HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-06-2015 B1 Lopes 1COUNCIL MEETING.
ITEM NO.: 13 l
Christian, Kevin
To: Mejia, Anthony
Subject: RE: 742 Marsh Street - City Council meeting Jan. 6
JAN p E� G
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: James Lopes [mailto:iameslopes @charter.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2014 4:28 PM
To: Ashbaugh, John; Carpenter, Dan; Christianson, Carlyn; Codron, Michael; Dietrick, Christine; Lichtig, Katie; Marx, Jan;
Mejia, Anthony; Rivoire, Dan
Subject: 742 Marsh Street - City Council meeting Jan. 6
TO: San Luis Obispo City Council
December 31, 2014
Dear Mayor Marx and Council Members:
Please consider the attached letter concerning 742 Marsh Street, which is proposed in the January 6, 2015 meeting for
delisting as a Contributing Historic Building. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
Have a Happy New Year!
James Lopes
for Save Our Downtown
James Lopes
1336 Sweet Bay Lane
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Ph. 805 - 781 -8960
Save Our Downtown
Seeking to protect and promote the historical character, design,
livability, and economic success of dozvntozvn San Luis Obispo.
Visit us at: saveourdozvntozvnslo.com
December 31, 2014
San Luis Obispo City Council
City of San Luis Obispo
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Subject: 742 Marsh Street - Proposed Delisting of Contributing Historic
Building
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
We, the members of Save Our Downtown, ask that you retain the Contributing
Historic Building listing for 742 Marsh Street, and that you require that this
listing be fully referenced in the review of the separate but pending proposal for
altering the facade. The current building design was constructed without
adequate commission or staff review. However, the design does adequately
address the qualifications of a Contributing Historic Building in this location and
in the context of past City strategies, as explained below:
1. The current design is the result of lack of attention and care by City
staff to meet the requirements of the Historic Preservation Program
ordinance.
Three facade redesigns over the last twenty -plus years, after the
building's listing as a Contributing Historic Resource, were not referred
to the Cultural Heritage Commission to determine whether the project
design conformed in each case to the Historic Preservation Guidelines as
required in Section 3.1.1 of the ordinance. The current design is the
result of little or no attention to historic reference through the City's own
processes.
The building has essentially been treated as if it was not a
Contributing Historic Building and not located within the Downtown
Historic District. Or, planning staff made decisions to find that the facade
redesigns were adequately in conformance with the Historic Preservation
Guidelines, meaning that the modern designs adequately interpreted
historic architecture within the meaning of the guidelines. Apparently
there is no written record of such determinations.
1
2. The building was listed in 1987 as a Contributing Historic Resource,
but the design which achieved the listing was not shown to the current
Cultural Heritage Commission, when staff asked that it approve the
delisting on August 25, 2014.
Without knowing what historic references were determined to be
culturally significant in 1987, it is impossible to base a delisting
determination on the original design as the point of reference which
qualified for the listing. The current design does contain enough
references to adequately maintain its appearance and integrity as a
historic resource.
3. The facade is designed with classical historic references in modern
terms, and it meets the qualifications of a Contributing Historic
Resource on its own.
The existing design, as presented to the Cultural Heritage
Commission, is a modern interpretation of classical fluted columns or
pilasters, with lamps that emulate classical capitals on columns or
medallions on pilasters. Horizontal recesses were located above the
lintels between columns to highlight the historic rhythm of downtown
shops. Bulkheads established a traditional base to the facade, which is
another defining historic feature in downtown. Awnings were in place,
which are preferred historic features in downtown Community Design
Guidelines. Together, these elements constituted character - defining
features as defined in the Historic Preservation Ordinance, Section
14.01.020 Definitions.
Although the subject design falls below the ideal mark somewhat,
due to the afore - mentioned inattention, it does contribute to the semi -
modern historic character of the surrounding neighborhood. It definitely
meets the definition set in Section 14.01.050 Historic Resource
Designation:
"Contributing List Resources or Properties. Buildings or other
resources at least fifty years old that maintain their original or
attained (emphasis added) historic and architectural character, and
contribute, either 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."
The building is located on the edge of a City parking lot and the
Downtown Historic District. It is fronted across Marsh Street by the
Forum, a modern interpretation of classical architecture, which is outside
the district. This area is a transition away from the Historic District
toward quite good 1930's through '50's architecture. The building does
not have to be an exact replica of an earlier period to meet the ordinance
qualifications. The current design has a minimal effect in contributing to
this rather unique setting on the blocks around Garden Street, again due
to inattention to the ordinance in previous remodels.
2
It seems only fair that the City would want to require any facade remodels
to improve on the historical references in the existing architecture, in the sense of
restoring and enhancing the historic place and setting of this building, since it is
also located within the Downtown Historic District. This strategy would bring
the City back into line with the intent of the district and the preservation
ordinance. To do otherwise is to continue to lean in the direction of 'developer
assistance' (however well - intended) which has left this building in its current
state. For the sake of restoring the intended historic integrity on this site, we ask
that your Council come down on the side of the vision of the historic district and
the historic resources ordinance.
We appreciate your willingness to consider with us how projects fit with
the City's policies and design guidance. We are always available to give
assistance in evaluating the design of projects in the downtown. However, we
also look forward to applauding projects that conform to the guidelines and sail
through the process.
Sincerely,
James Lopes
Sandra Lakeman
Allan Cooper
Jim and Diane Duenow
CC: Elizabeth C. Thyne, Chair, Save Our Downtown
Attachment: Excerpted Sections of Historic Preservation Ordinance
3
ATTACHMENT
Chapter 14.01
HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE
NOTE: Excerpted Sections applicable to a Contributing Historic Resource
14.01.020 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, certain terms, words and their derivatives are used as
follows:
9. "Character defining features" means, as outlined in the U.S. Department of the
Interior's National Register Bulletin 15 and Preservation Brief 17: "How to Identify
Character Defining Features," the architectural character and general composition of a
resource, including, but not limited to, type and texture of building material; type, design,
and character of all windows, doors, stairs, porches, railings, molding and other
appurtenant elements; and fenestration, ornamental detailing, elements of
craftsmanship, and finishes, etc.
12. "Contributing list resource or property" means a designation that may be applied to
buildings or other resources at least fifty years old that maintain their original or attained
historic and architectural character, and contribute either 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. They need not be located in a historic district. In some cases,
buildings or other resources that are less than fifty years old, but are nonetheless
significant based on architecture, craftsmanship or other criteria as described herein
may be designated as a contributing list resource.
14.01.050 Historic resource designation.4 SHRRE ?
The following classifications shall be used to designate historic resources and
properties. The primary categories of historic significance are master list and contributing
properties. Contributing properties include those properties that by virtue of their age,
design and appearance, contribute to and embody the historic character of the
neighborhood or historic district in which they are located.
A. Master List Resources. The most unique and important resources and properties in
terms of age, architectural or historical significance, rarity, or association with important
persons or events in the city's past, which meet one or more of the criteria outlined in
Section 14.01.070.
B. Contributing List Resources or Properties. Buildings or other resources at least fifty
years old that maintain their original or attained historic and architectural character, and
contribute, either 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. They need not be
located in a historic district. In some cases, buildings or other resources that are less
than fifty years old, but are nonetheless significant based on architecture, craftsmanship
or other criteria as described in Section 14.01.070 may be designated as a contributing
resource.
C. Noncontributing. Buildings, properties and other features in historic districts which are
less than fifty years old, have not retained their original architectural character, or which
do not support the prevailing historic character of the district. (Ord. 1557 § 3 (part), 2010)
0
14.01.060 Listing procedures for historic resources.® SHARE
A. Application for Historic Listing. The property owner may request that a resource to be
added to the master or contributing list of historic resources by submitting a completed
application to the community development department ( "department'), accompanied by
all available information documenting the historic significance and architectural character
of the resource. The CHC, ARC, or planning commission may also recommend, or city
council may directly request, the addition of a resource to the master or contributing list
of historic resources.
B. Review Process. The CHC shall review all applications for historic listing, whether
initiated by the city or a property owner, to determine if a property proposed for listing
meets eligibility criteria for historic listing. The CHC will review the eligibility criteria for a
proposed listing at a noticed public hearing. The director shall provide notification to the
property owner and public, as required by city standards. At the public hearing, or in no
case more than sixty days from the hearing date, the CHC shall forward a
recommendation on the application to the city council. The city council will take an action
on the application to add or not add the resource to the master or contributing list of
historic resources. The decision of the city council is final.
C. Removal from Historic Listing. It is the general intention of the city not to remove a
property from historic listing. Council may, however, rezone a property to remove historic
overlay 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. (Ord. 1557 § 3 (part), 2010)
14.01.070 Evaluation criteria for historic resource listing. __SHRRE_ __�
When determining if a property should be designated as a listed historic or cultural
resource, the CHC and city council shall consider this chapter 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 years old (less than
fifty 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:
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 – 1930).
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:
a. A landmark, famous, or first -of- its -kind event for the city — regardless of whether the
impact of the event spread beyond the city.
b. 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).
C. Integrity. Authenticity of a 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 a 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. (Ord. 1557 § 3 (part), 2010)
Z