HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 05 - Historic Significance Determination for a Contributing List Property (1156 Peach) Department Name: Community Development
Cost Center: 4003
For Agenda of: June 2, 2020
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE DETERMINATION FOR A CONTRIBUTING
LIST PROPERTY AT 1156 PEACH STREET
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC), adopt a Resolution
(Attachment A) determining that the structure at 1156 Peach Street does not meet eligibility
criteria for listing as an Historic Resource and removing the property from the Contributing
Properties List of Historic Resources.
DISCUSSION
The owner of the property at 1156 Peach Street has applied for a determination of historical
significance of the property and requests that the property be removed from the City’s Inventory
of Historic Resources, as provided in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (SLOMC §
14.01.060 (C)).
Site and Setting
The property is a residential parcel on the north side of Pacific Street, just west of Toro Street,
within the Mill Street Historic District. The neighborhood is characterized by modest single-
family dwellings built in the early 20th Century.
The site is developed with a single-family dwelling and detached accessory structure, estimated
to have been built between 1909 and 1926. The buildings on the property exhibit characteristics
of the Residential Vernacular style, characterized by their simplicity and with little or no
distinguishing decorative features, lack of any characteristics of recognizable styles. City records
provide sparse information about the property, summarizing the architectural style as “Modified
Plain Cottage” (Attachment B).
Historic Listing
Historic preservation policies are set out in the Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE)
of the City’s General Plan. Significant historic and architectural resources are to be preserved
and rehabilitated, and their demolition, or substantial change to them, is to be avoided (COSE §
3.3). The City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (SLOMC Ch. 14.01) implements these policies.
Item 5
Packet Page 29
Property may be designated as a Contributing List Resource where buildings or other resources
maintain their historic and architectural character, and contribute, by themselves or in
conjunction with other structures, to the unique or historic character of a neighborhood, district,
or to the City as a whole.1 The subject was designated as a “Contributing Property” in 1988
(Resolution 6424).
EVALUATION
The Historic Resource Evaluation prepared for this property by Charles Crotser Architect, AIA,
(Attachment C) evaluates the property against the Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource
Listing provided in § 14.01.070 of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. The author
concludes (Crotser, pg. 8) that the although the residence on the property retains a large measure
of its integrity, no evidence was found that the buildings satisfy listing criteria to a degree
warranting designation as a Contributing List Resource:
“…this evaluation found no compelling evidence of architectural importance of
this building through a connection with person, important historical events,
historical context, or as a community or neighborhood landmark.”
Criteria for Historic Resource Listing
In order to be eligible for historical 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 it is found to no
longer meet eligibility criteria for listing (§ 14.01.060 (C)). In evaluating the historic significance
of the property, the CHC considered whether, and to what degree, the property satisfies these
criteria. For convenience, these criteria have been provided for reference as Attachment D to this
report. The following provides a summary of the assessment of the historical status of 1156
Peach Street, as provided in the Crotser Evaluation.
Architectural Criteria (§ 14.01.070 (A))
Style and Design. The structures on this property can be described as an example of the
Residential Vernacular Style: a simple style lacking characteristics of other recognizable styles
(see Attachment E). The Crotser evaluation notes that primary dwelling on the site does not
represent a unique example of architecture for the area, and does not exhibit significant or
distinctive features that distinguish it from other buildings in the area (Crotser, pg. 5).
Architect. The evaluation provided includes a search of permit records related to the construction
of the buildings on the site, which provided no indication of their architect or builder.
1 See Historic Preservation Ordinance § 14.01.020 for definition of Contributing List Resource or Property.
Item 5
Packet Page 30
Historic Criteria (§ 14.01.070 (B))
Similarly, the literature search performed for the evaluation did not uncover evidence of any
association of the property with persons or events significant to local history (Crotser pg. 5).
There is no evidence that the property was associated with any famous or “first-of-its-kind”
event and its construction is not considered to be a notably important, unique, or distinctly
interesting contribution to the City. The home can be associated with early residential
development of the City, but this does not constitute a notable early, first, or major pattern of
local history elevating the structure to the level of historic significance
Integrity
The Crotser Evaluation notes that apart from minor modifications and routine wear and tear
commensurate with the age of the structure, much of the original form and basic character of the
dwelling have been retained (Crotser, pg. 7). Nevertheless, the retained integrity of the structure
does not rise to a level that would, alone, qualify the building for historical listing.
Previous Advisory Body Action
On April 27, 2020 the Cultural Heritage Committee reviewed the request and recommended that
the City Council remove the property from the Contributing Properties List of Historic
Resources. The Committee noted that accessory structure at the rear of the property exhibited an
interesting method of construction associated with structures built in the earliest periods of
California’s history as a state, and while they did not find that the method of construction
elevated the structure to a level of historic significance, they did recommend that the shed
structure and its construction be documented, prior to its demolition. A condition of approval
(Condition #1) has been provided in the Draft Resolution (Attachment A).
Policy Context
The recommended action on this item is supported by historical preservation policies set out
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 set out in §§ 14.01.060 & 14.01.070 of
the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance.
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 Ordinanc e.
Item 5
Packet Page 31
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: No Budget Year: 2019-20
Funding Identified: No
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding Sources Current FY Cost
Annualized
On-going Cost
Total Project
Cost
General Fund $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
State $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Federal $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Fees $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Other: $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Total $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
The project will have 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 1156 Peach Street on the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources, based on findings
that satisfy the criteria for Historic Resource Listing set out in the City’s Historic
Preservation Ordinance.
2. Continue the item for additional information or discussion.
Attachments:
a - Draft Resolution
b - Architectural Worksheet
c - COUNCIL READING FILE - Historic Resource Evaluation (Crotser)
d - Evaluation Criteria
e - Residential Vernacular (Historic Context Statement)
Item 5
Packet Page 32
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2020 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, REMOVING THE PROPERTY AT 1156 PEACH
STREET FROM THE CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES LIST OF
HISTORIC RESOURCES (1156 PEACH ST, HIST-0036-2020)
WHEREAS, the applicant, Ivan L. Lapidus, submitted on January 21, 2020 an application
to remove the property located at 1156 Peach Street (“the Property”) from the Contributing
Properties List of Historic Resources (HIST -0036-2020); 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 April 27, 2020
to consider the application, and recommended that the City Council remove the Property from the
Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources with the request that documentation be provided
on the shed structure at the rear of the property, prior to demolition ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
via teleconference from the City of San Luis Obispo, California on June 2, 2020 for the purpose
of considering removal of the Property from the Contributing Properties List of Historic
Resources; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings 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 Architectural Criteria set out in
§ 14.01.070 (A) of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. The primary dwelling
on the property does not represent a unique example of architecture for the area, and
does not exhibit significant or distinctive features that distinguish it from other
buildings in the area, nor does it exhibit any particular expression of artistic merit,
details, or craftsmanship. No significant architect is associated with the building. A
condition of approval (Condition #1) requires that the accessory shed at the rear of the
property be documented in order to record its characteristic construction method.
Item 5
Packet Page 33
Resolution No. _____ (2020 Series) Page 2
R _____
b) The property is not historically significant under the Historic Criteria set out in
§ 14.01.070 (B) of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. It has no known
association with persons or events significant to local history and its construction is not
considered to be a notably important, unique, or distinctly interesting contribution to
the City. Its association with early residential development of the City does not
constitute an association with patterns of local history that would elevate the structures
to the level of historic significance.
c) 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 formally evaluated by an architectural
historian. As described in historic resource evaluation prepared for the property, the
primary structure on the property does not meet the Secretary of the Interior’s criteria
for significance, does not meet the level of significance required by the California
Public Resources Code, and thus does not rise to the level of a significant cultural
resource. The evaluation supports the conclusion that the property is not a candidate
for inclusion on the City’s Inventory and is not a historical resource for the purposes of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
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).
Item 5
Packet Page 34
Resolution No. _____ (2020 Series) Page 3
R _____
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:
1. Before the issuance of any demolition permit for structures on the property, the
accessory shed at the rear of the property shall be documented as specified in City
standards, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
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 _______ 2020.
____________________________________
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 5
Packet Page 35
Item 5
Packet Page 36
Item 5
Packet Page 37
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:
Wtem29
Packet2Page28B
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).
Wtem29
Packet2Page28(
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.
Wtem29
Packet2Page206
City of San Luis Obispo Architectural Character
Citywide Historic Context Statement
HISTORIC RESOURCES GROUP
139
RESIDENTIAL VERNACULAR
The term “Residential Vernacular” is used to describe simple houses or cottages with little or no
distinguishing decorative features. These buildings are characterized by their simplicity and lack of any
characteristics of recognizable styles.
Character-defining features include:
Simple square or rectangular form
Gabled or hipped roof with boxed or open eaves
Wood exterior cladding
Simple window and door surrounds
Fitzpatrick House, 670 Islay Street, 1880. Source: Historic
Resources Group.
Foreman House, 1500 Eto Street, 1878. Source: City of
San Luis Obispo.
Anderson House, 532 Dana Street, 1898.
Source: City of San Luis Obispo.
Item 5
Packet Page 41
Page intentionally left
blank.
Item 5
Packet Page 42