HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/06/06 - Agenda Packet VII. Announcements
VIII. Public Comments
This is the time and place for the general public to address the
Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not
already appear on this agenda.
IS. Adjournment
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
May 2, 1991
Chairman Bob Schmidt called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Historic Preservation Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting
was held at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California. Chairman Schmidt then led the ;'pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Melicent Arner, Marsha Banks,
Gene Billings, Ada Cooper,
Alan Haskvitz, Steven Preston,
Bob Schmidt
COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: NONE
STAFF PRESENT: Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner;
Larry Henderson, Principal Planner;
Shelley Petrelli, Secretary
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION: Moved by Banks, seconded by Arner, carried unanimously, 7-0-0, to
approve the minutes of the April 4, 1991 Historic Preservation Meeting, as
amended.
NEW BUSINESS
A. DETERMINATION OF STATUS OF THE RED HILL WATER TANK, 8410 FOOTHILL
BOULEVARD - APN: 207-101-31
Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.
Mr. Ed Hopson, Attorney at Law, Covington and Crowe, Ontario, CA, representing
the applicant, Arroyo de los Osos Development, expressed his client's view
that the water tank did not exhibit historical significance. He commented
that the water tank was built only for the purpose of protecting the Sycamore
Inn in the event of a fire and that it was never part of the local area's
irrigation system, according to the property owner, Mr Verne Hinrichsen. Mr.
Hopson requested, on behalf of his client, that the Commission not take the
recommendation of staff to require any mitigations for the water tank's
demolition. He also mentioned that he had not had time to get estimates for a
HABS/HAER level documentation on the tank. However, he indicated he had
spoken with Mr. Van Wormer who had done the original documentation on the
HPC MINUTES - 1 - MAY 2, 1991
related Sycamore Village project, and Mr. Van Wormer had indicated that type
of documentation would cost several thousand dollars.
Commissioner Preston felt that historic significance does exist for the water
tank because of its close association with the Sycamore Inn and asked Mr.
Hopson if he agreed.
Mr. Hopson did not agree. He felt the benefit the community would receive by
retaining the water tank would not be equal to the expense incurred by the
developer.
Commissioner Preston asked Mr. Hopson if he understood that the Commission
bases their findings on a wide range of issues, and many other than economic.
Mr. Hopson stated that he realized that but felt perhaps the Commission would
be willing to forego the request because of the expense.
There was discussion between Commissioner Preston and Ms. Hartig about the
level of historical significance and Commissioner Preston recapped his
understanding of the discussion. He concluded that a demolition mitigation
would include a HABS/HAER survey record with photographs, a site plan,
elevations, details, a framing plan, and a narrative description. He asked if
any portion of the documentation could be reduced or eliminated, thereby
reducing the cost to the developer.
Ms. Hartig replied that she was willing to work with the applicant and that it
should cost no more than $2,000.
Commissioner Preston asked Mr. Hopson if that option would be acceptable to
his client.
Mr. Hopson responded yes; if the documentation costs could be reduced, they
would be willing to work with staff on their suggestion.
Mr. Verne Hinrichsen gave a brief overview of the tank's history stating it
was built in 1946 by the Cucamonga Water District for a secondary water
supply, as well as fire protection, for the Sycamore Inn. He stated that
several years ago a large fire had destroyed a portion of the tank's roof and
the use of the tank was discontinued at that time.
Commissioners Billings and Cooper both remarked that the tank was not used for
irrigation in the community and they did not feel this particular tank held
much historical significance for the area.
Commissioner Banks supported the suggested documentation process prior to
destruction.
MOTION: Moved by Preston, seconded by Banks, carried 5-2-0, that the Historic
Preservation Commission identify the Red Hill Water Tank as a potential Point
of Interest, require the owner to complete full HABS/HAER-quality
documentation, with the total cost not to exceed $2,000, and staff is to work
with the applicant to keep the costs reasonable.
HPC MINUTES - 2 - MAY 2, 1991
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ARNER, BANKS, HASKVITZ, PRESTON, SCHMIDT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BILLINGS, COOPER
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
--carried
B. REVIEW OF THE LORD HOUSE MILLS ACT CONTRACT
Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.
MOTION: Moved by Banks, seconded by Preston, carried unanimously 7-0-0, to
approve the Mills Act Contract for the Lord House and to recommend it for
approval by the City Council.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ARNER, BILLINGS, BANKS, COOPER, HASKVITZ,
PRESTON, SCHMIDT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
--carried
OLD BUSINESS
C. "CELEBRATE YOUR HERITAGE" PROGRAM UPDATE - Oral Report
Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner, updated the Commission regarding the plans
for the "Celebrate Your Heritage" program which includes the photo opportunity
at 10:00 a.m. in front of Thomas Winery on May 14 and the historic
lecture/slide show in the Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. that evening.
D. ROUTE 30 EXTENSION SUBCOMMITTEE UPDATE - Oral Report
Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner, updated the Commission on the status of the
EIR for the Route 30 extension and informed them that the draft EIR/EIS has
yet to be released.
HPC MINUTES - 3 - MAY 2, 1991
E. STOEBE HOUSE UPDATE - Oral Report
Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, presented the oral staff report. He told
the Commission that the City has not located the owner of the Stoebe
property. He further commented that the City was close to initiating an
abatement on the property which would involve repairing the house and placing
a lien against it.
Commissioner Banks stated the property was currently in a legal dispute over
the ownership.
F. CHAFFEY-GARCIA HOUSE UPDATE - Oral Report
Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, informed the Commission that after an
inspection of the Chaffey-Garcia House by staff and the Community Development
Block Grant representative, it has been determined that the property is
eligible for Community Development Block Grant funds. The program will be a
long-term project, taking approximately one to three years to complete.
Commissioner Banks mentioned that there will be a rummage sale at the house on
June 8 for anyone interested.
Mr. Henderson mentioned that staff is working with Mr. Salazar of L. A. Chenko
on the plans for disassembling of the Foothill Frostless Barn (formerly known
as the Wells Barn) to ensure that the wood, hardware, etc. will be usable for
the Chaffey-Garcia Barn.
G. DISCUSSION OF AGENDA TOPICS FOR THE JOINT HPC/CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON
MAY 22, 1991
The Commission held a discussion on potential items for their joint meeting
with City Council May 22, 1991. The following list contains items brought up
as well as the Commissioner's name who suggested the item be discussed:
1. QUINCENTENNIAL CELEBRATION - (Chairman Bob Schmidt)
2. ARCHIVES PROGRAM - (Commissioner Arner)
3. ORAL HISTORY PROGRAM AND HISTORY CENTER - (Commissioners Arner and
Banks)
4. BUDGET ITEMS - (Commissioners Preston and Banks)
a. Funding Preservation Projects - Working with the Redevelopment
Agency on Activities within the Agency Boundaries
HPC MINUTES - 4 - MAY 2, 1991
b. Other Funding Options
C. Landbank Program
5. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT VERSUS PRESERVATION - (Commissioner Preston)
6. AFFIRMATION OF SUPPORT FROM COUNCIL ON DEVELOPER FUNDED STUDIES -
(Commissioner Banks)
7. ROUTE 30 ISSUES - (Commissioner Banks)
Commissioner Haskvitz mentioned he would check into the possibility of using a
local cable television studio for historical educational programming so there
would be no need to add the item to the agenda.
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, informed the Commission that the City
Council recently passed the final budget for the Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) funding. He stated that $163,000 of the total CDBG budget is
slated for historic preservation activities.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
Commissioner Preston asked that a date be set to bring the Sweeten Hall issue
before the Commission.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Commissioner Banks mentioned that she had a call from Barbara Yellen, owner of
the Goerlitz house, and the family may be selling the house in the near
future.
Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, noted that plans were progressing smoothly
to move the Ledig house soon. He mentioned he has a meeting set to determine
which City departments would be handling certain aspects of the move.
Commissioner Preston gave an update on the last Tree Preservation Subcommittee
meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
HPC MINUTES - 5 - MAY 2, 1991
ADJOURNMENT
The Historic Preservation Commission adjourned at 9:00 p.m. to a Joint
Historic Preservation Commission/City Council meeting to be held at 7:00 p.m.
on May 22, 1991, at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center
Drive, in the Rains Conference Room.
Respectfully submitted,
Shelley A. Petrelli
Secretary
HPC MINUTES - 6 - MAY 2, 1 )') l
May 22, 1991
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Adiourned Joint Meeting City Council
and Historic Preservation Commission
A. CALL TO ORDER
An adjourned joint meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council and Historic
Preservation Commission was held on Wednesday, May 22, 1991, in the Rains Room
of the Civic Center, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. by Mayor Dennis L.
Stout.
Present were Councilmembers: William J. Alexander, Charles J. Buquet II, Diane
Williams, Pamela J. Wright, and Mayor Dennis L. Stout.
Present were Commissioners: Melicent Arner, Marsha Banks, Eugene Billings
(arrived 7:20 p.m. ) , Steven Preston, and Chair Bob Schmidt.
Absent were Commissioners: Ada Cooper and Alan Haskvitz.
Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; Brad Buller, City Planner; Larry
Henderson, Principal Planner; Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner; Sigmund Dellhime,
Management Analyst II; Tarry Smith, Park Planning/Development Superintendent; and
Jan Sutton, Deputy City Clerk.
B. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
B1. Approval of the Environmental Initial Study, Parts I and II, for the
proposed Haven Avenue, Westside Parkway Beautification Project - Deer Creek
Channel, to Highland Avenue and approval of Resolution and issuance of a
Categorical Exemption therefor.
RESOLUTION NO. 91-134
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL
STUDY AND ISSUANCE OF A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION FOR THE PROPOSED
HAVEN AVENUE WESTSIDE PARKWAY BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT - DEER
CREEK CHANNEL TO HIGHLAND AVENUE
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 2
MOTION: Moved by Alexander, seconded by Wright to approve the Consent Calendar.
Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
C. JOINT ITEMS OF DISCUSSION
Mayor Stout stated this meeting was one in a continuing series between the
Council and the Commissions and various agencies to enhance communication, and
he stated items that were on the agenda were not there for any action to be
taken, other than possible direction on the part of the Council or Commission.
Cl. DISCUSSION REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT OF A HERITAGE PARK FOR PLACEMENT OF
HISTORIC HOMES
Councilmember Williams stated she had this item placed on the agenda because this
had been considered at one point, and she was wondering what the status was on
that idea, especially after the problems they just had with the Ledig House.
Commissioner Arner stated the Commission has discussed this recently, about
saving and moving houses, and then selling them.
Councilmember Wright stated that you would need a piece of property in order to
do that, and though the Council discussed several possible locations in the past,
most of those locations have now been developed.
Commissioner Banks stated she needed clarification as to what to discuss, because
a heritage park could be set up in three different ways. One way would be to
move the houses, develop them commercially, then sell them, which allows the
public access to the houses since they are being used commercially. Another way
would be if it was developed into a museum complex, but did not feel that was
financially feasible in this community. The last way would be to move them into
an area where they could be resold and maintained privately. She felt that was
more like their land bank program, as opposed to a heritage park. She asked if
there was a direction the Council was interested in.
Councilmember Williams stated she was interested in what the Commission was
doing.
Commissioner Banks stated that after a joint meeting held with the Planning
Commission, they decided to pursue the land bank idea, an idea of buying the land
and moving the houses to that, and not necessarily all right next to each other,
but in close proximity.
Councilmember Wright thought another use would be to place a house in a park,
restore it and develop it to be a centerpiece of that park, and use it as part
of the recreational activities.
Commissioner Banks stated that had been the original intention of the Ledig
House, to move it to Arrow Route and let the City use it.
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 3
Councilmember Buquet stated there were cost considerations in moving a structure,
and though there are times when you have to realize the importance of the
structure, sometimes those cost considerations were a main factor. He felt if
they did not set a goal now, and try to designate an area as a heritage park,
they will not have that opportunity in the future. He also felt they did not
have the resources currently to set up a heritage park, nor did he feel the
museum concept was viable.
Commissioner Preston stated doing historic preservation was difficult in that it
was not perceived as everyone's desire. He thought it was the feeling of the
Commission that preservation works best when it was economically productive, and
the more that heritage parks are built as museum pieces, the less you are able
to integrate preservation as a movement into the larger goals of the community.
Councilmember Buquet stated they have had to be careful in the past to avoid
people coming and threatening to force the City to purchase a house or it would
be moved off-site to allow for development. He felt they needed to increase the
incentives for property owners to do the restoration of the buildings, at least
the facade, and maybe a staged process for restoring the inside.
Commissioner Banks felt Rancho Cucamonga was on the cutting edge as far as
offering incentives. She also felt the Commission had a lenient attitude towards
adaptive re-use. She felt they needed to educate the community on the incentives
that are in place, and the Commission has formed a community outreach committee
in order to facilitate that education.
Councilmember Alexander asked how they go about designating something as an
historic landmark.
Commissioner Banks stated they are trying to only consider sites at the
applicant's request, as opposed to picking out what they considered significant
places because they were meeting too much owner resistance. She felt they were
still having a lot coming before them due to the development in the City.
Commissioner Preston stated they usually try to get the major issues decided in
one evening, and two at the most.
Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, stated there were about a half dozen homes
that are clearly threatened, or will be threatened, by development.
Councilmember Wright asked if they had any type of long range master plan that
addressed ideas such as using a certain number of homes for a heritage park, or
in a park site, or for rejuvenating an area such as Amethyst in Old Alta Loma and
using those restored houses for commercial uses.
Commissioner Banks felt they had two long range plans, one was studying Old Alta
Loma as an Historic District, which would have a lot of design criteria and
redevelopment possibilities, in addition to if there was a vacant piece of land,
being able to move something onto it, and secondly the land bank program. She
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 4
stated the problem is that they have had a slow start on the land bank program,
and they need to be out acquiring land for the program, then it will be in place
when they have a threatened structure. She stated the only structure that has
been able to utilize that program so far was the Ledig House.
Councilmember Buquet stated in retrospect they should have made it a condition
of approval that the developer move the Ledig House to the other site. He felt
they have learned from that experience and could be more aware in the future of
similar situations. He also felt instead of having all the structures located
at the same spot, they should be in proximity to their original locations.
Mayor Stout stated their were two things they learned from the Ledig House
experience, one was that they overestimated the commercial value of the
structure, and the second one was that moving it any distance from the original
site would be very costly and possibly cause damage to the structure.
Commissioner Preston stated a few months ago they talked about reviewing what was
available and trying to prioritize their importance, and stated staff has
generated a current work program which is divided into several categories, such
as every day tasks, what could be done with available staff, and things they
would like to explore but would need to find a funding mechanism to handle. He
stated that program was outlined but they have it on hold pending the City's
budget review. He also felt that with the next General Plan revision they should
set up a historical preservation or cultural resource management element of the
Plan.
Mayor Stout asked if they would have to wait for the end of a cycle, couldn't
they revise it prior to the next review which would be in approximately four
years.
Brad Buller, City Planner, stated they could adopt that element prior to the
whole General Plan review cycle.
Councilmember Buquet stated he would be supportive of having something adopted
into the General Plan so that it could be considered when a development comes in
for processing.
C2. DISCUSSION OF QUINCENTENNIAL CELEBRATION
Chair Schmidt felt they should commemorate the Columbus celebration, maybe
slanted more towards the mingling of the the European, Native American and
African cultures; progress in mathematics, geography, and navigation; and most
importantly agricultural. He stated they were working on reviewing what has been
developed by various government agencies, and when they have all the information
collected and reviewed, they would report on it further to the Council.
Mayor Stout asked if they had any type of formal proposal for the Council
formulated yet.
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 5
Chair Schmidt stated he would like to commemorate it similar to what they have
done in the past, and that he was going to check with the Chamber of Commerce to
see if they were going to work it in next year in any way. He asked the Council
what length of time they would be interested in conducting the celebration for.
Consensus was for a short celebration.
C3. DISCUSSION OF ARCHIVES PROGRAM
Commissioner Arner stated one of their concerns was that now they have a location
for the archives, they did not know how it would be staffed. She stated one of
their original ideas would be to have an intern from a university. They have had
a manual developed by a professional archivist, but still needed to decide things
like would there be an archive room that was open to the public, who would staff
it, if there would be a trained person to work with volunteers, and someone to
advise what should or should not be in the archives.
Councilmember Williams asked if there would be any grants available that would
pay for staffing.
Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner, stated archival grants are very hard to come
by.
Councilmember Williams felt this would qualify as a library program, and thus
would be qualified for some library grants also.
Councilmember Buquet stated they could look for sponsorship from a local company
to offset the costs. He stated they would need to prepare a proposal to take to
the companies outlining what their needs were and the costs involved.
Councilmember Williams asked how much would it cost for staffing.
Commissioner Banks stated currently they were planning on staffing the facility
only half time, so approximately $10,000.00 per year.
Councilmember Buquet felt that would be a reasonable amount to obtain, possibly
with joint sponsorship.
Jack Lam, City Manager, asked if this would be something where an intern could
come in and set up the program, and then have it taken over by volunteers.
Councilmember Buquet stated they could possibly set up an ongoing internship in
conjunction with U.C. Riverside.
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 6
Mayor Stout stated they might want to offer some type of stipend for the intern,
especially working with graduate students, because they would usually be looking
for a sophisticated setting to learn as much as they possibly could, and felt the
City's program was not to that point yet. He also stated that Target Stores was
interested in specific programs for grant purposes, and thought the Commission
should contact them to fund the archive program.
Mayor Stout stated they might want to start a program of taking some of the
documents in the archives to various schools in the community, a travelling
exhibit of sorts, to increase their awareness of local history. He felt these
documents were assets, and should not be kept in a basement room all the time.
Commissioner Banks stated with their outreach subcommittee they were trying to
have an impact on the school system, and could incorporate both long and short
range history.
Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, stated they have looked at duplicating a lot
of information that is in the archives and having a history center in the library
at Central Park, in addition to their outreach program.
The Council discussed the pros and cons of moving the original documents from the
archive area for exhibits.
C4. DISCUSSION OF ORAL HISTORY PROGRAM AND HISTORY CENTER
Commissioner Banks stated when this was first discussed, the Council felt this
was a priority item. She stated they have had a slow start, what with a change
in personnel, going through the interview process and lining up the funding, but
was concerned that with the current budgetary constraints funding for the program
would be cut. She was looking for confirmation that the Council was still
committed to this program.
Councilmember Wright asked if they have collected any recordings yet.
Commissioner Banks stated they have done none yet.
Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner, stated they have been working on the contract
with Knox Mellon, who was the State Historic Preservation Officer for many years,
and once they have all the legal requirements worked out, they can proceed
immediately. She stated that some of the information collected on various
projects has been oral and has been recorded and filed, along with work on the
Old Alta Loma area, but that has been done on a staff level. Once they have the
contract worked out, then they will get the approval of the Community Foundation
for the release of funds.
Councilmember Wright asked if they have looked into a national grant source for
funding.
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 7
Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner, stated there are some grants available through
the state, that range from $1,000.00 to $1,500.00, but they receive many
requests. She stated there are not a lot of funding sources available for local
projects. She stated one year's budget would be $12,000.00, which would cover
twelve interviews. She stated another creative funding avenue they have taken
is having development mitigation fund oral histories when applicable.
Councilmember Buquet felt that whenever there was a grant opportunity available,
staff or the Commission should pursue it, within reason of course. He felt they
needed to look for local sources for funding and create their own financial
program.
Brad Buller, City Planner, stated they were trying to work out a unit cost so
that could approach sponsorship at different levels.
Councilmember Buquet felt they needed to set up a full range of funding, from
corporate levels down to unit costs for interviews, and if that amount was
significant, splitting it down somehow. He thought once it was started people
will be interested and will financially participate to be involved in that
history. He stated he would like to see them get creative because traditional
funding sources are not available anymore.
Councilmember Wright stated there seemed to be a perception that the Council was
not ready to fund the program, when she felt they were saying let's work together
to find funding, maybe for the Commission to work on some proposals and then when
they have some ideas, bring it to the Council so they can help identify the
funding sources. She did not want the Commission to be so concerned about
funding that they would not present worthwhile ideas to the Council because they
thought there be insufficient funds available.
Councilmember Buquet stated he would like a follow-up on this from staff or the
Commission in ninety days.
Commissioner Arner stated they touched on the topic of a history center when they
were speaking about the archive program. She stated there are a lot of residents
that have things they would donate to a history center if they could be assured
that they would be safe and not distributed into the community.
Councilmember Wright stated the current plans for the library include a history
room, but it will depend on the funding that is received and how the construction
of the building is conducted.
Commissioner Arner felt there were a lot of people who felt it was not safe to
give things to libraries. She stated that libraries she has visited that had
successful history programs had a separate room that was staffed, and the
materials inside did not ever leave the facilities.
Commissioner Preston asked if the library would ever be run by the City as
opposed to the County.
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 8
Jack Lam, City Manager, stated that would hinge on what occurs with the library
funding, and the administration of the library tax funding. He stated they are
defining the master plan as to what the community needs, and looking at
contingency plans if they are not successful in receiving a grant.
Councilmember Williams stated one of the tasks of the library consultant is to
determine the legal documents needed to transfer operation of the library from
the County to the City, if that need arises.
C5. DISCUSSION OF BUDGET
A. Funding Preservation Projects - Working with the Redevelopment Agency
on activities within the Agency boundaries.
B. Other Funding Options.
C. Land Bank Program.
Commissioner Preston stated the Commission was aware of the budget problems
facing all cities this year, and though they understand the large budget
decisions are things only the Council has the right to make, they have discussed
in the Commission programs they would like to initiate. In order to accomplish
those plans, though, they would need additional staff. As the Commission
understood it, at this time the funding for the historic preservation program was
drawn entirely from the General Fund, but they have discussed using the
Redevelopment Agency to a greater extent in a couple of different ways. The
first way would be that there are many cases where the decisions on preservation
are decisions that enable development to proceed, so in some cases a staff
planner working on the project could have that time funded by the Agency as
opposed to the General Fund. The second way would be if a developer approached
the Agency at a meeting and stated they did not agree with proposed historic
preservation on a project, and they were wondering if the Agency would be
interested in approaching the preservation-redevelopment link in a way that the
preservation deals are turned as part of the deal points in an owner
participation or disposition and development agreement.
Jack Lam, City Manager, stated they Agency has $50,000.00 in the land bank
program, because it was felt that program was related to the purposes of
redevelopment. He stated that if projects were done in the redevelopment area,
there might be funding available, but they could not necessarily go outside of
that area, and cautioned about marginal projects.
Councilmember Buquet stated they were just trying to express that the state was
reviewing all uses of redevelopment funds because they wanted to be able to
confiscate that money if used improperly, so they wanted to be careful projects
were done properly.
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 9
Commissioner Preston stated he was only talking about redevelopment projects,
things that would be benefitting the redevelopment of the community, so did not
feel that would be a problem. He stated that historic preservation is a
permitted activity of Agency funds, so he just wanted the Council to keep that<
in mind.
Commissioner Banks stated that in regards to the land banking program, she felt
most of the Commission was not pleased with the process the Ledig House went
through, that the house was not secured properly to avoid vandalism once the last
owners moved out.
Councilmember Buquet agreed that they needed to develop a procedure for
maintaining property, to ensure that proper caretaking was maintained for the
properties as they got into the land banking program.
C6. DISCUSSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT VERSUS PRESERVATION
Commissioner Preston stated that the Commission has talked about when there is
a case where they cannot balance the goals of preservation with the developer,
how would the Council like the Commission to handle it. Would they want the
Commission to just look at the historical impact excluding all economic factors
that may come into play when making their recommendation, then send it up to the
Council, or should they approach the projects with the awareness that in order
to make a project move, they should shorten their list of interests to pursue and
try to present to the Council something that already presents a compromise or
reduction in requirement.
Councilmember Buquet felt it was a matter of common sense.
Commissioner Banks disagreed, stating she did not feel they were qualified to
judge a project on monetary constraints, that the Commission should just look at
the historical merit of a project.
Councilmember Buquet stated he thought the Commission should be able to take an
approach that balanced as much of the variables as possible.
The Council and Commission discussed various projects from the last year and
considerations that might have been made at the Commission level.
Mayor Stout stated he felt the Commission should be helping the Council to
analyze why something was historically significant, making a recommendation of
some sort as to what can be done to make it work, but as far as the economics of
a project, he felt the Council was who ultimately made that decision. He stated
he did not want the Commission compromising a situation to where he could not
tell why they made their decision and what was important.
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 10
Councilmember Wright stated she felt that with all the Commissions when they were
reviewing a project, they were looking at it with the City's interest in mind,
not necessarily the developer's interest in mind, and that would be the aspect
she would like this Commission to take when reviewing a project. She stated they
could consider all of the aspects, including the economical, in the report, but
the determination should have to do with whether or not there was historical
significance.
Councilmember Buquet left the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
Commissioner Banks stated she felt that is how the Commission has been making
their decisions, but they were looking for direction if that was how the Council
wanted decisions made so that when it goes before Council it will be understood
the context the decision was made in.
Mayor Stout felt economic considerations were a different issue, and should be
handled at the Council level, that the Commission should focus on the historical
aspects with a solid recommendation, so the Council could work out a compromise
with the developer. He felt the City had a strong commitment when it was felt
that something was historically significant, and presented information on the
Virginia Dare Winery project as an example where they placed historical
significance over economic considerations.
Commissioner Preston presented information on how the Commission can go about
getting documentation on a structure for their historical files without
necessarily having to permanently preserve that structure and delaying or
changing an economically sound development.
C7. AFFIRMATION OF SUPPORT FROM CITY COUNCIL ON DEVELOPER FUNDED STUDIES
Commissioner Banks stated that in the last six months or so, the Commission has
come up with some innovative ways to fund studies and restoration. She stated
this was something new for them to be doing and the developers are not used to
historic preservation being a mitigation practice, and they were looking for
affirmation from the Council that this was the direction they want the Commission
taking because it could be controversial in the beginning.
C8. DISCUSSION OF ROUTE 30 ISSUES
Commissioner Preston left the meeting at 8:55 p.m.
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 11
Commissioner Banks stated they are the only Commission that presently has a
subcommittee looking at Route 30 in detail. She stated they are looking at the
draft EIR, which is still confidential, they are videotaping the route, they are
walking the route and looking at every structure and the vegetation. She stated
she was concerned about the process that would occur when they can develop
proposals once the EIR was released. It was her understanding that whatever
report the Commission develops would go through the Planning Commission first,
and she was concerned that their report would be watered down when given to the
Council.
Mayor Stout stated he has not ever seen that happen. He stated if the Historic
Preservation Commission has an opinion on something, the Planning staff has
always included a section in the report that addresses their concerns, without
a position being taken by the Planning Commission. He stated the report the
Council will see will include opinions from both bodies for the Council to
review.
Commissioner Banks stated they would probably be some strong statements from the
Historic Preservation Commission, and felt they had a real opportunity to have
some state funded preservation in conjunction with Route 30.
Councilmember Wright stated she would like the Commission to identify things that
will be problems and list suggestions on what needs to be done to mitigate
against those problems.
Commissioner Banks stated they are taking steps in that direction, and have found
the response from the state to be excellent on this matter.
Mayor Stout stated another issue to address is that Rancho Cucamonga is not the
approving authority for Route 30, that SANBAG is the agency that has
jurisdiction, with input from Caltrans and the federal transportation people.
He stated that when dealing with these groups, Rancho Cucamonga would be an
insignificant geographical location to them. He felt to impress them with the
importance of the issues, it would have to be presented in a very logical and
precise manner, or they will ignore preservation issues and deal with other
things first.
Councilmember Wright stated if there was a structure in the way that needed to
be preserved, the City would have to be responsible in seeing that was done, and
not rely on other agencies to do that.
Commissioner Banks stated they have suggested the state purchase a piece of
property where they could relocate a threatened structure of significance, then
they could sell it. That way the state would be fronting the money instead of
the City.
Commissioner Billings stated that Caltrans has done a tremendous amount of
preliminary work, and felt that Caltrans was going to be cooperative in this
matter.
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 12
C9. DISCUSSION OF ITEMS OF MUTUAL CONCERN
Mayor Stout felt they needed to keep in mind that what was being done today would
be historically significant in the future. He stated he would like the
Commission to suggest any ideas they might have to the Council on what they
should be doing today if that was possible.
Commissioner Arner felt they could not predict what would be historically
significant in the future, but they could be sure to document what happens today
to be available to future generations.
Councilmember Wright thought that Route 66 was an example of recent history that
happened inadvertently. You can tell that people did not give it any
significance, it was just a way to get somewhere, but now it is considered in a
nostalgic way and people are trying to preserve it. She felt you could not do
something with the intention that it was for history, you could only document
what was done because the passing of time would determine what will be
significant.
Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, thought possibly what the Mayor was
expressing would be something like what the City of Fullerton did with their
transportation center, where they took what was basically a slum area and vacant
lots, and over the last ten years they have bought the train station, built a
parking structure, brought in another station, converted a restaurant, and put
in landscaping and parking, and are even talking about expanding it because it
has been so successful. He thought some day that might be viewed as historically
significant because they took part of the old and combined it with part of the
new and made a better center.
Councilmember Wright stated the Cucamonga School District will be celebrating
their centennial next year and thought the Commission might be interested in
that.
Councilmember Wright stated she would like to get some information regarding a
hitching post that was reportedly still standing on Foothill Boulevard near
Rochester Avenue, and she was wondering if anything was ever done about
preserving that. She also stated they have spoken in the past about putting
markers out for buildings that have been preserved to help identify them for the
community, and wanted to know the status of that.
Councilmember Wright felt they needed a program to continue educating the public
of the historical buildings in the community.
Commissioner Banks stated the sign program was moving ahead, that there were
brass plaques on a few locations.
Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner, stated a developer was picking up the cost for
the prototype, and what they were trying to determine now was if the City could
initiate putting up plaques.
City Council/Historic Preservation
Commission Minutes
May 22, 1991
Page 13
Mayor Stout asked if it would be possible to put out a map that showed the
location of all the historical items in the City.
Commissioner Banks stated the community outreach subcommittee was working on
producing that. She stated they are working on producing a walking tour for the
schools in the Etiwanda area since they cannot always afford field trips that
involve buses. She felt the Commission could do a lot of things, but that the
public needed to be aware of them.
The Council and Commission discussed various ways of promoting historical tours
in the City.
D. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
D1. John Anicic, Jr. , Fontana Historical Society, complemented the Council and
Commission on their open communication, and stated he felt Rancho
Cucamonga had a very good historical preservation program.
E. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Wright to adjourn. Motion carried
unanimously, 4-0-1 (Buquet absent) . The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jan Sutton
Deputy City Clerk
Approved by the Historic Preservation Commission:
Approved by the City Council:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STAFF REPORT
i
DATE: June 5, 1991
TO: Chairman and Members of the Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Larry Henderson, AICP, Principal Planner
BY: Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: LANDMARK ALTERATION PERMIT 91-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Consideration of the relocation of the G.P. Ledig House (Landmark
No. 13) from 5702 Amethyst Street, to Lot 11 of Tract 13930, located
at the southeast corner of Hellman Avenue and Wilson Avenue. Also
being considered are plans for a new three-car garage and
rehabilitation specifications for the residence.
I. _BACKGROUND: As the Commission understands, the City will not relocate
the G.P. Ledig House to the Neighborhood Community Center on Arrow
Route, as detailed in Landmark Alteration Permit 90-02. Rather, a site
on the southeast corner of Hellman and Wilson Avenues will be purchased
by the City upon which the home will be moved, rehabilitated, and
sold. This Landmark Alteration Permit thus replaces 90-02 and will
detail the proposed site orientation, description of needed work, and
elevations for a new garage.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Exhibit HPC-1 consists of the Permit with
attachments for the relocation of the G.P. Ledig House. The entire
home, with more recent additions, will be moved and preserved; any areas
or elements disassembled or damaged during the move will be replaced
with materials identical to existing, unharmed examples. The home will
be placed in the center of the lot, approximately 50 feet from Hellman
Avenue. Staff has worked closely with the contracted Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) staff members, who have a broad range of
experience in construction, to arrive at an acceptable and cost
efficient rehabilitation.
The proposed work program details upgrades to the home's utilities and a
careful approach to the restoration of historic interior and exterior
details. All utilities and safety equipment will be brought up to code
prior to sale of the historic home. Broken or damaged window glass
and/or wood members will be replaced to match existing examples; all
windows will be in working order.
HPC STAFF REPORT
LAP 91-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
June 6, 1991
Page 2
Some of the more destructive proposed alterations stem from the
demolition of the basement, foundation, and porch which will be
completed in order to move the home. These measures will not go
uncompensated, however. The basement will not exist at the new site and
the foundation will be concrete with real rock veneer, but detailed
drawings of the foundation walls and the porch will allow for an
accurate recreation of those elements.
Southeast of the home's new location will lie a three-car garage, as
shown in Exhibit HPC-2. Emulating the home's existing configuration, a
circular driveway will be poured on the new site; splitting off the
south side of this new drive will be a long, side driveway to the new
garage. Although larger in scale than a period garage or stable, the
proposed garage retains historic characteristics such as wood siding and
multi-paned fenestration that keep it within the feel of the G.P. Ledig
home.
III. ANALYSIS: Staff feels that the proposed work program and relocation
efforts for the house meet with the goals of our overall preservation
efforts. Although the loss of the basement is regrettable, the accurate
reconstruction of the foundation will serve to strengthen and extend the
life of the historic property. The thorough description of the repair
and replacement program appears to ensure that the home's historic
details will be preserved.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The relocation and rehabilitation of the G.P.
Ledig house are exempt from CEQA under Section 15301 .
V. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Staff believes that the following findings can be
made in support of the proposal per the criteria in Section 2.24. 120 of
the Historic Preservation Ordinance.
Finding: The action proposed is consistent with the purposes of the
ordinance.
Fact: In order to preserve the G.P. Ledig House, it must be
relocated. This action will continue to promote and enhance the City's
cultural resources. Keeping the home as a residence maintains its
historic use and extends a greater chance of long-term protection four
the structure.
Finding: The proposed use will not be detrimental to a structure nr
feature of significant aesthetic, cultural, architectural, r
engineering interest or value of a historic nature.
Fact: Beyond necessary demolition for relocation, the propose•i
alterations retain and promote the home's historic qualities.
HPC STAFF REPORT
LAP 91-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
June 6, 1991
Page 3
VI. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission approve Landmark
Alteration Permit 91-01.
Respectfully submitted,
Lar y J. `Henderson, AICP
Principal Planner
LJH:AH:sp
Attachments: Exhibit HPC-1: Landmark Alteration Permit 91-01
Exhibit HPC-2: Site Plan for new locations
Exhibit HPC-3: Elevations for new garage
Resolution of Approval
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Application for
HISTORIC LANDMARK
Alteration Permit
IDENTIFICATION
1 . Common name: G.P. LEDIG HOUSE
2. Historic name: SAME
3. Street or rural address: 5702 AMETHYST AVENUE
City: RANCHO CUCAMONGA Zip: 91701 County: SAN BERNARDINO
Assessor's Parcel no. 1062-071-08 Zone: L
Legal Description: PARCEL 1. MAP 4433.BOOK 40. PAGE. 67
4. Present Owner: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Address:10500 CIVIC CENTER DR.
City: RANCHO CUCAMONGA Zip:91730 Ownership is: Public xxx
Private
5. Present Use: VACANT RESIDENCE Original Use: RESIDENCE
Other past uses: NONE
6. Proposed Use: RESIDENCE
7. Proposed Work: (i .e. demolition, remodel , addition, etc. ) SEE ATTACHED
8. Condition of Structure: FAIR
9. Justification for Work: RELOCATION IN ORDER TO PRESERVE
10. Other Information:
1=X 41 E31
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
LEDIG HOUSE RELOCATION
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
5702 Amethyst Avenue
ALL WORK TO BE DONE PER CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BUILDING LAWS. IN
ORDER TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS OF QUALITY, THE DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS MAY
REFER TO A CERTAIN PRODUCT BY NAME AND/OR FROM A MAJOR MANUFACTURE.
THIS PROCEDURE IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED ELIMINATING FROM COMPETITION OTHER
PRODUCTS OF EQUAL OR BETTER QUALITY BY OTHER MANUFACTURERS. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH THE LIST OF PROPOSED DESIRED SUBSTITUTIONS
PRIOR TO SIGNING OF THE CONTRACT. ALL ITEMS LISTED ON WORK WRITE-UP,
UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED, SHALL INCLUDE ALL FINISH WORK, INCLUDING ALL
TRIM, HARDWARE, PATCHING, AND FINISH PAINTING AND/OR STAINING. STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS ARE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW. USE OF LEAD BASE PAINT IS
PROHIBITED. ALL MEASUREMENTS OF SCREENS, DRAWERS, CARPETING, ETC. , ARE
TO BE MEASURED EXACTLY BY CONTRACTOR.
WORK DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE
I. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
A. Provide a termite report from a State licensed pest $ 2,200
control company and perform all repairs and
procedures as recommended on the inspection report.
B. Prepare construction documents for approval by
applicable City departments governing construction.
Include all phases of construction as listed.
Include all required permits. $ 3,500
II. CONCRETE
A. Construct a two-story foundation as per plan for the $ 12,750
dwelling and perform all work as instructed by soils
report. Include required compaction and test prior
to placing concrete, where applicable.
B. Construct driveway with street apron to new garage as $ 4,500
per approved plan. Prepare sub-base to be level and
compacted with minimum 1 1/2" drainage coarse of
drainage rock or sand. Pour monolithic drive of
Portland cement mix at minimum 2,000 psi. Minimum
thickness is 4", with control and score joints as per
recommendations by Building and Safety Division.
HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Page 2
III. MASONRY
Reconstruct porch using rock veneer over concrete $ 13,000
block and two brick chimneys as per plans.
IV. GARAGE
Construct 3-car garage as per approved plan. Materials $ 15,000
to match dwelling in regard to roofing, siding, windows,
doors, fixtures, etc. Provide electrical fixtures on
either side of vehicular doors on exterior, with minimum
2-light fixtures on interior (complete with switches) .
Provide receptacles (GFI) as per minimum code
requirements. Construction includes all work to be
finished as per painting, roofing, etc.
V. UTILITIES
Connect existing utilities of dwelling with City utilities,
except for septic system. Obtain all licenses, permits and
inspections required.
A. ELECTRICAL
1 . Confirm location of service panel with Edison. $ 1,525
Relocate to recommended accessible location if
applicable. Install GFI's at kitchen, bathrooms,
( 1 ea. ) ; and garage (minimum 2) . Ensure kitchen
receptacles are on minimum (2) circuits,
dedicated for kitchen only.
2. Test current loads and dedicate circuits of $ 750
reduced loads where overload(s) exist. Label
all circuits.
B. PLUMBING/SEPTIC SYSTEM
1 . Provide Septic system for newly located $ 11,000
dwelling. Provide a minimum 1200-gallon
capacity septic tank with 3' - 0" x 103' - 0"
leach bed. Steel reinforced tank with
fiberglass basin pump. All connections,
backfill, permits, etc. , complete.
2. Run water heater vent from tank through roof as $ 150
per code, strapped to ensure stability. Provide
a metallic pipe onto the existing water relief
valve and position to direct overflow for a
safe exit.
3. Provide a water pressure regulator if street $ 871;
pressure exceeds 65 psi. Connect dwelling to
City main with copper type "L" as per UPC's
connections, burial and backfill.
HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Page 3
C. GAS/MECHANICAL
1 . Connect gas after conferring with local Gas 2,500
Company. Install system to ensure all gas
consuming fixtures have proper lines and
correct pressure.
2. Provide a heating system in the front half of $ 5,200
dwelling to achieve sufficient heating and air
conditioning as required by energy calculations.
Connect and test existing unit, complete with all
duct work and thermostat with setbacks.
Replace all asbestos under floor duct; using
approved methods. All work as per the UNC.
VI. INGRESS/EGRESS REQUIREMENTS
A. Furnish and install hard-wired fire alarm, one on $ 350
1st level, one on 2nd level. Second level at loft,
installed at top of "drop stairs." Other alarms
located at centralized areas of hallways adjacent
to bedrooms. Alarms to be on switch and on dedicated
circuit.
B. Provide additional shoring support as required $ 800
after relocations of wooden porches and any framing
structures being realigned and reassembled after
transferal of dwelling.
C. Construct step platform to reduce deck/bedroom, $ 300
finish floor elevation differential from
approximately 9" down to two 4 1/2" steps with a
minimum 12" tread.
VII. WINDOWS
A. Replace broken, missing or cracked glazing of wood $ 600
double-hung picture windows. Remove paint
from stained glass windows of den.
B. Replace missing wood sash for triple hung window $ 600
at 2nd level northeast bedroom to match existing as
close as possible. Test and re-work All windows to
ensure proper operation. Ensure all glazing is
properly affixed to sash with stable putty. Furnish
and install screens for all windows. Ensure all
locking devices operate property.
C. Replace all foundation vent screens. $ 200
HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGPAM
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Page 4
VII. INTERIOR
A. After relocation of dwelling, reassemble any area $ 3,000
dissassembled for the purpose of moving the dwelling.
Reconstruct the "seam" or "seams" referred to by
replacing any damaged materials as would be used
in new construction. Materials selected will be
identical to adjacent materials unharmed during
transfer of dwelling. Includes framing, subfloor,
walls, ceilings, flooring, plaster, drywall, etc.
B. Replace kitchen cabinets with good quality birch $ 2,700
face units with hardwood doors and plywood side,
and 4 x 4" ceramic tile counter top. Provide
range hood with vent thru roof.
C. Furnish and install 30" oak vanity, top/bowl $ 1,200
with/faucet. Ensure all traps and arm back to
wastelines are watertight. Furnish and install
inlet lines (to code) , with shut-off valves at
each fixture. Faucets to be Delta, Moen or approved
equal. Replace all tub/shower fixtures and test
lines for proper operation.
D. Floors $ 8,500
1 . Install 36 oz. nylon pile carpet over 1/2"
rebond pad at all areas currently carpeted.
Reuse all base molding.
2. Install no-wax FHA minimum sheet good, over
1/4" plywood underlayment in kitchen, pantry,
bath 1 and 2. Provide vinyl tepset.
3. After all other trades in the area are finished
with their work, all hardwood flooring shall
be stripped, then sanded with a heavy-duty
sander. Coarse, medium and fine grades of
sandpaper shall be used to produce a uniform,
even and smooth surface. After sanding, the
flooring shall be swept or be vacuum cleaned
as necessary to remove all dust and dirt.
E. Replace water damaged ceiling panels opposite pantry $ 600
area. On exterior of same area, replace facia board
with similar sized wood member. Rework flashing,
shingling and rain gutters as required for proper
drainage on edge of gable and valley.
F. Furnish and install exhaust fans in each bathroom. $ 550
Provide switches for each.
HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Page 5
G. Repair all plaster cracks with appropriate filler, $ 3,000
sanded smooth. Scrape and clean all areas of
interior walls, and ceilings, to accept paint.
Prime all new materials. Apply (2) finish coats in
uniform coverage to all appropriate walls and
ceilings using (Dunn-Edwards, Sinclair or approved
equal) (latex flat) . Polish existing paneling with
"Liquid-Gold" or approved equal. Baths - kitchen
area all interior trim (windows, doors) to be
painted (semi-gloss) .
IX. EXTERIOR
A. Replace all cracked, split or rotted facia board. $ 4,000
Scrape all exterior siding and trim to remove
existing paint. Apply wood filler to cracks,
depressions, etc. , of surface. Apply (2) finish
coats of oil-based latex flat paint to trim and
siding, include window framing, sashes, and doors.
TOTAL
$ 99,350
M�
f HELLMAN
N 00 32' 31� bi 663.62
1tISTIMO =p t 9v Rw110Vl
EUCALYPTUS
AVW
44'
I
L ,
An
N ig n A O
k0 z i� ►� Z
kw
v
FRONT ELEVATION
ILL
i
REAR ELEVATION
0 g Item: LA P. 91--D1
on
Title: PR!2 f 56J> Ca
fit: -3 Scale: N A-
•
RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION
ct—
i S
LEFT SIDE ELEVATION
Citioaga Item: A • P. 91 - o r
Ion
nue: mprestEm U Aso
S�iblt:- �3 Beale:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
LANDMARK ALTERATION PERMIT NO. 91-01, THE G.P. LEDIG
HOUSE, LOCATED AT 5702 AMETHYST AVENUE - APN: 1062-071-
08.
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has held a duly
advertised public hearing to consider all comments on the proposed Landmark
Alteration.
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has received and
reviewed all input regarding said Landmark Alteration Permit.
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution
have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Historic Preservation Commission hereby
specifically finds, determines, and resolves as follows:
SECTION I: The application applies to the modifications as indicated
by the staff report dated June 6, 1991, with the structure and property
located at Assessor's Parcel No 1062-071-08.
SECTION II: Based upon substantial evidence presented to this
Commission during the above referenced public hearing on June 6, 1991 ,
including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this
Commission hereby specifically finds:
Finding: The action proposed is consistent with the purposes of
Section 2.24. 120 of the Historic Preservation Ordinance.
Fact: In order to preserve the G.P. Ledig House, it must be
relocated. This action will continue to promote and enhance the city's
cultural resources. Keeping the home as a residence maintains its historic
use and extends a greater chance of long-term protection for the structure.
Finding: The proposed use will not be detrimental to a structure
or feature of significant aesthetic, cultural, architectural or engineering
interest, or value of a historic nature.
Fact: Beyond necessary demolition for relocation, the proposed
alterations retain and promote the home's historic qualities.
SECTION III: This Landmark Alteration Permit is except from c'EQA
(Article 1, Section 15301) .
SECTION IV: Based on the substantial evidence received and reviPvr•i
by this Commission and based on the findings set forth above;
HPC RESOLUTION
LAP 91-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
June 6, 1991
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Rancho Cucamonga Historic
Preservation Commission does hereby approve Landmark Alteration Permit 91-01,
the G.P. Ledig House, as described in the June 6, 1991 staff report, with the
following conditions:
1 . Alterations and rehabilitation shall comply with
the plans and specifications provided within the
staff report dated June 6, 1991 .
2. This approval shall expire, unless extended by
the Historic Preservation Commission, if
modifications as indicated have not been
completed within 24 months from the date of
approval.
3. Detailed plans for the approved modifications to
the site and structure, including fencing and
architectural revisions, shall be submitted to
the Historic Preservation Commission staff for
their review and approval prior to issuance of
any permits for said home.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 6TH DAY OF JUNE 1991 .
BY:
Bob Schmidt, Chairman
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 6, 1991
TO: 4arry
airm n and Members of the Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Henderson, AICP, Principal Planner
BY: Anthea Hartig, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF THE HIPPARD RANCH MILLS ACT CONTRACT
James Banks, Jr. has submitted an application for a Mills Act Agreement with
the City for the Hippard Ranch, a designated local landmark. Staff
appreciates your reviewing the contract specifications and the proposed
structure/property improvement schedule. Please do not hesitate to contact us
with any questions of concerns. Thank you.
LH:AH:sp
Attachments: Draft Mills Act Agreement with Exhibits
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
and when
RECORDED MAIL TO:
City Clerk, City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
HISTORIC PROPERTY PRSSSRVATION AGRE MW
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 6th day of June, 1991,
by and between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation
(hereinafter referred to as the "City") and Marsha and James Banks, Jr.
(hereinafter referred to as the "Owner") .
W I T N E S S E T N
A. Recitals.
(i) California Government Code Section 50280, et seq. authorize
cities to enter into contracts with the Owners of qualified Historical
Property to provide for the use, maintenance and restoration of such
Historical Property so as to retain its characteristics as property of
historical significance;
-1-
i, - 2
(ii) Owner possesses fee title in and to that certain real property,
together with associated structures and improvements thereon, commonly known
as the Hippard Ranch and generally located at the street address 13181
Victoria Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739, (hereinafter such property shall
be referred to as the "Historic Property") . A legal description of the
Historic Property is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "A" and is
incorporated herein by this reference;
(iii) On May 18, 1989, the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga adopted its Resolution No. 89-224 thereby declaring and designating
the Historic Property as a historic landmark pursuant to the terms and
provisions of Chapter 2.24 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code; and,
(iv) City and Owner, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter
into this agreement both to protect and preserve the characteristics of °
historical significance of the Historic Property and to qualify the Historic
Property for an assessment of valuation pursuant to the Provisions of Chapter
3, of Part 2, of Division 1 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code.
B. Agreement
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Owner, in consideration of the mutual
covenants and conditions set forth herein, do hereby agree as follows:
1 . Effective Date and Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall be
effective and commence on June 6, 1991, and shall remain in effect for a term
of ten ( 10) years thereafter. Each year upon the anniversary of the effective
date, such initial term will automatically be extended as provided in
paragraph 2, below.
2. Renewal. Each year on the anniversary of the effective date of
this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the "renewal date"), a year shall
automatically be added to the initial term of this Agreement unless notice of
nonrenewal is mailed as provided herein. If either Owner or City desires in
any year not to renew the Agreement, Owner or City shall serve written nnri--e
-2-
of nonrenewal of the Agreement on the other party in advance of the annual
renewal date of the Agreement. Unless such notice is served by Owner to City
at least ninety (90) days prior to the annual renewal date, or served by City
to Owner at least sixty (60) days prior to the annual renewal date, one ( 1 )
year shall automatically be added to the term of the Agreement as provided
herein. Owner may make a written protest of the notice. City may, at any
time prior to the annual renewal date of the Agreement, withdraw its notice to
Owner of nonrenewal. If either City or Owner serves notice to the other of
nonrenewal in any year, the Agreement shall remain in effect for the balance
of the term then remaining, either from its original execution or from the
last renewal of the Agreement, whichever may apply.
3. Standards for Historical Property. During the term of this
Agreement, the Historic Property shall be subject to the following conditions,
requirements, and restrictions:
a. Owner shall preserve and maintain the characteristics of
historical significance of the Historic Property. Attached hereto, marked as
Exhibit "B", and incorporated herein by this reference, is a list of those
minimum standards and conditions for maintenance, use, and preservation of the
Historic Property, which shall apply to such property throughout the term of
this Agreement.
b. Owner shall, where necessary, restore and rehabilitate the
property according to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic
Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation and in accordance
with the attached schedule of potential home improvements, drafted by the
applicant and approved by the City Council, attached hereto as Exhibit "C".
C. Owner shall allow reasonable periodic examinations, by
prior appointment, of the interior and exterior of the Historic Property by
representatives of the County Assessor, State Department of Parks and
Recreation, State Board of Equalization, and the City, as may be necessary to
determine Owner's compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.
-3-
r-a LL
— }
4. Provision of Information of Corporation. Owner hereby agrees to
furnish City with any and all information requested by the City which may be
necessary or advisable to determine compliance with the terms and provisions
of this Agreement.
5. Cancellation. City, following a duly noticed public hearing as
set forth in California Government Code Sections 50280, et seq. , may cancel
this Agreement if it determines that Owner breached any of the conditions of
this Agreement or has allowed the property to deteriorate to the point that it
no longer meets the standards for a qualified historic property. City may
also cancel this Agreement if it determines that the Owner has failed to
restore or rehabilitate the property in the manner specified in subparagraph
3(b) of this Agreement. In the event of cancellation, Owner may be subject to
payment of those cancellation fees set forth in California Government Code
Sections 50280, et seq.
6. Enforcement of Agreement. In lieu of and/or in addition to any
provisions to cancel the Agreement as referenced herein, City may specifically
enforce, or enjoin the breach of, the terms of this Agreement. In the event
of a default, under the provisions of this Agreement by Owner, City shall give
written notice to Owner by registered or certified mail addressed to the
address stated in this Agreement, and if such a violation is not corrected to
the reasonable satisfaction of the City within thirty (30) days thereafter, or
if not corrected within such a reasonable time as may be required to cure the
breach or default if said breach or default cannot be cured within thirty ( 30)
days (provided that acts to cure the breach or default may be commenced within
thirty (30) days and must thereafter be diligently pursued to completion by
Owner), then City may, without further notice, declare a default under the
terms of this Agreement and may bring any action necessary to specifically
enforce the obligations of Owner growing out of the terms of this Agreement,
apply to any court, state or federal, for injunctive relief against any
violation by Owner or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate.
City does not waive any claim of default by Owner if City does
not enforce or cancel this Agreement. All other remedies at law or in equity
-4-
-� - s
which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in City's
regulations governing historic properties are available to the City to pursue
in the event that there is a breach of this Agreement. No waiver by City of
any breach or default under this Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of
any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereinunder.
7. Binding Effect of Agreement. The Owner hereby subjects the
Historic Property described in Exhibit "A" hereto to the covenants,
reservations, and restrictions as set forth in this Agreement. City and Owner
hereby declare their specific intent that the covenants, reservations, and
restrictions as set forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the
land and shall pass to and be binding upon the Owner's successors and assigns
in title or interest to the Historic Property. Each and every contract, deed
or other instrument hereinafter executed, covering or conveying the Historic
Property, or any portion thereof, shall conclusively be held to have been
executed, delivered, and accepted subject to the covenants, reservations, and
restrictions expressed in this Agreement regardless of whether such covenants,
reservations, and restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed or other
instrument.
City and Owner hereby declare their understanding and intent
that the burden of the covenants, reservations, and restrictions set forth
herein touch and concern the land in that Owner's legal interest in the
Historic Property is rendered less valuable thereby. City and Owner hereby
further declare their understanding and intent that the benefit of such
covenants, reservations, and restrictions touch and concern the land by
enhancing and maintaining the historic characteristics and significance of the
Historic Property for the benefit of the public and Owner.
8. Notice. Any notice required to be given by the terms of this
Agreement shall be provided at the address of the respective parties as
specified below or at any other address as may be later specified by the
parties hereto.
-5-
1-91 (.
To City: City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
Attention: City Planner
To Owner: Marsha and James Banks, Jr.
13181 Victoria Avenue
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739
9. General Provisions.
a. None of the terms, provisions, or conditions of this
Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between the parties hereto
and any of their heirs, successors or assigns, nor shall such terms,
provisions, or conditions cause them to be considered joint ventures or
members of any joint enterprise.
b. Owner agrees to and shall hold City and its elected
officials, officers, agents, and employees harmless from liability for damage
or claims for damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for
property damage which may arise from the direct or indirect use or operations
of Owner or those of his contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other
person acting on his behalf which relates to the use, operation, and
maintenance of the Historic Property. Owner hereby agrees to and shall defend
the City and its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees with
respect to any and all actions for damages caused by, or alleged to have been
caused by, reason of Owner's activities in connection with the Historic
Property. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for
damages suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of the
operations referred to in this Agreement regardless of whether or not the City
prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications or other documents
for the Historic Property.
C. All of the agreements, rights, covenants, reservations, and
restrictions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure
to the benefit of the parties herein, their heirs, successors, legal
-6-
representatives, assigns and all persons acquiring any part or portion of the
Historic Property, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever.
d. In the event legal proceedings are brought by any party or
parties to enforce or restrain a violation of any of the covenants,
reservations, or restrictions contained herein, or to determine the rights and
duties of any party hereunder, the prevailing party in such proceeding may
recover all reasonable attorney's fees to be fixed by the court, in addition
to court costs and other relief ordered by the court.
e. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement
are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent
jurisdiction, or by subsequent preemptive legislation, the validity and
enforceability of the remaining provisions, or portions thereof, shall not be
effected thereby.
f. This Agreement shall be construed and governed in
accordance with the laws of the State of California.
10. Recordation. No later than twenty (20) days after the parties
execute and enter into this Agreement, the City shall cause this Agreement to
be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of the County of San
Bernardino.
11. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended, in whole or in part,
only by a written recorded instrument executed by the parties hereto.
IN ■l�8 IMZFAW, City and Owner have executed this Agreement on
the day and year first written above.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Dated: By:
Dennis L. Stout, Mayor
-7-G
_G
Dated: By:
Marsha Meek Banks
Owner
Dated: By:
James Banks, Jr.
Owner
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
ss.
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
On this day of 1991, before me, the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared
, known to me to be the Mayor of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, a municipal corporation, and
known to me to be the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a municipal
corporation, and said persons are known to me to be the persons who execute
the within instrument on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and
acknowledged to me that the City of Rancho Cucamonga executed the same.
•1'17 my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said State
-8-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
ss.
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
On before me, the undersigned, a Notary
Public in and for said State, personally appeared ,
}mown to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged that executed the same.
WZTNSSS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said State
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
ss.
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
On , before me, the undersigned, a Notary
Public in and for said State, personally appeared ,
known to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
instrument and a0mailedged that executed the same.
■I' 0 ; my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said State
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
13181 Victoria Avenue
Etiwanda Colony Lands E 1/2 LOTS 2 AND 7 BLK K EX THEREFROMANY
PNT LYING WTTFHN P E R/W 9.37 AC
EMIT "Ate
� - 11
THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR'S REHABILITATION STANDARDS
1 . Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use for a
property that requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or
site, and its environment, or to the use of a property for its original
intended purpose.
2. The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building,
structure, or site, and its environment shall not be destroyed. The
removal or alteration of any historical material or distinctive
architectural features should be avoided when possible.
3. All buildings, structures, and sites shall be recognized as products of
their own time. Alterations which have no historical basis and which
seek to create an earlier appearance shall be discouraged.
4. Changes which may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of
the history and development of a building, structure, or site, and its
environment.
5. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship, .
which characterize a building, structure, or site, shall be treated with
sensitivity.
6. Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than
replaced, wherever possible.
In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the
material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other
visual qualities. Repair or replacement of missing architectural
features should be based on accurate duplications of features,
substantiated by historical, physical, or pictorial evidence, rather than
on conjectural designs or the availability of different architectural
elements from other buildings or structures.
7. The surface cleaning of structures shall be undertaken with the gentlest
means possible. Sandblasting and other cleaning methods that will damage
the historic building materials shall not be undertaken.
S. Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve
archaeological resources affected by, or adjacent to, any acquisition,
protection, stabilization, preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, or
reconstruction project.
9. Contemporary design for alteration and additions to existing properties
shall not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not
destroy significant historic, architectural, or cultural material and
such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and
character of the property, neighborhood, or environment.
10. Wherever possible new additions or alterations to structures shall be
done in such a manner that if such additions or alterations were to be
removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the structure
would be unimpaired.
Z EXHIBIT 'B'
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Property Maintenance . All buildings, structures,
yards and other improvements shall be maintained in a manner
which does not detract from the appearance of the immediate
neighborhood. The following conditions are prohibited.
1 . Dilapidated, deteriorating, or unrepaired struc-
tures, such as: fences, roofs , doors , walls, and windows;
2 . Scrap lumber, junk, trash or debris;
3 . Abandoned, discarded or unused objects or equip-
ment, such as automobiles , automobile parts, furniture,
stoves, refrigerators, cans , containers, or similar items;
4 . Stagnant water or excavations, including pools
or spas;
5 . Any device , decoration, design, structure or
vegetation which is unsightly by reason of its height, con-
dition, or its inappropriate location.
HISTOMC PROPGRTY 'IIESEIIVATION AGII MAKN
PAOMRTY MANTENANCE
EXHIBIT 'B'( 1)
- � 3
MILLS ACT AGREEMENT
Hippard Ranch
Potential Structure/ Property Improvements
The following is a list of renovation projects the applicant plans to complete.
Future projects by the applicant or by legal inheritors of this contract will be
reviewed by Planning Department staff.
1. Complete addition to home.
2. Rebuild entrance gates with native rock.
3. Landscape area around home.
4. Rehabilitate and replace when necessary existing grove.
5. Move or construct guest house on property.
EXHIBIT "C"