Historic Preservation Commission - Regular Meeting

Alright. Good evening, and thank you for coming to the 02/23/2026 historic preservation commission meeting. We'll go go ahead and call this meeting to order and take roll call, please. Mister Eddings.

Mister Johnston. Mister Laval. Present. Mister Federico? Here. Mister Collegiate?

Here.

Vice chair Hatley? Chair sponsor? Here.

Alright. Having informed, we'll go ahead and move forward going on to procedures. For each matter considered by the commission, there will first be a staff presentation followed by a presentation from the project applicants. The commissioners will then have the opportunity to ask questions of staff and applicant before opening to public. Testimony from supporters of the project will be fully taken, followed by testimony from those in opposition.

Staff may provide a summation if necessary. The applicant will then have the right to a final rebuttal presentation prior to closing the public hearing followed by consideration of the item and action if any by the commission. In accordance with section 13 of article two of the historic preservation commission bylaws governing length of the date, all public testimony from those in support and in opposition to project will be limited to three minutes per person. All public testimony must be presented to the commission at the podium. Any testimony that references race, religion, ethnicity, economic status, national origin, or any other classification protected under state or federal law in a drug free manner shall be deemed irrelevant and not be considered by the commission in making determinations.

If you challenge these matters in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised in or or written testimony or before the close of the hearing. With that, we will be moving past approved approving of the prior meeting minutes because it looks like that we do not have those just yet. But we will now move on to item four for approving of tonight's agenda. Are there any changes to tonight's agenda? No. There are no changes. Alright. I'll entertain a motion to approve.

So moved. Okay.

Motion to approve. Do I have a second? I second. All right. I'll take the motion by Commissioner Vall, second by Commissioner Vallorico. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Agenda passes. Having no items on the consent calendar or continued matters, we will go ahead and proceed to commission items in section seven. So item 7A file ID 20Six-two40. Is it here you consider eligibility for listing on the local register of historic resources, the property located at 755 East Shaw Avenue, assessor parcel number 4270337? And we have a presentation from staff?

Good evening, chair and commissioners. Ashley Atkinson, assistant director for planning and development. We do have a brief presentation for you and also a presentation from the applicant. So 755 East Shaw is known more colloquially as the former Wheatstocks department store, also more recently Winestock. Winestocks. Sorry. Not from Fresno. People will say it out loud too often. Weinstock's department store. Also, most recently, Forever twenty one, which I do know how to pronounce.

It's not a lie. So staff is recommending that you review the available evidence and make a determination of whether to initiate designation of the property as it has been proposed for demolition, and that is why we are bringing it to you at this time. It was constructed in 1970 as Winestock's department store. It has been a department store since that time, of course, serving at the eastern anchor of Fashion Pair Mall. It was Wine Stock's department store for a number of years, followed by Gauss Shalt's department store, which is also a California department store chain.

And then following that, Forever twenty one, again, a California chain, but a women's retailer. When the building was constructed, it was constructed along with the the bulk of the Fashion Fair mall, although Weinstocks and one of the other anchors, GC Kinney's, each independently contracted their own architects and had their own construction bids. So the Weinstocks anchor wing was constructed somewhat of semi independently of the rest of the Fashion Fair Mall. Weinstocks was financed by Broadway Hale stores and was designed by Charles and Associates. Charles Lichtman Associates is a commercial architecture firm based out of Los Angeles, but founded by Charles Lichtman after he parted ways with his former partner, William Pereira.

Charles is a renowned architect. Charles Lechman Associates is a firm that went on to design a number of buildings all around world, some of them well known as well as a large number of other commercial projects in cities across the country. We I know we have additional information from the applicants on this point, but per staff's research, this design of the Weinstocks Wing was replicated in at least a couple of other malls in California in Riverside and Citrus Heights. The exterior of the building was noted at the time for the steel frame, which resulted in a lack of interior columns, was noted for being climate controlled and described in one of the news articles of the time as a series of protruding levels and planes which give a dramatic play of light and shadow in the bright California sun. There have been no major changes to the exterior of the building since its construction other than to the signage, although there was an extensive interior remodel that took place in 2010 to 2011.

Next slide, please. Okay. Sorry for the the spacing there. It looks like it got a little bit funny. But as I just noted, 755 East Shaw does maintain the integrity of its exterior as it was constructed in 1970, but it is unclear based on the evidence available to staff at this time whether it achieves significance or meets any of the criteria for designation.

I know you're familiar with those criteria, but just to go over them, the criteria are first that it has been in existence for more than fifty years, which, of course, it has based on its construction date in 1970, that it possesses aspects of integrity to convey its significance based on location, design, setting, workmanship, feeling, or association. And one of the following four criteria that it is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history or is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past or it embodies the distinctive characteristics of a tight period or method of construction or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values, or it has yielded or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history. I think we can safely conclude that it probably does not meet criteria four, but the evidence to support whether it meets criteria one through three is unclear at this time. We are expecting a historic resources assessment, which has been requested from the applicants, but it was not available at the time that we drafted the report. What we have shared with you as the exhibits to the staff report are the articles from the Fresno B at the time that the building was constructed.

We've shared the mid century modernism historic context document, which goes through some of the history and context around the fashion fair mall and its the impacts of its construction and, of course, our designation criteria. With that, I will conclude the staff report and take any questions, and we do have a presentation from the applicant as well.

For the record, I just wanna show the commissioner, I

think, is right at six zero four. Any clarifying questions? Clarifying question. You said you it does not comply with criteria number four?

I I said, I think we can probably conclude that, like, that it has yielded or maybe likely to yield information important in prehistory or history.

I'm just trying to see that one.

Okay. Unless you count the time capsule, which was noted in the staff report. But there is a time capsule buried under the building dated 1969, I believe.

Alright. At this point, we'll go ahead and have the option come up and provide a presentation.

Good evening chair, sponsor, commissioners, and staff. Thank you for your time tonight. My name is Andy Greenwood. I'm with Macerich, the owner of Fresno Fashion Fair. I do have a prepared set of remarks that I will go through here, after which we have some others that will be providing an actual presentation for you to consider.

So I'll go ahead and go in with that. For this opportunity tonight, I appreciate the chance to be here at Macerich, owner of Fresno Fashion Fair. As you may know, Macerich and Dick's Sporting Goods, have partnered together to bring a new Dick's House of Sport store to the Forever 21 building site, which has been vacant since April '25. Brian Basic, who is leading the project for Dick's Sporting Goods, is also here if you had specific questions for the future plan. Well, we can answer those as well.

Since last summer, both Macerich and DICK'S Sporting Goods have been working with the city's planning and building departments on plans for a new building and we are fully prepared to move forward with this exciting new opportunity that will be a catalyst in bolstering the fashion fair model. Together with staff and others, there is great positive momentum in this project specifically in fact the new Fresno Fashion Fair generally. However, we understand because this building is more than 50 years old, the project cannot proceed until this commission determines whether the building is eligible for listing as a historic resource. To assist the commission with this determination, Nates Ridge recently retained Page and Turnpull to evaluate whether the building is eligible for designation as a historic resource. Page and Turnbull is a highly respected firm with a wealth of experience in historic research resource research and analysis.

In a moment, missus miss Dicus Robes, the principal of Page and Turnbull will present her findings and analysis as to why she does not think or believe this building meets the eligibility criteria. Miss Dicus Robes will also provide the city with written historical resource evaluation report to fully document her findings within the next week.

So we'll have paperwork to follow on.

May Mays Ridge also provided the city with a letter dated February 18 with additional information we believe supports the termination of the building is not eligible for historic designation. The information included copies of the original plans for the building which show that although the architectural firm Charles Luckman and Associates designed the building, Charles Luckman himself was not personally involved. Rather, the project architect was Richard Bigniew. In addition, identical or very similar buildings were built in malls throughout California during that same time when we provided pictures of two of the identical buildings in Riverside and in Citrus Heights. We very much appreciate the commission's thoughtful review of the facts.

We respectfully request that you determine this evening subject to the city's subsequent receipt of agent Turnbull's final report that this building is not eligible for historic designation so that this important community project at Fashion Fair can move forward now while people and capital resources are still allocated. I will now turn the time over to Ms. Barclay of Perkins Coley for some additional information before Ms. Titus Coley who will speak further on why she

Thank you, commissioners and staff. My name is Cecily. I'm with Perkins Cooney. I'm the land use attorney. I've been assisting the district for about twenty five years on different laws all over the country. And I wanted to both thank staff and also express to the commission that we recognize that it's a bit unusual. And so we appreciate you holding this hearing before the final written report was ready. There was not staff's fault at all, but on our end, I think a little uncertainty about what was needed for the hearing. And I've worked with Paige and Turnbull in my for decades. And so when I became aware of how I might help, I I got ahold of miss Brooks who will be presenting to you, and she's prepared tonight to get full findings.

But I just wanna clarify that Macerich and Dick's Sporting Goods are hoping that you will determine that the building's not eligible for historic resource, but we understand that staff will need to get the final written report and have it in its record before that conclusion could be final. But we really appreciate you hearing from us this evening. And, again, thanks, Ralph, for being that along. Thank you. Good evening, members of the Historic Preservation Commission.

I'm gonna put up my laptop here so that I don't have to squint across the room at the presentation. So I'm Christina Dicus Groves. I'm a architectural historian and historic preservation planner at Page and Treble. I'm also the principal in charge of our cultural resources planning studio. I've been at Page and Treble for eighteen years I'm based in San Francisco, but I have worked on projects throughout the state of California.

So we are still working on pulling together the written material for our historic evaluation, but we've conducted historic research, which I'm going to present now, and I'm happy to answer any questions at the end. Next slide, please. So you're probably familiar with this building at 755 East Shaw Avenue, but a little bit of a an architectural description. It's a three story steel and reinforced concrete structure with a concrete foundation. It has a regularly stacked rectangular volumes and is clad in a split face concrete block veneer and smooth veneer or smooth concrete with minimal ornamentation.

The building features flat roofs. It's surrounded by a large parking lot on the north, west, and south sides, and it's attached to Fashion Fair Mall complex on the west side. There have been a few alterations in addition to the signage changing with the tenant over time. The storefront glazing has been replaced, and there was also a large awning on the east facade that was removed. Next slide, please.

I don't know if you'll be able to read this, but I'll read it for you. A little bit of the site history and development. This area back in the nineteenth century was part of the Wolters Colony. It was an area of irrigated farmland in Fresno's outskirts. Post World War two, the Hoover neighborhood developed as part of Fresno's suburban growth, transitioning farmland into residential and commercial uses.

By 1965, mall development began, and this is when Fashion Fair Mall construction started. It wasn't the first shopping center to be built that started to pull some of the commercial retail away from downtown. Manchester Center in 1955 preceded it, as well as Fig Garden Village in 1956. In 1969, construction on this building started and completed in 1970 when it opened. It was a retail store that opened as wine stocks for parent company, Hale Broadway stores.

And then it's had a few different occupants, as was already mentioned. Weinstocks until 1996, Gottschalk's until 2011, and Forever twenty one until last year's spring. Next slide, please. So I'm going to talk about a few aspects of the building focusing on its architectural style first. We have reviewed the mid century modernism context statement, and the building does feature blocky massing, which could be associated with brutalism.

The mid century modernism historic context statement covered an era from 1940 to 1970, so this building really is at the very end of it. And brutalism is not a perfect fit for this building. It's primarily characterized by unpainted, often rough, or concrete, and this building doesn't have those features. I've included a couple of photos from other cities in California just as examples. What we really feel this building represents is late modernism, which it's more of an umbrella term.

It covers from the mid 1960s through the 1980s, and it's characterized by more exaggerated large forms than century modernism. Brutalism is kind of within that umbrella, but late modernism includes a lot more than just brutalism. So diverse materiality, other kinds of design features that we're really pushing into the seventies and eighties. So this building represents the style in its heavy massing, modular composition, flat roofs, concrete veneer, strong linear elements, and interplay of planes and geometric volumes. So it makes sense that it may not have been included in your mid century modernism historic context statement.

In fact, we just worked a couple years on a late modernism and post modernism historic context statement for San Francisco that went from 1970 to the nineties that followed their mid century modernism context statement. So I think the point that I'm trying to make here is that this building is kind of at the beginning of the next era of design. A little bit more about Charles Associates comes next. Charles Luckman Associates was a major mid twentieth century firm that designed many large scale commercial buildings across the country. It was one of the five largest architecture engineering firms in The United States by 1968, the time that this building was constructed, and employed hundreds of people.

Around the same time, the firm designed Madison Square Garden in New York City, 1968, the Los Angeles Convention Center in 1969 to '71, and the Chicago Marriott Hotel downtown in 1969, among many other projects. Charles Lugman was an interesting person. He didn't enter architecture field until he was about 40. He was really a businessman, and he was in the executive offices of companies like Colgate and the Lever Brothers before he transitioned into architecture, which was what his undergrad studies had been. He first paired teamed up with Joseph Pereira, and they had a firm partnership for about ten years before they spun off, and he started his own firm.

So he was involved in some of the firm's major projects, but it doesn't appear from what we found that he was directly involved in the design of this particular building. And over on the right side, you can see the information on the drawings for this building, and the project architect is listed as Richard McNew, and then there are other designers and draftsmen and so on who were working on this project. So a little bit more about the Broadway Hale stores and that company's relationship with architectural design. The Broadway developed a signature look for its The Broadway and Weinstock suburban stores, which numbered in the thirties by 1979. Stores in the nineteen fix fifties for this company were composed of a large massive pattern block.

By the nineteen sixties and nineteen seventies, the stores were generally characterized by a brutalist or late modernist geometric design composed of both ends and deep recesses. I actually found a website on department stores, and it had a series of Broadway Hale store designs starting in the nineteen thirties, and it they definitely had kind of eras of different aesthetics, and this is very much in the style of this late sixties, seventies time period. So you can see at the upper right that a building from a few years later is different, but kind of a similar idea. Charles Luffman Associates designed at least 18 other department stores on the West Coast with Broadway Hail stores with similar design elements. And in fact, this building is one of three identical designs by Charles Luckman Associates for Broadway Hail stores in California.

And as previously mentioned, one is located in Citrus Heights in Sacramento area, the other is in Riverside. The image at the lower right is a model of the building in Riverside, and you can see that it's the exact same design. And then just a few comparative photos and historic photos are coming up. So the two on the left are both different perspectives of the wine stocks and citrus heights, And then you can see that building in a more current era next to the Fashion Fair Mall building at the upper right and the Tyler Mall in Riverside compared to the Fashion Fair Building on the lower right. So getting a little bit into the evaluation that will be included in our resource evaluation report.

We are evaluating it against the California register and the local Fresno register, which have the same criteria, and we have not found it to be individually eligible for historic listing. So under criterion one, events, this building is representative of the popularity of retail mall development in California in the mid twentieth century, which itself was spurred very much by car culture. It contributed to a trend of retail that moved out of Downtown Fresno, but this building did not individually cause this trend. Fashion Fairmont had already been in development for several years before this building began its construction. And as I mentioned earlier, there were a couple of other shopping centers that began that trend.

In addition, the store is not significant in association with Broadway Hale stores or Weinstein's, which both have been in business for many decades independently and as a conglomerate. Under people, we haven't identified any individuals that appear to be historically significant and would in turn make this building historically significant in association.

Next slide, please.

And then under criterion three for architecture, as I mentioned, this building is an example of late modernism by Charles Luckman Associates, and it's one of three identical designs. It's not historically significant building either for its design or its association with the architecture firm, nor has any research indicated that Charles Luckman himself was directly involved. No information has been found about project architect Richard McNew other than he practiced in the 1960s and 70s and was a member of the American Institute of Architects. And then I did include a little bit on criterion for information potential. Typically, this one is associated with archaeological resources rather than built resources, and so it's not applicable to the evaluation of this building.

And that concludes my presentation.

Any clarifying questions from the admin?

I have just a few questions. So I do appreciate your analysis that it is a bit or a late modern building. I completely agree with that. Do you have any sense of how many other late modern buildings are in good condition at present? Do you have any sense of that?

I do not at this time.

Are there do you think there are any others?

I did try to do a little Google research in preparation for this presentation and didn't identify any readily. I think it would be useful to collect information on buildings, you know, commercial retail buildings, in particular, for an apples to apples constructed in the nineteen seventies, let's say, and and examine them, but I couldn't easily find that information.

So I think one of the things we're concerned about as a commission is we've lost a significant, I think, component of the mid mid century modern buildings that existed in Fresno. There were some really fantastic mid century modern practitioners whose work has gone away. So I think it would be really interesting to know how many other late modern buildings exist in Fresno so we can have a sense of how big is that pool of of late modern buildings. And if we lose this one, are we completely obliterating our pool of exemplary late modern buildings. So I think that would be a worthwhile endeavor if if time permits.

So that's item one. But I think the other item is you mentioned it was Lukman's partner was

you said Joseph Pereira? William

Pereira. William Pereira.

I wanted to be clear on that. So what he is he was the partner of William Pereira Yes. The designer of the Transamerica Pyramid. Correct?

It was yeah. It was Lukman and Pereira.

Lukman and Pereira.

The Transamerica Pyramid was post their partnership.

Post their partnership, but he was partnered with William Pereira, a noteworthy American architect.

Yes. And my my understanding is Pereira was more of the designer in the in the pairing, and Locumin was more of the businessman side.

Nevertheless, they were partners

Yes.

In an architectural practice Yes. Okay.

For about a decade.

Okay. So the other I guess the other item is you mentioned that there's three identical examples of this. How is that relevant to whether or not this building should be demolished?

I think in terms of individual significance, it wasn't built, you know, purpose purpose built for this location. The other examples have potentially less alterations around the storefront. So, comparatively, you know, it's not the only one that exists. It was built as part of a kind of trend in these department stores.

So you said this one has has been more altered than the others?

This one had yeah. They all had a kind of large awning Yeah.

Originally. Lights behind it.

Yeah. Exactly. It was in the newspaper article, so that's been removed. And the storefront system, the glazing entries have been replaced, and very much the corner of this, contemporary era. So it has lost a certain amount of integrity to its to its, period of significance. We wouldn't be, evaluating integrity if it doesn't have significance, which we're identifying that it doesn't. Usually, integrity is, like, the next step in the analysis. So But it it has had some alterations.

Given that, maybe my next question may be irrelevant. I'm gonna ask you. Wait. Tell me if I'm if I remember if it's irrelevant. If this one had not been altered, how would one determine which of the three is the most noteworthy or worthy of keeping if they were all the same? Is one more important or more valuable than the other if they're all the same?

I don't I don't necessarily think so, but I also don't know that this design, whether it was the only one or was one of three, rises to a level of individual significance. I think it is rather typical of department store design. You know, they it has minimal windows because of its function attached to the end of a a mall and so on. And so I you know, when I think of, let's say, the California register threshold and the idea of of writing a nomination and getting it designated and then local criteria are are in parallel, I don't see this building as rising to that level of individual significance.

Thank you. My last question. This I I think the argument is being made that because Luckman did not sign the drawings, he had no involvement. I don't think that you can necessarily make that argument. I think that's I think it's a weak argument. Oftentimes, an architect will be heavily involved in the design, but the project architect, the one who is responsible for generating the construction documents, that's the one who signs the drawing. So just because his name is not just because he's not signatory does not mean he didn't have involvement. So I don't know that you can categorically say that he was not responsible for

the design. Am I right? That is correct. We don't have information that he was involved. I would expect that if he was, it was more on the client relationship side.

But we don't know that

for certain don't know that.

And we don't know what to wear and evolve.

We we don't know. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you.

So we've been talking about the outside. What is the situation with

the inside? We don't typically include interiors on historic evaluations. So, yeah, we focus on the exterior design. And I do understand that it was quite updated and altered tenant improvements when Forever twenty one came in.

Just to answer your question, Elizabeth, that's what our, you know, city permitting records reflect as well. It makes sense

of renovation about fifteen years ago. And is it in usable condition on the interior at this time?

I I can't speak to that. We, you know, we do have some permits requested for early demolition work on the interior, but I I'm not sure what the condition was prior to to that.

I guess I was trying to get to if this does meet the criteria for designation. Is it still possible to utilize that building in a way that is in its current condition or close to it without a lot of renovation to do the project

as described? So I I think that might be a better question. My the business applicant has nothing to do with the building. Yep. So I may ask if if Dix can explain the the project here shortly. Yeah. I do have one clarifying question, and then if you will move on to them, I think we're gonna both take take this to public. You said that that it was one of three here in California that are identical. And did I get that it was one of 18 total that were essentially the same design?

Not necessarily the same design, but the same firm working with the same firm. Okay. Company.

Do we know of those three identical ones, which one was the earliest? I think

they were all contemporary contemporary. Yes. I think they were built at the same time. Same year, essentially.

I got it.

So I don't know if we'd be able to dig into that, but we can look into it perhaps by newspaper articles in those other locations or something. Got it. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.

So I would like to yes? Chair, before we go to more questions or the public, I just want to remind the commission that the question before you tonight is whether it is eligible for listing. It is not about a proposed project that has not been Understood. Agendized for tonight. I just wanted to

make sure we're all clear.

Is it eligible or not? And that that gives them direction as

to where they go next.

So given that that can can we ask for that information or no?

Oh, I think you can ask for

the information, but you can't make a determination Off of it. Off of that. Okay.

Okay. So if we can just kinda get a brief presentation from from Dick's as to what this proposal is. Good

evening. My name is Brian Basic. I'm the vice president of real estate development for Dick's Sporting Goods, and I'll be the final representative for this project going forward. So would can you elaborate on your question? Are you looking for Well, I think that we intend to do or do you want

some background? That was the question that was asked was if there was something to be determined at the designation, not saying that that's occurring, not saying that there's an opinion of that at the point at this point. But what would that do for this like, house of sports project? Would it would it kill it? Would it be done? If you can't necessarily pull the building now, I think that was the question.

So I can say that if if it were to be determined historic and we were not allowed to able to demolish the building, that would probably be a fatal flaw for us. We have a prototype that we are rolling out, and it's planned for Fresno Fashion Fair. The House of Sport initiative is a component of the larger Bix brand, and it's it is a 120,000 foot version of what you would otherwise know as a legacy Dick's store. Unfortunately, we have tried many times to retrofit or renovate existing department stores, and it is it's a very expensive task, and it and you end up with not much left of what you started with. And here, we were not allowed to touch the outside, we would not be able to plan our house of sport program within the existing contours of the building.

So this project really only works if we're able to

start from the path.

But that's not our Well, that's not our ability. That's not our responsibility. Our charge is simply correct me if I'm wrong. Our charge is simply to determine whether there's historic integrity to this building. Is that correct?

Whether it's eligible.

Whether it's eligible. It's liability. That's not our

charge. Correct.

And and the project is not in front

of you to

Right.

Yep. It's just information.

Yep. That was it. So that was it. Thank you. Okay.

At this point, we'll open it up to the public. So any of those that are in support of the designation, please come forward. Okay. Any of those that are in opposition to the designation? K. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the commission for more discussion.

So just one one last comment from staff. You're not designating tonight. You're simply determining if it is eligible, which gives us the path forward and and next steps. So it would come back to you with a project and with a CEWA document,

if you determine it's eligible. If you do not determine it's eligible,

it will not come back.

Just to clarify, the firm that was hired by the folks, the designers, the builders, is saying at this point that they do not believe that it is That was my understanding. Their position. Okay. I'm just clarifying.

And if I understood correctly, Ashley, the conclusion of the city is there is a potential for it, but we don't know what classification would fall under. Correct?

The conclusion of our report is that we did not have enough evidence as of the time the report was drafted to make a clear recommendation.

We would be looking for

a course of DPR form and and a full historic resource assessments in order for us to make an recommendation based on complete evidence.

Okay.

So, Jeremy,

so I look at it this way. I have three three thoughts. Number one, it's a comment that was made that this was a key part of the Fashion Fair Mall. It wasn't the impetus for the Fashion Fair Mall, but it was nevertheless one of the iconic components of the Fashion Fair Mall. The Fashion Fair Mall, from the standpoint of Fresno's history, is pivotal in understanding how the city grew.

And so having this key component to this larger development that is like as a Fresno resident is iconic. I I believe it does have historic significance from the standpoint of the city's development history, number one. Number two, I believe the fact that Luckman's firm designed it, I think there's I believe without clear evidence that he didn't work on it, I think the fact that it's associated with this firm alone gives it a stature that would otherwise not exist had he not been associated with it as a principle of the firm. And and lastly, I do believe as an architect that it is a very fine example of late century modern architecture within the fabric of Fresno. I think there are very few exemplary buildings that capture the ethos of that period, and I think that building is one of them.

So regardless of what I think about DICK'S, I think as a piece of architecture, it is eligible for the local register.

Any other commission?

I just I I don't know how we can vote knowing that there's still a report to

be completed.

And there was a lot of questions that both of you asked that weren't answered. Okay. But we anticipate it could be answered in a report. Some situation where we think we're just never gonna know. We might know. The report's just not done. Okay. I I don't know how we can

go. That's right.

What's the the timeline on the report? Do we know? Do we have a sense of that?

I'm gonna

ask the applicant to come back. The original expectation was that by the end of next week, the report would be ready. Some of the additional questions that have come up tonight might cause some additional time to be needed. I mean, the the the work to determine whether or not Luckman had anything to do with the building is underway. Like, they don't just say, well, it wasn't on the sheets, we're done.

There's a lot of review of publications to see if there's any indication of that as that there were hundreds of employees and lots of buildings needed. So but that was one element. And so I think I don't know if you have more to add. But Yeah. I I think that we'll need at least another two to three weeks to finish.

So, chair, I feel at this moment personally that there is a report in progress and that there are questions, well deserved questions. Yeah. And that I personally am not prepared to make a determination on whether it could or could not be eligible for the register based on what information we have at this time with knowing that there is more information forthcoming that may help us make that decision. Okay.

Yeah. I mean, I I can understand that. I I do want to say, I think, that part of I I know that there was the the comments that were made about it was one of a series that that were of retail moving out of downtown. And I think it it should be better put into the timeline that, yes, we had Manchester, then we had then we had Figgarden. But between Figgarden and Fashion Fair, we had Fulton Mall.

Yeah. And then Fulton Mall was built as a way to reverse what Big Guard in Manchester had done. And then I think that the the birth of Fashion Fair was where, you know, we we had our city elected at the time make make an immediate knee jerk wrong yet decision. And and less than a year after the mall opened, they said yes to to Fashion Fair. Not not saying that I have anything against Fashion Fair or anything along that line, but in the history and and development of of Fresno, it that created that kind of death nail for anything they were trying to do with downtown.

So as much as it yes. There was already movement. This was the the the the cap this was the the the the final nail. So I think that also needs to be as part of what's looked into as part of that too.

Commissioner Federico? Well, after listening to everybody's opinions and very good questions. I've been thinking about it a lot from the timeline of Fresno and how it moved and everything as well. And one thing I came upon was, and this doesn't mean it matters, but Fresno State University was kind of the reason moved out to that area. And I think fashion fair heads saw that and decided it was gonna be, you know, that that's what needed to happen because everything was gonna come out

there. So

whether that matters because it did do that, it did become the, you know, fashion fair, the big mall. So I don't know

if that I think it matters because it's part of Fresno's urban history. And if we're thinking simply about architectural history, we're kinda missing the the big picture here, which is Fresno's urban history and tracking the development of these retail centers and how they impacted the city is in some ways as important, if not more important, than assessment of individual pieces of architecture. K.

So what I'm hearing is is we need a little more information based on on how the timeline works as well as the the the yeah. It's a lot more I'm looking for. But, essentially, who who actually touched the documents? Who you know, whether was was, you know, heavily involved, whether it was involved, was there was no involvement. And and that we're kind of at a point where we're saying, we don't we can't make a termination tonight, what I'm hearing. Is that what I'm understanding?

I would rather wait till the information then. I think

it's prudent to wait till there's a final

Let's see. Being that is in progress and it's not a startup, it's in its final stages, It seems like we would be making decisions, particularly with these comments about, for example, that as you just brought up, the mall was there. Fashion Fair came in, and it was a car centered, not again a walking mall, which did lead to the decline of downtown by that time period. So there are other cultural things that need to come into it. At least if we could have the final report and a full report based on cultural as well as architectural situations, then we could make a better decision.

And I think the city staff would prefer that too.

Okay. With that, I'm open to a motion.

Go ahead. I

can do it. Did you leave?

Okay. I I moved out. Postponed a final vote tonight on whether this will or will not qualify potentially for the register until all final documentation has been presented by the applicant and analyzed further by the city staff.

Okay. So I'm a motion I'm I'm a motion to table it, I would say.

Correct? Okay. So not date and time certain, not continuing to the next meeting. It will need to be renoticed if we take this action. So that that's my concern if we and I'm not sure where where we're at in terms of timeline. Do we we want

a pre notice?

Certain the report would be done in the next because our we'll we'll meet at the March. So would it be done in the next four weeks?

Yes. Okay.

So then We can make the

effort to take it So

then make a motion to

Continue this until the March.

March. K? Alright. We have a motion. I'll go ahead and second that. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. So that's five zero 2. Continue it on the March 23 meeting. Okay? Thank you. Thank you. Alright.

Now we'll move on to item seven b, which is ID 26Dash211. Hearing to consider development from application P25Dash03963, which proposed interior and exterior renovations to the former Park Police Department Store at 887 Fulton Street. Good evening.

Once again, Ashley Atkinson, assistant director for planning and development. We have sort of a thematic agenda tonight with our mid century or late mid century department stores. This application is a development permit application, so it is an entitlement application proposing interior and exterior renovations to 887 Fulton. I'll just go ahead and pull out a couple of of differences between this application and the last one just so everyone is clear from the outset. This is not a consideration of eligibility.

This building has already been determined to be eligible for the local register. It was determined via a DPR form assessment that was done back in 2011 and revised in 2013. So it has already been determined to be eligible, although it is not on the register. This project, again, is a development permit application for interior and exterior renovation. So that's what you're being asked to consider and consider whether those renovations meet the secretary of the interior's standards.

The building in question is at 887 Fulton on the Fulton Mall. It was constructed in 1961, designed by Fresno architect Alastair Simpson, who was responsible for some other works locally and was not purpose built for Berkeley's department store, but Berkeley's department store was the first occupant of the building and remained there, operating there until 1982. It has been largely vacant since 1982. There has not been a consistent long term tenant. At during that time, the interior has substantially deteriorated.

The exterior has remained mostly unaltered except for removing the Berkeley signs that were on the facades and some deterioration of the building, you know, to to some of the elements. We could go ahead and switch to the next slide, please. So you can see here how the building appeared in 1961, which is largely as it appeared today except for the signage. The DPR form that was prepared in 2011 was part of the Fulton Corridor Historic Resources Study. It was recommended not eligible for listing in the National national Register register or or the the California California register, but was, again, found eligible for listing in the local register as a rare intact example of a post World War two department store associated with mid twentieth century commercial development in Downtown Fresno, reflecting Fresno's extensive revitalization efforts in the nineteen fifties and sixties.

The form does describe the features of the building. Although it's, you know, relatively unornamented. It notes the building as rectangular in plan with a flat roof, no eaves, a series of single pane display windows, a recessed glass entry, and, of course, the canopy of barrel vaults. It also notes that the upper facade is characterized by faux stone or concrete siding with no ornamental detailing. As of the time that form was completed, it was described as in good condition.

But in 2025, there was a section one zero six inventory conducted, which describes it as in disrepair. I will note that you did see this building come to you

in

December for review and comment on that section one zero six report. That report was done for a separate scope of work related to abatement of hazardous materials in the interior of the building. So at that time, you did not have a lot of comments on that scope of work because it was limited to the, you know, the deteriorated interior. However, we have included that report as an exhibit because it does go into a lot of details about the building and the history of the context. So that is available to you in the exhibits.

The building is owned by the city of Fresno, which purchased it in 2007, and the city is in a disposition and development agreement with the Fresno Area Hispanic Foundation to have them purchase the building, and that agreement does provide for a renovation of the building into a food hub and office space. So that was the intent of the agreement, and they are required to obtain entitlements and permits from the planning and development departments in order to effectuate that agreement and complete the sale, of course, including the approval of historic preservation commission. If we could okay. We're on the next slide. So I'll walk through what is proposed, and then I think we do have the applicants and their representatives available to share some more details.

So we're we are not looking at the interior changes, but changes proposed to the exterior include removal of the barrel vaulted canopies. There are structural supports for those canopies, which would remain, but the canopies themselves are proposed to be removed. New architectural projections on both facades that read eight eight seven. And, actually, Carrie, if you could switch maybe switch ahead two slides. I've included the elevations. Oh, one more. There we go. That's good. I've included the elevations for reference, and they're also in the exhibits. So you can see those projections as the vertical elements on the top row.

New second story window openings on three of the facades, the facades facing Fulton Street, Kern Street, and The Alley. New doors and new storefront window systems in the existing door and window openings. Relocating the entrance on the Kern Street facade, the entrance is currently closer to the baseball stadium, and it's proposed to be moved closer to the center of the building, and the other entrance would be decommissioned. And then, finally, an addition of a a third four 3rd Floor at the rear of the property, and that would also include a roof top dining deck on the roof. So these renovations, you know, are intended to provide for revitalizing a building that's been vacant and largely unused for more than forty years.

The changes, you know, allow for modernization of the use and would probably contribute to a more active relationship with the streets through a more open building. Some of the changes may be reversible in the future since the structural supports for the canopies are remaining. Those could potentially be restored in the future. The architectural projections could potentially be installed in such a way that they would also be reversible without impairing the historic integrity of the property. But some of the other changes that are such as the addition of a number of new window openings in the formerly blank facade may represent an irreversible change to a defining characteristic of the building.

Just as a reminder of the secretary of the interior standards, which are included as an exhibit as well, the removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize the property shall be avoided, and new additions, exterior alterations, related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. So, since this building has already been found eligible for listing on the local register, we're asking for a determination of whether the proposed plans can be found consistent with those standards.

Okay. Thank you. Any further

questions? Can

you clarify maybe you said the structure for the canopy is gonna remain?

My understanding is that there's a structural support for the canopy that would not be removed because it's integral to the building, but that the the barrel portion itself would be removed. But I think we have the architects. We have the architect here who can maybe speak

to that a little

Bring the architect forward. Forward now.

Do we want to start with the app does the applicant have a presentation? I think I'll ask the chair.

Oh, a gap gonna have

a presentation regarding this item? Sure. Yes.

Just some remarks that I'd to

hear. Good

evening, chair and commissioners. My name is Diego Livares. I am the chief operating officer at the Fresen Area Hispanic Foundation, a nonprofit organization that's been established for over twenty two years here in the Fresno community to support small businesses. I have been directly working with this project and the efforts on the 887 Fulton Berkeley's Building. And as mentioned, we entered into a DDA agreement with the city of Fresno in in May 2024 for the purposes of revitalizing and redeveloping the property as mixed use combination of retail and office space.

And as an expansion of the mission and the work that we do here in our community to help incubate and foster entrepreneurship for our small business community here. When we did execute the agreement, we were informed that it was that the building was not listed on the local, state, or national register. And based on that information, we moved forward with engaging with different consultants and, of course, our architect. So the past twenty one months, we've been investing a lot of time and financial resources as well. And we structured our project based on, you know, that framework and our tenant strategy as well.

We would like to request that we don't have any design restrictions imposed to us at this stage that would we feel that that would materially impact the feasibility of this project for us. It could increase cost for us, extend timelines, and basically limit the flexibility to design a functional building that can be marketable. That is a very critical component for us in being able to market the building for the purposes that we have intended for. I think it's also worth mentioning as it was mentioned earlier that the building has been vacant for four years. But we are ready to be able to change that.

And so we are coming in very, you know, positive. They have been doing a lot of work to change that. Fifteen years ago, we invested in our downtown business hub, which is also in downtown at 1444 Fulton Street. We faced similar challenges to downtown revitalization at that time as well, and so now, you know, we can say that we have, we currently host dozens of small businesses there, physically and virtually. We create jobs.

We serve as a proven anchor in our community to support our small business community, and so we did that project in partnership with the City of Espresso as well, and so we're coming back to continue on that same model. We want to be able to activate, you know, bring street level activation. We want to bring small business retail and support the business growth in the area. We know that small businesses are the backbone of our local economy, and our mission is to provide the economic vitality for the communities that we serve. We respectfully ask that you consider the timing and the financial realities of this project, the public benefit of this project, and that you allow us to proceed under the development of this framework without imposing any design restrictions.

As

mentioned,

we stand ready to deliver our commitment to the city, and to Fresno, to downtown, and, of course, to our community. So thank you so much for your time and and consideration. And so now I'd like to call mister Russ Taylor, who is our architect and principal of the Taylor Group.

Any any questions for me before we call it to Russ? Just what were some of your challenges that you were talking about that you faced with the revitalization?

In the previous sub

In the previous building? So, basically, you know, whether or not we were gonna get traffic to our building, whether or not, you know, we were gonna have people coming through our doors and being able to. So that was one. The other part was being able to have tenants in our building. We did, and I can tell you, it's very relevant to this case, the offices inside our building that didn't have any windows did not get leased. We had to go through a reconstruction of the design of the facility to be able to lease space that was more appealing and more marketable. We did

face that with that project.

So did I understand that this city did the city approach you offering this building, or did you approach the city to acquire the building?

So we approached the city. We have been we when that happened, we had already been exploring other locations. Again, going back to the commitment that we would have in in Downtown Fresno, we wanted to find a building and a property that was in Downtown Fresno. We looked at some that were, guess it's still considered in downtown, but there was some that were outside of the downtown area. And so when this opportunity came, we checked in the city to see what was available.

That's how we found it.

When you approached the city, were you made aware that the building is potentially eligible for the local registry?

Not initially.

You didn't know that?

No. We did not know that. And we did we did ask that question because we had come across that situation with our first project. And, of course, it was deemed historic from the 1444 Building that we have. So that's why we proceeded without knowing that. And so that has been brought to our attention now that we went

through the permitting process. Okay.

But, originally, when you entered into the agreement,

you didn't know that it was potentially eligible?

We asked, and we we were told that it was not.

Told by the city? Yes.

By the city's representative.

When did you find out?

About this? That it was

eligible.

It was potentially eligible.

Probably in the last couple of weeks.

I would say the last couple of months. It based when we started when

we started with plans. How was that made known? How did you find that out?

If I can speak to that when when a project is submitted, whether it's a building permit application or a planning entitlement application, it's reviewed for all of the agencies that that need to see it. One of which is historic preservation review if the building is over 50 years old. So it was routed for review by historic preservation, at that point, think the planner would have informed them that that was one of the reviewing agents. So

Could they have known that?

I'm sure that they're going through that process, could they have known that it was potentially eligible?

I think could they? Yes. It's possible that they could have. How exactly they might have been informed that? I'm I'm not sure because I I wasn't involved in the discussion.

No. I wanna clarify that. You're saying you were if you were told it wasn't eligible at that time by someone in this city.

I I don't We so

I don't know that we were told it wasn't eligible. I think we

were Okay. Just trying to clarify. That's what's the difference issue. That it wasn't designated. It wasn't it wasn't designated, but the question of eligibility wasn't really raised.

That was never brought in. Okay.

K.

Be that as it may.

It it is it's potentially eligible. There are character defining features that are being removed. I think that's the problem is if we're being we're not being asked to get about the viability of it or the wisdom of it. Sounds like a brilliant project. That's not what we're being asked. We're being asked, does this is are the changes you're proposing counter to or would it diminish its ability to be reg registered on the local registry? That's what

we asked. Before we go deeper, let's have Russ come up and kind of explain the the the process, and then we'll go out with

I wanna hear about reversibility. K.

I don't know if I can shed shed much light on it. So we were asked to come in and and work with Yuri and Dora. It's our second project with them. We did the other projects she mentioned earlier. And we

were told Can I ask

you a question? The other project, that's the one on is it on it's by Status Law. Status Law. Is that the Allen

Lou Building? Yeah. Yeah. So we were we were asked to come in and look at this and try to turn it into a multi use kind of restaurant food court Ground Floor. That was one of the stipulations the city made.

It has to be a restaurant use or uses on the Ground Floor and then you could go office above, above the floor, the the 1st Floor. When we got to the building, I walked through it and, it is a total mess. I mean, absolute total mess. I mean, really, was worried about that I would get sick after being in the thing because there's mold and everything everywhere.

In the basement as well. Right?

Basement as well. Yeah. So we refused to go back in the building until such time that they clean it up. They're in the process, I think, of cleaning it up or I don't think it started or not, but they're there there's a contract out to do to do total remediation on the interior. The roof's a mess. It's elite. It's, it's just really, really bad shape. So one of the things I'll point out is we are not removing the scallops. We're just gonna put a fascia in front of the scallops. So the scallops would remain. We're just still projecting out. Yeah. Yeah. We're not touching that. All that's gonna stay the same.

We're just gonna put a fascia on it. We like the bottom of it and then but just put a you know, you saw it just on a on a linear try to to get a little more modern look. We're adding a couple of vertical elements to it. And then the other thing, of course, we're trying to do is add windows on the 2nd Floor. They match exactly the ones on the Ground Floor because the structural reasons, we don't we can't widen any windows. We just kinda have to stack them in order to maintain the structural integrity

of

the building. And so those

are the key kind of design features. The building is load bearing concrete blocks. Is that right?

It it's not load bearing. If there's a structural skeleton inside, we we we think that's the sheer component of the building is the is the masonry. But the skin is concrete split face concrete block? We think so. It's it's hard to tell without coring. We're not exactly sure if it's just facade brick or if there's more there. Haven't gotten to it that far.

Can can you talk about

the thought process behind moving the entrance?

Well, we're not really remove we're not really moving the entrance. Well, we are. We we the the two entrances that are there are going to remain. We're not gonna touch Basically, the

would be discontinued as an entrance.

Right. Correct. There are

alcoves in each one, and we're we're leaving those kind of added as is, but there's a a main stairway, big open area in the middle where the stairway exists. And that's where we'd like to put the front doors because of interior circulation. It gives us more flexibility with the future tenants. So that that that would be a departure from the existing architectural value. You can you'd say the architectural value of the building.

And because it's a two story glass element, it's open all the way up, and we're gonna keep that. We're gonna keep that all the way up. Originally, we were going to open the floor and go all the way down. So we have this light shaft that we deliver light down into the basement as well, but we've decided that that's just too much of a stretch. And so we're going to leave that alone and just try to use that to kind of like the center element, kind of an atrium, two story atrium at the entry. And that's that's why we're beginning there. It's full of problems. The building's full of problems. Now I know that's not your problem. But to from where this started, the city is, I'm not gonna say desperate, but anxious in having Dora do what she wants to do there.

She's the only one that's stepped up. It's been, you it's been available for a long time, and and Doris Group has stepped up and has spent considerable amount of money to this point until we hit the stop sign that we're now thinking of.

Okay. It seems to me that the the windows of new openings are

free to do what you're gonna do.

You have to have those new openings. Otherwise, those offices are just not marketable, like you said.

Other otherwise, you could do an open atrium on the 2nd Floor, do a big skylight element or something and then have everything face in instead out. But you're gonna you're you're gonna lose quite a bit of floor area to do that. And and then I you know, again, that's all rent, and I think it doesn't economically, it doesn't quite work.

The challenge is the report is identified two character defining features, both of which are being altered. It's the the Yeah. The canopy, the barrel barrel, literally calls it a barrel canopy, and then the kind of solidness of

it. Right.

The solidness, it sounds like that, you know, for you to do what you need to do, you gotta have the windows. Right. The canopy though, do you have to change the canopy?

Not really. We we could leave it as is. It just doesn't quite go with, I mean, we would we could but it doesn't matter. But, yes, we yeah. We could we could leave the camp. Well, we're leaving the camp because

we're just gonna have too much.

Change the model. We wouldn't have to cover them. What's that?

You wouldn't necessarily have to cover them with them.

Wouldn't have to. You wouldn't have to.

Dora is not very fond of it, and and neither is Yuri, but, you know, they're the client. So we kinda work for them. Okay.

At this point, we're gonna go out to the public. If anybody has any comments in in support of this project, please come forward.

Okay.

Hi, everyone. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Jacqueline Mente. I currently serve as the board secretary for the Fresno Area Hispanic Foundation. And I'd also like to disclose that I am currently a planning commissioner for the city of Fresno. However, tonight, I am only speaking on behalf of the foundation. So I did see a few things. I have this whole spiel here, but I've heard you ask a few questions. And so the purpose of the building from what we saw earlier was revitalization post World War two. Being that it's historic and that was its purpose, historically, we wouldn't be in line with its purpose if we didn't allow for change to continue to revitalize downtown, which is one of the city initiatives and something that we all have in common.

I look to see the character defining features because although it is a beautiful block, you know, it's a a feature. It's very specific. You can't miss it. But I just, in a way, googled what are other buildings that don't have windows just to kind of see what we're working with and and, you know, what what we wanna portray when we see downtown and revitalization. Some other windowless structures, just based off a simple Google search, are infrastructure and utilities, buildings designed to house machinery rather than people, lack of windows maximized space, industrial and storage, cold storage warehouses are typically windowless to maintain that consistent low temperature, secured facilities.

Also, modern residential architectures, of course, which is what we're looking at, but that lack of windows is going to give that industrial message, and it's not going to be something that's going to work to really help to revitalize downtown. Just something I was thinking is that our vacant architecture does not create that vibrancy for revitalization that we're looking for in Downtown Fresno. Activated architecture does. So we just need to think in terms of what is our purpose, what are we looking to do. We want to, of course, keep this integrity and the character of this very beautiful building, But how is any anybody going to appreciate the architecture, appreciate the architect, appreciate what this building is for if it's not being celebrated and it's not being used and it's rotting because of asbestos and black mold?

So this is a huge ask, but what I am asking on behalf of the foundation is that the Berkeley Building not received the historical designation and that the foundation be allowed to move forward with this project without additional conditions. I'd like to express my support for the related development permit application that will enable this project to proceed. Of course, I I have information here about what, amount of money is the building, the building has already incurred that the foundation is paid, and there's also the $1,100,000 loan to remediate the building. And the foundation is willing to invest 7 to $10,000,000 to make this building really have its intended use there. So just a few key features.

Let me see if I'm looking anything over because it kinda changed when the the questions were given there. I think it would be lovely to see this building, have its intended use and its purpose for what it was made for for post World War two. And that's that's all I have to share. So I'd like to really enhance this building and make it something so that people can admire it and see it, and I hope a few windows doesn't prevent that from happening. So thank you.

Thank you. Mhmm. Mhmm. Alright. Any others in support? K. Any in opposition to this project? K. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the commission. So what's our what's our thoughts?

I know that the comments have been made that it's not ideal to keep that character defining feature of the the The barrel pinopy. Thank you. But could that be incorporated in the design that I mean, the windows, I I I think it makes sense. I've been I personally have toured that building looking for it as we were looking for the archive of Kern. I've been down this path. I know the basement. I know the mess inside, which, again, is not our

issue. But

anybody that's willing to take it on to me is a hero in a little ways. But is there some compromise that we could come to that the particularly, the barrel structures could potentially not be covered or not be maybe incorporated into some kind of design where that we could let this project move forward but not lose that particular character defining feature. Okay.

Anyone else?

I think one other I would I would support that. I think I think that Canopy is important whether it and it's not about do you like it or do we like it or not. It's it's it's been identified as a character defining feature. And whether we like it or not or you like it or not, it it is what it is. So I would argue that the canopy should remain. Another thing I'd argue is I agree. You got to have windows. I agree with that. What I would suggest is the way one does historic preservation correctly when they're modifying an existing building is you make a very clear distinction between what is new and what was there originally. So those windows you're adding, you need to charge Russ Taylor with making them making it clear that they are not original.

Do something different. Do something that makes it clear if they're not original. Those openings were not there. You're adding it. And it so you make a clear distinction between what was there and what is what is new. And I think Russ can do that for you.

And think that kind of part of the I think the the the design is almost there with that because I know that on upper top, they have the the architectural projection that they're they're looking with the street address. I think something should be done with that kind of simulated wood siding to to work with them. I think I think we're very close with it.

I'm sure I I have something that we've sort of become happy to recommend in any kind of changes to historic buildings, whether it be a one stocks or whatever. One of the things that has been acceptable to us is that there be some sort of feature included that represented the building in its original form so that if we are designating the building and showcasing that windows have changed, having a small area, a very small area of some kind that tells the history of the building. Because revitalization is crucial, but it was built on the back of massive construction of downtown from our, you know, 1920s buildings moving forward. And I personally this is my historical society had as well, but we like to see people that do come to these buildings Yeah. Have a a walk through time a little bit just to show, hey.

This was what Berkeley's looked like. And it it doesn't have to be something that takes up a huge amount, but needs to be prominent enough that people see it. So I would ask that if this gets to move forward, like, we're working trying to help do that, don't forget that. Maybe incorporate that as a little homage to the building. And it just happens my grandfather ran the shoe department there for forty five years. So I did live and climb those stairs. Was probably old enough to get a dress on the upstairs. But it it's any building like that, I think that we found, whether it was the ship at Story Land or whatever it is, go back and let's not forget that little piece of history. You're talking about like a

plaque or some sort of

Clap or something.

Would probably be the the least of that is something about what, you know, was there.

Just a little I mean, there's this could be a storyboard. When we we like, the storyboard that's at the Rooting Park Roundabout is gone now or whatever. That just a a storytelling mechanism that the historical site could help you do that to just honor the building in its original form. Okay. Just before. Okay. You know, I I'll I'll agree with everything Paul said. I think that

I think the BrauVault is important. I understand it's changing from a department store to an office, you need windows. I think that's kinda skippable. And I also understand that the design was done before we realized that there

were these other considerations.

So I think you're close. Think I think that's that's what I'm hearing. Can do we have a a

photograph of the existing what's currently?

Maybe the rust is The first one.

On the ground the Ground Floor windows. Yeah. Can you zoom in to the ground? Are there are they boarded up? No.

The windows are still there.

Are they is there like, on your elevation, you're showing, like, a lots of lot of mullions. If you were to treat the Ground Floor with just large sheets of glass like it was originally, like, you'd have it

at a part

of They the they exist just like they

used Okay. Just have the Ground Floor just be transparent, large pane of glass, and then through your the way you have emollients divided up on the Upper Floor, that would be a distinction between the Ground Floor and the Upper Floor. It would be in keeping with what was there originally. I think that would be a great way to express what's new and what's existing.

It's a great idea.

And I think, honestly, because I know that the the concern came up of of cost and things like that, that does keep your cost down, not having to add that facade to the the barrels. We're saving you money, man. We're just

and we and we appreciate it. We really do.

But I I I'm in concurrence with Paul as well, you know, having that. And and and I and, Elizabeth, I I see what you're saying too, especially, like, a little plaque about what the Berkeley's was. Yeah. It'd be good because you're always gonna people to come down and

try to reminisce and things like that. It is still part of our downtown culture. Those buildings, people remember. So perhaps a photo or two, maybe one on the outside, maybe one on the inside with some just historical data about when it was built and, you know, what what it did, and it doesn't have to take over your floor. Just a little something that I think your clients will appreciate that. Okay. And it can be in English at Spent.

And and I will note one of the things too is, like, one of the things that we noticed is how how close really are to kind of also respecting the the Yeah. The the features was your respective 3rd Floor, you put the back of the building. Now I know that may have been to also enhance the fact that it's right against the ballpark, but at the same time, that's one of the features that we ask when people are doing adaptive reuse of of historical buildings is to have that offset so you're not necessarily disrupting the the the street facing side of the building. So I I think you're you're kind of already in that process. So I I it's where we kind of see just a couple more things, and and I think we're there.

I agree. K? At this point, do we have a motion on this?

Is is our test tonight to decide whether it's not Was it eligible for the register? What are we asking here?

So what you're being asked to do is to consider the development permit and whether the proposed changes can be found consistent with the secretary of the interior standards given that it's eligible for designation. I would say you could refer it, the changes to the architectural review subcommittee. You could bring it back if you wanted to see it again at this body.

Or you could approve the conditions. You could

say it is consistent if

the following things are met. I'd like to do that. That allows them to move forward.

How how are you gonna know it's consistent with how many of you?

It'll come back when it when it's submitted for permits.

Permits. Right.

The the It's in development already, so we're gonna have to amend the file amend the application.

Correct. So it it is still in the historic preservation review in in the routing process. So until that review is complete, it it would not move forward. So you would need to, yes, resubmit revised plans.

Or or you can provide, again, conditional approval, which allows it to move forward. And if it doesn't come back and revise plans with those, then it would have to come back. But that allows it to keep that before.

But it

would so it'd reviewed as part of the plan check process? Yes. Yeah.

K. K.

K. I need the motion.

I guess the motion is but I don't wanna get

it to plan check until we have approval.

So I It's conditional.

On behalf of the owners, I think we need to bring it back one more time.

That's fine. Fine. Normally, we don't

hear that. We're we're trying to save you time.

I I I get that. But what I don't wanna do is do a full set of contract documents and have it come back and say, oh, no. We were the.

K. And

I mean, I'm speaking for the owner. Here, you can you can kick me if you want.

That's okay. So

could the motion be to send it back to the

developers? This

Or we go back to subcommittee?

Go back to the subcommittee.

Well, is there is there a chance when I make the changes that I could come directly? Yes.

That's actually what what the motion would be.

That's what it would be.

So the motion would be to redirect back to this architectural review subcommittee and and for the potential, like, conditional, you know Yes. Changes that we've asked. Okay? So that you and and mister Johnston and vice chair halfway can look at

it. K.

Fine. Okay. If if we

got this front, we don't have to go back and resubmit.

You you will have to revise your plans.

We're gonna have to revise

But you will not have to come back to this commission. We can schedule those subcommittee meetings at a convenient time when you're ready.

Okay. Again, it was just easier for me to to take it to mister Loggins on and say, hey, Paul. This is what I wanna do.

It's gonna have to go

through Yeah. Can't do that. That that Yes. Sub

You mean we can't do that? Or, like

We're trying to make it back.

So so due to how the commission works and how how, you know, Brown Act and things like that come into play with this, it would have to come back to that subcommittee. But the subcommittee could meet within, you know, a a short amount of time. Just an It's not a short time.

Contact to set that up?

I will be in contact with you.

Alright. Fair enough. Alright. So the motion is to send it back to the subcommittee architect review subcommittee?

Yes. With conditional approval pending the changes that were enumerated here tonight, including, but not limited to, the Beryl things that I can't remember. Beryl. Thank you, Kempey. I think you can't be. But that the architecture subcommittee would have the ability to make those decisions. Okay.

Alright. Alright. I have a motion. Do I have a second? I'll second. Okay. Motion to second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Motion passes.

You. I know it's good luck.

Understand it sounds complicated, but we have to make this easier you.

We just need it easier for you.

Thank you. We appreciate you.

Alright. We will do now, move on to item seven c. That's file ID 26Dash241 report from the present city and county current mansion upgrades.

I was asked, do I need to have to move to that? I do. Okay. I I can't wait either. Oh, well, okay. Good evening, commissioners and staff. And yes, I was asked by staff to put together a little presentation showing the glow up that we are undergoing at Kearny Mansion. And I thought it would be a little fun to see some history, so you can just move along. Just hold on. The fortunately,

thank you to

okay. I'll wait till they're done.

Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Go ahead.

Thanks to the County of Fresno's acquisition and sharing of ARPA funds, Kearny Mansion is finally getting a little bit of a facelift, a glow up. We've been, yes, talking about this for quite a while, but I thought it might be fun to just breeze through quickly some of the early photos of what Kearny Park eventually became. You can just run through them, Carrie, and let everybody just look at it for a second. This was Mr. Kearny's vision for the chateau, which would have become Chateau Fresno.

And the city of Fresno would have been an entirely different place had that actually come to pass. However, the pad was all that was laid as he died going on a shopping trip after the San Francisco earthquake to buy things for his fantastic chateau that never got built. So you can keep going. Something that people don't remember or realize is that the Kearny facility was almost 7,000 acres of farmland called the Fruitvale Estate. And these are some of the original buildings viewed from the water tower.

It was a self contained go ahead, Carrie, just do it as you people see it. I thought this was interesting. We did find several years ago that the blacksmith shop adobe bricks are still intact. It is something we do not have funds to do anything with at this moment, but they are protected from the elements. We can all read our friends on Shaw Avenue.

But we hope to be able to reconstruct this building at some point in time. But that is the blacksmith shop. It was a completely self contained area, lumber yard, every kind of crop you can think of. Go ahead and I just don't wanna keep you guys. I just wanna show you. Poultry department, few people knew that there were live animals. Also, are on the site. You can see the trees in the back. This was the Kearny store. It used something called Kearny coin because mister Kearny felt like his employees didn't really have a good way to get the eight miles into the downtown area of Fresno.

Was that early Bitcoin?

Yeah. It was it was empty old Kearny coin, And they are quite interesting. They were not meant to just make them shop there. It was supposed to be a convenience. And actually, a sitting congressman at this time's mother ran the Kern store, and his baby shower took place on the veranda of the Kern Mansion. And if anybody can name that congressman, then I will say congratulations. Costa. Yeah.

I'll say it's Costa.

Costa. So Carlos de Costa was born on the Kearny Ranch. And here, you can see this is the outside. It was very lively. There were hundreds and hundreds of workers all throughout time. You can keep going. They had this I thought this was kind of fun. They had a single men's refreshment room as well as the meat market, and it looks like there were more people wanting refreshments and meat on this day that these photos were taken. But I guess they were single. This is just two separate views of the entrance.

These are obviously no longer there. That was beautiful. You can see the brush growing. Mr. Kearney was very involved in the picking of the shrubs, bushes, plants, trees and every other thing, including the trees, the monkey trees that make us have to shake them before we do events because the big pots fall on people's heads.

This is something from Potts Collection actually. People did not realize that it was the Westside and cotton that these are both on the Kearny round. The cotton machinery on the right on the left is about 1918. And the very first bale of baled cotton, non compressed baled cotton was made at the Kearny facility in 1918. And that guy is weighing it right there.

Mr. Kearny loved his cars. He loved to drive down Kearny Boulevard. And also the picture on the right is his touring car in Europe, It was a Mercedes Benz, and he loved going there and driving around in it. So here you see the post office in store. And just we're moving forward in time. Mr. Curti passed away, as most of you know, in 1906. The facility continued as a working ranch until 1949. It was run by a wide variety of people from the West Side, all different ethnicities live there.

We see in the census if you come and visit our 3rd Floor exhibit, you can see in the census that there is a wide range of ethnicities represented as living on the Kearny Mansion property. And here we have one of those families. This was around 1920. The Kunishige family in their car behind the Kearny Mansion. I just thought some of these pictures pictures you guys might not have seen and they're kind of interesting as we go into what we're doing right now.

In 1962, the Fresno County Historical Society, we entered in a partnership with the county to oversee Kearny Mansion. And that is the photo from 1962 on the left and the first kind of field trip groups that still today have field trips on the regular in the mansion. And many, many families do get to go on field trips there during that time. 70% of the mansion is original. So that if you're going on a tour, you are seeing, in fact, even one of the carpets is original.

In the meantime, she's getting a little tired. So we were able to secure about a half $1,000,000 of ARPA funds. And these next photos, Carrie, you can just run through. You are seeing where oh, yes, stop on that one a second.

You got it. One of

the places that we are doing construction is the very famous Carriage House. On the right, you don't know what that is, but that is a Starling Nest. And during COVID, these funds were made available for damage that the mansion occurred during COVID as no one was on the property. These starlings burrowed through the roof and made a nest so big it went down the stairs and out the door. And it is obviously hazmat that has been remediated, but we are able to patch the roof on the carriage house to alleviate the problem of the starling.

So that is one of the things that is happening now. And you can just see that these are in construction. We have vacated the mansion for two months so that all the work can be done. We are getting new staircases on the outside. This is all work being done on the outside.

It will not affect anything to do. It's all replica wood. It's all everything that our architects are using is original materials to the best of their ability. So it will not show or look any different. Sadly, the rain has made things a little more complicated, but you can see that finally the staircases are getting all repaired.

They will not have metal rails anymore because they're very hot in the summer. I've asked them to do wood rails. It's probably more authentic and I like them better. And so all the rails on the outside staircases will be wood. The 2nd Floor deck, we didn't get enough money to replace the entire deck, but they're going to shore it up, paint it, and make it look a lot more appealing.

It still will not be usable until we can get some more funds. But this is what she looks like today. Just a few more shots of them going for it. And the paint will be on the 1st Floor, the veranda and the between the servants' quarters, which is where we work, and also the mansion itself. So I just thought you might enjoy seeing where she's done.

Thank you.

Yes, What

the questions? What year was the mansion building, did you say?

It was the mansion itself. It was completed in nineteen o three.

And do we know who designed it?

Yeah, we do. Someone does. No, I do know that, but

I don't have it right in

my hand. It is on the National Register as well. So all applicable regulations are being adhered to of both of our buildings, the one on Kern as well. The great thing about this is we start this Saturday. We're doing starting tours at the archive on Kern and just hosted some very big events.

And it's really fun. Paul will find out tomorrow and tell you because I can't remember. And it was somebody you know, not personally because it was long ago. But the servants yeah, not personally. The servants quarters behind where which is where the kitchen is located was constructed and finished in the 1890s.

And it served two meals a day for all of the workers on the entire property. Just so you know, we now have what's left. What remains of the estate, kind of thought this was interesting. The 11 mile Kearny Boulevard, the park as two twenty five acres and five original structures, not counting the blacksmiths. The Superintendent's Lodge, which is known as Kearny Mansion, but it's really was just the Superintendent's Lodge.

Family lived there, managed it at the Friselles for many years. The servants' quarters, the carriage house, the ice house, and the tea house. And hopefully, we can add to the blacksmith. We're like to put that back. There are still rail lines that are visible with the shed when we move the archive from the shed at Kearny Mansion to the new building when the vault gets built, we hope to be able to recreate kind of the packing shed, which is where everything left because you can see the railroad tracks to

the ground. It's kind of cool.

I think we need a field trip

Let's over there to make sure wait till she's back up and she's got her underwear back on. And, Sherry, thank you for glow up. I love that. Any other questions about what we're doing or it should be done by April so we could do a spring field trip. And there's a lot to see.

We still have our Chinese exhibit there. It will be moving over to archive on Kern. And I do have some news to report that's not official yet, but the McClatchy Foundation did meet in our building on Thursday at the archive, and they have decided to participate in helping us save the McClatchy collection. And so that is something we've been helping ourselves to getting for almost two years. So we're good. It'll help. We did lose two federal grants for construction during the IMLS decimation that were for the climate control of the archive as well as the vault, but that too will not

last forever. Perfect. Anything else?

I think that's it. Okay. Thank you.

Alright. So we're gonna move on to item seven b. That's our regular monthly topic starting with staff.

Just moment and we'll get the presentation back up. Just a very brief update on the Adobe this month. Last month, I reported that we were working on bringing the property owner back in with his architect and engineer in order to get some concrete next steps. They're in communication, but that meeting has not yet been placed. So we are still planning and development in partnership with the city attorney's code enforcement division working on making sure that happens in the near future.

So we will report back on that next time. But no change in the condition of the chart being

more than the building to report.

Even after these last this last storm these storms last week?

Nothing nothing visible. Okay. And just quickly to run through the activity, of course, we have our planning entitlements received and lagging a little bit on completion since those typically do take a little more time. Building permits received and completed continue to be higher numbers than we used to see because we are reviewing every permit for every building over 50 years old with Carrie's help getting to be a lot more efficient on those. And so we are completing most of them as they come in unless it's something that needs to be reviewed by the committee or the commission.

Just a small number of section one zero six reviews, no Mills Act or mitigation program activity to report this month. But I will note that we will be sending out a letter to all of the designated properties reminding them of the opportunity to apply for the Mills Act and expect to do that in March.

K. Right.

K. So subcommittee reports. Sure. Our character here.

Sarah's not here.

I know. She's the one that's. She just You guys meet the last one?

We did. We talked well, let's see. I'm thinking about the subcommittee on the municipal code. We met Okay. But I don't think we looked at NER. I don't think that

I don't remember that last week.

I think you I don't remember the exact dates. You did meet on the two applications that were in front of us.

Oh, yes. I'm not sure. But was that just The last

The fog.

Sorry. Sorry for my ineloquent support.

But the the conclusion for both was that you advise them to come to the commission.

Yes. That's right. Okay.

Okay. So then we'll go into the municipal code review. Lot of work. Okay.

We have a lot to read. So we've been given excerpts. We've been given the municipal code. We have to

read the municipal code. We're gonna

be looking at model codes that other communities have adopted and see if there are things we need to add to our code. I think that's the upshot of our discussion. Okay.

Historic reservation month. That's me.

Who wants to do it? You want me to? You wanna do it?

We've had it.

We have a task.

We're gonna meet again on Wednesday? Yeah. Yeah. Kinda went through some brainstorming, went through last year's calendar. Not not final yet, but sort of ideas percolate. We'll see what happens. And

and we are asking all members of the commission to those that aren't here even, which means you, to find something being that it's still we're in February and we're we would like to have a calendar up by March. Think about ways that can be that the whole commission can participate in some form or another, not together necessarily, but we are doing the kickoff at the Archive On Kern on the seventh, which is the Art Hawk Night. There will be activities before and after that. And we would love for the Archaeological plan committee to come up with something, but that we need to all rally around the '7 so that we do a bigger kickoff than we have in the past because it will be promoted as part of the Mayor's two fifty, America two fifty. So we wanna really we wanna really represent.

We have some good things on the calendar.

And what's what's the date? I'm sorry.

The seventh is the first Thursday, actually, of May. On May. May. I think. Whatever that first Thursday is. It is. It is back. Okay. I'm confusing myself. But we will do something. We will we're talking about getting food trucks and pictures and really showcasing, the fact that this is the semi quintessential year and that how we in California fit into that even back to the time, when we were a state. But there was activity happening here. I think it would be who goes to share that.

Yeah. I can approach the AIA chapter, see if they would like to partner.

We would love to

wonderful time

That would be wonderful. Okay. Process.

I I do have a couple of things that with that subcommittee that

I'm working on as well.

And so hopefully, I'll updates on Wednesday in that meeting.

And we are meeting Wednesday because tomorrow is the mayor's two fifty and then the Columbus Veterans Memorial District's eightieth. So we will have data from those two activities so that we can mesh them all together on one calendar and share them all.

Do you guys know for the archaeology, did you want us to do prehistory or just focus on historic archaeology?

I would go prehistory because that's very limited.

Yeah. That's But that'd be great. The last. That would be great.

Okay. Do we have any time range to stop at? Or

because there's a lot. I would say pre county formation. So pre 1856.

Or maybe even pre state, like eighteen fifty ish. Same thing. Yeah.

Six six years in the time of history. Thank

you. Alright.

Any other committee subcommittee updates that we have that are in this?

I have a question for the plaque committee. Okay. If we wanted to go about getting a plaque for a building, what do we do?

I'll wait for that to to to staff because it's actually there there's an application that you fill out.

Okay. We we would like to get a a

We but that can be done in half of week.

Okay. I I'm just I'm just asking the question. Don't have the answer, so let's talk after the meeting. Okay.

Alright. We'll move on to the chairperson's report. I do want to note that one of the things that will be coming up here in April is that the Lowell neighborhood, also known by our surveys as the North Park neighborhood, will be doing a history tour in in April that will be going through the neighborhood, essentially covering it all the way from its founding homes to Carnaby. So it'd be nice. They'll have actually trolley tours, so they'll be able to tour around a little bit different features in the in the neighborhood, including not only historic homes, but also art and and things like that.

I encourage everyone to to look at that.

Where was when was that in April? April 11. Okay.

Can I add April 30? Yes. The city college will be hosting a historical walking tour around the campus as the oldest city community college in the state, and we'll end up with lighting its bulldog, and that will be on April 30. More info to come. K.

So since that kind of moves into our unscheduled items for members of the commission, any other items from commission members? Okay. Any unscheduled items from staff? No. Okay. And then now public.

You guys wouldn't be able to meet without me, Posh. I'm going to bring up what I brought up last month. May is historic preservation month and Heritage Fresno has a film about historic preservation in Fresno. It's basically a tribute to the Caglia family, Calle if you want to be Italian, and what they did to preserve the Warner's Theater, the Boy with the Leaking Boot, the courtroom that's at the fairgrounds, and many other things that they saved through their good work. And this film will be shown on May 28 at the Warner's Theatre.

And that night, there will also be a concert by Cactus Harris. So the organ will come up out of the floor. He'll play it. He answers questions. He's a pretty good teacher. And then the film will be shown that same night. So the doors will open at 05:30, the concert will be at six, the film will be at 06:30, and then there'll be a brief tour of the lobby because you can't go much further than that. And I will bring you all an invitation next month, but I'll give this one to you now for the advertising. And I said I would help that committee. And one of the things that the Caglia family saved was the sign, which is now in a moonscape on the very South end of Fresno where nobody goes or sees it, anybody.

But the high speed rail said that they would replace it or move it to a better place. So maybe for May, we could that's two months away. We could get something done so that it's moved to a prominent place. I can think of about four places that you guys probably know more and have better idea. And then it would have to be, you know, of course, really put in a solid place. And then at the the Warner's Theatre on that date, the May 28 date, we'd love

to have one of the

lanterns, of which there are 82. We'd like to borrow one. I don't know, Ashley, if I should go through you or how we can arrange that. We will have security, and we will have a very good guardian of that wonderful contribution. And then, Pat Hunter will be that night, and she's the one who paints all the things that have really preserved Fresno, the stuff we've all knocked down.

In fact, in this calendar, there's the silos that have been painted by her, and now they're gone. And things that we'd like to save, like the cheese building on, Olive. And then here are two of her paintings of the the Warner's Theatre. And then we'd also we'll have that night the wonderful books she has painted the paintings, and Janice Stevens has written a text on architectural treasures of Fresno. And they'll be available at the theater that night. And hopefully with one of the lanterns, it would be an introduction to the general public. They saw it on television, all of them. And people keep asking me, where can I go to see one?

At the archive on

Where? At the archive on

Curd. Curd. So they can get in there anytime? They their regular tours starting this weekend.

Alright. Sorry. It will

be open? It will be open, and they can find it on the website.

Okay. Thank you. So and I will give this to you, James, so we can use it for the invitation for the city website and for that poster that you make out each year. We'll have posters we'll put in all the libraries. And we also have we're showing the film at most of the public libraries for people to come and see the film and then hopefully come in and attend this event, see the organ and all the stuff that

goes with it. Alright.

What's the name of film again? Bits of information, like telling you where the lanterns were in the underground. So the storage units knocked it down. Manchester Center was named after Chester Bergfeldt. And the way it got to be called Manchester was he was developing it and he would go in the bank and was working with the people to get money and so forth. And so they'd say, that Manchester, when they refer to the project, that Manchester's project. So that became Manchester Center. And that came from his good family friend, that information. A great story about why Manchester is called. It's not because of England, it's because of that Manchester.

Thank you so much. And then if you would like, I would love to meet with you. This would be a great key, this calendar, to the events that could be used for historic preservation month. In fact, one of them is the Corky Normarts stained glass window, which is in the Saint Michael's Church on Palm just across and Corky just passed away, sadly.

Yes. So

it would be a nice tribute to him. So we can

we can discuss that. Yeah.

And I can I think most of you have that anyway, that calendar? And I'll give

you these things. Yep. Thank you. Go ahead and leave them with Ashley, actually, and I'll take off.

Ashley, here's the invitation. Here's the library then.

So with that I don't know. We can move on to our next meeting, March at this point, we can move for a motion to adjourn. I so. Okay. I have

the motion to adjourn. Do I

have a second? Second. Thank you. We are adjourned at 07:58. Thank you.