HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 6.B-Attch09 05/17/2004MAY
} PAINTER
PRESERVATION
PLANMG,
HISTORIC PRESMATION & URBATIZESIGN
May 12, 2004
Ms. Susan Kirks
Paula Lane Action Network
PO Box 2903
Petaluma, CA 94953
Dear Susan:
I have reviewed Carey & Co.'s response to my lett er o0anuary 12, 2004 and still stand by the
statements in the earlier letter. While Carey & Co. acknowledges that an evaluation of this
property as a Rural Historic Landscape has value, their letter of February 3, 2004 does not
undertake this analysis," and they again conclude that the buildings on the property do not have
historic integrity. The historicaf signif cane of the property is not established by a review of
the buildings per se for the following reasons.
The Paula Lane property has
y potential historical. significance�as a Rural Historic Landscape, as
defined b N t onal Park Sery>ce, under °California Register Evaluation Criteria A, due to its
association with events that have made a. sign f cant contribution to .the broad patterns of history.
It also has potential historic value under California Register Evaluation Criteria C, as a Rural
Historic Landscape, for embodying the'distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or
method of construction.
In this case, the likely significance of the property is that it represents and embodies:a way of
life prevalent when Petaluma was a community made up of small family farms, often associated
with specific ethnic and/or immigrant groups. 2 ' 'In contrast to the statement in the JRP report of
April 18, 2002, the property does not have to be associated with the poultry industry in order to
be significant; the type of small ; scale farmingthat took place here °is actually representative of a
local lifestyle during the period under discussion.
In a property such ;as this, what must be evaluated are the structures, their relationship to each
other, and their relationship: to the landscape and other site features. These 'relationships and
their evolution- represent how the land was used and is what gives even a- former working
' A methodology for evaluating'thelistorical significance of Rural Historic Landscapes is found in'National
Register Bulletin,; "Guidelines ;Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic'.Landscapes," U. S. Department of
the interior, National Park Service, Cultural'Resources, National °Register, History and Education, 1999 (1989).
2 The March 4, 2003 peerkeview of the JRP report by Carey &.Co. states of John,Paula Sr., "it appears that he was
i nothing moreAhanan active member of two Portuguese- heritage�fraternal organizations," which confirms the ethnic
background ;of this .property owner, but does not place value ;on it...
2685•A;PETALUMA BLVD.A PETAWMA, CALIFORM , 707.658.0184 - diana @preservationplans.com
Letter to Susan Kirks, P.L.A.N.
May 12, 2004
Page 2 of 2
landscape its -meaning. Whether or not individual buildings are architecturally significant can
easily be irrelevant. The JRP studynotes, however, that "as a'semi -rural farm residence, [the
farm house] employees only°the basic form of this , popular, turn of the century style," which
would in fact support its °value as a typical small farm house of this era and in'th setting.
In conclusion, the value of the property cannot.be determined simply by evaluating the
architecture. The criteria for evaluating�Rural HistoricLandscapes are quite specific. They
require look ng,atland;uses and activities; patterns of spatial organization. response;to
natural. environment; :cultural traditions; circulation networks; boundary demarcations;
vegetation related to land use; and buildings, 'structures and objects. These features can still be
present when. or as land uses and property boundaries. change.
If the property does represent a historic resource; which i's! likely, the impact -of the project as
proposed e - a I gm icant effect. That is, it triay.cau5e a substantial adverse change in
that`the projectresultsin. 'demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resources or,. its 1.
immediate surroundings such that the significance of `[the] historical resource would, be
materially ,3
Until an analysis appropriate to the resource,type is complete, it cannot be' determined whether
or not the;property is,a significant historic ' resource, . and whether the proposed 'aetion.represents
•
an adverse effect.
Sincerely,'
Diana Painter PhD, AICP
3 CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Chapter: 3, 15064.5 (b) (1).
•
2685 A PETALUMA BLVD. n. • PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA 94952 • 707.658.0184 4 diana @preservationplans corn