Report to Mayor and City Council
Tuesday, July 16, 2024
Consent
SUBJECT:
Title
CONSIDER A HISTORIC STRUCTURE REPORT FOR CARSON CITY HALL PREPARED BY ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP OF LOS ANGELES AND FUNDED BY A GRANT FROM THE NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION'S CONSERVING BLACK MODERNISM PROGRAM (CITY COUNCIL)
Body
I. SUMMARY
In October 2022 the City of Carson was invited to apply for a $150,000 grant from the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s (“National Trust”) Conserving Black Modernism program under the National Trust’s African American Cultural Heritage Action Fund Grant program. The scope of the $150,000 grant, which was awarded in June 2023, was focused on producing a Historic Structure Report (“HSR”) and Structural Systems Report to prepare a historical context of Carson City Hall, assess the current physical condition, and develop a framework for the preservation of the building’s architectural elements, including guidance for future capital projects. The Grant Agreement was approved by City Council on September 19, 2023.
In October 2023 Architectural Resources Group, Inc. (“ARG”) of Los Angeles was awarded the contract to produce the report as the result of a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) for qualified firms to produce the report.
The HSR provides the context of the development of the City of Carson and the construction of Carson City Hall in the 1970’s, the building’s architectural style, and the cultural and social significance of the structure, including other significant works designed by the architectural team. It also provides a detailed description of the building, highlighting its unique architectural features and materials, as well as the current condition of the structure including any damage or deterioration, and recommendations for mitigation and treatment.
II. RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation
1. RECEIVE AND FILE a Historic Structure Report and Structural Systems Report for Carson City Hall prepared by Architectural Resources Group, Inc. of Los Angeles, California.
Body
III. ALTERNATIVES
TAKE another action the City Council deems appropriate.
IV. BACKGROUND
Purpose of the Project
The purpose of the HSR project is to develop a public educational program focused on Carson City Hall and its significant role in Black Modernism in Los Angeles in the 1960s and 1970s through its executive/lead architect, Robert Kennard. The HSR provides the research and framework for the public education program and architectural guidance on future building improvement projects for City Hall.
This HSR was made possible through funding provided by the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s Conserving Black Modernism Grant program. The Conserving Black Modernism Program is associated with the African American Cultural Heritage Action Fund and partly funded by The Getty Foundation, among other foundations and donors. The grant was highly competitive, and Carson was one of only eight grant recipients nationally to receive the award.
Consultant Selection
In July 2023 the City requested proposals from a qualified consultant or consulting team to develop a public educational program and an HSR, which would provide a foundation of documentation and information about City Hall and its architectural team, notably the executive architect Robert Kennard, and architectural guidance on future construction and renovation projects at City Hall.
All the top firms had similar experience in preparing HSRs, but part of the edge ARG had was that they have completed extensive HSRs of governmental structures; Pasadena City Hall and Union Station in Los Angeles are the most comparable HSRs. ARG specializes in architecture/historic preservation. They had the most complete team with a strong emphasis on architectural historian background and technical expertise including a cost estimator.
The Historic Structure Report
The purpose of this HSR was to document the building’s history, significance, and existing conditions, and to appropriately guide its rehabilitation and maintenance. The HSR is also intended to serve as an educational tool that can be used to inform city staff and the public about the historical background, design, and development of City Hall and its importance to the history of Carson.
An HSR establishes a valuable foundation for the rehabilitation of historic properties. It is a planning tool that will direct the future of the subject building in a manner that retains significant features, materials, spatial relationships, and interiors. The prevailing goals of this document are to provide a clear understanding of the subject building’s significance and condition, to establish a basic framework for decision making that shall be used by current and future stewards of the building, and to provide treatment priorities for future restoration and maintenance work. In addition to guiding the building’s maintenance and use, the HSR will serve as useful tool to engage the public according to the city’s educational programming goals.
Designed by an ethnically diverse joint venture architectural team including Robert E. Alexander, Robert Kennard of Kennard, Delahousie & Gault, and Frank Sata, in collaboration with landscape architect Yoshito Kuromiya and interior designer Michael Sanchez, Carson City Hall embodies a unique Late Modern design aesthetic with Spanish Colonial Revival influences. Completed in 1976, the building also represents Carson’s first purpose-built city hall and is emblematic of the nascent city’s forward-thinking optimism and its striving to create a better and more equitable future for its residents.
Carson City Hall is not formally designated in the National Register of Historic Places (“National Register”) or California Register of Historical Resources (“California Register”). However, based on research and analysis conducted as part of this HSR, ARG has determined the building is eligible for listing in the federal and state registers under Criteria A/1 and C/3, for the above-stated reasons.
The period of significance for Carson City Hall is 1975-1977, beginning with the year construction commenced and ending with the year improvements were made to the building’s basement for its use as an emergency operations center.
The report conveys information about the design and construction of the building in two parts: 1) Developmental History of the City and the Civic Center Complex itself, notably City Hall; and 2) Treatment and Work Recommendations.
Part 1, Developmental History, comprises a historical background and context; a chronology of development and use; a physical description and list of character-defining features and spaces; and a discussion of significance. The Developmental History section also provides a comprehensive analysis of the building’s interior and exterior conditions and examines the building’s systems.
Part 2 provides a comprehensive set of treatment and use recommendations for the building, including the conservation of significant materials and recommendations for necessary code and accessibility improvements. The proposed treatment was developed in accordance with The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings.
Late Modern Architecture
Carson City Hall is representative of a variation of Late Modern architecture that integrates historicist influences, in this case Spanish Colonial Revival (at times referred to as “Neo-Spanish Eclectic”).
The Late Modern style emerged in the mid-1960s as a reaction against the enduring ubiquity of post-World War II modernism. Compared to their Mid‐Century Modern predecessors, which stressed simplicity and authenticity, Late Modern buildings exhibited a more sculptural quality that included bold geometric forms, the use of “circulation spines” (pedestrian circulation corridors that connected interior spaces), uniform glass skins on concrete surfaces, and sometimes a heightened expression of structure and system.
Some practitioners during the Late Modern era (late 1960s to early 1980s) integrated historicist imagery into their work, returning to an interest in regionalism and referential historic architectural forms in reaction to the stripped-down aesthetic of International Style modernism. The historicist version of Late Modernism was more serious than later Postmodernism in its approach to using architecture as an homage to the history of a particular place.
At Carson City Hall, for example, the architects wanted the design to reflect the Spanish heritage of the Dominguez Hills. At the time of construction, many articles noted that when looking directly at it, “the building resembles the face of an Aztec temple,” and referenced its “Spanish modern” design. The resemblance to a temple can also be seen in the flat roof, minimal tile work, and monochromatic earth-toned stucco cladding.
Due to its relatively recent and highly regional application in architecture, very little scholarship exists on the Period Revival variants of Late Modernism, making a study of Carson City Hall’s architecture important and somewhat prescient. Although the 1970s Spanish Colonial Revival variant of Late Modernism is relatively common in places where the Spanish Colonial Revival style was prevalent during the early twentieth century (like Southern California), very little has been written about it.
Although its textured stucco was recently covered with smooth stucco, the building’s original design included rough stucco, bold geometric forms, shed roofs, clay tile roof cladding, and polychromatic tile accents. One of the building’s most prominent architectural statements is the arched entryway angled toward the Carson Street and Avalon Boulevard intersection. The concentric arches are boldly historicist while at the same time entirely modern in their proportions.
The Project Architects
Part of the historical significance of the building comes from its accomplished, multi-ethnic architectural team. Below are short summaries of the careers of the principals.
Robert Kennard
Robert Kennard was born in Los Angeles on September 18, 1920 and grew up in Monrovia. In high school, he learned of the work of prominent African American architect Paul Revere Williams. With the encouragement of his high school art teacher, he continued to hone his drawing as well as his drafting skills. Later he enrolled in Pasadena Junior College (now Pasadena City College) as one of only two African American architecture students enrolled, the other being Benjamin McAdoo, who would go on to become the first Black architect to establish a practice in Washington state.
While at Pasadena Junior College, Kennard began working as a draftsman for architect John Curtis Chambers, earning money that he intended to put towards admission at the University of Southern California (USC) School of Architecture. He transferred to the USC School of Architecture in 1946. Kennard later said of Chambers: “He hired me right out of junior college when job opportunities for blacks were scarce in a community that was markedly racist. He also encouraged me to study architecture.”
While at USC, Kennard took classes from Frank Wilkinson, who worked for the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles (HACLA) and as a liaison for the Citizen Housing Council. There Kennard learned more about the social issues plaguing Los Angeles such as overcrowding and lack of adequate housing in certain parts of the city. It was also while working as a secretary for the Citizens Housing Council that he met architect Robert Alexander.
After graduating from USC in 1949, Kennard worked for Alexander and architect Richard Neutra. Following enlistment in the Korean War, he worked as a draftsman for the Los Angeles City Department of Parks and Recreation and then for the firm of Daniel, Mann, Johnson, and Mendenhall (DMJM). In 1954, he was hired as a staff architect for Victor Gruen and Associates.
In 1957, Kennard opened his own architectural practice, Kennard Associates. His practice initially focused on residential design, including the Kelly Residence (1957) and the Zeiger Residence (1958). Kennard was the first African American architect to design residences for the innovative Wonderland Park neighborhood in Laurel Canyon. Kennard’s early designs, such as those for the Kelly and Zeiger residences and the Anderson Residence in Pasadena, were examples of Mid-Century Modernism.
Irving Zeiger, whose residence Kennard designed, later commissioned Kennard to design Temple Akiba (1962) in Culver City, one of his first non-residential designs. The hexagonal-shaped buildings were unique, with pie-shaped spaces for classrooms and other spaces.
In 1965, Kennard joined with Arthur Silvers to create the firm Kennard and Silvers. One of the firm’s first projects was the design of Hyde Park Elementary School (1966) for Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). With the award of this project, Kennard became one of the first African American architects to receive a commission from LAUSD.
That same year, the Watts Uprising occurred. Following the Watts Uprising, Kennard and Silvers turned their focus to “civic minded projects that resonated with a more socially conscious community,” (1973) and the Watts Shopping Center (1979). The firm also designed the Watts Happening Cultural Center (1967) and the Bank of America in Watts (1970).
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the firm expanded and its number of employees more than doubled. After the completion of the Watts Project, the firm also began doing planning work. Silvers left the firm in the early 1970s and by 1974, Kennard had appointed architects Ronald J. Delahousie and Jeffrey M. Gault as partners to form Kennard, Delahousie & Gault, Incorporated. It was this firm that was retained to design Carson City Hall.
Kennard’s design for the Civic Center sought to balance elements of the old and new. Also included in the Civic Center are the sheriff’s station, post office, and a central plaza with a cohesive landscape design by landscape architect Yoshito Kuromiya.
Kennard died in 1995 at the age of 75. In his honor, the AIA created the Robert Kennard, FAIA Award for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusivity. His firm continues in existence to this day and is run by his daughter, Gail Kennard.
Robert E. Alexander
Robert Evans Alexander earned his degree in architecture from Cornell University in 1930, after which he studied at the Académie of Beaux Arts in Paris. He moved to California in 1935 and partnered with Lewis E. Wilson and Edwin E. Merrill to form the Pasadena-based firm Wilson, Merrill, and Alexander.
The firm’s most notable achievement was Baldwin Hills Village (now Village Green, a National Historic Landmark), designed in collaboration with noted Los Angeles architect Reginald Johnson and East Coast planner Clarence Stein. Baldwin Hills Village was a progressive multi-family residential complex designed in accordance with Garden City planning principles. It utilized a superblock layout to separate the complex from the surrounding urban landscape, prioritized open space and pedestrian-friendly circulation, and arranged buildings around landscaped courtyards.
In 1945, Alexander was appointed to the Los Angeles City Planning Commission, and in 1948 became its president. In 1949, he partnered with Richard Neutra to form Richard Neutra and Robert Alexander, Architects, Planning Consultants and Associated Engineers. The partnership produced several public projects completed in the 1950s and early 1960s. Neutra focused primarily on residential while Alexander focused on corporate and institutional designs.
After the partnership dissolved in 1959, Alexander went on to lead his own practice, Robert E. Alexander and Associates, which became well known for large master planning projects including the first master plan for the University of California, San Diego, in 1963. Alexander passed away in 1992 at the age of 84.
Frank T. Sata
Frank T. Sata was born in Los Angeles, California, in 1933. Sata graduated from Pasadena City College in 1950 and attended the University of California Berkeley for a year before joining the Army in 1953. After he was discharged from service he returned to Los Angeles to earn his degree in architecture from USC in 1960. He travelled in the 1960’s and worked for a number of firms before forming his own practice in the 1970’s and taking on public projects. Sata is attributed as the primary designer for Carson City Hall. As described by the KDG design team, Sata “was a strong advocate for open space and landscape and his mark can be seen in the lay-out and use of spaces at the city hall and community center.” Other notable works of his include the West Covina City Hall (1970), Japanese American National Museum temple and museum renovation (1985), and the Child Development Center at California State University Long Beach (1975).
Yoshito Kuromiya
Yoshito “Yosh” Kuromiya was born in Sierra Madre, California in 1923, and was raised in Monrovia. In 1941, while pursuing a degree in art at Pasadena Junior College (today Pasadena City College), Kuromiya was sent to Heart Mountain incarceration camp in Wyoming following the onset of U.S. involvement in World War II, due to his Japanese heritage. While at Heart Mountain, he created landscape drawings, still lifes, and portraits as well as posters for the camp.
After World War II, Kuromiya worked for his father’s gardening business. In the mid-1950s, Kuromiya enrolled at California Polytechnic College in Pomona, where he studied horticulture and landscape architecture. He formed his own landscape architecture practice in 1968. Notable works by Kuromiya include landscape implementation at The Sea Ranch (1969-1973, carrying forward Lawrence Halprin’s original designs), the Starkey Residence (1974), the Huntington Library arcade and wings (1981), and Roosevelt High School Garden (1986). Kuromiya passed away in 2018 at the age of 95.
Evaluation of Significance
Framework for Evaluating Historic Significance
Carson City Hall has never been evaluated for historical significance. Constructed in 1976, the building is 48 years old and is approaching the 50-year age threshold to be eligible for historic designation. Thus, as part of the HSR, ARG evaluated the building against federal (National Register of Historic Places) and state (California Register of Historical Resources) historic eligibility criteria.
The City of Carson does not have an established regulatory framework of its own for evaluating the eligibility of potential historical resources, nor does the City have a historic preservation ordinance and/or a local designation program. Thus, an evaluation of the building against local designation criteria was not conducted.
Integrity Evaluation
In addition to meeting multiple eligibility criteria, Carson City Hall retains sufficient integrity to convey its reasons for historic significance. Historic integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance and is defined as the “authenticity of a property’s historic identity, evidenced by the survival of physical characteristics that existed during the property’s prehistoric or historic period.”9 The aspects of integrity, as defined by the National Park Service, are location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.
Carson City Hall is on its original multi-acre site at the intersection of Carson Street and Avalon Boulevard, within the larger Carson Civic Center. Its thus retains integrity of location and setting. Changes to the building are primarily cosmetic and include replacement of original textured stucco cladding with smooth stucco, replacement of original fully glazed aluminum entrance doors with new fully glazed doors, replacement of original clay tile roofing with cement tiles, and replacement of some landscape plantings.
The majority of the property’s original design features and materials, including its Y-shaped plan, very low pitched and shed roofs, bronze anodized aluminum windows, wood trellises/bris soleil, polychromatic accent tile, brick and concrete paving, concrete planters, and many original trees (eucalyptus, jacaranda, coral, pine) remain. Its intact design and materials help to convey its original workmanship and historic feeling and association.
Character-Defining Features
Character-defining features are those aspects of a building’s design, construction, or detail that are representative of its significant function, type, or architectural style. Character-defining features may include the overall shape of the building; its materials, craftsmanship, and decorative details and features; and the various aspects of the building’s site. For a historic resource to retain its significance, its character-defining features and spaces must be retained to the greatest extent possible. An understanding of a building’s character-defining features is a crucial step in developing a rehabilitation plan that incorporates appropriate levels of restoration, rehabilitation, maintenance, and protection.
Significant Spaces
The exterior and interior of Carson City Hall are largely intact and have only experienced minor, largely cosmetic alterations over time (i.e. replacement of textured stucco cladding, replacement of some doors and windows). Exterior and interior features and materials work together to produce a cohesive architectural statement, and collectively read as a unified whole.
Methodology
Defining and assigning significance ratings requires consideration of multiple factors: amount of original historic fabric (including exterior plantings), quality of materials and finishes, extent of prior modification, levels of integrity, and expression of original design intent, and is a holistic conclusion that takes into account all of these factors.
Significance ratings that were used to assess the City Hall building and site are defined as follows:
• Primary spaces retain the highest degree of historic materials and features and are essential to establishing the historic character of a building. Alterations to primary spaces should be kept to a minimum, and their character-defining features should be retained.
• Secondary spaces provide context associated with behind-the-scenes functions of a building. Because of their limited public exposure and more utilitarian nature, some degree of alteration may be acceptable in these areas. However, modification in these spaces should preserve historic materials and existing spatial relationships to the maximum extent possible.
• Non-Contributing spaces are those that have been extensively renovated with entirely new features (including landscape elements) and building finishes. However, exterior perimeter building walls in non-contributing spaces are original and should be retained. Similarly, any original plantings (i.e. mature trees) in non-contributing landscape spaces should be retained.
Existing Conditions
Introduction
The Carson City Hall Conditions Assessment has been broadly grouped into the following categories:
Structural systems, building envelope, exterior architectural features, interior architectural features, building systems (mechanical, electrical, and plumbing), and architectural hardscape and landscape features.
A summary of each consultant’s assessment has been included below, with complete reports included as appendices. Consultant assessments were provided by the following:
• Structural Systems: Structural Focus, Structural Engineers
• Building Envelope: Wiss, Janney and Elstner Associates
• Building Systems: MEP California Engineering Corp.
• Landscape: MIG, Inc.
The narrative description of the conditions assessment (with accompanying photographs) is included in the HSR on pages 80 through 101.
Historic Preservation Objectives
Selection of a Treatment Approach
Based on research in preparation of this HSR, ARG finds Carson City Hall eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources for its association with the city’s civic development in its years following incorporation and for being an excellent example of a Late Modern building with historicist Spanish Colonial Revival influences. Completed in 1976, the building was designed by an ethnically diverse joint venture architectural team, including Robert E. Alexander, Robert Kennard of Kennard, Delahousie & Gault, and Frank Sata, in collaboration with landscape architect Yoshito Kuromiya and interior designer Michael Sanchez.
Future repair and maintenance of the building should be carried out in such a way that the building’s historic integrity and reasons for its significance are retained. Future work on the building should also be guided by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (“the Standards”).
The Standards provide general information for stewards of historic resources to determine appropriate treatments. They are intentionally broad in scope so that they can be applied to a wide range of circumstances and are designed to enhance the understanding of basic preservation principles. The Standards identify four defined levels of treatment for a property. Each level of treatment is accompanied by its own set of standards that serve to guide the approach to work. Generally, in planning for anticipated work on a historic property, one of the four treatment levels is selected as the overall treatment approach. The four approaches to treatment are as follows:
• Preservation is the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain the existing form, integrity, and materials of a historic property.
• Rehabilitation is the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values.
• Restoration is the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period.
• Reconstruction is the act or process of depicting, by means of new construction, the form, features, and detailing of a non-surviving site, landscape, building, structure, or object for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period and in its historic location.
Based on ARG’s understanding of Carson City Hall’s significance and its existing conditions, ARG recommends the Rehabilitation approach to treatment. To comply with the Standards for Rehabilitation, all interventions should be designed and constructed with a minimal loss of historic material. Additionally, they should be designed with an eye toward restoring altered or missing features from the building’s period of significance.
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
Following are The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. These standards guide all repair and maintenance recommendations included in the HSR and should inform all future work on Carson City Hall.
1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
Treatment Recommendations
The Treatment Recommendations for all building systems are included in the HSR on Pages 111-126. The Treatment Summary and Prioritization Matrix is included on Pages 127-137. The Matrix breaks down the recommendations into High Priority (to be completed in 1-2 years); Medium Priority (3-5 years); Low Priority; and warranting Further Investigation.
How the Treatment Summary priorities are determined are as follows:
• High Priority: This category includes the minimum level of work required to maintain public safety and occupancy, including any necessary work to correct any safety hazards identified and to meet current building codes. It also includes higher priority building envelope items that are immediate concerns or issues which are damaging to historic materials and adjacent construction. These items should be addressed ideally within the next two years.
• Medium Priority: This category includes further repairs to the building envelope and other architectural materials which are not immediate concerns but could lead to, or contribute to, future damage. These items should ideally be addressed within the next five years.
• Low Priority: This category includes materials or features which are damaged or deteriorated, but do not affect adjacent construction; as well as items which are more cosmetic or aesthetic in nature. These items may be addressed as cost or time allows or can be performed alongside other adjacent work.
• Further Investigation: This category includes items for further research or investigation, including but not limited to up-close survey, non-destructive testing, minimally destructive investigations (exploratory openings), excavations and test pits, and materials sampling and testing. These items are often associated with other recommendations and should be performed concurrently or prior to that work.
In the future, the City could use the Treatment Summary in the HSR as a comprehensive planning tool for the proactive maintenance of and future rehabilitation of the building. These recommendations are appropriate for the architectural style, historic character, and period materials originally associated with the building.
V. FISCAL IMPACT
The preparation of the HSR was funded through a $150,000 Conserving Black Modernism grant funded through the African American Cultural Heritage Action Fund of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The City may submit for reimbursement of the costs from the National Trust now that the HSR is complete. Part of the match to the grant, however, is $25,000 in local match which was included in the Professional Services budget in the Community Development Department Account 100-70-701-100-6009. The purpose of those funds is to develop a public education program around Black Modernism and the historic significance of Carson City Hall. This mix of a GIS storyboard hosted on the City’s website, printed materials, and public education workshops and events, potentially in collaboration with Cal State Dominguez Hills, is the core of the effort.
As part of the project team that produced the HSR, ARG has engaged a cost estimator to develop and estimate of costs for the high- and medium-priority treatment recommendations. These are not included in the City’s current CIP or operating budget, unless a recommendation overlaps with a project the City decided on its own to undertake. Once the costs are determined, staff will meet to reconcile the treatment recommendations and the City’s CIP to make a recommendation to City Council for future actions.
VI. EXHIBITS
1. Historic Structure Report (pgs. 13-161)
2. Structural Systems Report (pgs. 162-323)
Prepared by: John S. Raymond, Assistant City Manager