Commission hears report: Hubbs House windmill tower removed, tank salvaged but left exposed

City staff told the Kingman City Historic Preservation Commission that workers demolished a leaning windmill tower behind the Hubbs House for safety and successfully removed the attached water tank intact, but left the tank on its original platform with no permanent fencing or interpretive signage.

The information came during the commission’s discussion of the Hubbs House water tower and tank. City staff said the tower “was not salvageable, but the tank was saved and remains on-site.” Staff also said the visible foundation under the tower was only a narrow concrete strip around the edge and that much of the former structure’s interior was dirt and pigeon droppings, limiting what could be preserved from the tower itself.

Why it matters: commissioners flagged a near-term public-safety risk because the tank is open at the top and the temporary fencing that had surrounded the demolition site was removed. Commissioners asked staff to coordinate with Parks to install hazard signage, temporary barriers or other measures to prevent people from climbing into the open tank.

Details: staff reported crews were initially concerned the tank would “fold in on itself” during removal but were able to extract it in one piece. The commission discussed options including leaving the tank on-site as a historical object and providing an interpretive display explaining the windmill and tank’s place in downtown history. Staff said they have limited documentation on the tank’s provenance; they estimate the windmill structure dates from the period around 1895–1907 based on historic photographs but could not identify the original fabricator or installer.

Commission responses and next steps: Commissioners asked whether anyone was actively preventing public access; staff replied the temporary fencing is gone and the tank is accessible. Multiple commissioners said Parks should be brought into the conversation; one commissioner said, “We need to have a discussion with parks because this needs to be something that we’re doing in tandem with them and actually speak with them directly.” Staff agreed to invite Parks to a future meeting and to return with recommendations on signage, temporary barriers and options for long-term interpretation or relocation.

What remains unclear: staff said budgets for Parks have already been submitted for the year and it is not certain whether Parks could add work this fiscal cycle. The commission did not take a formal vote on any action; staff were asked to pursue coordination with Parks and report back.

Ending: Commissioners emphasized a desire to preserve the town’s visual history while removing immediate hazards. Staff said they would follow up with Parks and bring options to a future commission meeting.