Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reverses Mendocino Historic Review Board, allows removal and replacement of Main Street water‑tower stair
Summary
After a lengthy hearing and divided public comment, supervisors voted 4–1 to overturn the Mendocino Historic Review Board’s denial of a permit to remove a deteriorated timber water‑tower stair on Main Street and install a new staircase.
The Mendocino County Board of Supervisors voted 4–1 on May 20 to reverse a denial by the Mendocino Historical Review Board (MHRB) and allow the demolition of the existing timber water‑tower stair at 45040 Main Street and installation of a new, unenclosed stair access to the second‑floor restaurant.
Property owner representative Brian Momson and owner Jennifer Raymond told supervisors that structural assessments show the existing tower is at the end of its useful life and presents a safety and liability risk. "The structural engineer's assessment is clear: the building's use should be phased out," Raymond told the board, saying her family could not safely repair the deteriorated structure.
Staff and MHRB members disagreed on whether the structure qualifies as a historic resource. Planning staff concluded it is not a listed historic structure in the Mendocino Town Plan inventory and that prior dismantling, reconstruction and later alterations diminished any claim of historic integrity. Planning project planner Liam Crowley concluded that, because the tower is not on the town inventory and has been altered and moved, the board could find the required approval findings met and approve the replacement stair design presented in the current application.
Opponents — including residents and historic‑preservation advocates — urged the board to protect the tower as part of Mendocino’s historic fabric. Several commenters, including John Kavanaugh and Anna Marie, cited historic district protections and argued for alternatives such as providing second‑floor access within the adjoining building and preserving the tower in place. Preservation advocates pointed to prior MHRB recommendations that a sheathing or reinforcement approach was feasible.
Planning staff noted accessibility issues: a full rebuild of the original tower form likely would trigger Americans with Disabilities Act upgrades (an elevator or lift) because estimated costs would exceed statutory thresholds for limited accessibility upgrades. Staff said the replacement stair proposal (the application before the board) was under the statutory threshold for full accessibility retrofits.
After public comment and a 20‑minute staff presentation, Supervisor Mulherin moved to approve staff’s recommendation to reverse the MHRB denial and approve the project; Supervisor Williams cast the lone dissent. The motion carried 4–1.
The board decision remands permitting steps to Planning and Building Services for final permits consistent with the approved replacement staircase design; staff noted that salvaged materials could be reused, and community members suggested looking for ways to preserve or re‑create a historic tower elsewhere if the demolition proceeds.
Speakers on record included the applicant Jennifer Raymond; counsel Brian Momson; Planning project planner Liam Crowley; several members of the public; and multiple supervisors who debated preservation versus safety and legal standards for historic resources.
