Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Resources topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic Landmarks Commission accepts Phase 1 finding that 1432 Portasuelo Avenue is not eligible for landmark designation
Summary
Alta Archaeological Consulting concluded the 1963 ranch‑style house at 1432 Portasuelo Avenue does not meet criteria for local, state or national designation; the Historic Landmarks Commission voted to accept the Phase 1 report after brief questions from commissioners.
The Santa Barbara Historic Landmarks Commission on June 17 accepted a Phase 1 historic‑resources report concluding that the ranch‑style residence at 1432 Portasuelo Avenue is not eligible for landmark designation.
Carrie Chastain, senior architectural historian with Alta Archaeological Consulting, presented the firm’s assessment and told the commission the house "does not appear eligible for any historical" registers or designation, noting it is a typical post‑World War II ranch‑style track house in a steep street and lacks documented associations with persons or events of historical significance.
Chastain summarized the report’s reasoning: the property embodies common materials and construction methods of the period, the developer (Maebob Construction Company) and early occupants do not show demonstrably significant historical associations in archival sources, and the building lacks high artistic value or distinctive features that would set it apart from numerous similar 1960s houses.
Commissioners asked technical questions about architectural features (window types, later additions, and neighborhood context). Commissioner Butler, noting familiarity with California ranch‑style precedents, asked which stylistic elements the report weighed as higher‑style versus common; Chastain walked through examples such as Asian‑influenced hip roofs and large sliding‑glass openings absent from this property.
After discussion, the commission voted to accept the Phase 1 report and its recommendation that the property is not eligible for designation. The commission’s action was procedural — acceptance of the consultant’s report — and does not itself change the property’s status beyond recording the panel’s finding and the consultant’s evidence in the public record.
The commission’s acceptance means the Phase 1 report will stand as the recorded evaluation unless new evidence emerges or a future nomination prompts a different analysis.
