HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-25-2022 CHC Agenda Packet
Cultural Heritage Committee
AGENDA
Monday, April 25, 2022, 5:30 p.m.
Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
The City of San Luis Obispo has returned to in-person meetings. Zoom participation will not be
supported. For those attending in-person, City facilities will be at limited capacity and masks are
strongly recommended.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT:
Public Comment prior to the meeting (must be received 3 hours in advance of the meeting):
Mail - Delivered by the U.S. Postal Service. Address letters to the City Clerk's Office at 990
Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, 93401.
Email - Submit Public Comments via email to advisorybodies@slocity.org. In the body of your
email, please include the date of the meeting and the item number (if applicable). Emails will not
be read aloud during the meeting.
Voicemail - Call (805) 781-7164 and leave a voicemail. Please state and spell your name, the
agenda item number you are calling about, and leave your comment. Verbal comments must be
limited to 3 minutes. Voicemails will not be played during the meeting.
*All correspondence will be archived and distributed to members, however, submissions received
after the deadline will not be processed until the following day.
Public Comment during the meeting:
Meetings have returned to an in-person format. To provide public comment during the meeting,
you must be present in the Council Chambers. Zoom participation will not be supported. The
Council Chambers are located in City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo.
Electronic Visual Aid Presentation. To conform with the City's Network Access and Use Policy,
Chapter 1.3.8 of the Council Policies & Procedures Manual, members of the public who desire
to utilize electronic visual aids to supplement their oral presentation are encouraged to provide
display-ready material to the City Clerk by 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Contact the
City Clerk's Office at cityclerk@slocity.org or (805) 781-7100.
Pages
1.CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chair Ulz will call the Regular Meeting of the Cultural Heritage Committee
to order.
2.OATH OF OFFICE
Deputy City Clerk Kevin Christian will administer the Oath of Office for two new
Cultural Heritage Committee members, listed below:
Valerie Butterbredt•
John Tischler•
3.ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
As required by the Cultural Heritage Committee Bylaws, each year the
Committee must elect two members to serve as Chair and Vice Chair for a one-
year term.
Recommendation:
To elect a Committee Member to the position of Chair for a one-year term.
Recommendation:
To elect a Committee Member to serve as Vice Chair for a one-year term.
4.PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
The public is encouraged to submit comments on any subject within the
jurisdiction of the Cultural Heritage Committee that does not appear on this
agenda. Although the Committee will not take action on items presented during
the Public Comment Period, the Chair may direct staff to place an item on a
future agenda for discussion.
5.CONSENT
Matters appearing on the Consent Calendar are expected to be non-
controversial and will be acted upon at one time. A member of the public may
request the Cultural Heritage Committee to pull an item for discussion. The
public may comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the
three-minute time limit.
Recommendation:
To approve Consent Item 5a.
5.a.CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - MARCH 28, 2022 CULTURAL
HERITAGE COMMITTEE MINUTES
5
Consideration of the Culture Heritage Committee Minutes of March 28,
2022.
6.PUBLIC HEARINGS
Note: The action of the Cultural Heritage Committee is a recommendation to the
Community Development Director, another advisory body, or to City Council
and, therefore, is not final and cannot be appealed.
6.a.989 CHORRO ST. (ARCH-0052-2022) REVIEW OF MISSION PLAZA
RESTROOM REPLACEMENT AND CAFÉ IMPROVEMENTS
(MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN PHASE I)
9
Recommendation:
Forward a recommendation to the Community Development Director
regarding the consistency of the proposed Mission Plaza Restroom
Replacement and Cafe Project with the City’s historical preservation
polices and standards.
7.COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
7.a.STAFF UPDATES AND AGENDA FORECAST
Receive a brief update from Senior Planner Brian Leveille.
8.ADJOURNMENT
The next Regular Meeting of the Cultural Heritage Committee is scheduled for
May 23, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm
Street, San Luis Obispo.
LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available -- see the Clerk
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible
to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate
alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who
requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting
should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100 at least
48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the
Deaf (805) 781-7410.
Agenda related writings or documents provided to the Cultural Heritage
Committee are available for public inspection on the City’s website:
https://www.slocity.org/government/mayor-and-city-council/agendas-and-
minutes. Meeting video recordings can be found on the City’s website:
http://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=60971&dbid=0&repo=CityCl
erk
1
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes
March 28, 2022, 5:30 p.m.
Teleconference - Broadcast via Webinar
Cultural Heritage
Committee Members
Present:
Committee Member John Ashbaugh, Committee Member Chuck
Crotser, Committee Member Karen Edwards, Committee
Member Leslie Terry, Vice Chair Eva Ulz, Chair Shannon
Larrabee, (one vacant seat)
City Staff Present: Senior Planner Brian Leveille and Deputy City Clerk Kevin Christian
_____________________________________________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage Committee was
called to order on March 28, 2022 at 5:33 p.m. by Chair Larrabee with Members
present via teleconference.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Public Comment:
Brian Leveille - Announced that this was Chair Larrabee's final meeting and
thanked her for her service.
--End of Public Comment--
3. CONSENT
3.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 2022 CULTURAL
HERITAGE COMMITTEE MINUTES
Approve the Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes of January 24, 2022.
Motion By Member Ashbaugh
Second By Member Edwards
To approve the minutes of the January 24, 2022 meeting of the Cultural
Heritage Committee with a correction to show that Vice Chair Ulz was
recused from Item 4a.
Ayes (6): Member Ashbaugh, Member Crotser, Member Edwards,
Member Terry, Vice Chair Ulz, and Chair Larrabee CARRIED (6 to 0)
Page 5 of 42
2
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
4.a 559 PISMO ST. (ARCH-0121-2022) CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION
TO THE BIDDLE HOUSE (MASTER LIST RESOURCE) FOR AN
ELEVATOR
Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell presented the staff report and responded
to Commission inquiries.
Applicant representative Timothy Becher and owner Adian Lenz provided
a brief overview of the project, shared project goals and challenges, and
responded to questions raised.
Chair Larrabee opened the Public Hearing
Public Comments:
None
--End of Public Comment--
Chair Larrabee closed the Public Hearing
Motion By Vice Chair Ulz
Second By Member Crotser
Recommend to the Community Development Director that the proposed
new construction is consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation
Ordinance (SLOMC Ch. 14.01), with added conditions as presented by
staff concerning Wood Material and Windows, and to address issues
raised, by consultation with the named sub-committee, concerning the
new gable's height and pitch, the "stick work" of the additions façade, and
differentiation of the new addition from the existing structure on the south
side. Further, the Committee formed an ad-hoc sub-committee consisting
of Chuck Crotser and Karen Edwards to assist staff in reviewing final
plans.
Ayes (6): Member Ashbaugh, Member Crotser, Member Edwards,
Member Terry, Vice Chair Ulz, and Chair Larrabee
CARRIED (6 to 0)
5. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
5.a STAFF UPDATES AND AGENDA FORECAST
Senior Planner Brian Leveille provided an update of upcoming projects.
Page 6 of 42
3
6. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:51 p.m. The next Regular Meeting of the
Cultural Heritage Committee is scheduled for April 25, 2022, at 5:30 p.m. in the
Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo. Please note
that with the return of in-person meetings. Zoom participation will no longer be
supported.
_________________________
APPROVED BY CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE: XX/XX/2022
Page 7 of 42
Page 8 of 42
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF MISSION PLAZA RESTROOM REPLACEMENT AND CAFÉ
IMPROVEMENTS (MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN PHASE I); ARCH-0052-2022
(989 CHORRO)
BY: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
Phone Number: (805) 781-7593
Email: woetzell@slocity.org
APPLICANT: City of San Luis Obispo
REPRESENTATIVE: Shelsie Moore, Supervising Civil Engineer
RECOMMENDATION
Forward a recommendation to the Community Development Director regarding the
consistency of the proposed Mission Plaza Restroom Replacement and Cafe Project with
the City’s historical preservation polices and standards.
1.0 BACKGROUND
The City Council adopted the Mission Plaza Concept Plan in 2017 (Attachment A),
intended to revitalize and refresh this important community hub and provide the City a
road map for planning of future maintenance and development projects for the Plaza. In
2018 RRM Design Group (RRM) was tasked with preparation of a Preliminary Design for
the Mission Plaza Restroom Replacement and Cafe Project, an early component of the
overall Concept Plan, including replacement of the Plaza restrooms, construction of a
small kiosk building, and creation of an outdoor seating area at the western end of Mission
Plaza.
City staff met with stakeholders and Advisory Bodies to receive input on the scope and
design intent of the Phase I project and worked with RRM to produce a Preliminary Plan
Set, with further guidance provided by through several Advisory Body study sessions in
the latter half of 2019. In February 2020 the City Council revie wed the Preliminary Plan
Set at a Study Session and provided final direction on completing the preliminary design
phase.
RRM has completed a final draft of plans for the Mission Plaza Restroom Replacement
and Cafe Project (Attachment B), which are the subject of this Architectural Review
application.
Meeting Date: 4/25/2022
Item Number: 6a
Time Estimate: 60 Minutes
Page 9 of 42
Item 6a
ARCH-0052-2022 (989 Chorro)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – April 25, 2022
2.0 DISCUSSION
2.1 Site and Setting
Downtown Historic District. The Downtown Historic District encompasses the oldest part
of the City of San Luis Obispo and contains one of its highest concentrations of historic
sites and structures, with the historic Mission at its center. Some structures date to the
Spanish and Mexican eras (1772-1850) and the American pioneer settlement era (1850s-
1870), although most of the surviving structures date from the 1870s to the 1920s. The
District was developed along the City’s earliest commercial corridors (Monterey, Higuera,
Chorro, Garden and Marsh Streets) and has retained its historical use as the City’s
commercial and civic center.
Architectural styles present in the Downtown District include examples of Classical
Revival, Italianate and Romanesque structures, and more modest early American
commercial, with the majority of Downtown buildings designed and built by local builders,
including the Maino family, John Chapek, and Frank Mitchell. More detail about the
District and its predominant architectural features is provided in the City’s Historic Context
Statement, and an excerpt from that document is provided as Attachment C to this report.
Mission Plaza. Mission Plaza has a unique and special character that reflects the
community’ s culture and history. Since 1772, and has become the community’ s
geographical, cultural and recreational center. The area in front of the church, the site of
Mission Plaza, has been used for public gatherings of various sorts from its earliest days.
As the community and the street network grew, the land in front of the Mission no longer
functioned as a public gathering space, with Monterey Street and private land holdings
making up the area between the Mission and San Luis Creek. During the 1960s, a plan
was developed for Mission Plaza which would close the area surrounding the mission to
vehicular traffic, restore and beautify the creek, and create a landscaped public park. In
1970, almost 200 years after the founding of the Mission, Mission Plaza was dedicated
to the City.
Today, Mission Plaza is the heart of San Luis Obispo and has been used for numerous
festivals and gatherings. Though the importance of the Plaza is well understood, it should
also be noted that it has not itself been designated as an historical resource and is not
included in the Inventory of Historic Resources.
Murray Adobe. The Murray Adobe (Figure 1), today
a small, two-room remnant of an adobe and wood
structure at the west end of Mission Plaza, is
estimated to have been constructed in about 1850.
For much of its existence it was covered in wood
siding and connected to an adjacent larger framed
residential building, the extent of which is evident in
the outline of the existing trellis-covered area
adjacent to the Adobe. The adobe was for a time
the residence of Walter Murray, co-founder and
editor of the Tribune, one of the early local Figure 1: Murray Adobe
Page 10 of 42
Item 6a
ARCH-0052-2022 (989 Chorro)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – April 25, 2022
newspapers, still in existence today. He was also an attorney, an agent for Wells Fargo,
and District Judge, and instrumental in forming the Vigilance Committee in 1858.
Restoration efforts were undertaken in 1972, including removal the greater portion of the
adobe, judged to be destabilized beyond saving, leaving only the small eastern portion of
the building, and creation of the trellis-covered patio seen today. The Murray Adobe has
been included as a Master List Resource in the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources
since the completion of the first Citywide survey in 1983 (see Historic Resources
Inventory, Attachment D). Although directly adjacent to the project site, it should be noted
that no changes to the Adobe building are proposed, and the Adobe is outside the limits
of the project scope, as show in the project Site Plan (Sheet A2, Project Plans,
Attachment B).
Restrooms. The adobe-style restrooms
at the western end of Mission Plaza
were constructed in the early 1970s, as
the City’s Mission Plaza project neared
completion. Recent stakeholder
interviews conducted during the
development of the 2017 Mission Plaza
Concept Plan raised concern about the
safety, design, and location of the
facilities, leading to inclusion of new
restrooms in the Plan.
2.2 Project Details
With the project’ s close proximity to the
Murry Adobe and Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa in mind, the architectural theme is
intended to complement the historical structures on and near Mission Plaza without
conflicting or competing with them.
Restroom Replacement. Responding to the need to provide increased restroom capacity
to serve Plaza functions and activities, enhance accessibility to the facilities, and to
address security concerns that have developed around the existing building, this project
Figure 2: Restrooms (Existing)
Figure 3: New Restroom Building (right) and kiosk (left)
Page 11 of 42
Item 6a
ARCH-0052-2022 (989 Chorro)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – April 25, 2022
includes a replacement restroom building, sited near to, but at an angle from, the current
building position. The new restrooms are provided in a single -story building utilizing a
brick base material accented by metal paneling features and standing seam roof (see
Colors and Materials, Sheet A9, in Plans, Attachment B). The building is embellished with
a decorative metal mesh transom band and accent facia with a brass metal finish.
Coloration of building features has been lightened in response to prior direction from the
Committee, now reflecting, for example, the color of the bear fountain at the northeast
end of the Plaza. In lieu of plaster, brick veneer, with pilaster detailing and precast
concrete bands, has been added to further soften and complement the overall feel o f the
building.
The materials and details incorporated into the building design are inspired by
neighboring historic buildings in the Downtown. The use of rose -colored brick (“Harvard
Blend” color) and metal grill work draw inspiration from the History Ce nter to the
southwest of the Plaza, and pressed metal panels reflect the storefront of the Sinsheimer
building to the northeast. These materials and details wrap around all four sides of the
building and provide public art opportunity on the side of the building facing the Museum
of Art.
Kiosk Building. Another primary goal of the project is to activate the western end of the
Plaza, adjacent to the restrooms and Adobe, with an enhanced environment for positive
activities, to further address security and safety concerns that have developed around the
current facilities. To that end, a small kiosk building will be installed that can serve a
number of small-scale uses, such as a small café space, and a complementary outdoor
seating area provided with updated surfaces and improvements. Its footprint is of an
octagonal shape that increases visibility around the building. Its strategic placement in
line with the Murray Adobe, a bit farther back from the street, enhances views toward the
Adobe.
As with the new restroom building, the kiosk building incorporates colors, materials, and
decorative details that are intended to complement the important historical buildings
within and near the Plaza without competing with or mimicking them. It employs the same
metal paneling features and standing seam roof (see Colors and Materials, Sheet A9, in
Plans, Attachment B), decorative metal mesh transom band and accent facia, but owing
to the openness of its service counter areas, brick surfaces are more limited, with a band
of brick creating a base to the building. Glass doors and windows provide flexibility to the
configuration and use of the building and are protected by roll-up security doors when the
building is not in use.
Pavers and Outdoor Seating. To complement the kiosk building and enhance active use,
the area around the restrooms and kiosk will be resurfaced using clay brick pavers
arranged in a concentric circular pattern, designed for consistency with the pathway
connecting this area the creek bridge behind. The non-historic trellis adjacent to the
Murray Adobe will be removed and replaced with a newly-developed flexible outdoor
seating area with movable table and chairs over a type of decomposed granite surface,
within a brick banding of paving that reflects the fuller extent of the former footprint of the
Adobe. Potted olive trees (providing historical reference to trees found today within the
Page 12 of 42
Item 6a
ARCH-0052-2022 (989 Chorro)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – April 25, 2022
Mission courtyard and Plaza) can be placed as needed depending on space needs (see
Materials and Furnishings, Sheet A8 of Plans, Attachment B). The seating area will be lit
with overhead string lights to help further activate the area, with no other structure
proposed near, or connected to, the Adobe itself. In addition to achieving activation and
positive use of this portion of the Plaza, this outdoor area presents an opportunity to tell
the story and history of the Murray Adobe, for example through interpretive signage or in
conjunction with appropriate future re-use of the Adobe building.
Associated Improvements. Existing pole lights will be replaced with classic iron fabricated
lights (see Site Materials and Furnishings, Sheet A8 of Plans, Attachment B) that are
reinterpretations of the forged iron work of the turn of the century and specifically designed
to complement the architecture of the Mission. As with the building fixtures, these are
designed and fabricated by Steven Handelman Studios with the goal of achieving a
timeless and authentic appearance. The movable table and cha irs match existing plaza
furniture used by the City for the Plaza, and bike racks, benches and litter bins and
containers will be consistent with City standards, for a unified appearance. Planter pots
are designed for consistency with terra cotta pots used on Monterey Street, stacked stone
material will be re-used for a re-purposed stone seat wall, and granite curbing is
incorporated around the Olive tree planters.
3.0 EVALUATION
Guidance for evaluating the consistency of the Restroom Replacement and Kiosk project
(Phase I of the Mission Concept Plan) with the City’s policies for the preservation of
historical and cultural resources is taken from several policy documents, as summarized
below, including:
City of San Luis Obispo General Plan
Historical Preservation Program Guidelines
Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties
Figure 4: Site Plan
Page 13 of 42
Item 6a
ARCH-0052-2022 (989 Chorro)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – April 25, 2022
3.1 General Plan1
Land Use Element (LUE)
4.16. Building Conservation and Compatibility. The City shall ensure that new buildings
are compatible with architecturally and historically significant buildings, but not
necessarily the same style.
Conservation and Open Space Element
3.3.2. Demolitions. Historically or architecturally significant buildings shall not be
demolished or substantially changed in outward appearance …
3.3.4. Changes to historic buildings. New buildings in historical districts should reflect
the form, spacing and materials of nearby historic structures.
3.3.5. Historic districts and neighborhoods. In evaluating new public or private
development, the City shall identify and protect neighborhoods or districts having
historical character …
3.5.4. Archaeologically sensitive areas. Development within an archaeologically
sensitive area shall require a preliminary site survey by a qualified archaeologist
knowledgeable in Native American cultures, prior to a determination of the potential
environmental impacts of the project.
3.6.1. Cultural Heritage Committee. The City’s Cultural Heritage Committee will help
identify and advise on suitable treatment for archaeological and historical resources;
and review new development to determine consistency with cultural resource
preservation guidelines or standards.
3.6.3. Construction within historic districts. The Cultural Heritage Committee will provide
specific guidance on the construction of new buildings within historic districts.
It is the policy of the City to ensure that architecturally and historically significant buildings
are identified, preserved and restored, and protected, and that new buildings are
compatible with architecturally and historically significant buildings. General Plan policies
for preservation and protection of historical resources are implemented by the City’s
Historic Preservation Ordinance and its supporting Historic Preservation Program
Guidelines. For construction of buildings, these policies are centered on assuring new
construction is compatible with the character of an historic district and architecturally
compatible with nearby historic resources.
1 The General Plan is available online at: https://www.slocity.org/government/department-
directory/community-development/planning-zoning/general-plan
Page 14 of 42
Item 6a
ARCH-0052-2022 (989 Chorro)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – April 25, 2022
3.2 Historic Preservation Ordinance & Program Guidelines.2
Historic Preservation Program Guidelines (HPPG)
3.1.1 Conformance with design standards. Construction in historic districts and on
properties that contain listed historic resources shall conform with the goals and policies
of the General Plan, the Historic Preservation Ordinance, these Guidelines, the
Community Design Guidelines, any applicable specific or area plan, and the Secretary
of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
3.2.1 Architecturally compatible development within Historic Districts. New structures
in historic districts shall be designed to be architecturally compatible with the district’s
prevailing historic character as measured by their consistency with the scale, massing,
rhythm, signature architectural elements, exterior materials, siting and street yard
setbacks of the district's historic structures. New structures are not required to copy or
imitate historic structures, or seek to create the illusion that a new building is historic.
3.2.2 Architectural compatibility. The CHC reviews development in historic districts for
architectural compatibility with nearby historic resources, and for consistenc y with
applicable design and preservation policies, standards, and historic district descriptions
in Section 5.2. New development should not sharply contrast with, significantly block
public views of, or visually detract from, the historic architectural character of historically
designated structures located adjacent to the property to be developed, or detract from
the prevailing historic architectural character of the historic district.
As discussed in the Project Details section of this report, above, this project includes two
primary structures: demolition and replacement of an existing restroom building dating
from the 1970s with new restroom facilities measuring about 470 square feet in building
area; and installation of a 165 square-foot octagonal kiosk building for use as a small
café, or similar function. Both buildings are a single -story in height, of limited size and
scale, and set within the open space of the western portion of Mission Plaza. Their
materials, colors, and detailing have been caref ully considered for architectural
compatibility with the style and details exhibited by important historic buildings in the
Downtown Historic District, without seeking to directly copy or mimic these buildings. The
new structures have been sited in a manne r that not only addresses security concerns,
but which also enhances views through to the Murray Adobe from the street.
The Murray Adobe is outside of, though adjacent to, the project area for the Restroom
Replacement and Kiosk Building project (see Site Plan) and will remain undisturbed.
Although no changes to this building are proposed with this project, and no element of
the project is proposed to directly connect to or otherwise come into contact with the
building, it is recognized that care should be taken during development of the outdoor
seating area and adjacent pavers so that the work is carried out in a manner that does
not disturb the building perimeter or contribute to damage to its foundation. Staff
recommends the following condition of approval to protect the Murray Adobe from
disturbance associated with the project:
2 The Ordinance and Guidelines are available at: https://www.slocity.org/government/department-
directory/community-development/historic-and-archeological-preservation/historic-preservation
Page 15 of 42
Item 6a
ARCH-0052-2022 (989 Chorro)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – April 25, 2022
Adobe Protection. A qualified Historic Architect or Architectural Historian with
demonstrated experience working with Adobe structures shall be retained to monitor and
provide protection guidance for any work in the immediate vicinity of the perimeter of the
Murray Adobe. Final plans for construction permits to complete this project shall note this
requirement and construction permits shall not be issued until a monitoring plan has been
approved by the Community Development Director. Improvements adjacent to the base
and perimeter of the Adobe shall be limited to decomposed granite, pea gravel, or similar
surface, appropriately sloped to promote drainage away from the building and protect the
building from damage by moisture, runoff, or new vegetation.
3.3 Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines
While this area has been subject to disturbance during its history, having been previously
developed, and with the creation of the Mission Plaza in the 1970s, including the restroom
building to be replaced, it is considered to be a Sensitive Area under the City’s
Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines. Although the work will occur
in previously disturbed areas, staff recommends inclusion of the following condition of
approval to ensure there are no impacts to archaeological resources:
Archaeological Monitoring. The applicant shall provide an archeological monitoring plan
prepared by a City -qualified archeologist to be implemented during construction. The plan
shall identify the qualified professional who will conduct the monitoring and circumstances
where a Native American tribal representative or qualified site monitor is required. The
plan shall recommend specific procedures for responding to the discovery of archeological
resources during the construction of the project consistent with Section 4.60 of the
Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines. The plan shall be submitted
as a part of the building permit.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The work proposed under the Mission Plaza Restroom Replacement and Kiosk Building
Project is covered by Categorical Exemptions from further environmental review,
described in the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA Guidelines). Replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and
facilities, such as the Plaza restrooms, is exempt under CEQA Guidelines § 15302
(Replacement or Reconstruction), as the new restroom structure will be located on the
same site as the structure replaced and has the same purpose and capacity. Construction
of the kiosk building is exempt under Guidelines § 15303 (New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures), as it is small in size (470 square feet in floor area), will
be put to uses which are allowed in the Public Facilities (PF) Zone, with all necessary
services and facilities available. Renovation of this portion of the Plaza to create an
outdoor seating area involves minor alteration of an existing public facility, exempt under
Guidelines § 15301 (Existing Facilities), where this portion of the Plaza remains in use as
a Park facility.
Page 16 of 42
Item 6a
ARCH-0052-2022 (989 Chorro)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – April 25, 2022
5.0 ACTION ALTERNATIVES
5.1 Concur with the discussion presented in this staff report and forward a
recommendation to the Community Development Director finding the project consistent
with the City’s historical preservation policies and standards, including suggested
conditions of approval.
5.2 Continue consideration of the item with direction to staff and the applicant on
pertinent issues;
5.3 Recommend that the Director find the project inconsistent with the Historic
Preservation Ordinance, citing specific findings of fact related to inconsistency of the
proposed project with relevant historic preservation policies.
6.0 ATTACHMENTS
A - Mission Plaza Concept Plan (2017)
B - Mission Plaza Phase I Project Plans (Apr 13, 2022)
C - Downtown Historic District (Citywide Historical Context Statement)
D - Historic Resources Inventory, Murray Adobe
Page 17 of 42
Page 18 of 42
LIMIT OF MASTER PLAN AREAMISSION SAN LUIS OBISPO de TOLOSAHISTORYCENTERMUSEUMOF ARTPrivate ResidenceBROAD STMONTEREY STMONTEREY STLuna RedCHORRO STPALM STBROAD STSAN LUIS OBISPO CREEKCreeky TikiSLO BrewThe NetworkMission MallCeladonFrog & PeachNovoWarden BuildingHistory CenterFuture ExpansionMetroBrewingCompanyWARDEN BRIDGEMAIN PLAZACENTRAL PLAZASCULPTUREGARDENADOBE PATIOKEY to FEATURES1. Scramble Crossing2. Main Entrance3. Performance Platform4. Interactive Recirculating Water Feature (at-grade)5. Trellis6. Flag-Poles7. 5HFRQÀJXUHG6WHSV8. Bear Fountain9. Emergency Access10. %HQFKW\SLFDO11. 0XUUD\$GREH,QWHUSUHWLYH&HQWHU12. Creek Overlook13. Pedestrian Bridge14. 3LFQLF7DEOHW\SLFDO15. Living Holiday Tree16. Interactive Art Node - Native Animals17. Cafe18. Restroom19. Maintenance Storage20. 0RRQ7UHH,QWHUSUHWLYH([KLELW21. Elevated Boardwalk to Creek22. :RRQHUI ZLWKRSWLRQIRUIXOOVWUHHWFORVXUH 23. %ROODUGIRU7UDIÀF&RQWURO24. Lawn25. Bike Racks26. ,QWHUSUHWLYH([KLELWV27. Potential Future Creek-Walk Connection Underneath Broad Street Bridge28. Relocated El Camino Real Bell29.%XV6WRS3HGHVWULDQ'URS2II124567891012121314151616171819202122222323243NOTESA. 0XVHXPRI$UWEXLOGLQJVKRZQUHÁHFWVWKHDSSURYHGUHQRYDWLRQH[SDQVLRQGHVLJQB. +LVWRU\&HQWHUFRPSOH[VKRZQUHÁHFWVDSRWHQWLDOIXWXUHH[SDQVLRQYLVLRQDQGQRWDQDSSURYHGGHVLJQC. Vehicular access across Warden %ULGJHZLOOEHSUHVHUYHG'Lighting and electrical service (240V) will be XSJUDGHGDQGGLVWULEXWHGWKURXJKRXWSOD]DE. Murray Adobe will be rehabilitated subject to further technical studies.141126272529MISSION PLAZASAN LUIS OBISPO, CA0’40’20’10’ 60’AUGUST 1, 2017SCALE 1” = 20’DRAFT CONCEPT PLANPage 19 of 42
Page 20 of 42
MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFET1#0256-02-UR18APRIL 20221/4” = 1’-0” (24X36 SHEET)024 8048 161/8” = 1’-0” (12X18 SHEET)TITLE SHEETMISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLANIMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEPROJECT DIRECTORYOWNER:CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPOARCHITECT:RRM DESIGN GROUP3765 S. HIGUERA STREET, SUITE 102SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401CONTACT: DEBBIE RUDDPHONE: (805)-543-1794EMAIL: DLRUDD@RRMDESIGN.COMPROJECT ADDRESS:989 CHORRO STREETAPN:002-423-006PROJECT DESCRIPTIONThe City of San Luis Obispo proposes to improve the outdoor restroom area in Mission Plaza. This effort includes demolishing the existing 825 SF restroom building and constructing a new 468 SF restroom and a 165 SF cafe building. The existing Murray Adobe will be preserved and is planned for future reuse. The café component will be accompanied by an outdoor patio. Estimated hours of operation will be 7:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. or until sunset. Quantity of employees shall be determined by the City of San Luis Obispo. General improvements to the site include improving accessibility (ADA), increasing restroom capacity, and enhancing safety. There are not any parking requirements associated with this project. SHEET INDEXPROJECT STATISTICSZONING:PF-H[PUBLIC FACILITY [WITH A HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY]PROJECT SIZE:0.16 ACRES(7,132 SF)MAX LOT COVERAGE:60% (7,132 SF)PROPOSED COVERAGE:10% (165 + 468 = 633 SF)KIOSK GROSS FOOTPRINT:165 SFRESTROOM GROSS FOOTPRINT:468 SFEXISTING PERVIOUS AREA:4,110 SFPROPOSED PERVIOUS AREA:2,355 SF PROPOSED LANDSCAPE AREA:1,386 SFEXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE:3,022 SFPROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE:4,777 SFMAX. ALLOWED HEIGHT:35’-0” FT.MAX. PROPOSED HEIGHT:14’-8” FT.PF-HMonterey StBroad
S
t
Chorr
o
St
ZONING MAPT1 TITLE SHEETA2 ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLANA3 FLOOR PLANSA4 RESTROOM ELEVATIONSA5 RESTROOM DETAILSA6 KIOSK ELEVATIONSA7 CONCEPT SKETCHA8 MATERIALS AND FURNISHINGS - SITEA9 COLORS AND MATERIALS - BUILDINGSA10 VISUAL SIMULATIONA11 SITE SECTION ‘A’A12 SITE SECTION ‘B’A13 IRRIGATION COMPLIANCE & MWELO CALCULATIONS - SITE* LIGHTING PHOTOMETRIC STUDIES TO BE SUBMITTEDAS A DEFERRED SUBMITTALPage 21 of 42
36” AND 18.5” REDWOOD TREES TO REMAINFUTURESCULPTUREGARDENBENCHFUTURE LOCATION OF PUBLIC ART KIOSKEXISTING BRICK PATHWAYTO REMAINPROPOSEDCAFE/ KIOSK 165 SF BROAD STREETPLANTER POTS WITH OLIVE TREESSTRING LIGHTSRELOCATED18” OLIVE TREE24” OLIVE TREE TO REMAINPOLE LIGHTOUTLINE OF FORMER BUILDING‘GRANITECRETE’PATIOEXISTINGADOBEMOVEABLE BISTRO TABLES10” & 12” SYCAMORE TREES TO BE REMOVEDEXISTING TREESEXISTING TREES TO REMAIN 5EXISTING TREES TO BE REMOVED4EXISTING TREE TO BE RELOCATED1ACCESSIBLE ROUTE WITH LOW RE-PURPOSED STONE SEATWALLSSTEP WITH HANDRAIL++++CLAY BRICKPLAZAPLANTERPOTSFLEXIBLE EXISTING LAWN AREAPROPOSED TREESSPECIESQUANTITYSIZEOLEA EUROPAEA‘WILSONII’OLEA EUROPAEA‘MANZANILLO’JACARANDAMIMOSIFOLIAEXISTING SIDEWALK TO REMAIN 18” OLIVE TREE TO BE RELOCATEDPLANTER AREALAWNTO REMAIN6” & 12” JACARANDA TREE (MULTI-TRUNK) TO BE REMOVEDTRASH RECEPTACLESRIGHT-OF-WAYPOLE LIGHTPROPOSEDRESTROOM468 SF6(N POTS)24” BOXFIELDGROWN36” BOX11+36” OLIVE TREE TO BE REMOVEDMURAL ON RESTROOM WALL“MOONTREE”RE-PURPOSED STONE SEAT WALLCOMMUNAL BAR HEIGHT SEATINGRE-PURPOSEDGRANITE CURBS AT TREE WELLSBIKE RACKSBRICK STEPS INTERPRETIVEPLAQUESTEPS TO LAWN AREARAILING TO BE REPLACED WITH CITY STANDARDEXISTING TREES TO REMAINLIMIT OF IMPROVEMENTSLIMIT OF IMPROVEMENTSLIMIT OF IMPROVEMENTS
SEE SHEETS A11 & A12 FOR ADDITIONAL AREA CALCULATIONSLIMIT OF IMPROVEMENTSMISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA2#0256-02-UR18APRIL 20221” = 10’-0” (24X36 SHEET)0 5 10 2001020 401” = 20’-0” (12X18 SHEET)ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLANPage 22 of 42
MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA3#0256-02-UR18APRIL 20221/4” = 1’-0” (24X36 SHEET)024 8048 161/8” = 1’-0” (12X18 SHEET)FLOOR PLANS26' - 0"18' - 0"AADD112211' - 0"4' - 0"11' - 0"BBCCRESTROOMCHASERESTROOM1/4" = 1'-0"1GROUND FLOOR PLANAADD1144BBCC13' - 6"13' - 6"3' - 0"7' - 6"3' - 0"13' - 6"13' - 6"3' - 0"7' - 6"3' - 0".,26.22333' - 0"7' - 6"3' - 0"3' - 0"7' - 6"3' - 0"RESTROOM FLOOR PLAN1/4" = 1'-0" (24 X 36 SHEET)1KIOSK FLOOR PLAN1/4" = 1'-0" (24 X 36 SHEET)2WALK-UP COUNTERWORKING COUNTERSHELVESSHELVESSHELVESSHELVESPLUMBINGCHASE & FIRE RISER ROOMPage 23 of 42
MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA4#0256-02-UR18APRIL 20221/2” = 1’-0” (24X36 SHEET)012 4024 81/4” = 1’-0” (12X18 SHEET)RESTROOM ELEVATIONS0’-0”0’-0”8’-0”8’-0”14'-2”14'-2”GROUND LEVELGROUND LEVELT.O.P.T.O.P.MAX HEIGHTMAX HEIGHTEAST ELEVATION1/2" = 1'-0" (24 X 36 SHEET)1NORTH ELEVATION1/2" = 1'-0" (24 X 36 SHEET)3WEST ELEVATION1/2" = 1'-0" (24 X 36 SHEET)2SOUTH ELEVATION1/2" = 1'-0" (24 X 36 SHEET)4Page 24 of 42
MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA5#0256-02-UR18APRIL 20221/4” = 1’-0” (24X36 SHEET)024 8048 161/8” = 1’-0” (12X18 SHEET)RESTROOM DETAILSmetal panel 6’ high privacy screenPHWDOZRRGORRNVRIÀWmetal grill detail - ventilation transomaccent lanternmetal paneling inspired by mission door detailingprecast concrete capbrick basemetal cornice detailingPHWDOFRUQHUÀQLDOVaccent brass fasciarestroom skylightVRIÀWOLJKWLQJspace for publicrestroom skylightVWDQGLQJVHDPPHWDOURRÀQJmetal cornice detailingPHWDOFRUQHUÀQLDOVPHWDOZRRGORRNVRIÀWmetal grill detail - ventilation transomsoldier course brick capPHWDOSDQHOLQJ FRORUÀQLVKWRPDWFK0LVVLRQ3OD]DEHDUVWDWXHV brick relief/pilaster rhythmprecast concrete capbrick base5(6752205($5'(7$,/ &5((.)$&,1* N.T.S.25(675220)5217'(7$,/ 3/$=$)$&,1* N.T.S.1art opportunitiesPage 25 of 42
MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA6#0256-02-UR18APRIL 2022KIOSK ELEVATIONS0’-0”0’-0”9’-4”9’-4”14'-8”14'-8”GROUND LEVELGROUND LEVELT.O.P.T.O.P.MAX HEIGHTMAX HEIGHTNORTH/EAST/WEST ELEVATIONS1/2" = 1'-0" (24 X 36 SHEET)1&251,&(75$1620'(7$,/ 5(6752206,08/$5 N.T.S.3%$6('(7$,/ 5(6752206,08/$5 N.T.S.4SOUTH ELEVATION1/2" = 1'-0" (24 X 36 SHEET)21/2” = 1’-0” (24X36 SHEET)012 4024 81/4” = 1’-0” (12X18 SHEET)PHWDOURRIÀQLDOmetal cornice detailingPHWDOFRUQHUÀQLDOVaccent metal signagePHWDOZRRGORRNVRIÀWopaque glass transomaccent lanternglass door/windowsmetal paneling FRORUÀQLVKWRPDWFK0LVVLRQ3OD]DEHDUVWDWXHV walk-up serving countermetal paneling inspired bymission door detailingbrick baseVWDQGLQJVHDPPHWDOURRÀQJPHWDOFRUQHUÀQLDOVwood menu signroll-up security doorsPage 26 of 42
MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA7#0256-02-UR18APRIL 20221/4” = 1’-0” (24X36 SHEET)024 8048 161/8” = 1’-0” (12X18 SHEET)CONCEPT SKETCHPage 27 of 42
LOW CURBS AROUND TREE WELLSRE-PURPOSED GRANITE CURBS FROM CITY OF SLOBRICK PAVERS - HERRINGBONE PATTERNCOLORS FADING DARK TO LIGHTPEDESTRIAN POLE LIGHTWROUGHT IRON¶*5$1,7(&5(7(· 3(50($%/($&&(66,%/( COLOR: GOLDBIKE RACKSPEAK RACKS, 4-BIKE SINGLE SIDED16” WHEEL SPACING, COLOR: BLACKCOMMUNAL BAR TABLE LANCASTER BAR HEIGHT INDUSTRIAL STOOLS, COLOR: BLACK WITH CUSTOM BAR TABLESTONE WALLSRE-USE EXISTING MATERIAL FROM EXISTING RAISED PLANTERSPLANTER POTS FOR TREESSYBERTECH, GROUND LEVEL PLANTER, CONICAL, COLOR: TERRACOTTABENCHRENAISSANCE MEMORIAL BENCH MODEL: 2806-6-MP, COLOR: BLACKDusty RoseMountain RoseSummer Wheat Sutter GoldEXISTINGADOBEPROPOSEDCAFE/KIOSKPROPOSEDRESTROOMMOVEABLE BISTRO TABLES LANCASTER 36” TABLE & INDUSTRIAL CAFE CHAIRS, COLOR: BLACK *Lighting shown shall include LED fixture mounted within roof plate to serve as a shield per Lighting and Night Sky Preservation SLOMC 17.70.100.LANTERN W: 14”LANTERN H: 30”WEIGHT: 15 LBSBULB: (3) 60 W E-26MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA8#0256-02-UR18APRIL 20221/4” = 1’-0” (24X36 SHEET)024 8048 161/8” = 1’-0” (12X18 SHEET)MATERIALS AND FURNISHINGS - SITEPage 28 of 42
WOOD LOOK METAL SOFFITHUNTER DOUGLAS RED RIVER PECAN 8467CONCRETE BASE CAPVENTURA CAST STONESEAGULLWALL LIGHTSTEVE HANDELMAN STUDIOCORDOVA WALL BRACKETCAST IRON*Lighting shown shall include LED fixture mounted within roof plate to serve as a shield per Lighting and Night Sky Preservation SLOMC 17.70.100.W: 9”H: 28”WEIGHT: 15 LBSPROJECTION: 12”BULB: (3) 2 WATT LEDMISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA9#0256-02-UR18APRIL 20221/4” = 1’-0” (24X36 SHEET)024 8048 161/8” = 1’-0” (12X18 SHEET)COLORS AND MATERIALS - BUILDINGSABCAAABGFFBCCCDGDDEEDEFGACCENT SIGNAGE/FASCIABRASS METAL BRUSHED FINISHBRICK BASE - THIN WAINSCOTH.C. MUDDOX - HARVARD BLENDDECORATIVE TRANSOM BANDOPAQUE GLASS WITH METAL (KIOSK)METAL MESH WITH METAL (RESTROOM) METAL PANELING, STANDING SEAM ROOF & STOREFRONTANTIQUE BRONZE FINISH (COLOR TO MATCH MISSION PLAZA BEAR STATUES)Page 29 of 42
MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA10#0256-02-UR18APRIL 2022VISUAL SIMULATIONPage 30 of 42
MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA11#0256-02-UR18APRIL 2022SITE SECTION ‘A’NOTE:SEE SHEETS A3 - A6 FOR BUILDING FLOOR PLANS AND ELEVATIONS PATIO AREAKIOSKLANDSCAPE AREA - EXISTING TURFAB KEY MAPBENCHBENCHTRASHCHBENCHBENCHTRASHBENCHBENCHELECMONTEREY ST.BENCHBENCHTTTRASHELELELLLEEECECCCCCEEEAPage 31 of 42
MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA12#0256-02-UR18APRIL 2022SITE SECTION ‘B’NOTE:SEE SHEETS A3 - A6 FOR BUILDING FLOOR PLANS AND ELEVATIONS AB KEY MAPRESTROOM(E) SLOPELANDSCAPE(E) PATH(E) ‘MOON TREE’BENCHBENCHTRASHCHBENCHBENCHTRASHBENCHBENCHELECMONTEREY ST.BENCHBENCHTTTRASHELELLLLEEEEEECECCCCCBPage 32 of 42
IRRIGATION DESIGN CRITERIA:THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL UTILIZE THE FOLLOWING METHODS:ALL TREES, POTTERY, SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER AREAS WILL BE IRRIGATED ON SEPARATE HYDROZONES WITH DRIP OR BUBBLER IRRIGATION. DRIP AND BUBBLER IRRIGATION WILL BE USED TO APPLY WATER ACCURATELY TO THE PLANT ROOT ZONES AT A RATE THAT IT CAN INFILTRATE TO IMPROVE IRRIGATION EFFICIENCY. LOW SPRINKLER HEADS WILL BE USED WHERE NEEDED TO APPLY WATER UNIFORMLY AND SLOWLY.OVER-SPRAY AND EVAPORATION WILL BE MINIMIZED AND MATCHED PRECIPITATION RATE NOZZLES WILL BE USED WITHIN EACH CONTROL VALVE AND CIRCUIT.A WEATHER SENSING, SELF ADJUSTING ‘SMART’ CONTROLLER WILL BE USED TO MONITOR THE IRRIGATION WATER AND MANAGE DAILY WATER CONSUMPTION TO THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH HYDROZONE. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL BE CONTROLLED BY A TIMER WITH THE ABILITY TO ADJUST RUNTIMES BY DATA COLLECTED BY RAIN AND ET SENSORS.THE WATERING SCHEDULE WILL BE BASED UPON PLANT NEEDS, SOIL TYPE, SLOPE, AND SEASON, WHERE IRRIGATION WILL BE SCHEDULED TO AVOID WATERING RAIN OR FREEZE EVENTS.PLANTING DESIGN CRITERIA:THE PLANT PALETTE DESCRIBED IS COMPRISED OF PLANT MATERIAL AND TREES KNOWN TO THRIVE IN THE LOCAL CLIMATE AND SOIL CONDITIONS. THE PLANT PALETTE IS COMPRISED OF PLANTS NATIVE TO MEDITERRANEAN CLIMATES. 20% OR LESS OF THE PLANT MATERIAL WILL REQUIRE MODERATE WATER, AND THE REMAINDER WILL REQUIRE LOW TO VERY LOW WATER ONCE ESTABLISHED. THIS PLANT PALETTE COUPLE WITH THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESCRIBED ABOVE WILL MEET OR EXCEED THE STATE AND LOCAL STANDARDS FOR WATER CONSERVATION THROUGH WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION DESIGN. ALL ABOVE GROUND UTILITIES WILL BE SCREENED WITH VEGETATION.MWELO CALCULATIONS:ESTIMATED WATER USE TOTALS: 17,906 GAL/YRMAXIMUM ALLOWED WATER ALLOWANCE: 20,068 GAL/YRReference Evapotranspiration (Eto)_____43.8Hydrozone # /Planting Description*Plant Factor (PF)Irrigation MethodIrrigation Efficiency (IE)ETAF (PF/IE) Landscape Area (Sq, ft)ETAF x Area Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU)1 - DT Shrubs 0.25 Drip 0.910.27797218.96 5,9462-DT Trees 0.25 Bubbler 0.80.3114043.75 1,1883-Mod Shrubs 0.5 Drip 0.910.5500.00 04 - Mod Trees 0.5 Bubbler 0.80.632012.50 3395 - Turf 0.9 Spray 0.711.2700.00 0Totals 957 275.21 7,473Recreation142911,650Edibles100Other100Totals 429 11,650ETWU Total19,12323,345Hydrozone #/Planting Description Irrigation Method Irrigation Efficiency ETWU (Annual Gallons Required)E.G. overhead spray or drip 0.75 for spray head Eto x 0.62 x (ETAF x Area)1.) front lawn0.81 for drip2.) low water use plantings3.) medium water use planting*MAWA (Annual Gallons Allowed) = (Eto) (0.62) [(ETAF x LA)]+((1-ETAF) x SLA)]ETAF CalculationsRegular Landscape AreasTotal ETAF x Area (B)Total Area (A)Average ETAF B / AAll Landscape AreasTotal ETAF x Area (B+D)Total Area (A+C)Sitewide ETAF (B+D) / (A+C)Average ETAF for Regular Landscape Areas must be 0.55 or below for residential areas, and 0.45 or below for non-residential areas. Regular Landscape AreasSpecial Landscape AreasMaximum Allowed Water Allowance (MAWA)where 0.62 is a conversion factor that converts acre-inches per acre per year to gallons per square foot per year. LA is the total landscape area in square feet. SLA is the total special landscape area in square feet, and ETAF is .55 for residential areas and 0.45 for non-residential areas.where 0.62 is a conversion factor that converts acre inches per acre per year to galls per square foot per year. MISSION PLAZA CONCEPT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE I - RESTROOM AND CAFEA13#0256-02-UR18APRIL 20221/4” = 1’-0” (24X36 SHEET)024 8048 161/8” = 1’-0” (12X18 SHEET)IRRIGATION COMPLIANCE & MWELO CALCULATIONS - SITEA13Page 33 of 42
Page 34 of 42
38
5.2.2 Downtown Historic District
Setting
The Downtown Historic District encompasses the oldest part of the City of San Luis Obispo and
contains one of the City’s highest concentrations of historic sites and structures. The historic
Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa is at the geographic and historic center of the district, which
is bounded roughly by Palm and Marsh Streets on the north and south, Osos and Nipomo Streets
on the east and west, plus Dana Street as the northwest corner. Although some structures date to
the Spanish and Mexican eras (1772-1850) and the American pioneer settlement era (1850s-
1870), the majority of surviving structures date from the 1870s to the 1920s. The district is
comprised of two subdivisions: the Town of San Luis Obispo, recorded 1878 and the Mission
Vineyard Tract recorded in March of 1873. The Downtown Historic District has an area of 61.5
acres and in 2010 includes 98 designated historic structures.
The Downtown Historic District was developed along the City’s earliest commercial corridors
along Monterey, Higuera, Chorro, Garden and Marsh Streets, and has retained its historical use
as San Luis Obispo’s commercial and civic center. Commercial structures were laid out in a
regular grid pattern, with buildings set at the back of sidewalks and relatively narrow (60 foot
right-of-way) streets. The resultant narrow streets and zero building setbacks reinforce the
district’s human scale and vibrant Main Street image.
Site Features and Characteristics
Common site features and characteristics
include:
A. Buildings located at back of sidewalk
with zero street and side setbacks
B. Finish floors at grade
C. Recessed front entries oriented toward
the street
D. Front facades oriented toward the
street
E. Trees placed at regular intervals along
the street
Architectural Character
Built during the San Luis Obispo’s boom time circa 1870s-1910s (when the Town’s population
increased over 800 percent from 600 people in 1868 to 5,157 in 1910), the district’s commercial
architectural styles reflect the increasing wealth of the times. Architectural styles present in the
Downtown District include examples of Classical Revival, Italianate and Romanesque structures,
and more modest early American commercial. Although a few structures were designed by
outside architects (specifically from San Francisco and Los Angeles), the majority of Downtown
buildings were designed and built by local builders, including the Maino family, John Chapek,
721, 717 and 715 Higuera Street, North
Elevation
Page 35 of 42
39
Doton Building, 777 Higuera
Street, North Elevation
and Frank Mitchell.
Predominant architectural features include:
A. One to two stories (occasionally three)
B. Flat or low pitched roof, often with a parapet
C. Wide entablature or projecting cornice that often
includes classical architectural details such as
dentils, brackets and molding
D. First floor windows are horizontally oriented
storefront windows, often with display space
facing street. In multi-story structures, windows
are vertically oriented, typically with double
hung, wood sashes, and symmetrically arranged
so that they are dimensionally taller than their
width
E. Structures follow simple rectilinear or “boxy”
buildings forms
F. Masonry or smooth stucco wall siding
G. Contrasting bulkheads along base of street façade
H. Use of awnings, historic signs, second-story
overhangs and canopies
I. Use of transom windows above storefronts
Individually Contributing Elements in the Downtown District
Not all historic resources in the Downtown Historic
District were built during the district’s period of
significance of 1870-1930. These buildings generally do
not exhibit the signature architectural elements described
above but do contribute to the historic character of San
Luis Obispo in their own right based on age, architectural
style or historical association. By virtue of their
significance, these resources also merit preservation.
For example, the Doton Building is an example of
Streamline Moderne architecture from the 1930s. This
building was placed on the Master List as a significant
resource due to its craftsmanship and the rarity of this
particular style in San Luis Obispo. Additional examples
include the Laird building at 1023 Garden. Built in the
1880s, the Laird building is one of the City’s last
remaining Pioneer False front buildings. The Golden State
Creamery building at 570 Higuera is historically
significant to San Luis Obispo for its association with the
Smith Building and Union
Hardware Building, 1119 and
1129 Garden Street, East
Elevation
Page 36 of 42
40
dairy industry, an industry integral to the City’s development.
Non-Contributing Elements in Downtown
Non -contributing buildings are those that both do not meet the criteria outlined above and have
not achieved historical significance. Most of the post—1950 contemporary buildings in the
district fall into this latter category.
Non-contributing architectural styles,
materials or site features include:
A. Buildings setback from street or side
property lines
B. Building height, form or massing
which contrasts markedly with the
prevailing 2-3 story pattern
C. Wood, metal or other contemporary
material siding, or “faux”
architectural materials or features.
D. Asymmetrical arrangement of doors
and windows
E. Raised, non-recessed or offset street
entries to buildings
Residential
Although the majority of the Downtown District is commercial, within the district is a smaller
residential section, primarily along Dana Street and also down Monterey Street to the west of the
mission. This subsection includes a spectrum of settlement from the mid 19th century to the
1920s. Lots were generally platted in regular grids, although curved along Dana to accommodate
the creek.
Site features and characteristics- Residential:
A. Street yard setbacks of 20 feet or
more, often with low walls (2 feet) and
fences at sidewalk
B. Coach barn (garage) recessed into rear
yard
C. Front entries oriented toward the street
with prominent porch and steps
D. Front facades oriented toward the
street
The architectural styles in the residential area
of the Downtown district are varied and 756 Palm Street, South Elevation
1010 Nipomo Street, South and West
Elevations
Page 37 of 42
41
represent several different periods of development in San Luis Obispo. The oldest, vernacular
Adobe, dates back the early pioneer period. The Rosa Butrón de Canet adobe at 466 Dana is
from this period and is one of the few surviving adobes in San Luis Obispo. Folk and High
Victorian structures built during the population influx at turn of the twentieth century. Finally,
Spanish Revival, a style that achieved popularity in San Luis Obispo during the housing boom of
1920s and 1930s which was itself funded in part by the maturation of war bonds from World
War I.
Architectural features- Residential:
A. One and rarely two story buildings
B. Gable and hip roof types predominate
C. Traditional fenestration, such as
double-hung, wood sash windows,
ornamental front doors, wood screen
doors
D. Painted wood or smooth stucco
siding.
469 Dana Street, North Elevation
Page 38 of 42
42
***
Murray Adobe, 474 Monterey Street; Anderson House, 532 Dana
Street; Hotel Wineman, 849 Higuera Street; 762 Higuera Street
Page 39 of 42
Page 40 of 42
Page 41 of 42
Page 42 of 42