Minutes of the Meeting of the

City of San Clemente

Landmark Preservation Task Force

April 12, 2007 @ 5:00 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER

Chair Wayne Eggleston called the meeting of the Landmark Preservation Task

Force to order at 5:10 p.m. in the Ole Hanson Beach Club Multi-Purpose Room,

located at 105 Avenida Pico, San Clemente CA 92672.

ROLL CALL

LANDMARK PRESERVATION TASK FORCE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Chair Wayne Eggleston, Jim Dahl, Donald Prime, Julia Darden, Mary

McMenamin, Kathy Van Auken, Mike Cotter and Brian Hannegan.

LANDMARK PRESERVATION TASK FORCE MEMBERS ABSENT:

Dorothy Prohaska.

STAFF PRESENT:

Jim Pechous, Principal Planner; Jeff Goldfarb, Assistant City Attorney; and

Denise Gee, Recording Secretary.

MINUTES APPROVAL

1. Minutes of the February 15, 2007 meeting.

MOVED BY JIM DAHL, SECONDED BY MIKE COTTER AND CARRIED 8-0 TO

APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 15, 2007 MEETING AS

PRESENTED.

PRESENTATIONS

1. Remarks from the Chair

Wayne Eggleston noted that the purpose of tonight’s meeting will be to

provide a staff presentation and then review each of the recommendations

of the task force individually. The task force can ask any questions

pertaining to that item after each item is presented. Public comments will

follow.

Landmark Preservation Task Force Meeting Minutes – 4/12/07 Page 2

Items will be voted on to approve the recommendations either as initially

proposed or as amended. The items will include Definition for Landmark,

Criteria for Listing Landmarks, Recommended List of Landmarks,

Landmark Task Force Recommendations for Incentives of Landmarks,

Landmark Task Force Recommendations for Protection of Landmarks and

Amendment of the Demolition of Historic Properties Section, then

adjournment. Regarding public comment period, each speaker will be

allotted three minutes.

Mr. Eggleston stated that the task force will be voting to make

recommendations on a proposed Landmark Ordinance to the Planning

Commission and City Council. The City Council is the final approving

body. Public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council

will be scheduled. The task force is not the final authority on two proposed

Landmark Ordinance.

2. Staff Presentation

Jim Pechous narrated the slide presentation, beginning with the City’s

recognition as a Preserve America City, a program initiated by Laura Bush.

Included in that designation are the requirements to maintain the standing.

Mr. Eggleston provided the letter to the task force that the City received

from Mrs. Bush.

Mr. Pechous highlight the specific components of project and staff

recommendations as follows:

Definition for Landmark:

Mr. Eggleston asked for comments from the task force, of which there

were none.

Criteria for Listing Landmarks:

Mr. Eggleston asked for comments from the task force, of which there

were none.

Recommended List of Landmarks:

Mr. Pechous advised that comments were received regarding specific

recommendations both in favor and opposed. In response to a concern

regarding St. Clements by Sea Church, Mr. Pechous advised that a

Landmark Preservation Task Force Meeting Minutes – 4/12/07 Page 3

proposition was passed that states cities cannot list religious buildings

without the explicit permission of the entity as it would create an undue

hardship on a non-profit. Reverend Diane Bruce and the Historical Society

are supportive of the request. The City will follow-up with the church.

Additionally, the task force discussed the processes to both add and

remove landmarks.

Landmark Task Force Recommendations for Incentives of

Landmarks:

The task force discussed the components of this recommendation, most

importantly. Regarding the recommendation to waive the Cultural Heritage

Permit fee, the committee believes that the fee should be waived for the

properties surrounding the historic resource. This waiver would include

anyone adjacent to or surrounding the historic structure.

Regarding the recommendation for a liaison, Mr. Eggleston asked for

specifics about the type of liaison proposed. Mr. Pechous advised that

making available a trained and qualified customer support staff member is

the goal.

The placement of a plaque at the landmark location and educational and

financial support was also discussed.

Landmark Task Force Recommendations for Protections of

Landmarks:

The components of this recommendation were presented and discussed

by the task force in detail. Staff presented various options regarding the

review area around landmarks.

Amendment of the “Demolition of Historic Properties” Section:

The recommendation is to make demolition consistent with CEQA and not

change the current process. Staff is not recommending a change in the

section, nor that it be made more restrictive.

Mr. Eggleston asked about the process for removing or adding a property

to the list. Mr. Pechous advised that there are two findings that would

need to be made to remove a property from the list. The first would be

justification that the criteria does not apply. The second would be an act of

God or something beyond control such as a natural disaster destroyed the

integrity of the historic resource to the point it no longer qualifies for listing.

Landmark Preservation Task Force Meeting Minutes – 4/12/07 Page 4

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Dena Van Slyke requested consideration regarding the removal of 230 W.

Marquita from the recommended list. Ms. Van Slyke noted that the property is

not a significant house. Ms. Van Slyke stated that she is very happy about many

of the suggestions and changes the task force has made. Ms. Van Slyke asked

for clarification regarding partial demolition and total demolition. Ms. Van Slyke

asked for the definition of modifications as the term is too broad.

Jennifer Blake stated that she is against adding homes that were built past the

1927-1928 timeframe. Ms. Blake has a home that was built in the 1940’s which

has been recommended to be put on the historical list, which she is opposing.

Many of the properties proposed to be added to the list are older homes and

buildings are eyesores. Her belief is that they should be torn down and rebuilt in

keeping with the Ole Hanson design. She indicated that the homeowner should

have the right to be placed on this list or removed from it. Ms. Blake also advised

that the City has other important issues that should be addressed including

growth, traffic and parking. Ms. Blake believes the Miramar should be rebuilt to

appreciate the tax benefits.

James Miranda agrees that the process should not be mandatory.

Bob Laidlaw expressed that he does not want his property to be on this list and

has stated his position before. He indicated that there is enough protection with

Historical Society and the present laws. Mr. Laidlaw advised that it is waste of

time and effort for 24 properties and does not see what value the process has.

Terry Hirchag, current owner of the Miramar, advised that there is nothing in the

ordinance having to do with health, safety and welfare of the community. He

stated that the Miramar has offended all three of those issues for the last twenty

year. He indicated he has had a demolition permit request in with the City since

2005. He painted the theater, spending $15,000. He does not believe it is fair

for the City to simultaneously working to turn the Miramar into a landmark that

coincides with his application to demolition it. He is opposed to establishing a

landmark without the permission of the owner.

Sally Jeisy stated that she believes the 300’ radius is discriminating. When she

purchased a home next to an Ole Hanson home, she did not realize they she

may be restricted or penalized with restrictions. Declaring the property a

landmark without the consent of the owner, in her opinion, is the back road to

eminent domain. As a 57-year resident of San Clemente, Ms. Jeisy is

requesting that an Ole Hanson historical home be treated like any other home in

Landmark Preservation Task Force Meeting Minutes – 4/12/07 Page 5

town, and any radius of influence, especially 300’ be dropped as of this evening.

Any home within any radius of an Ole Hanson home should be able to build or

remodel the home using our current codes. Ms. Jeisy is requesting that a

landmark can only be declared a landmark with the full consent of the property

owner. If not, the property owner may develop within the current building codes

and guidelines.

Don Jeisy advised that there are two things of concern. Mr. Jeisy advised that

the 300’ radius is ridiculous, indicating that most of the people at the meeting

would agree with him. Mr. Jeisy advised that on the east coast, there are

modern buildings next to historic building and no one complains. Mr. Jeisy

advised that there are too many hoops to remove a historic property. If the City

wants the property to be a landmark and the property owner does not, the owner

needs to get a buyer or the City needs to buy it.

Mary Ann Comes stated that she is supportive of the task force, especially now

that we are a Preserve America City. Ms. Comes believes this is very important

to the City. Ms. Comes believes that if the owners of older properties don’t want

to be on the historic list, they should have known this a long time. They should

sell the home and let someone else preserve and enjoy it. Ms. Comes stated

that there are a lot of beautiful buildings that are a lot better than the new junk

being built today. She indicated she is sorry for the builders here as it is their

livelihood. However, Ms. Comes stated that there are many people in San

Clemente that like the historic buildings and want to keep them.

Alan Korser addressed the maintenance of historic structures. Mr. Korser asked

why one of our mandatory landmarks is dying. Since then, Mr. Hirchag has

painted the Miramar. However, there are tiles that are still faulty from the fire that

was caused when derelicts living in the building because it wasn’t properly

boarded up. Supposedly part of the existing code, Mr. Korser stated that

anything causing decay of a structure is not to be allowed. Yet we have been

allowing this structure, by Mr. Hirchag’s admission. He has wanted to demolish it

for almost two years. The City has not done anything to prevent this from

happening. He can go through the process for demolition. Until that takes place,

he has a responsibility to maintain the building. The City is not condemning him

or asking him to do anything except paint it. The decay is still occurring because

of a roof that has not been replaced. We are still the Spanish Village by the Sea.

If we start tearing things down, we will not be a Spanish Village which might be

what developers would like to have. We hope we don’t have to rename

ourselves the Modern Spanish Village by the Sea.

Landmark Preservation Task Force Meeting Minutes – 4/12/07 Page 6

Larry Culbertson appreciates the work of the committee and complimented Mr.

Pechous on a great presentation. Mr. Culbertson does not believe the incentive

regarding $1000.00 should be spent on landscape. The City money should be

spent on something more lasting and not transitory. Mr. Culbertson is concerned

about deep neglect such as termite damage or a leaking roof, which is serious

deep damage. Mr. Culbertson would like to see more proactive code

enforcement rather than reactive. Mr. Culbertson would like to see code

enforcement go into historic structures to make sure deep neglect is not

happening.

Linda Ross wanted to thank the task force. Ms. Ross believes that the Miramar

roof needs to be repaired. Ms. Ross indicated that there are several historic that

draw people from around the world and that this is a beautiful spot to live in. She

stated that the City should protect the structures. The code needs to be followed.

People are drawn to the historic buildings. The new buildings need to be built

with respect.

Mr. Eggleston closed the public comment period.

Mr. Eggleston asked Jeff Goldfarb if anything being done by the task force entails

eminent domain. Mr. Goldfarb advised no.

Mr. Eggleston wanted to know how long the code has been in effect requiring a

permit process regarding living next to a historic structure. Mr. Pechous advised

the process has been effect since the 1980’s.

Mr. Eggleston asked if any of the proposals refer at all to view protection. Mr.

Pechous advised no.

Mr. Dahl asked Mr. Goldfarb to discuss entering of historic structures by code

enforcement. Mr. Goldfarb advised that permission from the property owner is

required. Without permission from the property owner, a warrant would have to

be obtained for any non-public portion of a building. The City cannot go into a

historic structure and make an inspection without the owner’s permission.

Mr. Eggleston requested Mr. Pechous review each of the items. The task force

will begin deliberations, address each item and vote.

Landmark Preservation Task Force Meeting Minutes – 4/12/07 Page 7

Definition for Landmark:

Vote to recommend the following definition for landmark:

A Landmark is a building, site, structure, object or improvement, manmade

or natural, with special character or special historical, cultural,

architectural, archeological, social or aesthetic value inherent to the

heritage of the City of San Clemente, the State of California, and/or the

United States.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Criteria for Listing Landmarks:

Vote to recommend the following definition for the landmark criteria:

The criteria to be used in determining special historical, cultural,

architectural, archeological, social or aesthetic character or value is that

the Landmarks shall be on the Designated Historic Resources List and

meet one (1) or more of the following criteria:

a. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to

the broad patterns of the history of the City, State or Nation.

b. Associated with persons significant in the history of the City, State or

Nation.

c. Embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or

method of construction. Of primary importance to San Clemente is

the Spanish Colonial Revival architecture.

d. Exemplifies the best remaining building type or architectural style in

a neighborhood.

e. Is essential to the integrity of another Landmark.

f. Is integral to maintaining a natural or cultural landscape that strongly

contributes to the well-being of the people of the City, State or

Nation.

g. Has a unique location, unique physical characteristics, or is a

landscape, view, or vista representing an established and familiar

visual feature of a neighborhood, community or of the City.

Landmark Preservation Task Force Meeting Minutes – 4/12/07 Page 8

Staff and task force discussion took place regarding the Western White House

and its relation to the National Park Service eligibility and designation.

Mr. Prime advised that there have been a lot of questions regarding voluntary vs.

involuntary. Mr. Prime requested Mr. Goldfarb read the next to the last

paragraph on page 10 of the staff report regarding voluntary and involuntary per

Code 37361. Mr. Goldfarb read the code aloud for the benefit of the members of

the public for clarification.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Recommended List of Landmarks:

IN FAVOR OPPOSED

L.S. Frasier House 8 0

Cotton Estate Gate 8 0

San Clemente Hotel 8 0

Casa Romantica 8 0

Campbell House 7 1

Goldschmidt House 8 0

Ole Hanson Beach Club 8 0

Casino San Clemente 8 0

Beachcomber Motel 6 2

Municipal Pier 8 0

Casa Pacifica 8 0

Ole Hanson Room 8 0

Warner House 8 0

Bartlett Building 8 0

Oscar Easley Building 8 0

Ole Hanson Administration 8 0

San Onofre Inn 6 2

San Clemente Theater 7 1

Sea Cliff Villas 8 0

Old City Hall 8 0

Moulton House 8 0

418 Cazador 8 0

Ann Harding House 8 0

Landmark Preservation Task Force Meeting Minutes – 4/12/07 Page 9

Regarding the Swigart House, Mr. Cotter asked if HRG (Historic Resources

Group) recommended this property. Mr. Pechous advised that this building was

recommended. Mr. Cotter also wanted to remind the task force that HRG

recommended nineteen landmarks based on whether or not they would

individually qualify for listing on the National Register. This property was

recommended for individual listing.

IN FAVOR OPPOSED

Swigart House 8 0

St. Clement Church 8 0

Mr. Eggleston advised that the City would need to obtain a letter of approval from

the rectory of St. Clement’s Church.

Landmark Task Force Recommendations for Incentives of Landmarks:

Vote for a wavier of all fees for Minor Cultural Heritage Permits and Cultural

Heritage Permits.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Vote for a Landmark Plaque program, walking tours of Landmarks would be

given only with owner’s permission.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Vote to provide a full time staff liaison trained in historic preservation to facilitate

and help historic property owner go through the process.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Vote to recommend a City-sponsored financial assistance to clean or improve a

site:

?? $300 all historic structures and neighboring properties subject to CHP

?? $1,000 for Landmarks

?? Eligibility - maximum of once every three years.

Landmark Preservation Task Force Meeting Minutes – 4/12/07 Page 10

The grants will only be available for long term improvements and that landscape

not be included.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Vote to create educational program that would provide educational brochures

and programs in partnership with the Historical Society/Casa and considers the

use of CLG/Preserve America grants to fund the programs.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Landmark Task Force Recommendations for Protections of Landmarks:

Vote to eliminate the task force’s previous recommendation of expanding the

review area around designated historic structure to 300 feet when the project has

a visual impact and 300 foot radius and is located on the same street.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Vote to eliminate the previous recommendation of expanding the review area

around Landmarks to 300 feet when the project has a visual impact.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Vote to maintain the present Landmark Task Force recommendation of all

abutting properties and 300 foot radius and is located on the same street.

In favor: 5

Opposed: 3

Passed with majority

Vote to recommend all modifications to the exterior of Landmarks require a CHP

approval by the Planning Commission. Minor CHP review by the Zoning

Administrator would not be allowed. Staff waivers granted for like for like repair

and maintenance only.

In favor: 1

Opposed: 7

Failed with majority

Landmark Preservation Task Force Meeting Minutes – 4/12/07 Page 11

Vote to recommend that the finding for Designated Historic Resources and

Landmark be amended as follows:

a. For resources on the City’s Designated Historic Resources List, the

proposed modifications, alterations or additions are in keeping with the

Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties

and the San Clemente Design Guidelines and enhance the historic

structure’s architectural and historical character.

b. For resources on the City’s Landmarks List the proposed modifications,

alterations or additions are in keeping with the Secretary of the Interior

Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and retain all character

defining features.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Vote to Maintenance for Historic Properties. The Owner shall keep and maintain

in good condition and repair their property in order to prevent the substantial

deterioration or decay of any exterior portion and any interior portions whose

maintenance is necessary to preserve any exterior portion.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Vote to recommend that a section Maintenance for Historic Properties section of

the code be added that requires property owners keep and maintain in good

condition and repair their property in order to prevent the substantial deterioration

or decay of any exterior portion and any interior portions whose maintenance is

necessary to preserve any exterior portion.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Amendment of the “Demolition of Historic Properties” Section:

Vote to recommend that the demolition of historic structures section of the code

be amended to be consistent with CEQA.

In favor: 8

Opposed: 0

Passed unanimously

Landmark Preservation Task Force Meeting Minutes – 4/12/07 Page 12

ADJOURNMENT

Chair Wayne Eggleston adjourned the meeting at 8:05 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

_______________________________

Wayne Eggleston, Chair

Attest:

_______________________________

Jim Pechous, Principal Planner

Minutes of Meeting