HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4a. 469 Dana St. (DIR-0075-2021)
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: 469 DANA STREET (DIR-0075-2021) REVIEW OF A PROPOSED
RECONSTRUCTED GARAGE WITH NEW ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ABOVE
BY: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
Phone Number: (805) 781-7593
Email: woetzell@slocity.org
APPLICANT: Larry Pearson REPRESENTATIVE: Chris Parker, C.P. Parker, Architect
RECOMMENDATION
Provide a recommendation to the Community
Development Director regarding the
consistency of a proposed new accessory
structure with the City’s historical
preservation policies (Accessory Dwelling
Unit over a garage; Contributing List property
in the Downtown Historic District)
1.0 BACKGROUND
The applicant proposes reconstruction of a
detached garage, with an Accessory
Dwelling Unit (ADU) to be added above the
garage, accessory to a single-family dwelling
(see Project Plans, Attachment A), on
property designated as a Contributing List
Resource in the City’s Inventory of Historic
Resources and located within the Downtown
Historic District. As provided by § 14.01.030 (C) (4) of the City’s Historic Preservation
Ordinance, the application is being referred to the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) for
its recommendation to the Community Development Director as to the consistency of this
alteration with historical preservation policies, including any relevant conditions of
approval the Committee may recommend.
2.0 DISCUSSION
The subject property is a residential parcel on the south side of Dana Street, about 850
feet west of Nipomo Street, within the Downtown Historic District, which encompasses
the oldest part of the City, with a smaller residential section along Dana Street that
includes a spectrum of settlement from the mid-19th Century to the 1920s (see District
description, Attachment B).
Meeting Date: 2/27/2023
Item Number: 4a
Time Estimate: 30 Minutes
Figure 1: 469 Dana St
Page 9 of 71
Item 4a
DIR-0075-2021 (649 Dana)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – February 27, 2023
It is adjacent to the course of San Luis Obispo Creek, with a portion of the recently
completed Downtown Terrace development visible across the creek channel, to the east
of the property. To the west is a multi-unit apartment complex, and across Dana Street to
the north, is the Rosa Butron Adobe, a modified adobe dwelling originally constructed in
1861.
The site is developed with a one-story single-family dwelling and accessory single-car
garage built in 1941 (Assessor information). The property was designated as a
Contributing List Resource in the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources in February 1987
(Resolution 6158), a designation applied to buildings that maintain their original historic
and architectural character and contribute to the unique or historic character of a
neighborhood, district, or to the City as a whole (Historical Preservation Ordinance
§ 14.01.050(B))
As described in City records, (see Attachment C), the dwelling on this property is
Mediterranean in style with Mission Revival influences. It is clad in stucco, topped by a
medium-slope tile roof. Windows are mostly rectangular, double-hung, but with an arched
picture window in front. An arched entry arcade, stucco chimney, and brick front wall with
wrought-iron fencing are identified as other characteristic elements of the dwelling. The
City’s Historic Context Statement provides summary descriptions of the characteristics of
both the Spanish Colonial Revival and Mission Revival styles, included as Attachment D
to this report.
Project Description
The applicant proposes to construct an expanded garage structure (see Project Plans,
Attachment A, and Figure 3) toward the rear of the property, to provide an additional
parking space in a tandem arrangement, with an 800 square-foot Accessory Dwelling Unit
(ADU) above the garage.
Figure 2: 469 Dana St (front elevation, Google Map Street View)
Page 10 of 71
Item 4a
DIR-0075-2021 (649 Dana)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – February 27, 2023
The predominant exterior material is stucco, with a Spanish tile roof cap around the
perimeter of the roofline. Windows are aluminum clad and rectangular, apart from an
arched picture window on the upper floor of the front elevation. A side staircase provides
access to the ADU entry under a partial archway. Decorative brackets are set under the
second floor on portions of the side, front, and rear elevations.
3.0 EVALUATION
Proposed work for alterations to listed historical resources must be consistent with
guidelines for Changes to Historic Resources set out in § 3.4 of the City’s Historic
Preservation Program Guidelines (HPPG). As they apply to accessory structures, these
guidelines aim to ensure that new accessory structures complement a primary structure’s
historic character through compatibility with its form, massing, color, and materials
(§ 3.4 (c)), and that work is carried out in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties1 (§ 3.4 (f)).
An Accessory Dwelling Unit consistent with standards set out in § 17.86.020 of the City’s
Zoning Regulations is normally approved ministerially, without discretionary review.
However, the proposed structure encroaches up to two feet into the required side setback,
for which an exception has been requested under this application.
1 Kay D. Weeks and Anne E. Grimmer. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic
Buildings. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service; Technical Preservation
Services, 2017
Figure 3: Proposed Garage and ADU; front elevation (left), side elevation (right)
Page 11 of 71
Item 4a
DIR-0075-2021 (649 Dana)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – February 27, 2023
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy
historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new
work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features,
size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its
environment.
Recommended Not Recommended
Related New Construction
Locating new construction far enough away
from the historic building, when possible, where
it will be minimally visible and will not negatively
affect the building’s character, the site, or
setting.
Placing new construction too close to the
historic building so that it negatively impacts
the building’s character, the site, or setting.
Designing new construction on a historic site or
in a historic setting that it is compatible but
differentiated from the historic building or
buildings.
Replicating the features of the historic building
when designing a new building, with the result
that it may be confused as historic or original to
the site or setting.
Ensuring that new construction is secondary to
the historic building and does not detract from
its significance
Adding new construction that results in the
diminution or loss of the historic character of
the building, including its design, materials,
location, or setting.
Constructing a new building on a historic
property or on an adjacent site that is much
larger than the historic building.
Designing new buildings or groups of buildings
to meet a new use that are not compatible in
scale or design with the character of the
historic building and the site …
Discussion: The proposed accessory structure replaces a smaller one-car garage,
providing two parking spaces and an Accessory Dwelling Unit to serve the existing
dwelling on the property. At two stories, it is appropriately scaled in relation to the single-
story dwelling on the site, and the one- and two-story residential structures in the vicinity.
It is situated about 20 feet behind the dwelling, reducing its visibility and apparent scale
as viewed from Dana Street. While it echoes the Spanish Colonial theme and style of the
primary dwelling, it is a separate structure with a two -story form and detailing (e.g.,
braces, stairway, greater variation in window sizing, etc.) that sufficiently distinguish it
from the dwelling, such that it can be d ifferentiated from the original construction. The
compatibility of its forms and materials and consistency of its scale and mass with that of
adjacent structures provide a basis for finding that it is compatible with the property’s
historical character and the character of the Downtown Historic District in terms of scale,
form, massing, materials, and details, as encouraged by Historic Preservation Program
Guidelines and Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties.
Page 12 of 71
Item 4a
DIR-0075-2021 (649 Dana)
Cultural Heritage Committee Report – February 27, 2023
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Construction of a residential accessory structure is categorically exempt from CEQA
environmental review, as New Construction of Small Structures (Guidelines § 15303).
5.0 ACTION ALTERNATIVES
5.1 Recommend that the Community Development Director find the project consistent
with the City's historical preservation policies, with any suggested conditions of
approval necessary to achieve such consistency.
5.2 Continue consideration of the item, with direction to staff and applicant
5.3 Recommend that the Community Development Director find the project
inconsistent with historical preservation policies, citing specific areas of
inconsistency
6.0 ATTACHMENTS
A - Project Plans (DIR-0075-2021 (469 Dana)
B - Downtown Historic District (Historical Preservation Program Guidelines)
C - Historical Preservation Information (469 Dana)
D - Architectural Styles (Historic Context Statement)
Page 13 of 71
Page 14 of 71
AREAS:EXISTING GARAGE: 343 SQ. FT.EXISTING MAIN RESID.: 1,620 SQ. FT.PROPOSED ADU: 800 SQ. FT.PROP. GARAGE ADDIT.: 490 SQ. FT.PROP. GARAGE TOT.: 833 SQ. FT.EXISTING MAIN LEVEL:EXISTING BASEMENT:1,254 SQ. FT.366 SQ. FT.EXISTING LOT SIZE: 15,984 SQ. FT.EXISTING LOT COVERAGE: 1,597 SQ. FT.(10%)PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE: 2,090 SQ. FT.(13%)PROJECT DESCRIPTION:PARCEL INFORMATION:A.P.N.: 002-402-005ZONING: R-3-HEXISTING USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCEPROPOSED HEIGHT: A.N.G. = 180.66', ALLOWED = 205.66'VICINITY MAP:PROJECTSITEPARKING: 2 ENCLOSED SPACES, 2 DRIVEWAY SPACESPROPOSED HEIGHT = 205.66'FIRE SPRINKLERS: NOT APPLICABLESHEET INDEX:A1.1A2.1A3.1PROJECT INFORMATION & SITE PLANGARAGE ADDIT. & ADU FLOOR PLANS / ELEVATIONSEXISTING ELEVATIONS OF MAIN RESIDENCEPROPOSED ADU PORCH: 53 SQ. FT.EXISTING GARAGEFOOTPRINTEXISTING TRELLISTO BE REMOVEDSHADED AREA INDICATESFOOTPRINT OF GARAGE& ACCESSORY DWELLING2'-9"5'-3"26'-8 1/2"EXISTING MAINRESIDENCEFOOTPRINT15'-7"3'-9 1/2"15'-10"C. P. PARKERA R C H I T E C TCONSULTANTS9 3 4 4 2 - 1 9 6 26 3 0 Q U I N T A N A R D. # 3 3 0M O R R O B A Y, C A.( 8 0 5 ) 7 7 2 - 5 7 0 0STAMPSPROJECTDRAWING PHASEREVISIONSSHEET TITLESHEET NO.C. P. PARKERA R C H I T E C TC H R I S T O P H E R P. P A R K E RA R C H I T E C TScaleUpdatedDwg. DateDrawn ByProject No.PROJECT INFO.A1.1.NER32-13-80RP.PARKERCHRISTOPHEC 30121FOETATSAINROFILACARCHITECLICENSEDTSITE PLANSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"CPPAS NOTED-DIRECTOR'SACTION-20-11812/17/22DETACHED ADUFORPROPOSEDLARRYPEARSON469 DANA STREETSAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIF.& GARAGE& SITE PLANADDITIONPage 15 of 71
TWO-CAR GARAGEPWDR.20'-2"19'-10"2'-0"19'-2"6'-6"40'-0"18'-0"11'-0"11'-0"5'-10"20'-8"9'-0"5'-10"2'-6"16'-8"2'-6"2'-0"6"9'-0"1'-6"14'-0"4'-0"3'-11 1/2"2'-6"4'-5 1/2"1'-6"1'-6"WALL LEGEND:9'-6"9'-1"22'-0"BEDROOMBATHTOIL.SHWR.ENTRYLIVINGKITCHEN20'-7 1/2"2'-6"3'-11 1/2"16'-8"20'-8"2'-6"44'-0"20'-0"13'-0"16'-11"6'-3 1/2"5'-8 1/2"15'-1"2'-0"11'-0"2'-6"2'-6 1/2"2'-0"7'-0"2'-0"2'-6"3'-1"16'-11"PORCH5'-11 1/2"4'-0"10'-8 1/2"2'-7"3'-4 1/2"4'-9"5'-11 1/2"3'-7"7'-1 1/2"TWO-CAR GARAGEACCESSORYDWELLING UNIT9'-6"9'-1"22'-0"C. P. PARKERA R C H I T E C TCONSULTANTS9 3 4 4 2 - 1 9 6 26 3 0 Q U I N T A N A R D. # 3 3 0M O R R O B A Y, C A.( 8 0 5 ) 7 7 2 - 5 7 0 0STAMPSPROJECTDRAWING PHASEREVISIONSSHEET TITLESHEET NO.C. P. PARKERA R C H I T E C TC H R I S T O P H E R P. P A R K E RA R C H I T E C TScaleUpdatedDwg. DateDrawn ByProject No.FLOOR PLANSA2.1.NER32-13-80RP.PARKERCHRISTOPHEC 30121FOETATSAINROFILACARCHITECLICENSEDTLOWER FLOOR PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"CPPAS NOTED-DIRECTOR'SACTION-20-11812/17/22DETACHED ADUFORPROPOSEDLARRYPEARSON469 DANA STREETSAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIF.SIDE ELEVATION (SOUTH)SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"& GARAGE& ELEVATIONSFRONT ELEVATION (WEST)SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"ADDITIONUPPER FLOOR PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"SIDE ELEVATION (NORTH)SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"REAR ELEVATION (EAST)SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"SECTIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"Page 16 of 71
15'-0"C. P. PARKERA R C H I T E C TCONSULTANTS9 3 4 4 2 - 1 9 6 26 3 0 Q U I N T A N A R D. # 3 3 0M O R R O B A Y, C A.( 8 0 5 ) 7 7 2 - 5 7 0 0STAMPSPROJECTDRAWING PHASEREVISIONSSHEET TITLESHEET NO.C. P. PARKERA R C H I T E C TC H R I S T O P H E R P. P A R K E RA R C H I T E C TScaleUpdatedDwg. DateDrawn ByProject No.EXISTINGA3.1.NER32-13-80RP.PARKERCHRISTOPHEC 30121FOETATSAINROFILACARCHITECLICENSEDTCPPAS NOTED-DIRECTOR'SACTION-20-11812/17/22DETACHED ADUFORPROPOSEDLARRYPEARSON469 DANA STREETSAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIF.& GARAGEELEVATIONSADDITIONFRONT ELEVATION (WEST)SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"EXISTING MAIN HOUSESIDE ELEVATION (SOUTH)SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"EXISTING MAIN HOUSEREAR ELEVATION (EAST)SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"EXISTING MAIN HOUSESIDE ELEVATION (NORTH)SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"EXISTING MAIN HOUSEPage 17 of 71
Page 18 of 71
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 19 of 71
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 20 of 71
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 21 of 71
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 22 of 71
42
***
Murray Adobe, 474 Monterey Street; Anderson House, 532 Dana
Street; Hotel Wineman, 849 Higuera Street; 762 Higuera Street
Page 23 of 71
Page 24 of 71
Page 25 of 71
Page 26 of 71
City of San Luis Obispo Architectural Character
Citywide Historic Context Statement
HISTORIC RESOURCES GROUP
140
MISSION REVIVAL
The Mission Revival style is indigenous to California. Drawing upon its own colonial past, Mission
Revival was the Californian counterpart to the Colonial Revival of the Northeastern states. Never
common beyond the Southwest, its regional popularity was spurred by its adoption by the Santa Fe
and Southern Pacific Railways as the preferred style for train stations and resort hotels. Features of the
California Missions were borrowed and freely adapted, often in combination with elements of other
revival styles.
Character-defining features include:
Red clay tile roofs with overhanging eaves and open rafters
Shaped parapets
Stucco exterior wall cladding
Arched window and door openings
Details may include bell towers, quatrefoil openings or patterned tiles
Old Gas Works, 280 Pismo Street, 1902. Source: Historic
Resources Group.
Grace Church, 1350 Osos Street. Source: Historic Resources Group.
Milestone Motel, 2223 Monterey Street, 1925. Source: City of San
Luis Obispo.
Page 27 of 71
City of San Luis Obispo Architectural Character
Citywide Historic Context Statement
HISTORIC RESOURCES GROUP
147
SPANISH COLONIAL REVIVAL
Enormously popular in Southern California from the late 1910s through the late 1930s, the Spanish
Colonial Revival style emerged from a conscious effort by architects to emulate older Spanish
architectural traditions, and break with Eastern colonial influences. At the peak of its popularity, design
features of other regions of the Mediterranean were often creatively incorporated, including those of
Italy, France, and North Africa. The result was a pan-Mediterranean mélange of eclectic variations on
Spanish Revival styles.
Character-defining features include:
Asymmetrical facade
Red clay tile hip or side-gable roof, or flat roof with a tile-clad parapet
Stucco exterior cladding, forming uninterrupted wall planes
Wood-frame casement or double-hung windows, typically with divided lights
Arched colonnades, window or door openings
Decorative grilles of wood, wrought iron, or plaster
Balconies, patios or towers
Decorative terra cotta or tile work
M.F. Avila House, 1443 Osos Street. Source: Historic
Resources Group. Division of Highways District 5 Office, 50 Higuera Street,
1931. Source: City of San Luis Obispo.
U.S. Post Office, 893 Marsh Street, 1925. Source: Historic
Resources Group.Mission College Prep Catholic High School, Palm
& Broad Streets. Source: Historic Resources Group.
Page 28 of 71
02‐27‐2023 Item 4a ‐ Staff Presentation
1
DIR-0629-2021 (469 Dana)
Review of new construction – garage and Accessory Dwelling Unit
Historic Preservation Ordinance
and Guidelines
Actions Subject to Cultural Heritage Committee Review (HPO §14.010.30 (C) (4))
New construction, additions or alterations located in historic districts, or on historically
listed properties, or sensitive archaeological sites
Changes to historic buildings (HPPG §3.3.4)
New accessory structures should complement the primary structure’s historic
character through compatibility with its form, massing, color, and materials
1
2
02‐27‐2023 Item 4a ‐ Staff Presentation
2
3
4
02‐27‐2023 Item 4a ‐ Staff Presentation
3
5
6
02‐27‐2023 Item 4a ‐ Staff Presentation
4
Historic Preservation Ordinance
and Guidelines
Changes to historic buildings (HPPG §3.3.4)
New accessory structures should complement the primary structure’s historic
character through compatibility with its form, massing, color, and materials
Scale
Two Stories, consistent with one- and two-story dwellings on site and in vicinity
Placement
Behind dwelling
Architectural Character
Mission Revival Influence (stucco, roof tile, arches)
Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and
spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with
the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its
environment.
Not RecommendedRecommended
Related New Construction
Placing new construction too close to the historic building so
that it negatively impacts the building’s character, the site, or
setting.
Locating new construction far enough away from the historic
building, when possible, where it will be minimally visible and
will not negatively affect the building’s character, the site, or
setting.
Replicating the features of the historic building when designing
a new building, with the result that it may be confused as
historic or original to the site or setting.
Designing new construction on a historic site or in a historic
setting that it is compatible but differentiated from the historic
building or buildings.
Adding new construction that results in the diminution or loss of
the historic character of the building, including its design,
materials, location, or setting.
Constructing a new building on a historic property or on an
adjacent site that is much larger than the historic building.
Designing new buildings or groups of buildings to meet a new
use that are not compatible in scale or design with the
character of the historic building and the site …
Ensuring that new construction is secondary to the historic
building and does not detract from its significance
SOI Standards (Rehabilitation)
7
8
02‐27‐2023 Item 4a ‐ Staff Presentation
5
DIR-0629-2021 (469 Dana)
Review of new construction – garage and Accessory Dwelling Unit
Action: Forward a recommendation to the Community Development Director regarding the compatibility
of the proposed new construction with historical preservation policies, particularly regarding compatibility
with the historical and architectural character of the property and District
9