HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 4, 2020 Supplemental Memo
Date: May 4, 2020
To: Walter Oetzell
Organization: City of SLO
From: Robert C. Pavlik, M.A.
& Pamela Ricci, AICP
Title: Historian, Architectural Historian
Principal Planner
Addresses: 778 Higuera Street,
782-790 Higuera Street
Topic: Responses to CHC Discussion on
April 27, 2020
Situation
On April 27, 2020, a public hearing was held before the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) to
evaluate the request to remove two properties from the City’s Contributing List of Historic
Properties: 787 Higuera Street (The Network) and 782, 786, and 790 Higuera Street. The
project team provided a Historic Resources Evaluation (HRE) prepared by Robert Pavlik, MA,
Historian/Architectural Historian, dated February 6, 2020. The HRE provided a detailed history
of the buildings and thoroughly evaluated the buildings in terms of their historic and architectural
integrity consistent with the criteria contained in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. In
addition, a Supplemental Historic Information memo dated April 11, 2020, as a companion
document to the HRE was prepared that described the original building character when first
constructed around 1900, the modifications to the Higuera facade over the decades, and the
overall impacts of all the remodeling changes on the historical integrity of the structures as t hey
exist now.
The CHC made a motion to recommend to the City Council that 778 Higuera be removed from
the City’s Contributing List of Historic Properties, but continued action on the same request for
782, 786, and 790 Higuera Street. James Papp, newly elected Chairperson for the CHC,
provided a lengthy presentation for why the building addressed 782, 786, and 790 Higuera
Street was important both architecturally and historically and should be retained on the City’s
Contributing List of Historic Properties.
This memo provides a summary of the applicant’s submittal for the further evaluation of the
proposed delisting of the structures addressed 782, 786, and 790 Higuera Street from the City’s
Contributing List of Historic Properties. The original HRE report has been updated to reflect
new information brought up at the April 27, 2020 CHC meeting and further document why the
structures do not warrant listing on the City’s Contributing List of Historic Properties.
Specifically, there are references made to National Register Bulletin # 15 which details the U.S.
Department of the Interior’s criteria for the evaluation of the architectural and historical integrity
of structures.
Main Points
1. The building remodel done in 2009 was not a preservation, rehabilitation,
restoration, or reconstruction consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
With the review of the project by the CHC on 2-25-08 there was no documentation in the
staff report or meeting minutes regarding the seismic retrofit and remodel meeting SOI
Responses to 4-27-2020 CHC Discussion
Page 2
standards. The staff report evaluated the changes using the Historic Preservation
Program Guidelines and Community Design Guidelines. There is no debate that the
changes were an improvement and more in character with the turn-of-the-century
storefront motif in the area, but the changes did not rise to the level of an authentic,
historically accurate reconstruction consistent with SOI standards (three versus five
bays, new and taller parapet, and loss of key character-defining features and materials).
In addition, there was not documentation prepared during and after construction to
document consistency with SOI guidelines. Rather, it was an appliqué, an homage
(skillfully designed) to a heavily modified building, a false front that, while it speaks to the
original design that extended across the entire length of the wing, is a scaled down re-
creation and does not meet the definitions as outlined in the Standards.
2. The 2009 remodel uncovered some original brick on the façade, but most of the
original materials have been replaced.
There was discussion at the April 27th CHC meeting about the extent of original materials
on the building’s facade. Based on field surveys and discussion with original members
of the team that worked on that project, the figure below was developed. It shows that
most of the façade has been replaced over time. The original brick is relegated for the
most part to the area above storefronts and below the parapet. Ornamental details and
the new reconstructed cornice were made of architectural foam core products.
Responses to 4-27-2020 CHC Discussion
Page 3
3. The building’s association with architect H.S. Laird does not in itself meet
historical significance criteria.
Historical documentation from H.S. Laird himself noted that the small storefronts were of
modest design and intended to be remodeled over time and were not designed to be of
the same architectural character and integrity as either the Warden or Johnson
buildings. Laird even is quoted as noting that the structures were constructed to
accommodate the addition of another story. The HRE also notes that the buildings have
been extensively modified from their original design and configuration and there are
better examples of his work extant in the City of San Luis Obispo.
4. The building’s association with C.H. Johnson does not in itself meet historical
significance criteria.
James Papp mentioned that C.H. Johnson was a prominent figure in the community and
his association with the property was pertinent. The HRE notes that while C.H. Johnson
is cited as the “builder” of the properties, there are other, more important resources
extant that are associated with Johnson, including the Johnson Block at the corner of
Higuera and Chorro.