’s misinformation in here. Make sure Amy knows about that or Robin.
Ms. French: I will be attaching resumes. I mean if you look at this thing it requires documentation so that’s
what I’ll be working on today, is getting that documentation.
Chair Bower: Oh, I should then – yeah.
Ms. French: I might have – for some – for many for you who’ve been on the Board, that there’s probably
something that Emily used in the past that I can still use. Unless you want to update your resume or
something that’s happened in the intervening time.
Chair Bower: Mine is updated so I’ll send it to you. Alright, anything else about this? This has to go in
(interrupted)
Ms. French: I’m going to put it into the mail tomorrow because it’s due tomorrow so I can have it
postmarked.
Chair Bower: I’m glad we’re not just coming right up to the deadline.
Ms. French: Just in time.
Chair Bower: Well we want to capture as much information as possible. Alright, any other comments about
this section segment? Ok, thank you.
Study Session
4. PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 840 Kipling Street [18PLN00185]: Study Session
for Historic Resources Board Consideration of Proposed Modifications to a Craftsman
Bungalow Previously Determined by the HRB to be a Contributing Resource Within the
Boundaries of the SOFA I Coordinated Area Plan. Environmental Assessment: No
Formal Action is Requested At This Time; Therefore, No Formal Review in Accordance
With The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Has Been Completed. Prior to
Any Formal Decision, The Project Will be Assessed in Accordance With CEQA. Zoning
District: R-1 (Low Density Residential). For More Information Contact the Project
Planner Claire Hodgkins at Claire.Hodgkins@cityofpaloalto.org
Chair Bower: Move onto the study session, public hearing about 840 Kipling. It’s a study session so we will
not be making any determinations today. It allows us to hear about the design plans and provide our input
to the – excuse me – the architect who happens to be our colleague Martin. Martin, you probably have
something to say about that.
Board Member Martin: Yes, thank you, Chair Bower. Yes, so I’m the architect for this project for the study
session so I’ll be stepping down from the HRB Board for this item. Thank you. I will be making a
presentation though.
City of Palo Alto Page 10
Chair Bower: Right and that’s – because you’ve done this before it’s allowed by – because you’re a sole
proprietor. Ok, just so everyone understands that.
Vice Chair Corey: (inaudible – off mic)
Ms. French: I’d like to introduce Claire Hodgkins. I think maybe some of you haven’t met her but she’s one
of our Planners and will be the Project Planner and present the project.
Chair Bower: So, before you start, excuse me, I just wanted to disclose that very good friend of mine own
this building back in the 80’s. I can’t really remember the interior of it but I do remember the somewhat
unique character of this building as it’s representative of a type of building that was built in Palo Alto at the
time. My friends don’t own it anymore so I don’t have any conflict as far as I know and I have visited the
site, Monday, to look at the – to see what it looks like now. Anyone else have any disclosures like that? Ok,
please proceed.
Ms. Claire Hodgkins, Project Planner: Good morning Board Members, Claire Hodgkins, I’m the Project
Planner for this project. The proposed project is located at 840 Kipling, it’s in the R-2 Zoning and under the
SOFA I Cap as the land use designation under our Comprehensive Plan. There are a couple things requested
as part of this project. A variance to allow construction of a second story on a substandard lot, Individual
Review for the new second story addition, and a Home Improvement Acceptation to allow for the extension
of a non-complying wall at the rear of the property. This did come to the HRB, I believe it was 1990 as
noted in the Staff report, a historic evaluation was done and analyzed and documented in that Staff report
and the HRB determined at that time that the home had historic merit. So, in order to move forward and
make the findings for a variance, part of those findings would be that the house is historic. In which case,
all additions and modifications to the house must be consistent with the Secretary of Interior Standards for
Rehabilitation. The recommended motion is just as you noted, this was just a study session so no formal
action is requested. Staff is just interested in HRB’s initial feedback on these proposed modifications as
they relate to the character of the existing structure. I do just want to note one additional item which is
that the home – because they are requesting a Home Improvement Exception, if they choose to move
forward with that request, 25 – more than – 75 percent or more of the home on the exterior walls must be
maintained. I do want to note that in Staff’s initial review of this plan set, the current plan set in front of
you, it appeared that more than 75 percent of the exterior wall or sorry, more than 25 percent of the
exterior walls were being revised. There may need to be some modifications in order to meet that
requirement under code. With that, key considerations today are just the proposed modifications and how
they align with the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. Particularly the character-defining
features outlines in the previous historic evaluation which were outlined in the Staff report. If you guys
want them, I do have each of the elevations, the existing and the proposed next to each other. With that,
I’ll turn it back to you and recommend that you hear a brief presentation from the applicant as well.
Chair Bower: Great, thank you. Good context to start. Martin, please proceed.
Board Member Bernstein: Thank you, Chair Bower. Just for members of the public, so I am on the Historic
Resources Board and yet I did receive a ruling from the California Fair Political Practice Commission that as
a sole proprietor without employees I’m allowed to represent the project to the Board. I do have some
drawings to submit to the Board. I also have copies of those for Staff, I’ll hand these out. These are Staff
– copies for Staff and each of these goes to each Board Member, thank you. I’ll give you a chance to take
a look at those. The – with me today is also the owner, Stephen Reyna, he’s the owner of the home. You’ve
owned the home for how long now, sir?
Mr. Stephen Reyna: 1998.
Board Member Bernstein: Since 1998, 20-years. I’d like to just start off by introduction that the goal for
Steve and his wife, Aysen, is just to create a modest addition and then keep everything compatible with
the neighborhood character and then also the historic character. I just want to make a note that the house
City of Palo Alto Page 11
is not on the City’s Master List of Historic Structures on the Historic Inventory but because we are in SOFA,
that’s why this contributing structure is required to come before the HRB. I’d like to talk just briefly about
why we are proposing a second story. This is an R-2 lot, it’s 87-square feet below the size of a lot needed
to be a standard lot and hence that is why we have to apply for a variance for a second floor. Variances -
- on a substandard lot maximum height is 17-feet and only one habitable floor. So, because we’re just 87-
square feet, we need to apply for a variance for that additional second floor and additional height. As you
may have seen in the drawings, we’re essentially at the maximum lot coverage and therefore any additional
square footage needs to be then therefore on the second floor then hence—now hence the variance.
There’s another reason for the not extending the first floor further than what we’re proposing is that you
can – perhaps you’ve seen on the drawings there are two major Redwood Trees and Palo Alto has the Tree
Protection Zone. What is critically important about maintaining these Tree Protection Zones, if you see on
the photo, I sent you of this tree at the next-door neighbor. In fact, you can see Steph and Aysen’s house
in that photo, this is from their rear yard, 63-inch diameter Redwood Tree. The neighbor’s house was within
that Tree Protection Zone and the City’s Planning Arborist issued a demolition permit for that tree. Not only
did the – to protect any historic structure, we need to be away from these – the Redwood Trees that are
on Steph and Aysen’s property. As you can see in the diagrams, we’re right up to that Tree Protection Zone
and again, we just don’t want the history of having structures being damaged and then a City Planning
Arborist issuing demolitions for significant trees so again, those are just another reason. We’ve got the –
we’re at the maximum basically lot coverage essentially and then the Tree Protection Zones so that’s again,
another reason just to go up rather than getting closer to those trees. There was a hybrid development on
this house. The original house was, in the rear portion, it was – there was a kitchen, a one-bedroom and
a dinning room. Over the years then the front living room was developed, the front porches developed and
there’s also a flat section of the existing front portion of the house that’s actually defective. It’s a flat roof,
we actually have photos of it, of the ceiling caving in. Anyway, our goal is for the existing historic – now
historic living room and the historic porch, we want to maintain that street facing character. That flat roof
we want to make that correct with the compatibility of the existing front of the house and that’s what
brings us to these renderings that you have in front of you. I’ll hold my example up here and for members
of the public. That rendering and all three of those renderings are showing then the historic front gable of
the front now living room and then the existing historic porch.
Chair Bower: Excuse me, Martin?
Board Member Bernstein: Yeah?
Chair Bower: Can you show that again because I don’t see that in (interrupted)
Board Member Bernstein: Oh, you don’t have a copy of it?
Chair Bower: No, we don’t have a copy of that.
Board Member Bernstein: Oh, did I not (interrupted)
Chair Bower: I mean we have the plan views but…
Ms. French: (inaudible – off mic)
Chair Bower: Oh, alright, thank you.
Board Member Bernstein: Ok thank you, Amy.
Chair Bower: Go ahead.
Board Member Bernstein: Just make sure everybody has it. Does everybody have…
Chair Bower: Ok, now we’re ready.
City of Palo Alto Page 12
Board Member Bernstein: Ok, thanks, good. So, the renderings are now showing the front street facing
façade of the historic living and its existing fenestration and then the existing front porch in those views
here. The – as we all know we have many tools for creating compatibility and I’m just going to quickly read
those here. Thanks for the moment. Well I do have them right here, I’m sorry. We all worked on the
Professorville Historic Guidelines but the emphasis I want to make is, because this applies to all historic
properties, is the idea of how do we get compatibility with new versus old. So, I’ll just reading some of the
criteria, locate new addition at the rear of the residences whenever possible. So, as you see on some of
the other drawings the second floor is definitely set back. I think its setback about 18-feet from the front
so that’s the purpose of these renderings that you saw. To minimize additional bulk, just use some sloping
roofs and that’s in some of the guidelines. Avoid building a rear addition that is wider than the front of the
house. Employ compatible massing and roof forms and you’ve seen that we’ve done that. Make the roof
forms similar to the historic structures, we did the sloping roofs. Respect the existing residence by using
cladding and roofing materials that are compatible. Construct new window materials that are similar in style
but different so we’re using aluminum clad and we got simulated divided lights. Design window patterns
that are similar to the existing which we have done. So, differentiation would be probably the most
important principle that we want to employ. Then you can see on one of your other hand outs that hopefully
you’ve received, it shows then all the new addition work and, in the back, it has horizontal siding. The
existing siding on the house is actually 1 x 12s but it’s brought up so it looks like its 1 x 4 but’s its one piece
of 1 x 12 that’s sculped. We’re proposing on the new addition for differentiation to be 1 x 6 lap siding. Very
similar to the existing but a different dimension and again that’s outlined also in the Professorville Design
Guidelines for differentiation. Alright so those are some of the differentiations but the main point is again,
the subordination of the second floor. That’s important so again the step back, we did that, and then also
on the second floor the plate heights. So, for technical reasons, for member of the public, plate heights is
the height from the floor to the start of the exterior wall before sloping up. We dropped that down to 7
foot 6 inches, still habitual heights but at least we can lower it a little bit here. Again, that was the main
point of these elevations that you have is just to show how it is subordinate from the house there. Good.
Look at my notes. Those are the main points and I’d be open to questions. I’d also like to introduce the
owner, Stephen Reyna. Would you like to make any comments?
Mr. Reyna: Good morning Board Members. If I should break into a coughing fit please forgive me. I just
went through a bad flu last week and my wife is at home. She wanted to be here but she’s at home right
now suffering from what I went through last week. Back in 1997-1998 we were looking for a house and
we counted, we probably went through -- physically went through about 100 different homes looking for
something we thought would fit. We were actually looking originally for a three-bedroom, two bathrooms
so that we could have some space to grow in because we were looking for a family. Then when we walked
into 840 Kipling, this was home. This was the first home we’d walked into that just grabbed us and said
this is were we want to live. You know it’s smaller than we wanted but the beauty of it, the charm of it just
made our decision when we walked in. We bought it that weekend, two days after we found out about it.
We love old houses, we love historic character of our house both the interior and the exterior. The porch
with the open beams inside that we can sit and have our coffee. The picture window and the divided light
paneling above and below. Inside, if Mr. Bower remembers, there a craftsman like fireplace with built in
bookcases on the left and the right. We’ve got divided light pocket doors between the living room and the
dinning room and there’s a built-in hutch in the dining room. I mean all of these just have the characters
that just called to us and as we’re coming up with – these are the things, both interior and exterior, that
we want to preserve and build on in a compatible way. Now, we’ve been there 20-years. We now have a
teenage son, we have two aging moms that want to visit and take of as best we can and this two in one is
just not working. We actually – because we are a substandard lot, we have more FAR available then we
can build on the first floor and so our solution was to find a way to add a historic, compatible structure on
the second floor. Our goal is always modest. We’re not here to build an elephant house. We don’t want an
elephant house but we do want is something that reflects and expands on the historical character that
called to us when we first saw this house and chose it as our home. So, our fundamental goal, even when
we were interviewing the architects, find somebody who understands historic homes. That was our first
criteria and we have this design in front of you, a modest addition on top of a beautiful first story, 1912
City of Palo Alto Page 13
house. We believe our architect Martin has done a great job of achieving the goals we set out to achieve
and we look forward to your comments. Thank you.
Chair Bower: Thank you.
Board Member Bernstein: I have one more comment, if I may? I’d like to just make a brief comment about
our proposed Home Improvement Acceptation. The ordinance reads that, as Planner Claire mentioned, to
retain 75 percent of the existing walls. Where we’re proposing the rear addition on the fist floor, so those
existing rear walls obviously are being removed. The ordinance, we didn’t see it written about what about
the existing walls – the side walls to remain. One of the interruptions that the City has been using is even
if on that existing wall, if you move a window over a little bit, that’s considered not retaining that area of
the existing wall. I’ve seen some other applications that were responding to that issue. if you move a stud
to replace – that’s considered not maintaining so anyway, it just becomes maybe something to consider is
that what is meant by existing wall to remain? Anyway, there’s an HIE to allow the additional square footage
but how – what’s considered an existing wall to remain? It gets pretty technical and I don’t know maybe
that seems to discourage – anyway it becomes a challenge. So, I just wanted to make – anyway, that’s the
issue with the – how the HIE is – how the regulation is implemented. As Steve mentioned – here’s the
existing character of the street facing façade as you can see but again, we did take actually good counsel
from Planner Claire Hodgkins and also then the good counsel from Arnold Mammarella about making sure
that the proposed second floor is subordinate. That’s why I did the plate height and then we moved it back,
I think it’s something like 18-feet back from the street facing façade just to keep everything subordinate.
Then all the differentiation issues as I mentioned so again, we have a lot of good tools for differentiation
so we tried to apply all those things. Again, so as I mentioned I think on previous projects is the good
counsel received from Planning Staff and then the IR consultant. I do think these things – those advices to
make good – better projects and I’m grateful for the City to offer those things to us. Anyway, so we’re hear
to answer any questions or respond to any comments. Thank you.
Chair Bower: Do you have questions? Ok, Brandon.
Vice Chair Corey: Maybe this is also a question for the Planner. I’m trying to understand this 75 percent/25
percent. Is it – I think you probably confused me more Martin in some of the details there but is it the
existing – are the only exterior walls that are changing the back walls on the rear? That’s what I’m trying
to understand.
Ms. Hodgkins: The way that we analyze – that Staff analyzes that is just looking at the façade of each side
and where changes are being made to the façade, whether it’s moving a window, removing a window, or
adding windows or doors or changing the wall entirely. Any areas of change is what we look at.
Vice Chair Corey: But it’s exterior walls, right?
Ms. Hodgkins: Of the exterior walls, yes.
Vice Chair Corey: So, what – so then it sounds to me then there’s portions of the front of the existing house
that are changing in subtle ways that I’m not following on the plans?
Ms. Hodgkins: Yeah, so I can show you really quickly.
Vice Chair Corey: Perfect.
Ms. Hodgkins: Where’s the – can I have this?
Ms. French: (inaudible – off mic)
Ms. Hodgkins: I’ll look at each elevation kind of just to briefly go over so the area of change on the front
would be this front door is being revised and the windows being added. We don’t count new area, we’re
City of Palo Alto Page 14
looking at just the existing façade. So, all this is being retained, there’s some changes happening here. On
the east façade you can see that there’s a significant number of changes. You’re looking at the change of
the rear here, you’re looking at all of the windows being revised on the entire façade, and some changes
to the wall. On the rear it’s basically most of the façade is being changed and on the west side there’s only
a small change at the rear. You can see these three windows are being retained and then this one is being
revised for the addition.
Vice Chair Corey: Thanks, that was – thank you. So, Martin?
Board Member Bernstein: Yes, thank you Brandon for asking that question. If you look on Page A4.0 please.
So, you can see my calculations for existing wall to remain and existing walls to be removed. The diagonal
indicated walls, that was my diagram for walls to be removed, and that’s then less than 75 percent. Claire’s
bringing up an interesting and good point about yes, we are changing windows on the left side there. To
the point from a historic and compatibility issue from the street facing façade, if you look at the porch, Clair
is correct. We are modifying the front doors to the bedroom on Page A4.0 and we are modifying the door
to the living room. Those are historic doors there, we are just switching locations of those because now
the entry is where the bedroom is. That’s becoming the new front entry so we are keeping the historic
doors, we’re just switching the location of those two.
Vice Chair Corey: Got it.
Board Member Bernstein: My comment is, if you look at from the Secretary of Interior Standards for
Rehabilitation is there’s no change in the massing, there’s no change in the locations of the doors, there’s
no change in the historical character, we’re salvaging materials, we’re not throwing it away. Anyway, so
it’s just how is that HIE defined as changing exterior walls. That could be a subject of a future conversation
but currently the City is saying if you make that change, you’re not retaining that existing wall. So, let’s
talk about historic character and what harm is being done by doing that and anyways, that’s a comment.
Chair Bower: How close are you to the 75 percent number?
Board Member Bernstein: Let’s see, we are…
Vice Chair Corey: 74.5
Board Member Bernstein: … 70…
Vice Chair Corey: It says 74.5.
Ms. Hodgkins: So, we’re not though, (crosstalk) I mean it’s clear that it’s not calculated the way that Staff
calculates it.
Board Member Bernstein: Correct.
Ms. Hodgkins: So, we’re not – I’m not saying that there’s not a solution, I just wanted to point it out
because it may mean that some changes might be made to ensure that they are meeting the 25 percent.
I don’t know at this point in time exactly how much they are changing when that calculation is done but it
seems to be more than 25 percent right now. So, it would probably require some revisions to meet that
code requirement or some changes might be required and they don’t move forward with the HIE but the
variance still moves forward. So, there’s a couple different options but we just wanted to call that out for
attention as you analyze it.
Chair Bower: If I can jump in here. It seems to me as Martin points out, the purpose of this particular
calculation is to prevent basically massive destruction of the exterior surface which is what we’re really
protecting with our Historic Ordinance or historic designations. We want to maintain that, we’re not really
talking about the inside, and I would have to agree with Martin that adding a window in a wall, flipping
City of Palo Alto Page 15
those doors around is – well moving the French door from the living room to the current existing bedroom
number one might remove some siding but the rest of it would remain unchanged. You wouldn’t take the
siding off and add new siding so it’s really a modest thing. I think the calculation could hopefully be more
elastic when we’re talking about taking existing materials and simply putting them in a different location.
If it turns out that that’s not the way planning decides to calculate it, it seems to me that it’s possible that
you could just leave the front porch alone. While that might not be ideal, at least then you retain those two
walls and maybe that gets you closer to 25 percent. I mean I would say that I think that most of the
materials stay as it is currently sided so the siding wouldn’t be removed. That’s the purpose of this particular
requirement.
Vice Chair Corey: I guess my question on that is how do you – if you look at even, I guess the side walls,
it feels like you’d have to cut out a lot of material. You’d have to reuse a lot of material around the windows
but you’d also have to redo – you’re not going to cut and leave siding half way across. So, you’re going to
have replace the entire line of siding across the back of the house. So naturally it feels to me like if you
look at this west elevation, does this mean a third of the siding is being replaced along the entire length or
how does that – you know what I mean? You don’t patch up pieces of siding.
Chair Bower: Right.
Vice Chair Corey: So, this is a specific thing on the front, just in general to that house there could be a lot
of patchwork. I do like the idea of preserving the doors on the front. I mean it’s a neat idea, just…
Chair Bower: It’s an option.
Vice Chair Corey: …yeah, it’s an option.
Chair Bower: Way back when I was a newly graduated collage graduate and I started my business, it was
very difficult to find someone who would make – you couldn’t buy – this is called three lap siding in the
trades. You couldn’t find it and so we painstakingly removed the siding for areas where we needed to
patch. Now that’s something that doesn’t exist in 100-foot long pieces. It’s all pieced on that building and
it’s pieced at random ways and then painted. You don’t see the – were each piece stops and you can take
the old siding off and you can patch it in in other places. Now, of course, you can hire – you can get that
siding reproduces exactly as it is for about $100 set up fee plus the cost of material. It wasn’t available
then so it’s possible to take it off and piece it back and really retains it. Some of it will break but you know
that’s a more expensive and painstaking way of doing it but it can be done. I just wanted to interject that
that’s a possibly and I think that is done on other historic buildings.
Board Member Bernstein: That’s a good point, Chair Bower. We’ve got 38-linear feet of wall by 9-feet high
of this – what was your reference to it as? Three…
Chair Bower: It’s three lap siding.
Board Member Bernstein: Three lap siding.
Chair Bower: They’re probably originally 16-foot lengths. That was pretty standard (inaudible)(crosstalk)
Board Member Bernstein: Yeah so these are one – basically it’s 1-inch by 12-inch piece at scale.
Chair Bower: Exactly.
Board Member Bernstein: We’ve got 38-linear feet of that around the back of the building that we’re
removing. Again, as part – as you all know and Staff knows, part of the Comprehensive Plan is salvage not
recycle.
City of Palo Alto Page 16
Chair Bower: I’m only – let me just say one more thing. I think the eastern side here is most likely –
because there’s so much work to be done on that side with the second story addition, I would envision that
side would be all new material of some sort. Other parts of the façade which have fewer penetrations –
new penetrations of removing or moving windows probably could use original siding. That’s just a…
Vice Chair Corey: I guess I’m not trying to belabor the point, I guess my question is if in theory to do these
windows, all the siding on that was replaced. How is that factored in to the 75 percent area because in
theory you could say I’m touching a window on each side but I’ll replace all the siding in like kind. That’s
what I’m trying to understand. I’m not saying that’s the intent, I just want to understand.
Ms. Hodgkins: We do count all of that if it’s being removed. That is actually something that we’re finding
in the field. So, when we calculate we actually do require them to calculate slightly beyond what the change
in window is and stuff because once you start cutting a window you’re not stopping at exactly where the
window is. The whole point of that section of the Home Improvement Exception is simply to try and
discourage complete façade remodels. It’s not to stop you from doing a single change on a door or a
window or anything. It’s simple to – if we are going to allow for a non-complying wall to be extended in
this case, we want the façade to be maintained because the whole point is to maintain the existing structure
to the extent feasible. We put that in because we’re finding that a lot of structures where you know we
were doing this Home Improvement Exception with the intent to keep the house but the entire façade was
being changed. So, they’re not really keeping the house in the end.
Chair Bower: There’s a building on Channing between Webster and Middlefield that had three lap siding on
it and sadly, it stayed there for most of the renovation. Then near the end they ripped all the siding off and
put 1 x 6 siding on it. Totally different look, kind of destroyed the look of the building. Not relevant to this
discussion but I understand what drives this particular requirement.
Board Member Bernstein: I agree with Claire. It’s a – for preservation, let’s put some regulations that
discourage or prohibit so it’s a fair regulation.
Chair Bower: Although if you came to the Building Department and said I have dry rot in my siding and I
need to replace it and I want to replace it in kind. There wouldn’t be any issue so this is where these
requirements with important objectives can actually become more difficult and maybe not achieve what is
intended.
Board Member Bernstein: Just one other comment, if I may please? Just again, part of our goal today is
just to hear the Board’s comments about for compatibility for the existing structure, meeting – conforming
with the Secretary of Interior Standards. Again, because of the risk of building to close to a tree, I just
didn’t want another tree permit on our property to be granted approval. So then also the historic structure
can stay in perpetuity -- so hearing -- in support of our variance. So, hearing from the Board that agreement
that the proposal meets the Secretary of Interior Standards for subordination, setback, a lower plate height
for the upper level. Enough differentiation that it meets these standards, that would be our goal for today.
Ms. French: I would just interrupt to say that this is a study session and there’s no biding comments. We
aren’t prepared – we haven’t – we have our Page and Turnbull, that is our expert help, and we would have
to come back with that analysis.
Chair Bower: Sure. Roger.
Board Member Kohler: Staff, if you look on the page here that says new north and new south and you see
the daylight plane and it comes really close to the gutter. You know where it says new north and new
south, see here the gutters are and the daylight plane? We’re being told now that – from Staff that you
can’t be that close. You have to be 1 to 2-feet away from the gutter with the daylight plane.
Ms. Hodgkins: Yeah so, this project is still being analyzed under the IR Guidelines. I will note that we ask
anything adjacent, single story residences to be below the daylight plane. This one is not next to a single-
City of Palo Alto Page 17
story residence on that side. That’s not to say that what they’re doing is going to be approved. This is still
going to be reviewed under the IR Guidelines for analysis.
Board Member Kohler: So that relies on adjacent homes, whether – how close you can get?
Ms. Hodgkins: Yeah so, we look for everything to be…(interrupted)
Commissioner Kohler: Is that written down anywhere?
Ms. Hodgkins: Well, it’s shown in the IR Guidelines. We look at the diagrams that they show and we’re
looking to provide space when it’s adjacent to a single-story residence. In this case they look to design to
try and push away from the adjacent single-family residences on the right side. It’s still being reviewed by
our consulting architect for consistency with the IR Guidelines.
Chair Bower: Anyone else? Margaret.
Board Member Wimmer: I drove by the project today and it looks like there’s also an application for that
right-side house at 836. I would assume their doing a second-story addition there too. Oh, well…
Board Member Bernstein: No, they’re not doing a second-story floor addition.
Board Member Wimmer: Oh, ok. Well I just thought maybe there would be some impact there. I mean I
think also what Martin’s done is I think it’s very complementary to what’s existing. The only thing I want
to ask about is the existing front gable and then there’s the new upper gable. I’m wondering if on that
west side elevation that you would want to connect that upper roof with the existing lower roof so you
don’t have an interruption? You could go from the lower roof plane and connect it in one plane instead of
having that skip. I don’t know if that would… (interrupted)
Board Member Bernstein: I think…
Board Member Wimmer: … prevent water…
Board Member Bernstein: One of the – I’m sorry, what was your last comment?
Board Member Wimmer: I was just saying that that’s – I would – I was wondering if you’d consider doing
that? Just having a continuous roof on that side. Also, I believe you could have some kind of a dormer or
a shed dormer window in that bedroom three that can violate the daylight plane for a certain width; like
15-feet or something. So that might help your bedroom three to allow you to have another window that’s
facing that west side but that might add square footage.
Board Member Bernstein: We did – I think one of the earlier drawings we had those planes lining up and
my thought on that is that now you’re starting to perhaps offer some confusions. Say well what’s the
historic gable, what’s the new gable and again, because of the Secretary we really wanted to emphasize
and be clear here’s historic, here’s new. I think that my comments about that.
Board Member Wimmer: That makes sense.
Board Member Bernstein: As far as – we had – again, we did some dormers but now we’re going to start
– as you can see in the diagram on A5.1, we start interrupting that daylight plane. There’s an existing one-
story house very near by and we just didn’t want to start violating those daylight planes.
Board Member Wimmer: I think you’re allowed – with a dormer I think a dormer can protrude into the
daylight plane for a certain width. That might allow you to have an additional window in that bedroom but
in the rear bedroom you already have windows on two elevations so that should be fine. Just a thought.
City of Palo Alto Page 18
Chair Bower: Thanks Margaret. Michael?
Board Member Makinen: Yes, I think we should keep in mind the overall goal in a rehabilitation of a historic
property and that is to make it suitable for moderate living but still retain the historic flavor and character
of the house. I think that’s the overwriting principle we should be paying attention to right now. Clearly the
house, as originally constructed, is not suitable for modern family living and here the homeowner is making
every attempt to preserve the character of the house and fit within the guidelines of what rehabilitation is.
So, I would encourage to accept the changes here because I believe that the historic character is retained
and the sides of the house are essentially not visible from the street. So, the façade is the only thing that
is of real importance as far as the historic character goes. I think if we kind of take a more general view of
this, what is trying to be achieved right here, and not try to nit pick every little thing right here will go along
ways towards maintaining the proper perspective.
Chair Bower: Thank you Michael. I think you’re spot on there. Debbi, did you have any comments you want
to make?
Board Member Shepherd: No.
Chair Bower: Ok. I have a couple comments. It seems to me that a variance for this property is exactly the
right vehicle to take and so this project is constrained by history. To Michael’s point, the development of
the property – the property to the, I think it’s the east, those properties were all built when the Palo Alto
Medical Foundation moved.
Board Member Bernstein: Correct.
Chair Bower: Those are far denser and much closer than anything we would allow now but that’s was I
guess a planned development decision. As Michael points out this building is not visible from the street
except on the front facades. That’s probably our focus, we’re required to analyze all these things we’ve
been talking about but I think it’s relatively insignificant. One of the questions that I think you might want
to answer before you move forward is or as you move forward is whether you’ve thought about putting a
basement under the entire building and not adding a second story? You’re not in the flood zone and I
realize that’s difficult to do but Roger and I – Roger designed and I built a basement under a property on
Emerson in Professorville. Suspending the building and putting an entire half a house underneath the
house. Probably more expensive now than it was then but it’s something that somebody might ask. Well
why do you have to go up when you could go down? Economics are an issue. I don’t – I’m not asking you
to answer that but I just think that’s something to think of. The only other thing I’m having a little trouble
with the 1 x 6 siding as opposed to three lap siding. I understand the differentiation issue, I’m just – again,
it won’t be seen so it probably doesn’t matter but I’m just – as I envision it, it seems to me to be a little
disjointed. I know exactly why you’re doing it, I’m not being critical of it, and I can’t offer a better solution.
Vice Chair Corey: I was thinking about that too. Another possibility might be to do something in between
on the siding because I get the idea, you’re trying to differential but is there something – is there a 1 x 8
or something that may look more different but maybe not as disjointed? That might be an idea.
Chair Bower: We had a project in Professorville maybe 5-years ago that had the same siding, three lap
siding, and then extended the building out back. I cannot remember what we did – what was proposed
there. Frankly, there’s nothing wrong with 1 x 6 siding. I’d rather see 1 x 6 than 1 x 8 but I think there was
a – if I remember any of this correctly, there was a vision or a dividing line between old and new that
allowed a material that was almost the same as what was on the building to go forward.
Board Member Bernstein: We can explore those things. Again, I’m in total support of differentiation and
then now – however, if it goes through the process, we can show some alternatives features but the
differentiation is important so we want to keep it. Other things that we are doing for differentiation in
addition to the simulated divided lights versus a tree divided light, we’re going to go – we’re proposing
aluminum clad windows (inaudible). Other things we’re doing is on the front gables underneath the barge
City of Palo Alto Page 19
board, technical term, there is a profiled molding underneath that barge board. What I’ll be proposing on
the construction drawings is that – and future planning drawings is the molding underneath the barge
board on the front gables will be a more simple profile. So again, we’re just looking at ways to get different
so that – yeah, here are the differences. So, for our trained eyes we can see the difference but still have
the compatibility.
Chair Bower: One of the most interesting things that I heard at a seminar given by the California Historic
Historian I think was a comment about differentiation of these types of details we’re talking about. He said
basically only architects and builders are ever going to see these.
Board Member Bernstein: True or historians.
Chair Bower: I mean the general public doesn’t understand that one molding is different than another so
it’s the attempt to make it clear to a trained professional eye where the existing building stopped and the
new building starts. I think you’ve done a good job of addressing those issues.
Board Member Bernstein: Great, thanks.
Chair Bower: Alright, any other comments? Well good luck, I hope we will see this back.
Board Member Bernstein: Ok, thank you.
Action Items
Chair Bower: Ok, move onto Action Items. I don’t think we have any action items, do we?
Ms. French: Approval of minutes.
Approval of Minutes
5. Approval of Excerpt Minutes of January 10, 2019, of the Joint Meeting of the Historic
Resources Board and Architectural Review Board and minutes of the November 8,
2018, Historic Resources Board Meeting
Chair Bower: Right so let’s do approval of minutes. I’ll have to say Board Members, I’m exhausted reading
these minutes, especially on these long meetings. I’m willing to let the artificial intelligence just do what it
does with it. So, do I have a – I didn’t see any gross errors. Anybody else see anything? If not, do I have
a motion to approve?
MOTION
Vice Chair Corey: I give a motion to approve the minutes.
Chair Bower: Alright, do we have a second?
Board Member Kohler: I’ll second.
Chair Bower: Roger, second? Alright. Any discussion? I don’t think we have any discussion.
Board Member Bernstein: Yes, sorry, I won’t be able to vote on those because I was – I did not participate
in the issues regarding the railroad.
Board Member Wimmer: I was also absent from those two meeting, sorry.
City of Palo Alto Page 20
Chair Bower: Well, you can still vote to approve them. I tend to abstain when I don’t attend because I
don’t see how you can approve something that you didn’t hear. So, with that said, all in favor? All not in
favor?
Board Member Bernstein: I’m not voting.
Chair Bower: Or any abstentions?
Board Member Bernstein: Abstain.
Chair Bower: So, one abstention. Margaret, you voted yes? Ok.
MOTION PASSED 6-0, 1 ABSTAIN
Chair Bower: Alright, well that was tough.
Subcommittee Items
Chair Bower: Subcommittee items, I think the only subcommittee we have is the Mills Act and we’ll probably
try to meet as quickly as possibly for I think one final time so we can get this to the Board.
Board Member Questions, Comments and Announcements
Chair Bower: Let’s move to Board Member questions and comments and announcements and then we’ll
adjourn. Debbi.
Board Member Shepherd: I wanted to announce that at the next meeting of the Santa Clara County
Historical Heritage Commission they are going to be discussing and taking public comment regarding
Stanford’s new General Use Permit Application which includes an important section about historic resources.
They really need more community engagement, public comment, and interest taken perhaps on departed
people on our Board as well. That meeting is at 70 W. Heading Street on the 21st at 6:30 in San Jose.
Thank you.
Chair Bower: Thank you. Anyone else?
Board Member Kohler: 6:30 in the morning?
Chair Bower: Night, 6:30 in the evening. That’s even to early for me. Alright, if there are no other comments
or announcements, I think we are adjourned. Thank you all for coming. It’s great we had all seven of us
here today.
Adjournment