HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 11 - Request to Remove 1136 Iris St. from the Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources
Department Name: Community Development
Cost Center: 4003
For Agenda of: April 6, 2021
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO REMOVE THE PROPERTY AT 1136 IRIS STREET FROM
THE CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES LIST OF THE CITY’S INVENTORY OF
HISTORIC RESOURCES
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC), adopt a Resolution
(Attachment A) removing the property at 1136 Iris Street from the Contributing Properties List
of the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources.
DISCUSSION
As described in the applicant’s statement (see Attachment B), the owners of the property at 1136
Iris Street have requested consideration of a request to remove the property from the City’s
Inventory of Historic Resources, as provided in Listing Procedures for Historic Resources, set
out in Section 14.01.060 (C) of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance.
Site and Setting
The property is a residential dwelling
on the north side of Iris Street, between
Ruth and Henry Streets in the East
Railroad area. The neighborhood is
characterized by single-family
residences, many with historical
character. The property is adjacent to,
but not within, the Railroad Historic
District, and the Southern Pacific
Water Tower (a Master List Historic
Resource) is located behind the
property, to the north, on an adjacent
lot.
Figure 1: 1136 Iris Street
Item 11
Packet Page 31
The site is developed with a two-bedroom single-family residence in the front portion of the site
and was built in 1910. An addition to the house, and a small duplex building to the rear, were
constructed as part of a 2013 expansion. The style of the house is described in City records1 as
“Victorian Cottage.”
Historic Listing
Historic preservation policies are contained in the Conservation and Open Space Element
(COSE) of the City’s General Plan, and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (SLOMC
Ch. 14.01) implements these policies.
Property may be designated as a Contributing List resource where a building on it maintains its
historic and architectural character, and contributes, by itself or in conjunction with other
structures, to the unique or historic character of a neighborhood, district, or to the City as a
whole.2 The subject property was designated as a “Contributing List Resource in 2007 following
a City-wide survey in the area known as the East Railroad neighborhood.
EVALUATION
Criteria for Historic Resource Listing
The applicant statement, prepared by Craig Smith, Architect, (Attachment B) summarizes the
applicant’s evaluation of the property’s eligibility for historic listing, as set forth in the
Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing (Historic Preservation Ordinance § 14.01.070).
The statement discusses the circumstances surrounding the request to remove the property from
the Historic Inventory, and concludes that the primary dwelling does not satisfy listing criteria to
a degree warranting designation as a Contributing List Resource:
The property should be removed from the list as it cannot satisfy the required and
appropriate evaluation criteria as a qualified, historic, and contributing property.
In order to be eligible for designation, a resource must exhibit a high level of historic integrity
and satisfy at least one of the evaluation criteria listed in § 14.01.070 of the City’s Historic
Preservation Ordinance. The Ordinance also provides that, while it is the general intent that
property not be removed from historic listing, property may be removed if the structure on it is
found to no longer meet eligibility criteria for listing (§ 14.01.060 (C)).
Architectural Criteria (§ 14.01.070 (A))
Style and Design. The primary residence on this property, although described as “Victorian
Cottage,” exhibits the “Neo-Classical Cottage” style described in the City’s Historical Context
Statement: simple house forms or cottages with fewer decorative features than other styles from
the period (see Attachment E).
Architect. There is no information to suggest the residence is associated with a famous architect
or builder of importance is associated with the structure. A search of permit records related to the
construction of the buildings on the site provides no indication of their architect or builder.
1 Architectural Worksheet from City historical property information file (see Attachment C)
2 See Historic Preservation Ordinance § 14.01.020 for definition of Contributing List Resource or Property
Item 11
Packet Page 32
Historic Criteria (§ 14.01.070 (B))
Person or Event. Similarly, there is no known association of the property with persons or events
significant to local history or evidence that the property was associated with any famous or
“first-of-its-kind” event.
Integrity
The front portion of the primary dwelling retains much of its original form and basic character. A
two-story addition was added to the back of the existing residence, providing a new master
bedroom and two-car garage. The addition was part of a 2013 project (Fig. 2), which included
construction of a duplex building at the rear of the lot. These additions have been identified by
the applicant as elements which have degraded the physical integrity of the structure.
Previous Advisory Body Action
On December 2, 2020, the Cultural Heritage Committee reviewed an Architectural Review
application (ARCH-0420-2021) for a proposal to construct of another addition, to the front of the
primary dwelling, involving relocation of its front façade closer to the street. In its discussions,
the Committee noted concerns with the existing conditions and alterations that have already
diminished the integrity of the building and found that the cumulative effects of the additions and
alterations already made on the property taken together with the new proposed alterations, would
further diminish the building’s integrity and the integrity of the setting, such that the property
would not retain its contributing status.
On February 22, 2021, the Cultural Heritage Committee reviewed this Historical Preservation
application (HIST-0020-2021) requesting removal of the property from the City’s Inventory of
Historic Resources. In considering this request, the Committee distinguished between the more
narrowly-focused question of a proposed addition’s compatibility with the property’s historical
character in terms of scale, massing, and architectural detailing (the subject of its prior review of
the development proposed under the Architectural Review application), and the larger question
of the eligibility of the property for historic listing that is the subject of this request, in light of
diminishment of the building’s integrity, which members of the committee previously discussed
in the December 2nd meeting, and as noted in the applicant’s statement.
Figure 2: Rendering of south and east building elevations (2013 additions)
Item 11
Packet Page 33
After discussion of the property’s continued eligibility for listing, the Committee recommended
that the City Council remove the property from the Contributing Properties List, finding that the
original dwelling has lost integrity due to previous additions and alterations to the property, to a
degree that its connection to its period of significance has been lost, such that it is no longer
eligible for listing as a Contributing List Resource since it could not convey architectural
significance (see Meeting Minutes, Attachment F).
Policy Context
The recommended action on this item is supported by historical preservation policies in section
3.0 of the Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan, and with
procedures and standards for listing of historic resources of The City’s Historic Preservation
Ordinance SLOMC Sections 14.01.060 & 14.01.070. Ordinance. The Historic Preservation
Ordinance states that in order to qualify as a resource, a high degree of integrity mush be
maintained and that at least one of the historic significance criteria is satisfied.
Public Engagement
Public notice of this hearing has been provided to owners and occupants of property near the
subject site, and published in a widely circulated local newspaper, and hearing agendas for this
meeting have been posted at City Hall, consistent with adopted notification procedures for
development projects.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Consideration of continued eligibility of this property for historic listing is exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as it is does not have the
potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and so is covered by the general
rule described in CEQA Guidelines § 15061 (b) (3). The determination of continued eligibility
for historic listing is limited to review of whether the subject site remains eligible for historic
resource listing according to the criteria set forth in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: No Budget Year: 2020-21
Funding Identified: No
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing Cost
General Fund N/A
State
Federal
Fees
Other:
Total
Item 11
Packet Page 34
The removal of the property from the contributing properties’ list has no fiscal impacts since the
property is not currently eligible for historic preservation benefits (i.e. Mills Act) and the historic
designation of the property has no bearing on City fiscal resources.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Maintain 1136 Iris Street on the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources, based on findings
that the property continues to satisfy the criteria for Historic Resource Listing of the City’s
Historic Preservation Ordinance.
2. Continue the item for additional information or discussion.
Attachments:
a - Draft Resolution
b - Applicant Summary
c - Architectural Worksheet
d - Evaluation Criteria
e - NeoClassical Cottage
f - CHC Minutes of 02-22-2021
Item 11
Packet Page 35
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2021 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, REMOVING THE PROPERTY AT 1136 IRIS
STREET FROM THE CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES LIST OF
HISTORIC RESOURCES (HIST-0020-2021)
WHEREAS, the applicants, Robert and Michelle Braunschweig, submitted on January 8,
2021 an application to remove the property located at 1136 Iris Street (“the Property”) from the
Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources (HIST-0020-2021); and
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted
a public hearing via teleconference from the City of San Luis Obispo, California on February 22,
2021 to consider the application, and recommended that the City Council remove the Property
from the Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
via teleconference on April 6, 2021 for the purpose of considering removal of the Property from
the Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing and meeting were made at the time and in the
manner required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the record of
the Cultural Heritage Committee hearing and recommendation, testimony of the applicant and
interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following
findings:
a) The property is not historically significant under the Integrity criteria set out in
§ 14.01.070 (C) of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. The primary dwelling
on the property no longer has the integrity to qualify as a Contributing Historic
Resource due to previous alteration.
b) The removal of the property from the City’s Contributing Properties List of Historic
Resources is consistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance because the buildings
on the property lack significance within the historical contexts addressed by the
Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing set out in § 14.01.070 of the City’s
Historic Preservation Ordinance. The eligibility of the property for inclusion in the
City’s Inventory of Historic Resources has been evaluated by an architectural historian.
As summarized in the applicant’s statement submitted with application HIST-0020-
2021, that evaluation concluded that the primary structure on the property no longer
has the integrity to qualify as a Contributing Historic Resource due to previous
alteration, and that the property is not a candidate for inclusion on the City’s Inventory.
Item 11
Packet Page 36
Resolution No. _____ (2021 Series) Page 2
R _____
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. Consideration of continuing eligibility of this
property for historic listing is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). The determination of continued eligibility for historic listing is limited to review of
whether the subject site remains eligible for historic resource listing according to the criteria set
forth in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. A determination that the property is not eligible
for historic listing will cause the removal of the property from the City's Inventory of Historic
Resources but will have no direct physical effect on the environment, as the determination does
not approve any physical site development. As such, it is does not have the potential for causing a
significant effect on the environment and is covered by the general rule described in CEQA
Guidelines §15061(b)(3).
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby
determine that the structures located on the Property do not meet eligibility criteria for listing as
Historic Resources and removes the Property from the Contributing Properties List of Historic
Resources, subject to the following condition:
Upon motion of Council Member ______ , seconded by Council Member ______ , and
on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this ______ day of __________ 2021.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick, City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, on ____________________________.
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington, City Clerk
Item 11
Packet Page 37
crsa | architecture
January 07, 2021
Community Development
℅ Cultural Heritage Committee
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA. 93401
Subject: Historical Preservation Application ARCH-0470-2020 (1136 Iris ):
Request to De-List 1136 Iris Property from the Historic List
Dear Cultural Heritage Committee,
Please accept this letter requesting to “delist” the stated and existing property at 1136 Iris Street.
This request is based on the inability to establish any conforming findings set by the State of
California Interior Secretary’s historical preservation conditions and the City of San Luis Obispo
Historic Preservation Ordinance, per the given and established facts with no contributing
“historical” significant elements to maintain eligibility.
The base summary elements are that no important or significant person has occupied, owned or
used the property; no “famous” architect of importance has designed the structures; nor is there
an element of any historical use, event or justification that can be made, or determined, to
establish any historical significant for the property to remain on the list. Furthermore, the ability
to retain existing material integrity, with “original” materials (i.e.: wood shiplap siding), cannot be
assured or verified without detailed, investigated and substantiated inspection and verification.
This later issue has been found to be relevant in the first two phases of the project and are
contributory to this current and proposed phase of work.
Removal from the contributing properties list of historic resources, does not change the proposed
scope of work for the relocation and expansion of the existing front façade and entry porch. The
property should be removed from the list as it cannot satisfy the required and appropriate
evaluation criteria as a qualified, historic and contributing property.
Sincerely,
Craig R. Smith, AIA
Principal Architect
CRSA Architecture
CRSA Architecture – 860 Walnut Street, Suite B – San Luis Obispo, CA. 93401
805.544.3380 – crsa@craigrsmithaia.com
Item 11
Packet Page 38
Item 11
Packet Page 39
Item 11
Packet Page 40
12
Zoning, or remove the property from historic listing if the structure on the property no longer
meets eligibility criteria for listing, following the process for listing set forth herein.
14.01.070. Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing
When determining if a property should be designated as a listed Historic or Cultural Resource,
the CHC and City Council shall consider this ordinance and State Historic Preservation Office
(“SHPO”) standards. In order to be eligible for designation, the resource shall exhibit a high
level of historic integrity, be at least fifty (50) years old (less than 50 if it can be demonstrated
that enough time has passed to understand its historical importance) and satisfy at least one of the
following criteria:
A. Architectural Criteria: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or
method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values.
(1)Style: Describes the form of a building, such as size, structural shape and details
within that form (e.g. arrangement of windows and doors, ornamentation, etc.). Building
style will be evaluated as a measure of:
a. The relative purity of a traditional style;
b. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity although the
structure reflects a once popular style;
c. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a particular social
milieu and period of the community; and/or the uniqueness of hybrid styles and how
these styles are put together.
(2)Design: Describes the architectural concept of a structure and the quality of artistic
merit and craftsmanship of the individual parts. Reflects how well a particular style or
combination of styles are expressed through compatibility and detailing of elements.
Also, suggests degree to which the designer (e.g., carpenter-builder) accurately
interpreted and conveyed the style(s). Building design will be evaluated as a measure of:
a. Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its artistic merit, details and
craftsmanship (even if not necessarily unique);
b. An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among carpenter-builders,
although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not be superior.
(3)Architect: Describes the professional (an individual or firm) directly responsible for
the building design and plans of the structure. The architect will be evaluated as a
reference to:
Wtem277
Packet Page 41
13
a. A notable architect (e.g., Wright, Morgan), including architects who made
significant contributions to the state or region, or an architect whose work influenced
development of the city, state or nation.
b. An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship, made significant contributions to San
Luis Obispo (e.g., Abrahams who, according to local sources, designed the house at
810 Osos - Frank Avila's father's home - built between 1927 – 30).
B. Historic Criteria
(1) History – Person: Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California,
or national history. Historic person will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which
a person or group was:
a. Significant to the community as a public leader (e.g., mayor, congress member,
etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognition - locally, regionally, or
nationally.
b. Significant to the community as a public servant or person who made early, unique,
or outstanding contributions to the community, important local affairs or institutions
(e.g., council members, educators, medical professionals, clergymen, railroad
officials).
(2) History – Event: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to
the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the
United States. Historic event will be evaluated as a measure of:
(i) A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of whether
the impact of the event spread beyond the city.
(ii) A relatively unique, important or interesting contribution to the city (e.g., the Ah
Louis Store as the center for Chinese-American cultural activities in early San Luis
Obispo history).
(3) History-Context: Associated with and also a prime illustration of predominant
patterns of political, social, economic, cultural, medical, educational, governmental,
military, industrial, or religious history. Historic context will be evaluated as a measure
of the degree to which it reflects:
a. Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the historic
effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected with the building (e.g.,
County Museum).
b. Secondary patterns of local history, but closely associated with the building (e.g.,
Park Hotel).
Wtem277
Packet Page 42
14
C. Integrity: Authenticity of an historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the
survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Integrity
will be evaluated by a measure of:
(1) Whether or not a structure occupies its original site and/or whether or not the
original foundation has been changed, if known.
(2) The degree to which the structure has maintained enough of its historic character
or appearance to be recognizable as an historic resource and to convey the reason(s)
for its significance.
(3) The degree to which the resource has retained its design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling and association.
14.01.080 Historic District Designation, Purpose and Application
A. Historic (H) District designation. All properties within historic districts shall be designated
by an “H” zoning. Properties zoned “H” shall be subject to the provisions and standards as
provided in Ordinance 17.54 (Zoning) of the Municipal Code.
B. Purposes of Historic Districts. The purposes of historic districts and H zone designation are
to:
(1) Implement cultural resource preservation policies of the General Plan, the
preservation provisions of adopted area plans, the Historic Preservation and
Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines, and
(2) Identify and preserve definable, unified geographical entities that possess a significant
concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, or objects united
historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development;
(3) Implement historic preservation provisions of adopted area and neighborhood
improvement plans;
(4) Enhance and preserve the setting of historic resources so that surrounding land uses
and structures do not detract from the historic or architectural integrity of designated
historic resources and districts; and
(5) Promote the public understanding and appreciation of historic resources.
C. Eligibility for incentives. Properties zoned as Historic Preservation (H) shall be eligible for
preservation incentive and benefit programs as established herein, in the Guidelines and other
local, state and federal programs.
Wtem277
Packet Page 43
City of San Luis Obispo Architectural Character
Citywide Historic Context Statement
HISTORIC RESOURCES GROUP
138
NEO-CLASSICAL COTTAGE
The term “Neo-Classical Cottage” is used to describe simple house forms or cottages with fewer
decorative features than other styles from the period. While vernacular residences may display certain
characteristics of recognizable styles, decorative detailing is typically confined to the porch or cornice
line.
Character-defining features include:
Symmetrical façade
Simple square or rectangular form
Gabled or hipped roof with boxed or open eaves
Wood exterior cladding
Simple window and door surrounds
Details may include cornice line brackets
Porch support with turned spindles or square posts
1203 Pismo Street, c.1900. Source: Historic Resources
Group.
1211 Pismo Street, 1908.Source: Historic Resources
Group.
Item 11
Packet Page 44
Minutes – Cultural Heritage Committee Meeting of February 22, 2021 Page 1
Minutes
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Wednesday, February 22, 2021
Regular Meeting of the Cultural Heritage Committee
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage Committee was called to order on
Wednesday, February 22, 2021 at 5:30 p.m. via teleconference, by Chair Shannon Larrabee.
ROLL CALL
Present: Committee Members Karen Edwards, Damon Haydu, Glen Matteson, Vice Chair Eva
Ulz, and Chair Shannon Larrabee
Absent: Committee Member Wendy McFarland
Staff: Senior Planner Brian Leveille, and City Clerk Teresa Purrington
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None
End of Public Comment--
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1.Approve the minutes of the December 2, 2020 Cultural Heritage Committee meeting.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER MATTESON, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER EDWARDS, CARRIED 5-0-1 (Member McFarland absent), to
approve the minutes of the December 2, 2020 Cultural Heritage Committee meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
2.1136 Iris Street. Review of a request to remove the property at 1136 Iris Street from the
Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources in the City’s Inventory of Historic
Resources (this action is not subject to environmental review); Project Address: 1136 Iris
Street; Case #: HIST-0020- 2021; Zone R-2; Robert and Michelle Braunschweig,
owner/applicant.
Senior Planner, Brian Leveille presented the staff report and responded to Committee inquiries.
Applicant representative, Craig Smith, responded to Committee inquiries.
Item 11
Packet Page 45
Minutes – Cultural Heritage Committee Meeting of February 22, 2020 Page 2
Public Comment
None
End of Public Comment--
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER MATTESON, SECONDED BY
VICE CHAIR ULZ, CARRIED 5-0-1 (Member McFarland absent) to remove the property
from the Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources with the Finding that the building
no longer has the integrity to qualify as a Contributing Historic Resource due to previous
alterations.
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION
3.Evaluation of the Mills Act Program
Planning Intern Chris Murphy provided a PowerPoint presentation and responded to
Committee inquiries.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
Senior Planner Leveille provided an agenda forecast.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:42 p.m. The next Regular Cultural Heritage Committee meeting
is scheduled for Monday, March 22, 2021 at 5:30 p.m., via teleconference.
APPROVED BY THE CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE: 03/22/2021
Item 11
Packet Page 46