HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/04/1999, 1 - AGENDA ADDENDUM CONTRACT TO DELIVER ASPHALT LLA 20-99 LL ADJD 2353 BUSHNELL ST CONT LLA 20-99 (Lathrop)
2353 Bushnell Street
Page 5
ALTERNATIVES
1. Adopt draft resolution"B"denying the lot line adjustment map with findings that the site is not
physically suited for the type and density of development proposed and that proposed
exceptions are not warranted.
2. Continue review to allow revisions to the map or presentation of additional information.
Specific direction should given to the applicant and staff.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Draft Resolution"A"approving the lot line adjustment with exceptions
Attachment 2: Draft Resolution"B"denying the lot line adjustment
Attachment 3: Vicinity map
Attachment4: 8 1/2"x 11"copy of tentative map for LLA20-99(County Map No. SLO 99-006)
Attachment 5: Assessor's Parcel Map with neighboring lot sizes
Attachment 6: General Location of New Slope/Wall Easement along Bishop Street
Note: A Full Size Lot Line Adjustment Map was given to the City Council and is available for
review at the City Clerk's Office.
BhoaWCGLLA20-99(Lathrop)
1-5
ATTACHMENT 1
Draft Resolution"A"
RESOLUTION NO. (1999 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT MAP LLA 20-99(COUNTY MAP NO.
99-006),INCLUDING EXCEPTIONS FOR LOT DEPTH FOR PARCEL 1,AND
LOT WIDTH FOR PARCELS 2 AND 3,FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 2353 BUSHNELL STREET
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on May 4, 1999, and
considered the applicant's request for a lot line adjustment map to consolidate portions of six lots
that existed prior to 1977,and exceptions to lot depth for Parcel 1 and lot width for Parcels 2 and
3, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed lot line adjustment and minor
subdivision exceptions are consistent with the Zoning and Building Regulations, and other
applicable City ordinances; and
WHEREAS,the City Council finds that the lot line adjustment is categorically exempt as
provided for by California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, Section 15305 Minor
Alterations in Land Use Limitations.
BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of Lot Line Adjustment
Map No. LLA 20-99 (County Map No. SLO 99-006), staff recommendations and reports thereof,
makes the following findings:
1. With minor exceptions to the subdivision regulations, the resulting parcels from the lot line
adjustment will conform to the City's Zoning Regulations and building codes.
2. The lot line adjustment will improve the non-conformity of the of the existing lots consistent
with Chapters 17.12 of the City's Zoning Regulations. The resulting parcels will more nearly
conform to the lot area and dimension requirements of the Subdivision Regulations.
1-6
Resolution No. (1998 Series)
Page 2
3. The lot line adjustment will not increase the number of parcels and complies with Section
66412(d)of the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Regulations.
4. The proposed lot line adjustment is categorically exempt from environmental review
pursuant to Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 2. Conditions. Lot Line Adjustment Map No. 20-99 (County Map No. SLO
99-006), including exceptions to the Subdivision Regulations is approved subject to the
following conditions and code requirements:
1. The lot line adjustment shall be finalized with either a parcel map or a lot line adjustment
agreement. If the agreement is pursued, the applicant shall submit a "Declaration of Lot
Line Adjustment", along with recording and processing fees, and an 8-1/2 z 11 map exhibit
suitable for recording, to the City Engineer for review, approval and recordation, based on
samples available in the Community Development Department.
2. The developer shall submit a detailed soils engineering report prepared by a register civil
engineer,prior to development of the site.
3. The developer shall submit a noise study to analyze potential noise impacts from train noise
on the future residences,prior to development of the site.
City Code Requirements
4. Because the site is zoned R-2 with a special considerations overlay,future development of the
site will require an administrative use permit,architectural review and possibly environmental
review.
5. Upon development of each parcel, separate water, sewer,gas, electric,telephone and cable TV
services must be constructed to serve each property.
6. Frontage improvements will need to be installed as each parcel develops. Improvements will
include a 2m (_-6 ft.) wide integral curb, gutter, sidewalk and driveway ramp, street pave-out,
fire hydrants and street lights.
7. Street trees will be required to be planted per City Standards(one tree per 35 linear feet of street
frontage).
8. Traffic impact fees are required to be paid prior to issuance of a building permit.
9. Water and wastewater impact fees are required to be paid prior to issuance of a building permit.
1-7
Resolution No. (1998 Series)
Page 3
SECTION 3. Exceptions. That the requested exceptions to Sections 16.36.160 of the
Subdivision Regulations be approved along with the tentative map for Lot Line Adjustment LLA
20-99(County Map No. 99-006)based on the following findings:
1. The property to be divided is of such size or shape, or is affected by such topographic
conditions,that it is impossible,impractical or undesirable,in the particular case,to conform to
the strict application of the regulations codified in Title 16 of the Municipal Code(Subdivision
Regulations);and
2. The cost to the subdivider of strict or literal compliance with the regulations is not the sole
reason for granting the modification;and
3. The exception to the subdivision regulations will not be detrimental to the public health,safety
and welfare,or be injurious to other properties in the vicinity;and
4. Granting the subdivision exception is in accord with the intent and purposes of these
regulations,and is consistent with the general plan and with all applicable specific plans or
other plans of the city.
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this_day of , 1999.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
Lee Price,City Clerk
APPROVED AS P FORM:
i Atton�y J ey Jorgensen
]ShwWCOLLA20-99(Resolution)
1-8
ATTACHMENT 2
Draft Resolution`B"
RESOLUTION NO. (1999 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT MAP LLA 20-99 (COUNTY MAP NO.99-
006).INCLUDING EXCEPTIONS FOR LOT DEPTH FOR PARCEL 19 AND LOT
WIDTH FOR PARCELS 2 AND 31 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 2353 BUSHNELL STREET
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on May 4, 1999, and
considered the applicant's request for a lot line adjustment map to consolidate portions of six lots
that existed prior to 1977, and exceptions to lot depth for Parcel 1 and lot width for Parcels 2 and
3,and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed lot line adjustment and minor
subdivision exceptions are not consistent with the Zoning and Building Regulations; and
WHEREAS,the City Council finds that the lot line adjustment is categorically exempt as
provided for by California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, Section 15305 Minor
Alterations in Land Use Limitations.
BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of Lot Line Adjustment
Map No. LLA 20-99 (County Map No. SLO 99-006), staff recommendations and reports thereof,
makes the following findings:
1. The site is not physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in the R-2-
S zone.
2. The property to be divided is not of such size or shape, or is not affected by such
topographic conditions,that is impossible,impractical or undesirable,in the particular case,
to conform to the strict application of the regulations codified in this title (Title 16,
Subdivisions,of the SLO Municipal Code).
1-9
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 2
3. The modification will be detrimental to the public health,safety and welfare,or be injurious
to other properties in the vicinity.
4. Granting the modification is not in accord with the intent and purposes of these regulations,
and is not consistent with the general plan and with all applicable specific plans or other
plans of the city.
SECTION 2. Denial. The request for approval of Lot Line Adjustment Map No. 20-99
(County Map No. SLO 99-006) and requested exceptions to the subdivision regulations are hereby
denied.
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this_day of . 1999.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
Lee Price, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ity Orn Je y qihorgensen
JShoals/CC/LLA20-99(DenyRes)
1-10
Li �'' ATTACHMENT 3
R 2-S )
R 2S
;.
R 1-
JY_
w -
\ � z
o
BISHOP
\ m
\ � e
a -
NX L
SAN CAR10
H -1 R -
\
-H \� GS-S-HGOS_5EL E
Q
v r4
2353 Bushnell
A 0 80 160 za0 Feet
LLA 20-99
ATTACHMENT 3
H
o W0
O wee
mmoe(F ■� y L iisL C�
°t•t�'� P�3 R y�3 wF Q
p
e oLU
a �
0
a
QO t
h
it
e
t
yn 1
1331LIS doHSIH —
" o
Gam- t \_ R I E
c !
i
c
00 i i Ep6F 5
rF`t
q IIISe
— — 3r"y soToo Htl5
e
s
Eggs final
1-12
Acc
Lj
_tr N a_�J . ;Axa: �� _ 30N3801-4
« � i.'p I. v .• Ki -"CT II:GZ 4BGi
p qG s, /♦
2� � n
dd� ] ��OJ LmJ 1., � w � el0_ m• ml w.\ V
`1 n
/ r..—..
BUZ
01
n nils
._::rte•• J 133b1S 113NNsne ``++ 113NHsne S
� --cr•a/i aio os•a/i-°s,'s, I I i I I I °n / /
e6 6r Lr ar a1"ar sP'•t rf'ar cr 1 `r
� I ♦ I � I I I I V I W N�
I _ �
�J
n O
----- ' �♦ � Umi�-- ,, a St�ppo MNa V
J � •n O � —mT—O—_1----- �FY' Pao
� n n ►"'i
♦ w
0r'6// 1 00 IV/
.rv'o/✓ + O
tZ fi �
Y Apli//1 rY
!fig M
a
a
1 =1 J �I = C I m I
� 7�[ r ♦ 1 LI rrL► � aL'LI cr LI arll W
arra sv/ "'
�� lg 3 AVG
o $
\�J ^ cr oris ecfil
ca
ei o/•f// °I ,orzrl fe , I I I
_� I I~ I I Q I I ~ 1 I I I I I ♦
=mL
C,4
W --1--L--r--1--1--
r' _�rl nT—T—mT—i F— � wl:— —__—♦ j ♦ M _ YIY O
—en
4
�I I i = Iti wl
; ZI
I .I
os a[`' 1 I I I I i i• ~' ,
1 —13
'f •zrl aLrI ' I I I I j
I
$ 3AV •artrs`. r',..r «rirl iru� i I �
ME
t1221111S dOHSIG b R P w
Ile
VIE
15 J,
vc E—
-�., m .
IQ
cc
E-
14-
CO ca
%L z :74
.00*66 3 .6r.1c-64..N C4
Z
lab
co
6z
IDA
MID!, X Or
s6w ,
M.M.69 N
3flNaAV SOrIZIVD NVS
1-14
council 116'0 ,r— -
j acEnaa Repout 2"�
C I T Y OF SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Direc
Prepared By: Jeff Hook, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: CULTURAL. HERITAGE COM EE NOMINATION OF
PROPERTIES TO THE CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES LIST OF
HISTORIC RESOURCES.
CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution adding 24 properties to the Contributing
Properties List.
DISCUSSION
Advisory Body Recommendation. At advertised public hearings on January 25te and March
22nd, 1999, the Cultural Heritage Committee. (CHC) voted unanimously to nominate the
following properties to the Contributing Properties List (minutes attached):
• 368, 369, 375, 395, 398, 431, 453, 476, 482, and 487 Chorro Street
• 491 Hill Street
• 754, 755, 762, 785, and 795 Lincoln Street
• 704, 706, 724, 732, 770, 780, 794 and 804 Meinecke Street
Situation. One of the CHC's 1997-99 workprogram priorities is updating the City's Master
List of Historic Resources. Last year the CHC began its update by reviewing properties in the
Mt. Pleasanton Square/Anholm neighborhood for architectural or historical significance. This
is the third group of properties nominated for historic status from that neighborhood. Of 28
properties in this group initially reviewed, 24 properties were nominated as Contributing
structures due to their age, (at least 50 years old), condition and architectural style. Property
owners were notified prior to the CHC hearings and one property owner requested that his
property not be considered for historic listing. As a result of this request, 765 Lincoln Street
was deleted from consideration. Three other properties (391 Chorro, 748 and 752 Meinecke)
were deleted from further consideration due to exterior changes which had adversely affected
the houses' original architectural character. City Council approval is required to add
properties to the Master or Contributing List of Historic Resources.
The purposes of the historic listing are: 1) to recognize buildings which contribute to the City's
architectural, cultural and historical diversity, 2) to help preserve and restore buildings which are
historically or architecturally significant, 3) to help preserve the historic character of
neighborhoods, and 4) to make certain historic properties eligible for preservation incentives,
such as rehabilitation loans, tax incentives, or more flexible building or zoning codes. Based on
the properties' historic documentation, advisory body recommendations, and public testimony,
the City Council should decide whether the properties meet the eligibility criteria for adding
them to the Contributing Properties List. These criteria were adopted by the City Council and
2-1
Council Staff Report-CHC Historic Resource Nominations
Page 2
are listed in the City's Historic Preservation Program Guidelines (criteria attached). If the
Council concurs with the CHC's nomination, it should adopt the attached resolution adding the
properties to the Contributing Properties List.
Mt. Pleasanton Square/Anholm Neighborhood. All of the properties are located within the Mt.
Pleasanton Square/Anhohn neighborhood, an area comprised of two residential subdivisions
developed in the 1920s and 1930s and located northwest of Downtown between the base of Cerro
San Luis Obispo and Stenner Creek. Predominant architectural styles are Mission Revival,
Spanish Colonial revival, Tudor Revival, Craftsman, and California Bungalow, reflecting
popular architectural styles of that time. The area's popularity was due, in part, to its proximity
to Downtown and sheltered location on the lee side of Cerro San Luis. Early residents include
many prominent educators, business owners and professionals..
This continues to be an attractive, recognizable neighborhood, with most homes in good
condition and many in original or near-original architectural character. Because of the apparent
concentration of architecturally and historically important homes, the CHC has discussed the
possibility that the Mt. Pleasanton Square/Anholm neighborhood may merit historic district
status. As an initial step, the CHC is reviewing all properties within these two subdivisions for
their architectural and historical significance.
Master and Contributing Properties
Lists. Procedures for historic
nomination are found in the Historic
Preservation Program Guidelines.
There are two categories of historic
resources: Master List properties and
Contributing properties. The Master
List of Historic Resources consists of 167
of the City's most important residential
and commercial structures which have
significant historic or architectural value
to the community and which merit -
special preservation and recognition. Figure 1: A Master List Property - Myron Angel
Master List properties are eligible to Home, 1886
receive a historic plaque, commemorating the historic name and date of the building. Some of
these properties are also eligible for State or Federal historic designation, and may qualify for tax
incentives such as the federal tax credits or the Mills Act Program. Once added to the Master
List, exterior building changes are possible, provided that such changes promote the structure's
original architectural style and character. Demolition is also possible, subject to Architectural
Review Commission approval. According to the Historical Preservation Program Guidelines,
demolition of a historical resource should be done only when: "1) the condition of the building
poses a threat to the health, safety or welfare of community residents or people living or working
on or near the site, or 2) the project sponsor demonstrates that it financially infeasible to
2-2
Council Staff Report-CHC Historic Resource Nominations
Page 3
rehabilitate the structure or preserve the historic nature of the site."
The Contributing Properties List contains
about 400 properties, most of which are
houses within designated historic L
districts. Contributing properties consist
of structures, gardens or other features
which are at least 50 years old and
which, while not necessarily unique or ►
associated with an important person or
historical event, contribute to the
architectural or historical character of
their neighborhood. Contributing
Properties listing is primarily an
_a
honorary designation. Changes to
Contributing properties do not require
any architectural or historical review : .7
beyond that which would normally be Figure 2: A Contributing Historic Property - 30
required (none, for additions and Chorro Street, 1932.
remodels to single dwellings or duplexes), although city policies encourage their preservation.
Both Master List and Contributing List properties are considered "historic" and may qualify for
more flexible zoning and building codes to encourage their preservation and upkeep.
General Plan Policy. Policy 6.6.1 of the General Plan Land Use Element says that the City
should identify, preserve and where possible restore historic resources. By designating eligible
properties as historic, the City helps preserve important buildings and features of the
community's heritage. In so doing, the City and property owners work together to maintain the
distinctive architectural character and "sense of place" of both residential and commercial
neighborhoods.
Contributing Properties List Nominations
368 Chorro Street
Property Owner: Mary L. Baldwin
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story, Mission Revival-style house on a 6290 sq. ft. lot.
Date Built: HRS factual 1929.
369 Chorro Street
Property Owner: Jeffrey G. and Jane G. Jorgensen
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Mission Revival style house on an 8500 sq. ft. lot.
2-3
Council Staff Report-CHC Historic Resource Nominations
Page 4
Date Built: HRS factual 1931
375 Chorro Street
Property Owners: Barbara A. Rieger
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: Two-story Craftsman Bungalow style house on an 18000 square foot lot.
Date Built: HRS estimated 1920.
395 Chorro Street
Property Owner: Harold W. and Glendora Gray
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Tudor Revival-style house on a 6,000 sq. ft. lot.
Date Built: HRS factual 1931.
398 Chorro Street
Property Owner: Mary L. Russell
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Mission Revival style house on a 5,875 sq. ft. lot.
Date Built: HRS factual 1931.
431 Chorro Street (formerly 451 Chorro Street)
Property Owner: Christina Muller
Zoning'. R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Tudor Revival-style house on a 8,350 sq. ft. lot.
Date Built: HRS factual 1931.
453 Chorro Street
Property Owner. Minnie Dellabitta
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Tudor Revival Cottage on a 8,200 sq. ft. lot.
Date Built: HRS factual 1930.
476 Chorro Street
Property Owner: John R. and Marguerite L. Valpey
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Tudor Revival-style house on a 5,000 sq. ft. lot.
Date Built: HRS factual 1930.
482 Chorro Street
2-4
Council Staff Report-CHC Historic Resource Nominations
Page 5
Property Owner: Fred Willie
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Mission Revival-style house on a 5,000 sq. ft. lot.
Date Built: HRS factual 1930.
487 Chorro Street
Property Owner: Robert and Michaelann bimitrihevich
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Tudor Revival-style house on a 6,495 sq. ft. lot.
Date Built: HRS estimate 1942.
491 Hill Street
Property Owner: Anthony Bramwell, Trustee
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: Two-story, Spanish Colonial Revival-style house on a 1.4 acre lot.
Date Built: HRS estimated 1935.
754 Lincoln Street
Property Owners Jerry E. and Katherine D. Bourne
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Craftsman Bungalow/Rowhouse.
Date Built: HRS factual 1927
755 Lincoln Street
Property Owners: Donald F. and Betty M. Hartley
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Vernacular Bungalow.
Date Built: HRS factual 1927.
762 Lincoln Street
Zoning: R-1
Property Owner: Warner J. Vanspanckeren, Tre Etal
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Vernacular Bungalow.
Date Built: HRS factual 1927.
785 Lincoln Street
Property Owner: David A. Brodie, Tre Etal
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
2-5
Council Staff Report-CHC Historic Resource Nominations
Page 6
Description: One-story Vernacular Bungalow.
Date Built: HRS factual 1927.
795 Lincoln Street
Property Owner: Lyne M Dyche, Tre Etal
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Mission Revival-style house on a corner lot.
Date Built: HRS factual 1928.
704 Meineke Street
Property Owner: Charlene A. Dexter
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Spanish Colonial Revival on a corner lot.
Date Built: HRS factual 1929.
706 Meinecke Street
Property Owner: William R. McLennan, Etal
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Spanish Colonial Revival.
Date Built: HRS factual 1928.
724 Memecke Street
Property Owner: Steven Carlson
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Spanish Colonial Revival.
Date Built: HRS estimate 1935.
732 Meinecke Street
Property Owner: Josephine Sagouspe, Etal
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Mission Revival.
Date Built: HRS factual 1928.
770 Meinecke Street
Property Owner: Michael B. Tilden
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Cottage.
Date Built: HRS estimated 1930.
2-6
Council Staff Report-CHC Historic Resource Nominations
Page 7
780 Meinecke Street
Property Owner: William G. Jessup, Etal
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Craftsman Bungalow.
Date Built: HRS estimated 1930.
794 Meinecke Street (45 Chorro Street)
Property Owners: O.B. and M.S. Young, Tres Etal
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: Two-story Spanish Colonial Revival on a corner lot.
Date Built: HRS estimated 1940.
804 Meinecke Street
Property Owners: Gerald and Kathi Machi
Zoning: R-1
General Plan: Low-Density Residential
Description: One-story Cottage on a corner lot.
Date Built: HRS estimated 1930.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Do not adopt a resolution adding one or more of the candidate properties to the
Contributing List.
2. Continue the nominations item for additional information or study, and specify the
the additional information or analysis needed. There is no mandated deadline for action
on this item.
Attachments: -Draft resolution
-Vicinity Map
-CHC draft minutes
-Excerpt, Historical Preservation Program Guidelines (Appendix C)
-Historical Designation Criteria
Council Reading File: Historic Resource Inventories
ih1.:hmmonA-99.ccM
2-7
RESOLUTION NO. (1999 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ADDING PROPERTIES AT 3689 369,3759 3959 3989 431,453,4769 4829 487 CHORRO
STREET; 491 MIJ STREET; 754,755,762,785,795 LINCOLN STREET; 704,706,724,
7329 7709 7809 794,AND 804 MEINECKE STREET TO THE CONTRIBUTING
PROPERTIES LIST OF HISTORIC RESOURCES
WHEREAS, in 1983 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5197 establishing the
"Master List of Historic Resources" and "Contributing Properties List" (collectively referred to as
"Historic Resources"),along with procedures for adding properties to the listing,and
WHEREAS, on January 25, 1999 and March 22, 1999, following such procedures the
Cultural Heritage Committee held public hearings to consider recommending to the City Council
the addition of several properties in the City of San Luis Obispo to the Master List or the
Contributing Properties List due to their historical and/or architectural significance to their
neighborhood and to the community; and
WHEREAS, at said meetings, the Cultural Heritage Committee reviewed the historical
documentation on the following properties and recommended that the City Council add these
properties to the Contributing Properties last of Historic Resources:
• 368,369,375, 395,398,431,453,476,482,AND 487 CHORRO STREET
• 491 HILL STREET
• 754,755,762,785,AND 795 LINCOLN STREET
• 704,706,724,732,770,780,794(45 Chorro Street),AND 804 MEINECKE STREET
WHEREAS,this City Council considered this recommendation during a public hearing on
May 4, 1999 pursuant to historic preservation guidelines established by Council Resolution No.
6157 (1987 Series).
2-8
Council Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 2
NOW THEREFORE BE TT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
that based on the Cultural Heritage Committee's recommendation, documentation as described in
the Historical Resource Inventory for each property, on file in the Community Development
Department, public testimony, the staff report, and on the City's Historical Preservation Program
Guidelines the following:
SECTION 1. Addition to Contributing Properties List The following properties have been
found to contribute to the historic and architectural character of the City, meet the criteria for
inclusion on the Contributing Properties List, and are hereby deemed Contributing Properties:
• 368,369,375,395,398,431,453,476,482,and 487 Chorro Street
491 Hill Street
• 754,755,762,785,and 795 Lincoln Street
• 704,706,724,732,770,780,794 and 804 Meinecke Street
SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The City Council hereby determines that this
action is not a "project" as defined in Article 20 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA)since does not have the potential for resulting in a physical change in the environment, and
therefore,is not subject to environmental review requirements.
SECTION 3. Publish Revised Master List. The Community Development Director is hereby
directed to amend the Contributing Properties List to include the properties listed above, and to
publish revised historic resource listings for public distribution.
On motion of seconded by and
on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 4th day of May, 1999.
2-9
Council Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 3
Mayor Allen K Settle
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
�r R. City Attorney
jhazhisaemoma.c=
2-10
CHC Historic Property Nominations
VICINITY MAP
Mli
O
� Proposed Historic properties
N
2-11
Draft
MINUTES
SAN LUIS OBISPO CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Regular Meeting of Monday,March 22, 1999
The meeting convened at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room (Room 9), San Luis Obispo
City Hall, 990 Palm Street.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Steve McMasters, Paula Carr, Margot McDonald, Bob Pavlik, Bob
Schrage, and Matt Whittlesey.
Absent Amy Kardel.
Staff: Jeff Hook, Associate Planner.
Bridget Fraser, Engineering Associate
Aaron Jon Hyland, AIA (Consultant, Architectural Resources Group)
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: On a motion by Committee member Whittlesey, seconded by
Committee member Schrage, the minutes of the regular meeting of February 22, 1999 were
approved as submitted on a 6:0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
1. Consider nominating the following properties to the Contributing Properties List: 491
Hill Street; 754, 7559 762, 765, 785, and 795 Lincoln Street; 704, 706, 724, 732, 7709
780, 794 and 804 Meinecke Street.
Jeff Hook introduced the item, noting that the owner of 765 Lincoln Street had previously
requested that his property not be considered for historic listing. Mr. Hook also noted that the
candidate properties had been reviewed at the Committee's February meeting and that property
owners had been notified of tonight's public hearing. Consequently, the CHC could nominate
one or more properties for historic listing at this meeting.
Chairman McMasters opened the public hearing. There was no public comment. The public
hearing was closed. Committee members discussed each candidate property in terms of
architectural style, condition, and architectural integrity. After a brief discussion, it was
moved by Committee member McDonald, seconded by Committee member Carr, to nominate
the following properties to the Contributing Properties List and to forward the nomination to
the City Council: 491 Hill Street; 754, 755, 762, 785 and 795 Lincoln Street; 704, 706, 724,
732, 770, 780, 794 and 804 Meinecke Street and to forward the recommendation to the City
Council. 765 Lincoln Street was removed from consideration at the owner's rig t
CHC Minutes, Regular Meeting of March 22, 1999
Page 2
Committee members noted that a garage addition at 765 Lincoln Street had adversely affected
the property's architectural integrity and setting, and therefore, the property did not meet the
criteria for a Contributing Property.
The motion carried on a 6-0 vote.
2. Review schematic design for new handicapped access ramp, stairs, benches and
decorative railing at the B oad Street entry of the historic Carnegie Library.
Jeff Hook introduced Aaron Jo yland, Project Architect, who explained the proposed Broad
Street entry design and features. noted that concrete bollards would be installed where the
existing stone wall was removed to a odate the handicapped access ramp entry, and the
bollards would be colored to match the sto wall. The ramp would have a colored concrete
retaining wall, and the bollards and retaining 1 would have a smooth-trowelled finish and
tinted to match the stone wall; the ramp itself wo be natural concrete colored. Overall, the
design would closely follow Secretary of the Inte or's Standards of Treatment of Historic
Properties.
Bridget Fraser, Project Architect, explained rocedures planned to protect the adjacent
Victorian Box Tree (Pittosporum undulatum oots from damage due to grading and installation
of the handicapped access ramp. She no that excavation in the area around the roots would
be done by hand. She summarized th roject status and expected construction phasing.
Mr. Hyland noted that ramp light' g would be provided by recessed lighting in the ramp
retaining walls and that the handrail sign would be a plain, dark colored, and unobtrusive
tube powder coated steel.
Committee member McDonald suggested that th small stair/ramp landing adjacent to Broad
Street may need to be larger. She felt that additi nal lighting at the Broad Street basement
door would be a good idea for safety and security.
Committee member Pavlik asked if disabled rsons had been consulted as to the ramp design.
Mr. Hyland said that he had design handicapped access for several historic Carnegie
Libraries and had incorporated previous omments from disabled persons into this design.
Committee member McDonald asked if sta and ramp railings and bollard design details be
sufficiently complete for the ARC to review th
Mr. Hyland replied that they would.
Committee member Carr liked the `star" grillwork pattern in the building's windows and
suggested that a similar pattern be repeated in the stair railing, but in small scale.
2-13
CHC Minutes, Regular Meeting of January 25, 1999
Page 3
Committee voted 7-0, finding that the proposed building demolitions or relocations at 1616 and
1628 Monterey Street would not affect any architecturally or historically significant resources,
and recommended that the "Palm Motel" sign and mature Palm trees be preserved, and that if
the buildings are relocated, the owner's give preference to relocation within the City limits.
2. Consideration of nominating the following properties to the Contributing Properties
List: 368, 369, 375, 391, 395, 398, 431 (formerly 451 Chorro Street), 453, 476, 482
and 487 Chorro Street.
Chairman McMasters opened the public hearing. Mary Russell, 398 Chorro Street, said she
supported historic listing for her property as long as she could modify the landscaping to be
more drought tolerant and add a front patio wall, in keeping with the house's original
architectural theme. Committee members agreed unanimously that the landscape changes and
patio wall she described would not pose any problems in terms of historic listing and would not
require any special City review. Christina Muller, 431 Chorro Street, also supported historic
listing for her property and asked whether it might qualify for the Master List of Historic
Resources. Committee members encouraged Ms. Muller to work with staff to provide
additional historic documentation which might meet the eligibility criteria for Master List
properties.
Committee members then considered each property's photograph and historic documentation
individually and on a motion by Committee member Schrage, seconded by Committee member
McDonald, the Committee nominated the following properties to the Contributing properties
list: 368, 369, 375, 395, 398, 431, 453, 476, 482 and 487 Chorro Street. Committee
members indicated that 391 Chorro Street was Potentially Contributing, due to changes in the
original windows.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
3. Review a recommendation by the Friends of Las Casas de Adobe to change the historic
name of the Bowden/La Loma Adobe to "La Loma de la Nopalera Adobe"; and
confirming the name of the historic "Rodriguez Adobe."
Astrid Gallagher explained that the Friends of Las Casas de Adobe (FOCA) were under an
agreement with the City to restore, preserve, and operate the City's three historic adobes, and
as part of that responsibility, FOCA has also been asked to research and recommend
appropriate historic names for each adobe. She indicated that the two suggested names had
been carefully researched by FOCA members and asked the CHC to endorse the names.
On a motion by Paula Carr, seconded by Bob Schrage, the Committee endorsed the historic
names "La Loma de la Nopalera Adobe" and the "Rodriguez Adobe."
4. Review historic documentation for properties located at 491 Bill Street; 754, 755, 762,
765, 785, and 795 Lincoln Street; 704, 706, 724, 732, 7489 7529 770, 780, 794 Amd.8Q4
APPENDIX C. Procedures for adding properties to the
Master List of Historical Resources.
1. Who Can Apply.
Any person may request that a property be added to the Master List of Historical
Resources. The Cultural Heritage Committee, Architectural Review Commission, Planning
Commission or the City Council may also initiate an application.
2. Where and How to Annly. i
A standard application form must be completed and submitted to the Community
Development Department. The form must be accompanied by all available information
that documents the historical importance and architectural character of the building
or site. h
i
There is no fee for applying for Historical Resource designations. 1
For information about data sources and help with preparing an application, contact the
Cultural Heritage Committee.
3. Actions by the Cultural Herita¢e Committee,
The Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) will review the application and decide whether
it merits consideration. If the CHC finds that an application merits consideration, a
public hearing will be scheduled and the applicant will be notified.
The time, date and place of the public hearing will be advertised in the Telegram
Tribune newspaper. At the public hearing, or in no case more than 60 days from the
hearing date, the CHC will recommend that the property be added or not added to the
Master List of Historical Resources. When evaluating an application, the CHC will use
the attached criteria.
4. Actions by the City Council.
Within sixty days from the CHC action on an application, the City Council will decide
if the property should be added to the Master List of Historical Resources. These
decisions will be made at an advertised public hearing. The applicant will be
notified of the hearing date.
In making these decisions, the City Council will consider the CHC's recommendations,
public testimony and application materials. The action of the City Council is final.
If the City Council approves the addition of a property to the Master List of
Historical Resources, the City Clerk will send the applicant a copy of the council
resolution that affirms this action.
2-15
City of San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage committee
DELINEATION OF HISTORIC RESOURCE CRITERIA
FOR BUILDING EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
ARCHITECTURAL CRITERIA
I. Style
Describes form of building such as size, structural shape and details within
that form (i.e., arrangement of windows and doors, ornamentation, etc.)
Building style will be evaluated as a measure of:
1. The relative purity of a traditional style (as compared to building styles
in San Luis Obispo);
2. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity
although the structure reflects a once popular style;
3. 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.
4. The degree to which the structure has maintained its integrity (i.e.,
assessment of alterations and structural condition, if known).
II Design
Describes the architectural concept of a structure and the quality of artistic
merit and craftmanship 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 architect (i.e.,
carpenter-builder) accurately interpreted and conveyed the style(s).
Building design will be evaluated as a measure of:
1. Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its uniqueness,
artistic merit, details and craftsmanship;
2. Overall attractiveness because of craftsmanship and aesthetic value, though
not necessarily unique;
3. An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among
carpenter-builders, although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not
be superior.
2-16
III. /'ge
Age is a measure of how relatively old a structure is in the context of the
history of San Luis Obispo, primarily Anglo-American history (circa 1850). (See
Scale of Building Age).
CRITERIA FOR BUILDING EVALUATIONS
IV. 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:
1. A master architect (e.g., Wright).
2. A known architect who made significant contributions to the state or region
(e.g., Julia Morgan).
3. 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 fathers home - built
between 1927 - 30).
4. An early architect who is otherwise of no special significance but can be
identified as a professional (e.g., pioneer architects of the region as
confirmed by AIA archival membership records of California and the Central
Coast).
V. Environmental Design Continuity
Describes the inter-relationship of structures and their relationship to a
common environment. Refers to the continuity, spatial relationship, and visual
character of a street, neighborhood, or area.
Environmental design continuity will be evaluated as a measure of the:
1. Symbolic importance of a structure to the community and the degree to which
it serves as a conspicuous and pivotal landmark (i.e., easily accessible to
the public, helps to establish a sense of time and place).
2. Compatibility of a structure with neighboring structures in its setting on
the basis of period, style (form, height, roof lines), design elements,
landscapes, and natural features; and how these combine together to create
an integral cultural, historic, or stylistic setting.
3. Similarity to and/or compatibility of a structure with its neighboring
structures which, collectively, although of no particular aesthetic value,
combine to form a geographically definable area with its own distinctive
character.
2-17
HISTORICAL CRITERIA
VI. History - Person
Describes a person, group, organization, or institution that has been connected
with the structure, either intimately or secondarily, for at least two
generations (i.e., 40 years).
Historical person will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which a person
or group was:
1. Significant to the community as a public leader (i.e.;mayor, congressman,
etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognition - locally,
regionally, or nationally.
2. Significant to the community as a public servant who has made early,
unique, or outstanding contributions to important local affairs or
institutions (i.e., councilmen, educators, medical professionals,
clergymen, railroad officials).
3. Contributions which, though minor, directly or indirectly, had a beneficial
effect on the community (i.e., firemen, law enforcement officers, postal
workers, businessmen/shopkeepers, city employees, etc.).
VII. History - Event
Associated with a social, political, economic, governmental, educational or
other institutional event that has been important to the community.
Historical event will be evaluated as a measure of:
1. A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of
whether the impact of the event spread beyond the city.
2. A relatively unique or interesting contribution to the city (i.e., the Ah
Louis Store as the center for Chinese-American cultural activities in early
San Luis Obispo history).
3. A contribution which, though minor, nonetheless was important to the
community (i.e., local interest groups), or, alternatively, a unique or
interesting contribution only loosely connected with the structure, object,
site, or district.
VIII. 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.
Historical context will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which it
reflects:
2-18
1. Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the
historical effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected
with the building (i.e., County Museum).
2. Secondary patterns of local history but closely associated with the
building (i.e., Park Hotel).
3. Secondary patterns of local history but loosely associated with the
building.
Historical context will also be evaluated on the basis of:
4. Whether or not a structure occupies its original site and/or whether or not
the original foundation has been changed, if known.
2-19
{
sl,
• �P"Y ®1
1�1 UP
'R
'_ij� 'files,• + 1 � , ��'� � �+� .
!
All
FIRM\ , IA
®® ®®
in
/ � � � ���.��� =fir ice'►�1is �IC�� ��'�;+n
e
•
•
i
u
®C ®L
Fill r• '
VIMvt
LOW
1 _�—_ _. l� iillb: m"1'e■' 11l�?I�
,
011 VOW
gin
Al
•,� amp
MINION�
��►�� �� �� ���_� ��®�, ---., ®ill _ ■
� � �. � , �
� �
� � � �
�� � � �
�� � ---
w
C
S
V Q s QTY ,
2' 4a
V �
0 L
s'=
i to
4rss
x
p
a£ f
P'
n41P�
jG.
it
1
23
llr�5L5
L�
I
r '
, ni
wNEsc
t � t
JIM
ifY {
1 t f 4
1
1 I Y
i
i
N, Is
N r v
o
W
C� � TC .E yon-v 3
C. vunc�r�-
-
RECEIVED
18 June 99 JUN 18 1999
To: City Clerk and CITY
OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TY DEVELOPMENT
Planning Commission, San Luis Obispo, CA
From: Jo Ann C. Wheatley, Ph.D.
2263 Flora St
San Luis Obispo, CA
541-0732
I withdraw my appeal —dated 14 Jun 99 - to the Zoning Hearing Officer's
decision of 4 Jun 99, to grant a use permit (Appl. 93-99) for establishment of
a Child Development Center at 2000 Bishop St. (1720 Bishop St.). My
reason for appealing the decision was to protest the lack of time for the
neighbors/homeowners to inform themselves about the project. I am
withdrawing my appeal so as not to hold up the project while continuing to
seek redress from the City Council on the manner in which this affair was
conducted.
Effective and timely notification of neighbors in the spirit of the law should
take precedence over the letter of the law for notification as spelled out in
City Codes. The county property adjoining General Hospital and containing
Probation Department and "Sunny Acres"has the potential to impact
adversely one of the city's finest neighborhoods and ANY development in
that area will be under keen scrutiny by homeowners.
I request relief from the City Council concerning the notification
regulations/procedures of the Planning Department. In addition to posting
the parcel(s) and publishing notices in the newspaper, I am requesting that
the City Council instruct the Planning Department to mail notices of any
permit requests or other action pertaining to this county property, to all
property owners in a wider circle than currently mandated.
Because of peculiarities in the Planning Department's notication procedures,
for instance, l received notice by mail of the ARC meeting, but not the use
permit hearing which preceded it. Other homeowners received notice of the
permit hearing but not the ARC hearing. None of us received mail notice of
the County Board of Supervisors decision to lease the property nor of any
deliberations by that body concerning this land use.
Lastly, the "expeditious" manner in which the entire Child Development
Center permit, land lease, and Architectural Review were carried out is
contrary to the norm. I understand the need for timelines in this case, but this
type of precipitous action by the City Staff is not conducive to inspiring
confidence by the neighbors that all impacts and considerations were
properly addressed. A rush to judgement and playing favorites is unfair to us
as well as to the community at large. Perhaps the next "favorite" project will
not be as benign/beneficial —how then to proceed fairly?
I thank you for your time and deliberations in this matter and look forward
to hearing from you.
AJOC. Wheatley
Cc: City Council members
County Board of Supervisors
2
RECEIVED
San Luis Obispo City Planning Department/Commission JUN 211999
Attn. Pe Mandeville CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO June 21, 1999
City Hall g� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA
Re.: My appeal of use permit granted to the Child
Development Center.
Dear Ms. Mandeville:
This appeal was certainly not about denying a good,just cause - The Child Development Center.
This is about the process: We received no notice of the use permit hearing. Also, no notice of
the County Board of Supervisors Meeting was received, so we had no advance notice to consider
this useldevelopment. Our property is within 300 feet of the proposed development, so, I believe
that we should have received notice.
There is some history, as some of you`younger folks"may not know, regarding development of
this property. The county once proposed development of a jail right below the Probation Depart-
building. The neighborhood was up in arms. We carried petitions, got many signatures,
made a lot of noise at hearings, got publicity and defeated the"dungeon". So, as you can see,
we are sensitive to any development here, especially one that seemed to be railroaded through
with little(proper) notice. An informal telephone call early on would have probably stopped
any opposition.
In addition my wife,Barbara, and I do support a viable County General Hospital. It,
unfortunately, seems necessary to keep the private providers"honest"and to provide services
to the needy. Personally, I am not locked in to this site as long as a modern, efficient hospital
is developed.
Please withdraw my appeal of this use permit, immediately. This certainly seems like a useful
development.
Sincer�l -
IcqA
N. Ray Ste
2250 Flora Street
ccs: Mayor Allen Settle
City Council Members
County Board of Supervisors Members
Shelly Higginbotham, Child Development Center
-
�
i
'I
I
r