Huntington Beach to explore moving International Surfing Museum
But the museum could be moving a bit north as part of a merger with the Main Street branch of the Huntington Beach Public Library.
The City Council voted 7-0 on Tuesday night to direct staff to evaluate the feasibility of locating the surfing museum within some underutilized space in the library.
The item was brought forward by Mayor Pro Tem Casey McKeon, Mayor Pat Burns and Councilwoman Gracey Van Der Mark after the International Surfing Museum approached the city asking for more space to display larger surfboards, some dating back to the 1930s, along with other archival materials.
Van Der Mark expressed hope that a shared space between the museum and library, along with the Huntington Beach Art Center across the street, could create an art district on the fifth block of Main Street.
'I think actually outgrowing the current facility is a good problem to have,' she said. 'We're trying to find a solution. It is Surf City USA … maybe it'll be a little destination. Instead of just coming down to the first block to shop, second block to eat, maybe tourists can work their way out there to go to the surf museum and the library, maybe even collaborate with the library and having some reading programs.'
International Surfing Museum executive director Peter 'PT' Townend said he has an extensive library of surf magazines and books, along with other relics.
'We're going to create a study center of surf culture,' said Townend in an interview following Tuesday night's meeting. 'We hope to help with one of the educational institutions, one of the colleges, as part of that.'
Townend added that Mike Adams, a member of the museum's board of directors, has already sketched out some possible layouts.
'It's a big step forward, in my opinion, for Surf City,' Townend said. 'We need to be bigger and better. We've been operating world-class exhibits in a box, and now it's time to get bigger and better … We might have lost the Olympics, but we're still Surf City. We want people to come here for the Olympics, to come visit Surf City and see the International Surfing Museum.'
He added that the International Surfing Museum, which debuted an exhibit about Duke Kahanamoku last year, is planning for a 2026 exhibit to honor the 50th anniversary of the World Surf League. Townend, originally from Australia, became the first professional surfing world champion in 1976.
City staff will review the Main Street library branch's compatibility with the surf museum, operational impacts and required land use entitlements and return to the City Council within 90 days with findings and next steps.
Visit Huntington Beach, the city's tourism agency, has indicated preliminary support for the move and could help with relocation and operating costs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
10-08-2025
- Los Angeles Times
Prepare to say a frond farewell to Los Angeles' palm trees
Call forth the mourners from far and wide. And remind them to bring their chainsaws. We gather to prepare ourselves to bid a frond farewell to Los Angeles' palm trees. Don't freak out. This isn't an alert about any wholesale dying of palms. Not all of them, anyway, and not right away. But Ecclesiastes got it right about everything having a season, 'a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted.' The season — the long, long winning season — for so many of our palm trees is running its course. Our exotic, come-hither, haphazard forest is being slowly timed out. We stand at an inflection point for L.A., after the fires, in the grip of climate change, recalibrating our future right down to the roots. Literally to the roots. Uncounted thousands of trees burned in the fires. Thousands more are getting thinned out by disease and drought and age. How do we replace our geriatric urban forest with more and better trees? Original L.A. was not the forest primeval. It was a landscape of scrubby shrubs and chaparral and grasses. What native trees there were grew alongside water, which flowed abundantly, if seasonally, until we took over the land and dried up the waterways. Palm trees came to town with the missionaries, for religious ceremonies, and then, decades later, with the great PR sales pitch of Southern California being the 'American Mediterranean,' which demanded the right set dressing — palm trees. The City Beautiful movement of the 1910s and1920s and the glories of the 1932 Olympics stuck thousands of trees of all kinds into the ground to adorn public L.A. All they had to do was look good; to fret over drought or heat was treason. Angelenos' faith that pretty much anything could grow here was usually right. The unlikeliest tree cuttings from the world over were carried here, adapted and came to elbow out the locals. Thus, Los Angeles became a tree zoo. Now it's time to make it a tree ark, and not every species should make it aboard. Climate change changes cities. We can no longer afford freeloader trees, however glamorous. Palms suck down water like camels, but give back barely enough leafiness to shade a Hula-Hoop. Falling fronds can deliver a mean whack, and during fires, palms light up like a flare. The nonprofit TreePeople has been trying to prep us for this for years. Bryan Vejar is a master arborist who directs community forestry for TreePeople, and, yes, in fact, he does have a few thoughts on the topic, and this is the moment we need to hear them, so take it away, Mr. Vejar: 'Trees are not some cosmetic thing, some ornament. They're also critical infrastructure, like traffic signs and traffic lights. They have tremendous value for the health and safety of the community.' 'We should be planting trees that serve a greater range of ecological benefits. There's not just one clear answer. The trees we plant now have to be climate-adaptive for weather forecasts for 50 and 60 years.' 'Native trees also support local wildlife, specifically ones endemic to our geographical biome. Pollinators, nesting birds, migratory birds and other species rely on them.' 'Not a lot of trees check every box. You want trees that are very durable and very resilient, that can endure many different soil types in any given community.' All right, then. What's in, and what's out once we cart away old trees and/or plant new ones? Out: most palms. And don't replace them with something like crape myrtle, which is pretty but doesn't offer much shade for the space it takes up. Most eucalyptus, out. They're invasive below ground and tiki torches above. Sweet gums, out; They're also invasive, triggering allergies, and dropping nasty, spiky balls like alien spoor. (Some trees appear on a city-approved list, but TreePeople gives them a 'branches-down.') I share Vejar's loathing for the relentless 'tree of heaven,' the deciduous plant that is sometimes called a stinking sumac. You see it everywhere; it not only crowds out natives, it also poisons the soil to kill off the competition and ruins biodiversity. Its leaves can also kill your dog. If you see one in your garden, kill it before it kills us. Vejar's 'ins' include native oaks and some sycamores, black walnut trees, desert willows, drought-tolerant African sumac and Chinese pistache. Ficus trees scrub away air pollution and cast vast shade, something vital when an urban forest can lower temperatures by 10 or 20 degrees. Ideal, right? Yet cities planted them unwisely alongside sidewalks, which their mature roots now crack and split. 'The thing that makes it a workhorse for urban forests,' says Vejar, 'is also what makes cities have to pay out millions in lawsuits from people tripping, ADA violations and such.' So, suppose the palms do take their last bow? Which understudy is ready to step onstage as our new arboreal star? Oaks and sycamores are too generic. Orange trees? Memento mori. But the jacaranda — now there's beauty. Fast-growing, generous with shade, drought-tolerant and soil-forgiving. Bees and butterflies love them. And did I mention beautiful? That ultraviolet haze shimmering around a blossoming jacaranda delivers a moment of transcendent enchantment. So what if the fallen petals are sticky? It's a small toll paid to glory. Like a wad of gum dropped on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
Chicago Tribune
06-08-2025
- Chicago Tribune
Historic St. Charles home to remain for now, after City Council denies request to demolish it
A historic house in downtown St. Charles, which recently made a state nonprofit's list of the most endangered historic places in Illinois, will remain for now, after the City Council Monday night denied its owner's request to demolish it. Owned by Baker Memorial United Methodist Church, the house at 217 Cedar Ave. has for years faced an uncertain future, as its owner has pursued city approval to tear it down and reuse the space. The house at 217 Cedar Ave. is also referred to as the Judge William D. Barry House, for its original owner. William D. Barry was a lawyer, a Kane County judge around the time of the Civil War and the first president of the Kane County Bar Association, who may have known Abraham Lincoln, according to former board president of the St. Charles History Museum Steve Gibson. Gibson has been researching Barry and the house since 2017, when he sat on the city's Historic Preservation Commission that first voted against demolishing the house. The building dates back to the 1840s, according to Gibson's history written for the St. Charles History Museum. Because it's located within the city's Historic District, exterior changes to the building must be reviewed by the city and its owners must receive a certificate of appropriateness before it can be demolished. The church brought a request about the property to the city in 2017, according to past reporting, but its application was withdrawn before the City Council could vote on the house's fate. In 2017, the church proposed creating a green space and prayer garden on the site, per the city. More recently, the church's pitch has been to turn it into parking spaces, citing a need for additional parking in the area, its financial situation and other concerns. Baker Memorial also owns the buildings at 211-215 Cedar Ave. and the parking lots to the south, west and north of the buildings, according to past reporting. The city's Historic Preservation Commission in 2017 OK'd the demolition of the structure at 211-215 Cedar Ave., but not the house at 217 Cedar Ave., per city documents. In October, the city's Historic Preservation Commission recommended the City Council deny the more recent request for a certificate of appropriateness to demolish the Judge Barry House, based on findings about the building's significance and architecture. In December, it went on to the City Council's Planning and Development Committee, which ultimately postponed making a decision so city staff and the church could discuss their options. From there, the city and the church continued to discuss the house's future, including whether the city could purchase it from Baker Memorial, but they were unable to reach an agreement. So the matter went back to the City Council Planning and Development Committee in May and was recommended for approval, despite facing some opposition from residents and advocates. But a final City Council vote on the fate of the house was delayed because of offers to buy the house or move the structure off the property, according to past reporting. That brings the matter to Monday's meeting, when the City Council took up the issue again. But the council did not deliver the church its long-awaited green light to take down the house and put up the parking they have been expressing a need for. Mayor Clint Hull noted the months-long conversations that have been going on among the city, church and those advocating for preservation. 'The goal has been and always will be to continue to find a solution that would be what I would characterize, and many characterize, as a win-win,' Hull said Monday evening. 'That win-win would allow the church to sell the property at a fair-market value and would also preserve the Barry House for future use.' In their conversations, Hull said three options were being considered: Baker Memorial selling the house at a fair-market value to a person or organization that would preserve it, the church selling or giving the structure itself to a person or organization that would move it off the property and, lastly, the church selling the property to the city. But none of those options were achieved. Hull said he has reflected on his own background as a Kane County judge as this issue has made its way through the city. 'When you make a decision like this, at the city council level or at a courtroom, you understand that people are very passionate on both sides of the issue,' Hull said. 'I have asked myself over the past three months, 'What would Judge Barry expect the City Council to do?'' He said he thinks Judge Barry would have wanted the City Council to research and understand all the facts, listen to both sides and keep an open mind, deliberate and reflect and make the decision transparently and communicate that decision. 'I can guarantee you that the City Council members that are here tonight have done all that and more,' he said at the meeting. City Council member Jayme Muenz, who shortly after voted against allowing the building to be demolished, emphasized that many residents are concerned about a reverence for history. 'I also feel that there is a precedent that is set when you make changes to historic structures,' Muenz said. 'You decide for the entire community what that value is.' Council member Vicki Spellman, who also voted against the house's demolition, said the issue is not just about the historic significance of the home, which has been debated, but the neighborhood it exists in. 'To me, it's not just a home,' Spellman said. 'I do think that it would affect the character of the neighborhood.' Ultimately, the request to allow for demolition was shot down, with three council members voting for it and seven voting against. Baker Memorial United Methodist Church did not immediately return The Beacon-News' request for comment. Al Watts, the community engagement director of local nonprofit Preservation Partners of the Fox Valley, told The Beacon-News on Tuesday that, with demolition not an option, the Preservation Partners could assist the church with applications for grant money to do maintenance on the house, connect them with contractors or help them get information on the value of their property if they were to sell, for example. Watts explained that members of the Preservation Partners of the Fox Valley are 'always going to be happier' that a historic building was preserved rather than demolished, but said they also don't want to see such buildings deteriorate and become a problem. 'The number one thing about historic preservation is if the building doesn't have a use, then it's never going to get saved,' Watts said. 'It's going to, eventually, it's going to get demolished one way or the other, either just because it'll literally fall down or because it'll just be too much of a problem that somebody has to knock it down. This building is not in that category yet, but, if nothing is done, eventually it will be.' But what happens next remains to be seen. 'This is just one vote,' Hull said at Monday's meeting. 'The city is committed to continuing to work together with both sides to continue to try to figure out if we can achieve that goal of a win-win.'
CBS News
06-08-2025
- CBS News
How a Colorado woman used AI to save Marshall Fire survivors up to $2 million
After the Marshall Fire, the City of Louisville worked to put in rebate programs for survivors in an effort to make it easier for folks to rebuild and move back home. Now one neighbor is using AI to hold council to one of those rebate promises that could bring Marshall survivors a share of close to $2 million. More than three years later, the Marshall Fire continues to be a topic at city council meetings, and Tuesday was no different. But now, as the city voted on what money they could get back if there's ever a possible settlement, some residents are working to get back some of their own from the city. Tawnya Somauroo lost her home to the Marshall Fire and spent the time and money to rebuild, but doesn't have time for every city council meeting. "It's really hard to participate, like what happens in local government can be really important; its hard when you know you have a family, and a job, and meetings happen at dinner time for your kids," Somauroo said. But she wanted to get more involved, and she remembered that at some point in time in the last three years, the city council may have made a promise to pay back extra rebuilding permit fees to survivors. Those extra fees are now estimated to total between $800,000 and close to $2 million. "I saw the staff had told them that, you know, 'No, we never made this promise,'" Somauroo said, "I was like, that's not correct. So it's like me against, you know, a million videos." To prove she wasn't making it up, Somauroo put hundreds of hours of meetings into an AI program to check for anything the council ever said about these permit rebates. Somaruroo asked the AI program, "Did the council promise to return Marshall Fire permit profits to fire survivors?" adding, "I had to find this needle in the haystack." And as a result, the exact days, times, and related quotes all came up. On July 19, 2022, Deputy City Manager Megan Davis said in part, "City council has given staff direction to determine if the fees that we're collecting are in, you know, excess of the programs and services that are necessary to respond to the Marshall fire and the rebuilds associated with that and and if we find that there's, you know, any inconsistency there, then we can determine a way to rebate or pass on, you know, any discrepancy." Then again in that meeting, Ashley Stolzmann who was the mayor at the time says in part, "...make it clear that the we have given direction that we want the building fee program to cover the cost of building inspection and plan review, and that if there are savings, because so many people are going through this at the same time, we. Hope there are savings like that could be a silver lining in a terrible situation, that we will rebate those savings." In another meeting on Aug. 16, 2022, councilmember Maxine Most said, "I think there's a general consensus that if we find out that we get way more in permitting fees than we expected, I think there's consensus among the council that we're happy to give that money back." This June, Somauroo emailed all of this information to the city council, and last month they voted to look into back into the issue. Still, some council members like Mayor Pro Tem Caleb Dickinson want some limits on funds the city was already counting on, especially as 90% of homes are already in the rebuilding process. "It is a tough time to be thinking about giving a million dollars back when we're making budget cuts to some of our core services. So it's a tough moment, but we want to hold to that, that idea that these permits are meant to pay for service," Dickinson said. When divided amongst survivors, the rebates could give each family a few thousand dollars. When CBS Colorado Your Boulder County Reporter Sarah Horbacewicz asked Dickinson if he thought this topic would ever come back up without Somauroo's detailed AI report, he said, "No, honestly, I don't think so. I think we felt pretty whole. I think we felt like we made a really good choice about what we did, rebate, didn't rebate, and I think it felt it felt good to me personally, but it didn't feel good to others," also adding, "For us to hear that voice, that that's really important. We've heard both sides." And Somauroo hopes other residents will hear more from their city council, even if they don't have the time for their next meeting. "I hope people who aren't engaged and want an answer, you can go and ask questions," Somauroo said. The city says it plans to look into the rebate options over the next few months as it hopes to find a balance between keeping a promise and balancing next year's budget.
