Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-08-08 Historic Resources Board Agenda PacketHISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD Regular Meeting Thursday, August 08, 2024 Council Chambers & Hybrid 8:30 AM Vice Chair Samantha Rohman Remote Call‐In Location:68900 Frank Sinatra Dr., Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 Historic Resources Board meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attend by teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose to participate from home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged if attending in person. T h e   m e e t i n g   w i l l   b e   b r o a d c a s t   o n   C a b l e   T V   C h a n n e l   2 6 ,   l i v e   o n YouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen Media Center https://midpenmedia.org. Commissioner names, biographies, and archived agendas are available at https://bitly.com/paloaltoHRB.  VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/96800197512) Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512    Phone: 1(669)900‐6833 PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comments will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or an amount of time determined by the Chair. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutes after the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org and will be provided to the Board and available for inspection on the City’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subject line. 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. The Chair may limit Public Comments to thirty (30) minutes for all combined speakers. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak on Study Sessions and Actions Items to two (2) minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers. PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted only by email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received, the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strong cybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are not accepted. Signs and symbolic materials less than 2 feet by 3 feet are permitted provided that: (1) sticks, posts, poles or similar/other type of handle objects are strictly prohibited; (2) the items do not create a facility, fire, or safety hazard; and (3) persons with such items remain seated when displaying them and must not raise the items above shoulder level, obstruct the view or passage of other attendees, or otherwise disturb the business of the meeting. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENT  Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS The Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management. CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 1.Historic Resources Board Schedule of Meetings and Assignments STUDY SESSION Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker. 2.Historic Resources Board Retreat: Discussion of the Following Potential Topics: (1) Draft Mills Act Letter; (2) Historic Review Bulletin; (3) Historic Preservation Awards; (4) HRB Workplan; (5) Historic Status Label in Parcel Report APPROVAL OF MINUTES Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker. 3.Approval of Historic Resources Board Draft Minutes of June 13, 2024 BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s). ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email, teleconference, or by phone. 1. Written public comments may be submitted by email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org. 2. Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, click on the link below to access a Zoom‐ based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in‐ browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up‐to‐date browser: Chrome 30, Firefox 27, Microsoft Edge 12, Safari 7. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 3. Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted  through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions above. 4. Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Board. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN    Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512   Phone:1‐669‐900‐6833 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.  1 Regular Meeting August 08, 2024 HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARDRegular MeetingThursday, August 08, 2024Council Chambers & Hybrid8:30 AMVice Chair Samantha Rohman Remote Call‐In Location:68900 Frank Sinatra Dr., RanchoMirage, CA 92270Historic Resources Board meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attendby teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safety while stillmaintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose to participatefrom home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in themeeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged if attending inperson. T h e   m e e t i n g   w i l l   b e   b r o a d c a s t   o n   C a b l e   T V   C h a n n e l   2 6 ,   l i v e   o nYouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen MediaCenter https://midpenmedia.org. Commissioner names, biographies, and archived agendas areavailable at https://bitly.com/paloaltoHRB. VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/96800197512)Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512    Phone: 1(669)900‐6833PUBLIC COMMENTSPublic comments will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or anamount of time determined by the Chair. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutesafter the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance tohrb@cityofpaloalto.org and will be provided to the Board and available for inspection on theCity’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subjectline.Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified aspresent at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson's presentation will be allowed up tofifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non‐speaking membersagree not to speak individually. The Chair may limit Public Comments to thirty (30) minutes forall combined speakers. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak on Study Sessions andActions Items to two (2) minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers.PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted only by email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received, the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strong cybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are not accepted. Signs and symbolic materials less than 2 feet by 3 feet are permitted provided that: (1) sticks, posts, poles or similar/other type of handle objects are strictly prohibited; (2) the items do not create a facility, fire, or safety hazard; and (3) persons with such items remain seated when displaying them and must not raise the items above shoulder level, obstruct the view or passage of other attendees, or otherwise disturb the business of the meeting. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENT  Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS The Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management. CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 1.Historic Resources Board Schedule of Meetings and Assignments STUDY SESSION Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker. 2.Historic Resources Board Retreat: Discussion of the Following Potential Topics: (1) Draft Mills Act Letter; (2) Historic Review Bulletin; (3) Historic Preservation Awards; (4) HRB Workplan; (5) Historic Status Label in Parcel Report APPROVAL OF MINUTES Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker. 3.Approval of Historic Resources Board Draft Minutes of June 13, 2024 BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s). ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email, teleconference, or by phone. 1. Written public comments may be submitted by email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org. 2. Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, click on the link below to access a Zoom‐ based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in‐ browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up‐to‐date browser: Chrome 30, Firefox 27, Microsoft Edge 12, Safari 7. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 3. Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted  through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions above. 4. Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Board. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN    Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512   Phone:1‐669‐900‐6833 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.  2 Regular Meeting August 08, 2024 HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARDRegular MeetingThursday, August 08, 2024Council Chambers & Hybrid8:30 AMVice Chair Samantha Rohman Remote Call‐In Location:68900 Frank Sinatra Dr., RanchoMirage, CA 92270Historic Resources Board meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attendby teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safety while stillmaintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose to participatefrom home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in themeeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged if attending inperson. T h e   m e e t i n g   w i l l   b e   b r o a d c a s t   o n   C a b l e   T V   C h a n n e l   2 6 ,   l i v e   o nYouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen MediaCenter https://midpenmedia.org. Commissioner names, biographies, and archived agendas areavailable at https://bitly.com/paloaltoHRB. VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/96800197512)Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512    Phone: 1(669)900‐6833PUBLIC COMMENTSPublic comments will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or anamount of time determined by the Chair. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutesafter the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance tohrb@cityofpaloalto.org and will be provided to the Board and available for inspection on theCity’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subjectline.Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified aspresent at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson's presentation will be allowed up tofifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non‐speaking membersagree not to speak individually. The Chair may limit Public Comments to thirty (30) minutes forall combined speakers. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak on Study Sessions andActions Items to two (2) minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers.PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted onlyby email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received,the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strongcybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are notaccepted. Signs and symbolic materials less than 2 feet by 3 feet are permitted provided that: (1) sticks, posts, poles or similar/other type of handle objects are strictly prohibited; (2) the items do not create a facility, fire, or safety hazard; and (3) persons with such items remain seated when displaying them and must not raise the items above shoulder level, obstruct the view or passage of other attendees, or otherwise disturb the business of the meeting. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENT  Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS The Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management. CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 1.Historic Resources Board Schedule of Meetings and Assignments STUDY SESSION Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker. 2.Historic Resources Board Retreat: Discussion of the Following Potential Topics: (1) Draft Mills Act Letter; (2) Historic Review Bulletin; (3) Historic Preservation Awards; (4) HRB Workplan; (5) Historic Status Label in Parcel Report APPROVAL OF MINUTES Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker. 3.Approval of Historic Resources Board Draft Minutes of June 13, 2024 BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s). ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email, teleconference, or by phone. 1. Written public comments may be submitted by email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org. 2. Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, click on the link below to access a Zoom‐ based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in‐ browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up‐to‐date browser: Chrome 30, Firefox 27, Microsoft Edge 12, Safari 7. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 3. Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted  through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions above. 4. Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Board. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN    Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512   Phone:1‐669‐900‐6833 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.  3 Regular Meeting August 08, 2024 HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARDRegular MeetingThursday, August 08, 2024Council Chambers & Hybrid8:30 AMVice Chair Samantha Rohman Remote Call‐In Location:68900 Frank Sinatra Dr., RanchoMirage, CA 92270Historic Resources Board meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attendby teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safety while stillmaintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose to participatefrom home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in themeeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged if attending inperson. T h e   m e e t i n g   w i l l   b e   b r o a d c a s t   o n   C a b l e   T V   C h a n n e l   2 6 ,   l i v e   o nYouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen MediaCenter https://midpenmedia.org. Commissioner names, biographies, and archived agendas areavailable at https://bitly.com/paloaltoHRB. VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/96800197512)Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512    Phone: 1(669)900‐6833PUBLIC COMMENTSPublic comments will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or anamount of time determined by the Chair. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutesafter the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance tohrb@cityofpaloalto.org and will be provided to the Board and available for inspection on theCity’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subjectline.Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified aspresent at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson's presentation will be allowed up tofifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non‐speaking membersagree not to speak individually. The Chair may limit Public Comments to thirty (30) minutes forall combined speakers. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak on Study Sessions andActions Items to two (2) minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers.PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted onlyby email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received,the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strongcybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are notaccepted.Signs and symbolic materials less than 2 feet by 3 feet are permitted provided that: (1) sticks,posts, poles or similar/other type of handle objects are strictly prohibited; (2) the items do notcreate a facility, fire, or safety hazard; and (3) persons with such items remain seated whendisplaying them and must not raise the items above shoulder level, obstruct the view orpassage of other attendees, or otherwise disturb the business of the meeting.CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALLPUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker.AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONSThe Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management.CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS1.Historic Resources Board Schedule of Meetings and AssignmentsSTUDY SESSIONPublic Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker.2.Historic Resources Board Retreat: Discussion of the Following Potential Topics: (1) DraftMills Act Letter; (2) Historic Review Bulletin; (3) Historic Preservation Awards; (4) HRBWorkplan; (5) Historic Status Label in Parcel ReportAPPROVAL OF MINUTESPublic Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker.3.Approval of Historic Resources Board Draft Minutes of June 13, 2024BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE MEETINGS ANDAGENDASMembers of the public may not speak to the item(s). ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email, teleconference, or by phone. 1. Written public comments may be submitted by email to hrb@cityofpaloalto.org. 2. Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, click on the link below to access a Zoom‐ based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in‐ browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up‐to‐date browser: Chrome 30, Firefox 27, Microsoft Edge 12, Safari 7. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 3. Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted  through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions above. 4. Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Board. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN    Meeting ID: 968 0019 7512   Phone:1‐669‐900‐6833 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.  4 Regular Meeting August 08, 2024 Item No. 1. Page 1 of 1 Historic Resources Board Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: August 8, 2024 Report #: 2407-3296 TITLE Historic Resources Board Schedule of Meetings and Assignments 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 it be brought to staff’s attention when considering this item. No action is required by the HRB for this item. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: 2024 HRB Meeting Schedule & Assignments AUTHOR/TITLE: Steven Switzer, Historic Preservation Planner Item 1 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 5     Historic Resources Board 2024 Meeting Schedule & Assignments 2024 Meeting Schedule Meeting Dates Time Location Status Planned Absences 1/11/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 1/25/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 2/8/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Canceled 2/22/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Canceled 2/23/2024 6:00 PM Hybrid Community Meeting 3/14/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Canceled 3/28/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 4/11/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Wimmer 4/25/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Canceled 5/9/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Pease 5/23/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Canceled 6/13/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 6/27/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Canceled 7/11/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 8/8/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 9/12/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 10/10/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 11/14/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 12/12/2024 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 2024 Subcommittee Assignments January February March April May June July August September October November December Item 1 Attachment A - 2024 HRB Meeting Schedule & Assignments     Packet Pg. 6     Item No. 2. Page 1 of 5 Historic Resources Board Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: August 8, 2024 Report #: 2407-3308 TITLE Historic Resources Board Retreat: Discussion of the Following Potential Topics: (1) Draft Mills Act Letter; (2) Historic Review Bulletin; (3) Historic Preservation Awards; (4) HRB Workplan; (5) Historic Status Label in Parcel Report RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Historic Resources Board (HRB) discuss any or all of the following potential topics. The following order is only suggested and may be modified. 1. Draft Mills Act Letter 2. Historic Review Bulletin 3. Historic Preservation Awards 4. HRB Workplan 5. Historic Status Label in Parcel Report Note that: •Retreats include oral communication from members of the public on any item not on the agenda at the beginning of the meeting. •Members of the public may also speak to agenda items during the discussion of each item, including during the final open session item. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The following content is provided as background information for the five retreat agenda items. Item 1: Draft Mills Act Letter (a)Past HRB Packets The HRB has long discussed bringing its Mills Act pilot program concept to City Council. The Tailored Mills Act Program Outline (Attachment A) was last updated in January 2018. Since that time, the HRB has discussed its approach and recommendation to present a Mills Act preservation incentive proposal to City Council. Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 7     Item No. 2. Page 2 of 5 (b)HRB’s 23-24 Work Plan Goal 5 The HRB’s 23-24 Workplan Goal 5 showed the third quarter targeted to finalize the Tailored Mills Act Program outreach approach and bring forward a program report to City Council. Most recently at the May 9, 2024, and June 13, 2024, HRB meetings staff presented reports recommending the HRB discuss an approach/recommendation to present a Mills Act preservation incentive proposal to City Council.1 (c) Comprehensive Plan Policy L-7.13 Policy L-7.13 provides the following, “Encourage and assist owners of historically significant buildings in finding ways to adapt and rehabilitate these buildings, including participation in state and federal tax relief programs.” The Mills Act offers the single most important economic incentive program in California for the restoration and preservation of qualified historic buildings by private property owners. (d)Next Steps Discuss and review and the Draft Mills Act Letter to City Council (Attachment B). Discuss and review the comments provided by Board member Pease (Attachment C) regarding the Tailored Mills Act Program Outline. Item 2: Historic Review Bulletin (a)The Historic Review Bulletin edits The Review Bulletin was last updated in September of 2023. These updates reflected the Comprehensive Plan policy L7.2 and noted the meaning of potentially eligible in parcel reports. Staff has revised the Review Bulletin to remove the potentially eligible references, modified the table orientation for more legibility, and revised the text for shorter, more succinct sentences. (b)Summary of the Two Review Categories (Group A and B) Group A resources: Inventory Category 1’s and 2’s citywide and Categories 3’s and 4’s in the Downtown, located in Historic Districts, Professorville or Ramona Street, not including the Eichler Districts (not individually determined). Group A resources need to be reviewed pursuant to Secretary of the Interior Standards (SOIS) for discretionary applications such as individual review, two-story home review, variances, home improvements exceptions, et cetera, and architectural review if not a single-family home. If there are impacts from non-minor alterations that are not compatible with SOIS, the application is referred to the HRB for review and comment. Group B resources: Inventory Categories 3’s and 4’s, located outside of the Downtown area and Historic Districts, Professorville or Ramona Street. Some may be listed on the 1 May 9, 2024, HRB Meeting Agenda Item 3, Tailored Mills Act Program Recommendation to City Council: https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=13989 June 13, 2024, HRB Meeting Agenda Item 3, Recommendation on Tailored Mills Act Program: https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=14010 Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 8     Item No. 2. Page 3 of 5 National and State registers. Group B resources are evaluated for SOIS compliance for discretionary applications. However, these resources are not subject to review and comment with the HRB. Note: Evaluations are not done for interested buyers, only for property owners, who have to pay for the evaluation, and staff deals directly with the City’s Historic Consultant. Once a property is determined California Register eligible, it is then considered a Group B resource. If it is not determined eligible, the ‘potentially eligible’ note is removed from the system and replaced with ‘found ineligible’ as it is not considered a resource. Item 3: Historic Preservation Awards (a)Comprehensive Plan Policy L-7.6 Policy L-7.6 reads as follows, “Promote awards programs and other forms of public recognition for exemplary Historic Preservation projects.” Currently, there is no such program in place to implement Policy L-7.6. (b)Purpose The Historic Resources Board (HRB) awards would express appreciation for the efforts to preserve and protect Palo Alto’s culturally, historically, and architecturally significant places that create a vibrant and sustainable community that fully reflects Palo Alto’s diverse past. (c)Next Steps Establishing an award program would require a revision of the HRB 24-25 Workplan and possible revision of the HRB’s Bylaws. For more information on the workplan, refer to Item 4: HRB Workplan section of this report. Staff has identified the following items for the HRB’s consideration and review to implement Comprehensive Plan Policy L-7.6: a. Criteria for Selection and Frequency of Awards The HRB may want to model the historic award program after the Architectural Review Board (ARB) design awards. This would entail the following: i. Frequency: Awards would occur every 5 years. In this instance, the soonest award ceremony would be in 2025. The HRB may want to establish a different frequency other than a 5-year interval. ii. Criteria for selection: The ARB design awards are determined by the ARB and are only awarded to built projects. Award-winning projects are selected from those reviewed by the ARB and completed since the last awards were made. Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 9     Item No. 2. Page 4 of 5 The HRB may choose to select different criteria than a previously reviewed project that has been completed. b. Time and Location of Award Ceremony Determine the best time and location for an award ceremony. This could include, but not be limited to, the following: i. Have Council recognize these projects at one of their hearings. ii. Hold a reception in the lobby and community meeting room of City Hall prior to a Council meeting where the awards are presented to the winning teams. iii. Display the winning projects in the City Hall Lobby. iv. Display the winning projects on the City’s webpages. c. Amend the HRB 24-25 Workplan Should the HRB pursue an award program, this effort would need to be reflected in the HRB 24-25 Workplan. d. Amend the HRB By-Laws Should the HRB pursue an award program, it is recommended that the HRB By- Laws be amended to include an Article detailing the purpose, criteria, frequency, and location of award ceremony. Item 4: HRB Workplan Review of the HRB 24-25 Workplan with City Council will occur at the August 12, 2024, meeting. The HRB Chair will present at said meeting an overview of the proposed workplan and be available for any questions that Council or the public may have. The submitted HRB 24-25 Workplan is provided for the HRB’s review (Attachment E). Should the HRB decide to pursue establishing a historic award program or any additional work items not currently listed on the workplan, a revision to the workplan would need to reflect these changes. Since workplans for boards and commissions are reviewed and approved by City Council, any revisions would require subsequent approval. Staff can coordinate these efforts and agenda planning for any future HRB 24-25 Workplan revisions. Item 5: Historic Status Label in Parcel Report On April 22, 2024, City Council directed staff to explore alternatives to the use of “Potentially Eligible” on parcel reports. Staff is considering aligning parcel report language with the status codes provided by the California Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD).2 The BERD files provide information, organized by county, regarding non-archaeological resources that are not 2 California Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD) Historic Status Codes https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1068/files/Resource-Status-Codes.pdf Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 10     Item No. 2. Page 5 of 5 subject to confidentiality requirements. The following five status codes could be applied to City properties: 1. Property listed in the National Register (NR) or the California Register (CR) 2. Property eligible for listing in the National Register (NR) or the California Register (CR) 3. Property Recognized as Historically Significant by City of Palo Alto This would follow the existing local category designations (i.e., 1, 2, 3, 4) applied to a property 4. Not Eligible for Listing or Designation 5. Not Evaluated for National Register (NR) or California Register (CR), may need evaluation This would replace the potentially eligible status. This could be applied to all properties that meet the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) for project review. An additional alternative could include removing the historic status codes from parcel reports. This would provide for simple public facing information. However, this approach would not eliminate the internal staff review and adherence with state requirements for CEQA review of project impacts to Historic Resources. The fact that a resource is not listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register, not included in the local inventory, or identified in a historic resources survey (meeting the criteria in Public Resources Code, Section 5024.1(g)) does not preclude the City of Palo Alto from determining that the resource may be a historical resource as defined in Public Resources Code, Sections 5020.1(j) or 5024.1. 3 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Palo Alto Mills Act Tailored Program (Draft) Attachment B: Draft Mills Act Letter Attachment C: Board member Pease’s Mills Act Comments Attachment D: Historic Review Bulletin Attachment E: Proposed 24-25 HRB Workplan AUTHOR/TITLE: Steven Switzer, Historic Preservation Planner 3 California Public Resources Code, Div. 5, Ch. 1, Art. 2, Sections 5020.1(j) and 5024.1: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=PRC&division=5.&title=&part=&chapter =1.&article=2. Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 11     MILLS ACT TAILORED PROGRAM OUTLINE January 2018 Prepared by the City of Palo Alto & the Historic Resources Board Item 2 Attachment A: Palo Alto Mills Act Tailored Program (Draft)     Packet Pg. 12     1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 2 Tailored Program Summary ...................................................................................................................... 2 Role of the Applicant ................................................................................................................................. 3 Role of Planning Department .................................................................................................................... 3 Role of Historic Resources Board .............................................................................................................. 3 Role of Santa Clara County Assessor’s Office............................................................................................ 3 Role of California Office of Historic Preservation ..................................................................................... 3 Mills Act State Policy .................................................................................................................................... 4 State Criteria for Eligibility ........................................................................................................................ 4 State Contract Requirements .................................................................................................................... 4 Proposed Local Mills Act Policy ................................................................................................................... 5 Local Mills Act Criteria for Eligibility ......................................................................................................... 5 Local Mills Act Program Regulations ......................................................................................................... 5 Term Limitations ................................................................................................................................. 5 Tax Redirection Limitations ................................................................................................................. 5 Property Value Limitations .................................................................................................................. 5 Ranking System ................................................................................................................................... 6 Cancellation Penalty ............................................................................................................................ 6 Fees ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 Submittal Date .................................................................................................................................... 6 Local Mills Act Contract Requirements ..................................................................................................... 7 HRB Review ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Rehabilitation and Maintenance Plan ................................................................................................. 7 Eligible Work .................................................................................................................................. 7 Ineligible Work ............................................................................................................................... 8 Tax Redirection.................................................................................................................................... 8 Property Inspection ............................................................................................................................. 8 Application Checklist .................................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 1. Mills Act Contract Timeline ............................................................................................................ 6 Item 2 Attachment A: Palo Alto Mills Act Tailored Program (Draft)     Packet Pg. 13     2 INTRODUCTION Enacted by the State of California in 1972, the Mills Act grants participating local governments the authority to enter into contracts with owners of qualified historic properties who actively participate in the restoration and maintenance of their historic properties while receiving property tax relief (CGC 12.50280-50290, CRTC 1.9.439-439.4). It is the “single most important economic incentive program in California for the restoration and preservation of qualified historic buildings by private property owners.”1 An important feature of the Mills Act program is its flexibility. Although the State has certain requirements that must be included in all individual Mills Act policies, the program allows jurisdictions to develop additional requirements to insure that unique local goals and needs are met. By implementing a tailored Mills Act program in Palo Alto, with finely tuned eligibility criteria and contract requirements, the City can both incentive the thoughtful preservation of our shared heritage and wisely address the community’s priorities and needs. Tailored programs have been successfully adopted in other California cities that have similar complications like high property values and schools supported by Basic Aid.2 Tailored Program Summary The Tailored Mills Act Program for Palo Alto will be a tax redistribution program, where all tax relief received will be reinvested in the rehabilitation, preservation or restoration of the historic building. Work will be reviewed and approved by the Historic Resources Board (HRB) and will meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (Standards). Mills Act contracts will be open to all property types but will be limited in length, the maximum being 15 years. For educational purposes, property owners will be required to fund, with tax redirection, and display an interpretive panel along the public right of way that is visible to the public. The Mills Act program is voluntary and requires owner consent. COMMUNITY PRIORITIES AND NEEDS ADDRESSED BY THE TAILORED MILLS ACT PROGRAM 1. contributes to Affordable Housing 3. safeguards a Sense of Place 5. fosters Civic Pride 7. protects Palo Alto’s History 9. provides Preservation Incentive 2. encourages Seismic Safety 4. promotes Heritage Tourism 6. preserves Neighborhood Character 8. supports Environmentally Conscious Development 1 California Office of Historic Preservation, “Mills Act Program,” http://www.ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21412. 2 Other nearby communities with successful Mills Act programs includes Oakland, Berkeley, San Francisco, Saratoga, Los Altos, San Jose and Campbell. Cities that have both basic aid school districts and Mills Act program include Beverley Hills, Campbell, Los Altos and Saratoga. Item 2 Attachment A: Palo Alto Mills Act Tailored Program (Draft)     Packet Pg. 14     3 Role of the Applicant The Applicant is responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the property during the duration of the Mills Act contract and must follow the approved Rehabilitation and Maintenance plan. The Applicant is responsible for obtaining appropriate documents, signatures and recordation attachments as well as associated fees prior to work and successful contract recordation. Role of the Planning Department The Planning Department oversees all Mills Act applications and monitors existing Mills Act properties. Planners, specifically the Historic Preservation Planner, will work with property owners to complete their applications and develop rehabilitation and maintenance plans that are specific to each property. Planners keep the applicants informed throughout the year, as the application moves forward through HRB review, City Council and the Assessor’s Office. Role of the Historic Resources Board The HRB will first hold a hearing to make a recommendation to City Council whether to approve, modify or deny the initial Mills Act application. Once a Mills Act contract is entered into, all subsequent work on the property during the duration of the contract will require HRB review and approval, including compliance with the Standards. Role of Santa Clara County Assessor’s Office The role of the Assessor’s Office is to locate and accurately assess all taxable property Palo Alto and also serve as the county’s official record-keeper of documents such as deeds, liens, maps and property contracts. In a Mills Act Historical Property contract, the Assessor’s Office assesses qualified properties based on a state prescribed approach and records the fully executed contract. All Mills Act properties will receive an initial valuation during the application process and will be assessed annually by the January 1st lien date and in subsequent years, as required by state law. The State Board of Equalization has strict guidelines the assessor must follow in order to value Mills Act properties (Revenue and Taxation Code Section 439.2). Role of the California Office of Historic Preservation OHP provides Mills Act information to local governments and uses information provided by local governments to maintain a list of communities participating in the Mills Act program as well as copies of Mills Act ordinances, resolutions, and contracts that have been adopted. OHP does not participate in the contract negotiations, is not a signatory to the contract and has no authority over the administration of the Mills Act program. Item 2 Attachment A: Palo Alto Mills Act Tailored Program (Draft)     Packet Pg. 15     4 MILLS ACT STATE POLICY Effective March 7, 1973, Chapter 1442 of the Statutes of 1972 (also known as the Mills Act) added sections 50280 through 50289 to the Government Code to allow an owner of qualified historical property to enter into a preservation contract with local government. When property is placed under such a contract, the owner agrees to restore the property if necessary, maintain its historic character, and use it in a manner compatible with its historic characteristics. State Criteria for Eligibility As set forth in California’s Government Code 50280.1, a property is eligible for the Mills Act as follows: “Qualified historical property” for purposes of this article, means privately owned property which is not exempt from property taxation and which meets either of the following: (a) Listed in the National Register of Historic Places or located in a registered historic district, as defined in Section 1.191-2 (b) of Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations. (b) Listed in any state, city, county or city and county official register of historical or architecturally significant sites, places or landmarks. State Contract Requirements As set forth by California Government code 50281, the following requirements must be included in the language of any Mills Act contract: (a) The term of the contract shall be for a minimum period of 10 years. (b) Where applicable, the contract shall provide the following: (1) For the preservation of the qualified historical property and, when necessary, to restore and rehabilitate the property to conform to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, and the State Historical Building Code. (2) For the periodic examinations of the interior and exterior of the premises by the assessor, the Department of Parks and Recreation, and the State Board of Equalization as may be necessary to determine the owner’s compliance with the contract. (3) For it to be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of all successors in interest of the owner. A successor in interest shall have the same rights and obligations under the contract as the original owner who entered into the contract. Item 2 Attachment A: Palo Alto Mills Act Tailored Program (Draft)     Packet Pg. 16     5 PROPOSED LOCAL MILLS ACT POLICY The proposed City of Palo Alto Mills Act policy must include all the State contract requirements above. In addition, staff is proposing to include the following more restrictive criteria to balance historic preservation with the significant competing goals of the community, which is allowed under the State’s Mills Act program. Local Mills Act Criteria for Eligibility As allowed by the State, staff proposes the following local modifications of the term “qualified historical property” which will be defined as any property that meets any of the following: (a) Listed in the National Register of Historic Places or located in a registered historic district, as defined in Section 1.191-2 (b) of Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations; (b) Listed in the California Register of Historical Resources; (c) Listed on the City’s Historic Inventory as Category 1 through 4, as defined in Section 16.49.020 of PAMC (b); or (d) Contributing to a Local Historic District, as defined in Section 16.49.020 of PAMC (c). Local Mills Act Program Regulations As allowed by the State, staff proposes the following local regulations, which do not invalidate State requirements: (a) Term Limitations: Mills Act Contracts will have a minimum term of ten years and a maximum term of 15 years. This is accomplished by the City issuing a notice of nonrenewal in the 5th year of the agreement, after which the remaining 10-year term of the contract occurs before the agreement formally terminates. During the 10 year phase-out period, the property tax benefits enjoyed by the Mills Act property gradually decrease until they reach the full regularly assessed value of the property at the end of the final year (Figure 1). (b) Tax Redirection Limitations: A limit will be set on the total tax redirection that can be associated with Mills Act properties. Program impact on City revenues will be limited to $100,000/year, to be adjusted annually in amount equivalent to the percent change of the overall assessed valuation of the City for the previous year, excluding those properties that have been issued a notice of nonrenewal. (c) Property Value Limitations: A limit will be set on total property value that would be eligible for Mills Act contract. Pre-contract assessed valuation limits will be $5,000,000 or less for residential and $10,000,000 or less for commercial. Item 2 Attachment A: Palo Alto Mills Act Tailored Program (Draft)     Packet Pg. 17     6 (c) Ranking System: A ranking system will be employed by the HRB when reviewing Mills Act applications that is based on community priorities and needs and utilizes the criteria listed below. Staff considers that the scope of the required rehabilitation plan will ensure that all applications for a Mills Act will bestow a major public benefit on the community by extensively rehabilitating and maintaining historic properties. Public access to private homes is not a requirement. A higher ranking will be given to those applications that demonstrate that entering into a Mills Act contract:  Will result in more affordable housing units;  Will substantially reduce the threat to the historic property of demolition, deterioration, abandonment and/or general neglect;  Will result in the greatest number of improvements to the historic property, resulting in the greatest benefit to the public. (d) Cancellation Penalty: Noncompliance with the provisions of a Mills Act contract will result in either legal action against the owner or contract cancellation. If the contract is cancelled, the owner must pay a penalty of 12.5% of the market value of the property at the time of cancellation. The cancellation fee shall be paid to the City Tax Collector at such time and in such manner as the City shall prescribe. (e) Fees: Permit fees will be waived or greatly reduced for Mills Act participants. There will be no application fee for submitting a Mills Act contract application but a one- time activation fee of $250 will be required if the contract is selected and initiated. (f) Submittal Date: Applications will only be accepted and approved during the month of June in any given year in order to allow sufficient time for the City and Assessor’s Office to determine the cumulative financial impact, to record contracts prior to January 1st in any given year and to reduce the cost of processing applications. Figure 1. Mills Act Contract Timeline Item 2 Attachment A: Palo Alto Mills Act Tailored Program (Draft)     Packet Pg. 18     7 Local Mills Act Contract Requirements As allowed by the State, staff proposes the following local additions to the State’s contract requirements: (a) HRB Review: All Mills Act applications, including rehabilitation and maintenance plans and subsequent work, will be reviewed and approved by the Historic Resources Board. (b) Rehabilitation and Maintenance Plans: A ten-year rehabilitation and maintenance plan will be required to be submitted for attachment to the Mills Act contract. All work performed must conform to the rules and regulations of the California Office of Historic Preservation, including compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and the State Historic Building Code. The rehabilitation plan must include extensive restoration of the identified character defining features of the property and the removal or compatible replacement of incompatible alterations. The rehabilitation plan can include exterior and interior work that has been pre- approved. Rehabilitation and restoration work that commenced up to two years before the establishment of the contract may be indicated on the ten-year rehabilitation plan. An annual report detailing the rehabilitation and restoration work performed during the past year along with the overall cost of the work performed will also be required. In general, work that is directly related to the repair or improvement of structural and architectural features of the historic building will qualify. Examples of eligible and ineligible work include but are not limited to: Eligible Work  Seismic upgrading  Foundation repair  Re-roofing and downspout restoration  Exterior siding and trim repair and restoration  Historic windows repair and restoration  Paint exterior  Removal of inappropriate additions and construction  Plumbing upgrades  Electrical upgrades  Basement waterproofing  Original door, hardware and other features restoration  Front iron fencing restoration Item 2 Attachment A: Palo Alto Mills Act Tailored Program (Draft)     Packet Pg. 19     8  Chimney repair  Consulting/Professional fees  Repair and restoration of Interior features (like original built-ins and woodwork) must get HRB approval to be considered eligible  Components of HVAC systems (heating, ventilation and air conditioning)  Solar panels and other renewable energy sources (like wind turbines and geothermal systems) must be essential to the operation or maintenance of the rehabilitated historic building and must get HRB approval to be considered eligible3 Ineligible Work  New construction and additions  Landscaping  Homeowner labor  Acquisition/furnishing costs  Parking lot (c) Tax Redirection: All tax savings must be redirected into rehabilitation work for the property and the anticipated construction must be equal to or greater than tax savings. (d) Property Inspection: The property will be inspected every two years by the Historic Preservation Planner, accompanied by the Building Official if necessary, to determine compliance with the Mills Act contract and approved Rehabilitation and Maintenance plan. (e) Educational Component: For educational purposes, property owners will be required to fund, with tax redirection, and display an interpretive panel along the public right of way that is visible to the community. The panel will include information on the history and architectural merit of the home for the public to enjoy. The property will also be used for exterior home tours at the discretion of the City and other promotional material with proper notification. 3 See National Park Service, Historic Tax Credit Qualified Expenses explanation on solar panels. Generally, HVAC features are included as eligible cost so the function and purpose of a renewable energy system will determine if it is an eligible expense. Systems that produce electricity to back feed the power grid may not qualify (https://www.nps.gov/tps/tax-incentives/before-apply/qualified-expenses.htm). Item 2 Attachment A: Palo Alto Mills Act Tailored Program (Draft)     Packet Pg. 20     9 APPLICATION CHECKLIST Item 2 Attachment A: Palo Alto Mills Act Tailored Program (Draft)     Packet Pg. 21                        !" # $                                     % !"                              &  %  !"                       ' $%()*+,--./0(1 $                   2 !     #      %      !     !  # $   3    % $4                      % # $       $         %56  78   $     $    977:%      %;/0<=>?@AB?AC/-?/-(?D.+,--./0(B,.0@..,?A1   $       !" 9E          %$          9F  %           %$         GF   !"         $ %3 977H      $            4   #$85I%  # $ J     F 4   K9&            L %$ M G#$85I "  M              %>*N@*.(?O0?@A0,-1P     !"       Q  R  # $  $ %#           'S#   L                                      # $ J    %S5                       %S#   $             T  4  % Item 2 Attachment B: Draft Mills Act Letter     Packet Pg. 22                                                                                           !"#      $   %    $                     $      $     & '  (    %   $         )   $ Item 2 Attachment B: Draft Mills Act Letter     Packet Pg. 23     1 Comments / Suggestions on the June 13, 2024 HRB Meeting Packet Staff Report: Mills Act Tailored Pilot Program HRB Board Member Pease - 07/01/24 1) Introductory Council Study Session – The Primer: A “primer” detailing current incentives and regulations for historic resources in Palo Alto will be provided to CPA Council for its recommended Mills Act pilot program Council study session (See: “Next Steps” – Packet Page 18): The first study session goal is to: Establish clear homeowner expectations for “homeowners” considering a [Mills Act] contract. Understanding current CPA historic resources requirements and incentives has been demonstrated to be confusing to most non-expert audiences, especially owners of listed or potentially qualified historic residential homes and multi-unit buildings. Any CPA Mills Act program has revenue implications – it will divert funds for both the city and its unified school district. For the city itself, there are existing historic preservation rules that include specific owner benefits and responsibilities with financial implications. At their core, each if not most of has a monetary benefit that can accrue to property owners, either by potentially reducing a cost associated with owning and maintaining a historic resource and/or by potentially enhancing the underlying asset value of that resource. For this reason and others, the particularities of a specific tailored Mills Act will have its own costs and public benefits to a city, as well as benefits and responsibilities that can accrue to owners. It is also important to keep in mind that current state housing laws intended to motivate additional housing stocks appear to overlap or offer perceptively similar, if not more lucrative, financial incentives to owners of some types of qualified historic properties, but especially to owners and owner-landlords of residential single-family homes. Item 2 Attachment C: Board member Pease’s Mills Act Comments     Packet Pg. 24     2 Suggestions: Although necessarily intended as a Mills Act pilot overview and orientation for Council, this primer it should nonetheless be contextualized with respect current CPA incentives and regulations for all types of historic resources and the differences between them, from monetary benefits that reduced city fees to transferable commercial property development rights. This contextualization should also extend to current state housing laws that are intended to increase new housing stock and how they might compare, overlap, complement, or compete with possible Mills Act incentives. Staff outreach to other cities that have adopted locally tailored Mill Act programs provides valuable contextualization for CPA decision makers and community stakeholders as to what CPA might do for itself. This primer should follow suit with regard to existing CPA historic resources policies and programs, as well as state housing laws. (See: Table + “Resource Impacts” Packet Page 17) 2) Introductory Council Study Session – Second Goal: Reduce the Subjectivity of [Mills Act] Application Reviews (See: “Next Steps” – Packet Page 18): With respect to the second Council study session goal to reduce “subjectivity” involve in a hypothetical CPA Mills Act tailored program and its contract review and approval process, nine criteria are outlined in the January 2018 MILLS ACT Tailored Program Outline (See “Community Priorities and Needs Address by the Tailored Mills Act Program – Packet Page 21): A) contributes to Affordable Housing B) encourages Seismic Safety C) safeguards a Sense of Place D) promotes Heritage Tourism E) fosters Civic Pride F) preserves Neighborhood Character G) protects Palo Alto’s History Item 2 Attachment C: Board member Pease’s Mills Act Comments     Packet Pg. 25     3 H) supports Environmentally Conscious Development I ) provides Preservation Incentive[s] These nine “Community Priorities” then appear to be reduced, modified, and tied into three different criteria, as the basis for a CPA Mills Act contract selection process that decides via a “Ranking System” (See “Local Mills Act Program Regulations” / “(c) Ranking System” / Packet Page 25): A) Will result in more affordable housing units B) Will substantially reduce the threat to historic property demolitions, deterioration, abandonment and/or general neglect C) Will result in the greatest number of improvements to the historic property, resulting in the greatest benefit to the public Putting aside the notion of reducing subjectivity in a hypothetical Mills Act contract selection process, implementing ranked choice voting as a disciplined method for deciding which Mill Act contracts are approved could in and of itself boost public understanding, clarity, trust, and acceptance, based on its consistency and simplicity. And, like California’s rank-choice system for primary elections, a ranking system may produce higher level of perceived consensus among HRB board member recommenders, as well as an increased sense among property owners in the trustworthiness HRB recommendations to Council. This suggest that the benefits of a “ranking system” for awarding Mills Act contracts may offer a more believable public benefit without overclaiming any fact-based, non-subjective advantages. Suggestion: Pilot test a ranking process by deemphasize or eliminating the term “subjectivity” and reposition to Council that for purposes of pilot test it should require the HRB to use rank-choice voting to recommending which, if any, pilot contracts should be approved. Item 2 Attachment C: Board member Pease’s Mills Act Comments     Packet Pg. 26     4 Post-pilot - should Council enact a CPA tailored Mills Act - it can determine if and how the HRB will use a rank-choice process to select which Mills Act applications it recommends to Council for approval. 3) Introductory Council Study Session – MILLS ACT Tailored Program Outline (draft) – Local Mills Act Criteria for Eligibility (See Packet Page 24): To be eligible a property must be one of the following: A) Listed in the National Register of Historic Places B) Listed in the California Register of Historic Places C) Listed on the City’s Historic Inventory D) Contributing to a Local Historic District Typically, this requires a certified professional to evaluate the property, make an eligibility assessment, and produce a report as to whether it is or is not qualified. The cost for doing so currently appears to be in the range of $5000 - $7000. This cost borne by the owner(s), whether or not their property is found to be eligible or not. Yet, in both the staff recommendation for a Council study session (Packet Page 18) and MILLS ACT Tailored Program Outline (starts Packet Page 19) make no mention of it. In other words, if you engaged a qualified professional to perform an evaluation because you are interested in applying for CPA Mills Act program – should there be one – and if that process concludes with a “not eligible” judgement, then you absorb that cost without any prospect of a tax benefit. This may discourage many owners from even considering applying for a CPA Mills Act program, and put them off even more for a limited pilot test. Suggestion: Specifically incorporate this programmatic cost / risk into the Mills Act study session agenda so that Council members can be fully aware of it. Item 2 Attachment C: Board member Pease’s Mills Act Comments     Packet Pg. 27     HISTORIC RESOURCES & PERMIT REVIEW REQUIREMENTS Historic Preservation July 2024 Page 1 of 2 What is a “Group A” Historic Resource? A “Group A” historic resource is an existing property listed in the Palo Alto Historic Inventory, and subject to Historic Resources Board (HRB) review under the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance. A “Group A” resource may also be subject to CEQA review. “Group A” resources include historic properties that are one or more of the following: •Listed in the City's Inventory as Historic Category 1-2; or •Listed in the City's Inventory as Historic Category 3-4 and located in the Downtown Area; or •Located in one of the City's locally designated historic districts, Professorville or Ramona Street. What is a “Group B” Historic Resource? A “Group B” historic resource is an existing property that was previously designated or formally evaluated and may be subject to CEQA review. “Group B” resources are subject to HRB review if CEQA review indicates that a resource may be impacted. “Group B” resources include historic properties that are one or more of the following: •Listed in the City's Inventory as Historic Category 3-4 and located outside of the Downtown Area and local historic districts; or •Listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NR) or the California Register of Historical Resources (CR); or •Listed in the Palo Alto Historic Survey Update (Dames & Moore, 1997-2000) as NR-eligible or CR-eligible; or •Determined CR-eligible via historic resource evaluation performed by a qualified historic preservation professional on behalf of the City or peer-reviewed by the City’s consultant, pursuant to Comprehensive Plan Policy L7.21. When Does a Property Require Evaluation as a Historic Resource? A property that has not yet been evaluated or designated may qualify as a historic resource for the purposes of CEQA review. Development applications for these properties may require a Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) report to complete CEQA review. The City of Palo Alto may require an HRE report should the property meet BOTH of the following conditions: •A “discretionary” development application proposes demolition, new construction, new addition, or other substantial exterior alterations; and •The existing development on the property is more than 45 years old. For information on a specific property, please review a Parcel Report for the subject property, available at the City's website at www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Current-Planning/Parcel-Reports or request a Parcel Report from City staff at: Development Services, 265 Hamilton Avenue; (650) 329-2496; planner@cityofpaloalto.org 1 2030 Comprehensive Plan Policy L-7.2 states, “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. NOTE: 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. Normal maintenance or repair, interior work, and landscaping for historic resources typically do not require historic review. Historic resources enrich the quality of life in Palo Alto. They include buildings, structures, sites, and areas of historical, architectural, and cultural significance. The Planning Department groups historic resources according to the development application review procedures that apply. Some development projects involving historic resources are subject to review under the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 16.49) and/or the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as explained below and on the reverse page. Item 2 Attachment D: Historic Review Bulletin     Packet Pg. 28     Historic Resources Application Review Procedures Historic Preservation July 2024 Page 1 of 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE (PAMC 16.49) REVIEW PROCEDURES CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) REVIEW PROCEDURES “GROUP A” HISTORIC RESOURCES Route any permit applications for exterior changes, including ministerial, to the Historic Preservation Planner. ➢The Planner reviews the application for consistency with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation1 “Standards” and the Historic Preservation Ordinance. ➢If the project is inconsistent with the Standards, or it exceeds the scope of a “minor exterior alteration2” according to the Historic Preservation Ordinance, the Planner refers the application to the HRB. Route discretionary development applications3 for exterior changes to the Historic Preservation Planner. ➢The Planner reviews the application for consistency with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation1 and potential impacts to a historic resource per CEQA. ➢If CEQA analysis indicates that there may be a potential impact to an historic resource, the Planner refers the application to the HRB. “GROUP B” HISTORIC RESOURCES Not subject to the review procedures in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. Only “Group A” properties are subject to review under the Historic Preservation Ordinance, see PAMC 16.49.050. Pursuant to Comprehensive Plan Policy L-7.2, a Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) may be required to demolish a potentially eligible historic resource. If an HRE determines that a property is eligible for the California Register (CR), it is classified and reviewed as a “Group B” resource. If the evaluation determines that a property is not CR-eligible, it is considered a non-resource and reviewed accordingly. Route discretionary development applications3 for exterior changes to the Historic Preservation Planner or the City’s historic preservation consultant. ➢The Planner reviews the application for consistency with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation1 and potential impacts to a historic resource per CEQA. ➢If CEQA analysis indicates that there may be a potential impact to an historic resource, the Planner refers the application to the HRB. PROPERTIES THAT REQUIRE EVALUATION AS HISTORIC RESOURCES Not subject to the review procedures in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. Only “Group A” properties are subject to review under the Historic Preservation Ordinance, see PAMC 16.49.050. Route discretionary development applications3 for demolition, new construction, addition, or substantial exterior alterations to the Historic Preservation Planner or City’s historic preservation consultant. ➢The staff determines if a Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) report is required to conduct and complete CEQA review. If a property is found to be eligible for the California Register of Historical Places, it is reviewed as a “Group B” historic resource. 1 The Standards are found on the National Park Service’s website: https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/rehabilitation.htm. 2 Minor exterior alterations are those alterations the Director of Planning and Development Services or his/her designee determines will not adversely affect the exterior architectural characteristics nor the historical or aesthetic value of the historic structure, its site, or surroundings. 3 Discretionary development applications include: Architectural Review; Design Enhancement Exception; Home Improvement Exception; Neighborhood Preservation Exception; Single Family Individual Review; Site and Design Review; Variance Item 2 Attachment D: Historic Review Bulletin     Packet Pg. 29     Prior Year Accomplishments During the work plan period the HRB held 14 public meetings, met the objectives in the 'ongoing' goals 1 and 2 of the plan, completed goal 3 of the plan (providing recommendations on nominations of properties previously found eligible for the National and State historic registers to the City's local historic inventory, unless property owners submitted objections to listing; known as the 2023 Historic Reconnaissance Survey), and many objectives set forth in goal 4 of the plan. The staff continued to implement policy L7.2 as an ongoing activity, and conducted three evening community meetings over the plan's term, to further encourage community participation. Historic Resources Board Staff Liaison: Amy French, Chief Planning Official Lead Department: Planning and Development Services About the Commission The HRB is now five members, effective July 4, 2024. Four candidates are set for August 2024 interviews, for two positions. The City is a Certified Local Government (CLG) responsible for historic preservation - to identify, evaluate, register, and preserve historic properties within its jurisdictions and promote the integration of local preservation interests and concerns into local planning and decision-making processes. Staff prepares an annual report of the activities of the Certified Local Government each spring for the prior year and submits these to the State Office of Historic Preservation. This HRB Work Plan covers July 2024 - July 2025. HRB member terms are for 3 years and are staggered per PAMC Section 2.27.020. For more information please visit https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/City-Hall/Boards-Commissions/Historic-Resources-Board. The Department webpages are a wealth of information, go to: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Historic-Preservation 2024-2025 Workplan Overview Mission Statement Per Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 2.27 Historic Resources Board, Section 2.27.040 Duties, HRB purview is:(a) Render advice and guidance to a property owner upon the owner's application for alteration of any historic singlefamily or duplex building in the downtown area and any such building designated as significant elsewhere in the city (b) Inform the ARB of the historical and/or architectural significance of historic commercial and multiple-family structures in the downtown area and any such buildings designated as significant elsewhere in the City that are under review by the ARB. Submit recommendations to the ARB regarding proposed exterior alterations of such historic structures (c) Recommend to the Council the designation of additional buildings and districts as historic. Research available information and add historical information to the inventory sheets of historic structures/sites. This inventory is maintained in the department of planning and development services. (d) Perform such other functions as may be delegated from time to time to the HRB by the City Council. Current Commissioners Alisa Eagleston-Cieslewicz (chair), Samantha Rohman (vice chair), Christian Pease, and Caroline Willis, Margaret Wimmer or Mike Makinen (until two successors are appointed) Date approved by HRB 4/11/2024 (Amended 7/8/2024) Item 2 Attachment E: Proposed 24-25 HRB Workplan     Packet Pg. 30     TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Subject to Council direction, to begin in the second quarter City Council direction and accommodation in the PDS department workplan would be needed. HRB subcommittee and staff of planning and city attorney departments to prepare draft amendments for Council review and adoption Well-written ordinance language that assists the public's understanding and calms the fears of property owners about governmental overreach Council may provide direction to modify PAMC 16.49; CLG cities maintain historic preservation ordinances. COUNCIL-DIRECTEDPOLICY UPDATE Council may provide direction to modify PAMC 16.49; CLG cities maintain historic preservation ordinances Priority is high to enable greater understanding of the HRB's role and address property owners' concerns with respect to Boal items (a) and (b) LOWER PRIORITY Lower priority: Goal item (c) - listed historic resources placed on the City's inventory in the late 1970s and 1980s have not been reviewed to determine whether any modifications reduce critical aspects of integrity and drop or lower the properties' local historic resource category. Board/Commission Name PROJECT/GOAL 1: BENEFICIAL IMPACTS Limited modification to PAMC 16.49, historic preservation, providing clarifications regarding the HRB’s role. The HRB could discuss language providing clarifications of its role with respect to three potential topics: (a) the nomination process, (b) the effect of HRB recommendations regarding exterior modifications to residential historic resources, and (c) category changes (upgrades, downgrades, removals) Staff Liaison: Amy French, Chief Planning Official Lead Department: Planning and Development Services PURPOSE STATEMENT: The Board/Commission's goals and purposes (purview) are set in Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 2.27 Historic Resources Board, Section 2.27.040 Duties. These duties include reviewing alterations to historic resources and providing recommendations on nominations to the locla historic resources inventory. The City's historic program includes the implementation of Comprehensive Plan policies on an ongoing basis including Policy L7.2 (preparation of historic evaluations to determine eligibility for the California Register of Historical Resources and associated tracking), Policy L7.1.1 (recommend eligible resources to the local inventory), and Policy L7.1.2: Reassess Historic Preservation Ordinance. HIGH PRIORITY 2024-2025 Workplan The benefits are providing clarification of the HRB's role for the public Item 2 Attachment E: Proposed 24-25 HRB Workplan     Packet Pg. 31     TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Goal 2 to begin during plan quarter 1 and continue through quarter 2 (October - December) Staff of PDS would be tasked as well as an HRB ad hoc committee to make progress. Website contains links to information resources and videos, to assist property owners, staff, and others. N/A COUNCIL-DIRECTEDPOLICY UPDATE N/A TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Subject to Council direction/ resource allocation and to begin in fourth quarter Budget for and assistance from qualified consultant to assess conditions of inventory properties listed prior to April 22, 2024 Data on conditions of buildings placed on the local inventory prior to April 22, 2024 No COUNCIL-DIRECTED POLICY UPDATE Determining conditions of existing inventory properties (listed prior to April 22, 2024) would allow better clarity HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY The benefits would be to improve preservation in Palo Alto and clarity for owners of historic properties. Item (a) a table of existing zoning code incentives and another table of historic building code provisions and Item (b) improvements to types of communications used to promote historic preservation. HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY Items (c) and (d) Conduct a survey of the local inventory resources listed prior to the 2023 Historic Reconnaissance Survey, to determine historic conditions. If Council directs a survey update, that work would require resources and may extend into the next year work plan. BENEFICIAL IMPACTS PROJECT/GOAL 3: PROJECT/GOAL 2: BENEFICIAL IMPACTS Education and Creating New User-Friendly Resources/Communication Regarding Historic Preservation. (a) find new ways to promote preservation, including use of the existing zoning code incentives and State historic building code (b) improve upon communication types to provide the community accessible information, including the use of videos (linked to the City’s and State’s webpages) to help property owners understand the local and State preservation incentives and codes, (c) continue to provide updates to the historic review process bulletin as needed to communicate CEQA requirements related to PAMC 16.49 and listed historic resources, and (d) enable the HRB staff liaison(s), the City’s historic preservation consultant, and Chief Building Official to implement training providing an ongoing opportunity for HRB members, staff, and the community to gain working knowledge as to the use of the State’s historic building code Item 2 Attachment E: Proposed 24-25 HRB Workplan     Packet Pg. 32     No TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Goal 2 to begin during plan quarter 2 (item a) and subject to Council direction, continue through quarter 4 (April - June 2025, items b and c) PDS staff and CAO staff. City Council direction and accommodation in the PDS department workplan would be needed. More historic properties are preserved for future enjoyment of the owners and community, due to the additional incentives. Council may provide direction to modify PAMC title 18. COUNCIL-DIRECTED POLICY UPDATE N/A Properties that have been demolished remove from local inventory Properties that have lost integrity over time that may need a category change Benefit will be for all property owners who do not currently see any benefit to listing their property on the City's historic inventory HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY Item a is to gather ideas for new incentives in the zoning code to add to a table of existing incentives in the zoning code.Subject to Council direction, items b and c would follow item a. PROJECT/GOAL 4: Additional preservation incentives (a) discuss and recommend additional zoning code incentives to continue the community engagement process that began with the 2023 reconnaissance survey/ inventory update; (b) represent the HRB’s interests during public hearings, or participate in joint meetings with the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council, to review any proposed zoning code modifications incentivizing historic preservation incentives; (c) outreach to the community after adoption of any adopted new incentives. BENEFICIAL IMPACTS Item 2 Attachment E: Proposed 24-25 HRB Workplan     Packet Pg. 33     Item No. 3. Page 1 of 1 Historic Resources Board Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: August 8, 2024 Report #: 2407-3302 TITLE Approval of Historic Resources Board Draft Minutes of June 13, 2024 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Historic Resources Board (HRB) adopt the attached meeting minutes. BACKGROUND Attached are minutes for the following meeting: •June 13, 2024 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: HRB 6.13 Minutes AUTHOR/TITLE: Amy French, Chief Planning Official Item 3 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 34     City of Palo Alto Page 1 Call to Order/Roll Call Present: Chair Alisa Eagleston-Cieslewicz; Vice Chair Samantha Rohman; Board Members Christian Pease and Caroline Willis Absent: Board Members Gogo Heinrich, Michael Makinen and Margaret Wimmer Public Comment Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions City Official Reports 1. Historic Resources Board Schedule of Meetings and Assignments Chief Planning Official Amy French announced that the Council adopted an ordinance to decrease the number of Historic Resources Board (HRB) members to five and would take effect in July. On June 17, 2024, the Council plans to review five applications for two vacancies and provide directions for interviews. Starting in July, a quorum will require three HRB members. Two current members, whose terms have expired, are invited to attend to maintain a five-member board. Besides the scheduled meeting on August 8th, a special HRB meeting might be convened on August 22nd, following the appointment of new members. Action Items 2. Review and Approve Changes to the Historic Resources Board Bylaws for Consistency with Amendments to Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 2.27, Historic Resources Board Ms. French suggested that the HRB should examine and approve modifications to the HRB Bylaws to align with amendments to Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 2.27, Historic Resources Board. The bylaws now indicate that a quorum consists of three members and regular monthly meetings are to be held, with a minimum of four meetings annually. Chair Alisa Eagleston-Cieslewicz opened the floor for comments from both the public and the Board. There were no responses. MOTION Motion by Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz that the HRB accept the bylaw changes as proposed. Seconded by Vice Chair Rohman, the motion carried (4-0-3) 3. Recommendation on Tailored Mills Act Program Historic Preservation Planner Steven Switzer presented the staff report and provided an overview of the Tailored Mills Act Program Outline. He discussed the letter with recommendations submitted to the City Council and the strategy on presenting a Tailored Mills Act Program proposal to the City Council. The staff had consulted with historic preservation staff from other jurisdictions, including cities in the Bay Area and HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD MEETING DRAFT MINUTES, June 13, 2024 Council Chamber & Virtual Zoom 8:30 A.M. Item 3 Attachment A - HRB 6.13 MInutes     Packet Pg. 35     City of Palo Alto Page 2 others with basic aid school districts. He displayed a slide showing some of the City revenue loss limits enacted by other jurisdictions to mitigate resource impacts. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz invited comments from the public. Ben DiCicco, a resident at 860 University Avenue, expressed his interest in enrolling his property on University Avenue in the pilot program, if possible. He mentioned that his home, which is Category 1 nationally and locally and houses one of the largest Tiffany stained-glass windows in North America, would be a suitable candidate for this type of program. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz invited discussion from the Board. Board Member Willis suggested exploring alternatives to house-front signage, adding that the internet may be helpful for that. She expressed her concern that signage could be an aesthetic distraction. Vice Chair Rohman asked Board Member Willis which page in the pilot program includes the requirement for signage. Board Member Willis responded that on packet page 21, the Tailored Program Summary paragraph states “and display an interpretive panel along the public right of way that is visible to the public.” She suggested that the Board consider an alternative approach. Vice Chair Rohman stated that especially for the pilot program, the resources required to research, vote, and place an adequate sign might not be available. She suggested listing the history of the house on a City of Palo Alto webpage dedicated to the Mills Act pilot program as an acceptable alternative. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz asked if including this information on the City website would pose any problems. Ms. French responded that having a webpage about the program was an excellent idea, but it would require worldwide outreach. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz proposed giving people a choice. Board Member Willis expressed her concern about creating something that could become a distraction rather than an asset. Vice Chair Rohman agreed, adding that the interpretive panels are currently very controversial regarding what they should say, who they should recognize, and why houses should be recognized. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz sought clarification on whether a requirement for more limited signage, potentially like a smaller bronze plaque, would be acceptable. Board Member Willis suggested that even stamping the sidewalk would suffice and reiterated her belief that the Board should be cautious with signage. Vice Chair Rohman thought that a webpage on the Mills Act pilot program, including the houses and their histories, might meet the HRB’s goals. She opposed having it in front of the house, stating that it is somewhat of an eyesore. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz asked if their address would become part of the public record as part of the discussions to obtain a Mills Act contract. Ms. French confirmed that the information would be part of the public record. She proposed the idea of a small QR code on a fence, which people could scan to learn about the Mills Act Program. Vice Chair Rohman expressed her enthusiasm for this idea, noting that most people carry their phones while out and about. Board Member Pease asked if there was any information available about similar initiatives in other cities. Historic Preservation Planner Switzer shared that his research did not reveal any on-site signage in other jurisdictions. However, he noted that all the jurisdictions detailed in the staff report had an online presence. Some even provided a comprehensive list of all properties and the dates they were contracted. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz asked if the Board would support an update to include a web page option. The Board unanimously voiced their support. Item 3 Attachment A - HRB 6.13 MInutes     Packet Pg. 36     City of Palo Alto Page 3 Vice Chair Rohman suggested that the Board could consult with the pilot program owners to gauge their support or any desired changes regarding what is being proposed. Board Member Willis sought clarification on the State Contract Requirements on page 23, specifically the discussion about phasing it out after five years, which she found contradictory. Historic Preservation Planner Switzer clarified that the minimum contract term of ten years is a State requirement. To comply with the California Government Code section detailed in the packet, a ten-year period would be necessary. Vice Chair Rohman pointed out the Local Mills Act Program Regulations on page 24, which mention a notice of nonrenewal in the 5th year, except the term can extend up to 15 years, so the nonrenewal should occur in the 10th year. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz questioned if this was an administrative workaround to achieve a 15-year contract, as a ten-year followed by a five-year contract would not be feasible, but a five-year followed by a ten-year contract could be implemented. Historic Preservation Planner Switzer believed that was correct. Board Member Willis asked about the 10-year phase-out period and whether it could commence after the first ten years or after the notice of nonrenewal. She expressed confusion over the terms of the contract being altered in the fifth year and asked if this had been reviewed by the legal department. Ms. French informed that there had been no discussions with the legal department yet, but it was a possibility. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz believed that the intention was to provide a fifteen-year contract option, and this was the method to achieve it. However, she emphasized that the legal department would need to review it at some point for any potential issues. Ms. French agreed, adding that the legal department would be fully engaged before scheduling anything with the City Council for a Study Session. Board Member Willis, referring to page 25 (c) Ranking System, suggested rephrasing the bullet point that states, “Will result in more affordable housing units”. She also asked if the City has a City Tax Collector. Ms. French clarified that the County is the Tax Collection Agency and that the bullet point may have been copied from another Mills Act. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz recommended revising the wording to state, “shall be paid at such time and in such manner as this City shall prescribe.” Board Member Willis, referring to the top of page 26 about the Submittal Date, suggested changing “Applications will only be accepted and approved during the month of June” to “Applications will only be reviewed during the month of June.” She emphasized that the Board should accept applications at any time but make it clear that they are only reviewed in June. She also suggested distinguishing between approval by the HRB or Council. Vice Chair Rohman proposed updating it to state that applications will be accepted on a rolling basis but approved during the month of June. Board Member Willis suggested a revision to the Rehabilitation and Maintenance Plans (b), proposing that the phrase “Qualified rehabilitation and restoration work that commenced up to two years before the establishment of the contract may be indicated on the ten-year rehabilitation plan” be rephrased. Vice Chair Rohman inquired if the Board’s legal counsel would review the document before it is presented to the Council. Ms. French clarified that the Attorney’s Office is actively involved in reviewing any Council staff reports. After the HRB’s decision at the current meeting, a meeting with the City Attorney will be scheduled. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz initiated a discussion among the Board Members about the letter intended for the Council. Item 3 Attachment A - HRB 6.13 MInutes     Packet Pg. 37     City of Palo Alto Page 4 Vice Chair Rohman mentioned that she had received several comments and additions to the current draft of the letter. She emphasized that this was not the final version, but a draft for further feedback. She also noted that she had received comments and additions from the Chair, which would be incorporated. Ms. French advised that any further comments from the Board Members should be directed to the Staff, who would then relay them to Vice Chair Rohman. Vice Chair Rohman welcomed any immediate comments or concerns. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz expressed hope that the Board could review a final draft at the next meeting and then decide about its submission to the Council. She was uncertain if the legal department would have had an opportunity to review it by then. Ms. French suggested that a review could be possible given the month-long gap between meetings. Councilmember Lydia Kou asked if the Board wished to propose a joint session with the Council. Despite a tight schedule, she suggested that a joint session with the Council might be feasible after the break. Vice Chair Rohman explained that the Board was considering the next steps, including whether to forward the letter and the Mills Act to the Council in conjunction with the Study Session, or to transition from the Study Session to a Workshop before forwarding everything. She emphasized the need for clarity on this matter. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz sought confirmation that the letter included a request for a Study Session with the Council. Vice Chair Rohman confirmed this and noted that adjustments could be made as necessary. Ms. French mentioned a discussion about requesting the Council to include this topic in their Work Plan for the upcoming Fiscal Year (FY), starting in July. Councilmember Kou justified her suggestion for a joint study session, explaining that it would allow the Council to ask questions about the letter and request, and the Board could provide feedback and updates on the HRB’s activities. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz asked if the request for a joint session should be made through a letter like this or through the Staff. Ms. French proposed that a direct interaction with a Council member might be a more effective way to facilitate real-time dialogue. She committed to discussing this with the Director. Board Member Willis suggested that the Board should define “multi-family” and consider improvements to the category under Property Value Limitations (c) on page 24 of the packet. Vice Chair Rohman speculated that the pre-contract assessed value limitations were likely designed to minimize the impact on schools and the diversion of tax money. However, if the Board intended to have a limited program, she wondered if the HRB would consider raising the limits. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz asked if the Legal Department could provide guidance on this matter. Board Member Pease proposed the exclusion of commercial properties that do not provide housing, arguing that the greatest lack of incentives was for individual and multi-family housing. Board Member Willis believed that commercial properties should be considered, albeit as a lower priority. Board Member Pease advocated for further discussion, citing a significant imbalance that might not be clear to the public or even the Council. He expressed a desire to maximize the benefits for historic housing, which he believed could impact the concept of naturally affordable housing. Vice Chair Rohman agreed that further discussion was warranted and suggested that if the HRB decided to take a stance on this issue, it could be incorporated into the ranking system. Board Member Pease suggested considering an increase in the amount for residential properties, arguing that if a property merits it, it should not be limited. Item 3 Attachment A - HRB 6.13 MInutes     Packet Pg. 38     City of Palo Alto Page 5 Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz proposed that the Board should plan to review the completed letter, potentially with legal review, at the next meeting and then decide on a recommendation for outreach to the Council. The Board Members unanimously agreed. Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz invited comments from the public. Ben DiCicco shared that his family owns a property in Coronado, California, which was not initially designated. The property is listed on the local County and Coronado websites. The contract, established in 2000 for a home built in 1888, is perpetual and costs approximately $5,000 per year. Approval of Minutes 4.Approval of Historic Resources Board Draft Minutes of April 11, 2024 Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz invited comments/changes to the minutes. Board Member Willis questioned the term “Queen Anne Free Classic” on page 33, line 9, and asked if it should be removed. Ms. French committed to checking this. Historic Preservation Planner Switzer explained that “Queen Anne Free Classic” is an actual architectural style with certain characteristics shared with the Queen Anne style, but with distinct features that set it apart. It features a large porch and an Americana feel, somewhat like a toned-down Queen Anne style. Vice Chair Rohman expressed that she had learned something new. MOTION Motion by Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz to approve the minutes of June 13, 2024. Seconded by Vice Chair Rohman, the motion carried (4-0-3) by voice vote. Board Member Questions, Comments, Announcements or Future Meetings and Agendas Ms. French announced that the CPF Organization had drafted a letter opposing a State legislation that had unanimously passed one of the Houses of Legislature in California. Historic Preservation Planner Switzer added that this is Assembly Bill (AB) 2580, which was just recently passed in the State Assembly on May 21, 2024, and it is going to the Senate on June 18, 2024. He briefly discussed highlights of AB 2580, stating that it would require that the Housing Element include an analysis of historic preservation practices and the policies in an assessment of how the existing and proposed historic designations affect the local jurisdiction’s ability to share the housing need. It frames historic preservation as a constraint to affordable housing and housing development and presumes that local historical preservation nominations and designations are used to block housing development. He said it was mostly opposed by a majority of the State’s preservation foundations and organizations. He stated that he would be happy to share the opposition letter with the Board and distribute it. Ms. French noted that the bill was asking cities to compile information that is already compiled each year for the CLGs, which she considered a duplication and inefficient government. She stated that it may not be additional work on the City’s part to compile the information because there are other jurisdictions in the State that are not CLGs that have historic resources. Councilmember Kou announced that the City Council has a lobbyist and suggested that this issue be elevated through Staff to the Deputy Assistant Manager, who is the direct contact with the lobbyist. Vice Chair Rohman announced upcoming training by a preservation group at the end of August. The cost of the training is $50 for members and $100 for nonmembers. She invited any interested Board Members to let Ms. French know. Adjournment MOTION Motion by Chair Eagleston-Cieslewicz to adjourn. Seconded by Board Member Vice Chair Rohman, the motion carried unanimously by voice vote. Item 3 Attachment A - HRB 6.13 MInutes     Packet Pg. 39     City of Palo Alto Page 6 The meeting was adjourned at 9:21 a.m. Item 3 Attachment A - HRB 6.13 MInutes     Packet Pg. 40