Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/09/2010, PH 2 - CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION TO UPDATE THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM GUIDELINES A court It Marinrs;/�� j ac Encu REpmt PN a CITY O F SAN LU I S O B I S P O FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Direct vyl Prepared By: Kim Murry, Deputy Director, Long Range Planning 7j W SUBJECT: CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION TO UPDATE THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM GUIDELINES AND CREATE A HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE (GPI 72-09) RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee and incorporating direction from Council: 1. Introduce an ordinance to add new chapter 14.01 of Title 14 (Community Preservation) to the Municipal Code to incorporate historic preservation regulations; and 2. Adopt a resolution updating the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. DISCUSSION Report in Brief The Council reviewed the Cultural Heritage Committee's draft Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines on September 21, 2010, and October 5, 2010, respectively. Council heard public testimony and directed staff to return with revisions to the draft documents on November 9`h. These drafts have been revised to remove financial penalties originally proposed as well as address organizational issues and to clarify intent. The Council expressed a desire to have the current City Council take action on the draft documents rather than postponing the decision for the new Council to consider. Staff has prepared the revised drafts in response to Council direction. Background The City Council reviewed the Cultural.Heritage Committee's (CHC) recommended drafts of a new Historic Preservation Ordinance and updated Historic Preservation Program Guidelines on September 21S` and October 5, 2010. At both hearings, public testimony indicated that the proposed Ordinance was "heavy-handed" and that the enforcement and penalty section(including monetary fines) was inappropriate for homeowners. Council members reviewed the draft documents in detail and provided both general and specific language direction to staff. While the Council wished to complete review of the documents prior to the membership changes that will occur with the upcoming elections, the Council expressed a stronger desire to provide enough time for members of the public to review the revised documents prior to Council action. The documents with the Council-directed changes were made available for public review on October 191h through posting on the City's web site, copies placed at the City-County Library, and copies available for public review at the Community Development Department. A display ad was placed in the Tribune on October 19a' to alert members of the public of the upcoming PH2-1 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines Page 2 hearing and that the revised drafts were available to review. In addition, brochures were sent to all owners of properties on the Historic Resources list with a summary of revisions requested by Council and to notify them of the Council meeting tonight. Staff prepared information that has been posted on Channel 20 and additional larger postcards were mailed to owners of properties on the Historic Resources List in addition to the required legal ad notifying the public of the meeting on November 9`h. All of these noticing resources are part of Attachment 3. Council Direction The following charts display the changes directed by Council at both the September 21, 2010, and October 5, 2010, public hearings. Some of these sections have been further edited, reorganized or deleted and notes to that effect are listed under the "New Section" column with descriptions in a subsequent table. Council-directed Changes to Historic Preservation Ordinance September 21 2010 9-21-10 Staff Report Section New Section Direction Page 223 14.01.045 14.01.040 Clarify authority of Director. Notwithstanding Section 14.01.040 A-E and G 232 14.011.062c Will move to Clarify that ERC,is advisory to Chief Building Municipal Code Official. -15.48 233 14.01.064b Will move to Work with City attorney to clarify intent of Municipal Code "on call"—both staff and citizens 15.48 233 14.01.064e Will move to Eliminate the word"hazardous"on second Municipal Code line. "physical access to ldet}s Master List 15.48 buildings"... 234 14.01.065(a)ii Will move to Change the word "available"to "viable". Municipal Code "where no alternative route of service strategy 15.48 is mailable viable. 234 14.01.065(b)i Will move to Remove the word"structurally". "or Municipal Code rehabilitation is not stfuewfally feasible." 15.48 235 14.01.065(c)ii Will move to Replace"determine" with"identify" and strike Municipal Code "unwilling or". "photo-documentation to 15.48 det2Fmine identify if.... "property owner is tmwi-lliag-eF unable to save..." 235-236 14.01.070 14.014.140 Rename Non-compliance section 235-236 14.01.070-074 14.01.120 Re-order section. Place historic property Property standards first and follow with enforcement. Standards have Clarify intent—property conditions that lead to PH2-2 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines Page 3 9-21-10 Staff Section New Section Direction Report Page been removed demolition by neglect. 236 14.01.072A 14.01.140A Eliminate CHC and City Council from enforcement section 236 14.01.072B 14.01.14013 Change"non-conformance" to "non- compliance" 236 14.01.072C 14.01.140B Allow 60 days to correct the violation. Incorporate Council member Marx's proposed wording from red file. 236 14.01.073A 14.01.140D Eliminate section. Default to Government Code 36900(a) related to violation charges. 236-237 14.01.073D (a) Eliminated.-no Reword section related to fines and link fines penalties to property standards that describe demolition by neglect. 237 14.01.Mb 14.01.120B include language to reflect the City will record a formal release of a deed restriction. 238 14.01.074B Eliminated— Reword to reflect that the list reflects defects International that could lead to demolition by neglect. Property Maintenance Code covers 238 14.01.074B(11) Eliminated— Eliminate subsection that describes trash and Zoning Code weeds—this is covered under other codes. covers 239 14.01.074D 14.01.120B Demolition by neglect—remove CHC as body that determines this condition. 239 14.01.075 14.n i ooJ Address Economic Hardship process in a way that doesn't require disclosure of property owner's financial condition at a public hearing. Refer to existing similar processes and incorporate similar process. 239 14.01.075 14.01.100J Change"firm selected by city"to "firm approved by Director". 239 14.01.080 14.01.130 Add "direction for fundins and expenditures..." 240 14.01.0801) 14.01.130D Add 4) for real property acquisition if there is a willing property owner, including..." 245 14.01.100(38) 14.01.020#37 Remove CHC as body that determines neglect under definition. 245 14.01.100 (41) 14.01.020#40 Amend definition of Property Owner to include public agencies. PH2-3 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines Page 4 Council-directed changes to Guidelines October 5, 2010 9-21-10 Staff New Re Port Section Section Direction Page 131 Inside Inside Update Council assignments and CHC members cover cover 132 Table of Table of Update with revised pages Contents Contents Various Various Various Correct typographic errors and reference errors as sections et moved. 137-139 2.212.3, Eliminat Delete sections reference CHC, CHC.duties and role of 2.4 ed Director—these are covered in Ordinance. 148 3.4.2(c) 3.4.2e Reword section regarding Historic Preservation report. Clarify when required. 149 3.4.3 3.4.3 Clarify alteration and remodel (current section uses both words). Indicate that alteration greater than 25% will be subject to the standards related to demolition rather than being called a demolition. 151 3.6 3.6 Demolition section to be moved to Ordinance. Revisions to eliminat this section follow, but will appear in Ordinance. ed from Guidelin es 152 3.6.4 Eliminat Incorporate proposed language from staff Red file: ed from Guidelin 3.6.4 Required findings for demolition of a listadc resource. The decision-making es body shall approve an application for demolition of a structure listed in the Inventory of Historic Resources only if it determines that: (a) The historic resource is a hazard to public health or safety,andrepairs of stabilization is not structurally feasible. Deterioration resulting from the property owner's neglect or failure to maintain the property should not be a justification for demolition The applicant may be required to provide structural reports, to the approval of the Community Development Director or City Council, to document that repairs or stabilization are not feasible;ad or @)The proposed demolition is consistent with the General Plan;and (c)Denial of the application will constitute an economic hardship as described under findings a-e of Section 14.01.075. ;a the pfepeF�y. 152 3.7 Relocation section to be moved to Ordinance. Revisions to this section follow,but will appear in Ordinance. PH2-4 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines Page 5 9-21-10 Staff New Re ort Section S ction Direction P Page 152 3.7 Eliminate"except where it is the only feasible alternative to demolition" after the word "discouraged"in the first sentence. 152 3.7(b)(1) Replace"in whole or art"with the word "significantly" 152-153 3.7(b)(2) Wording changes as shown below for relocation criteria. (b) Criteria for reloratiom Relocation of structures included on the Inventory of Historic Resources,or those that are determined by the CHC or the Director to be potentially historic,is the least preferred preservation method and shall be permitted only when: (1) The relocation will not, ;Significantly change,destroy, or adversely affect the historic,architectural or aesthetic value of the resource; and Q(i,—Mocation will not adversely affect the character of the historic districtor neighborhood where the resource is located or at its proposed location,and Q(4The original site and the proposed receiving site are controlled .through ownership long term lease or similar assurance by the person(s) proposing relocation,to the Director's approval,and f((ii4The proposed receiving site is relevant to the resource's historic significance and.the relocation will pose no adverse impacts to the surroundingproperty,and (>]E{ajRelocation is consistent with goals and policies of the General Plan, any applicable arca or specific plans,and the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines.OR 'S�The relocation is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition on the site and no other measures for correcting the condition are feasible,OR (7)The proposed relocation meets the same findings required under Section 3 6.4 for demolition of a historic resource. 153 3.7(e) Include findings for relocation—this has been added under (e)(3)—"The Director, ARC or the City Council will not grant an approval for the relocation of a listed historic resource unless the criteria for relocation under Section 3.7 can be met." 208 Definitions Def. #4 The definition for"Alteration" should provide an exemption for ordinary repairs and maintenance. Verbiage has been updated for this term in both the Ordinance and Guidelines. 209 Definitions Def. #18 "Structural feasibility' needs to be defined under"Feasible". A sentence has been added to this term to define structural feasibility as: PH2-5 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines Page 6 9-21-10 Staff New Re Port Section Se tion Direction Page Structural feasibility means that a building or other structure can be repaired or rehabilitated so as to be safe and usable without significant loss of historic fabric. Factors to be considered when making this determination include the existence of technology that will allow the design of the work and the ability to repair, supplement or replace load-bearing members and the thermal and moisture protection systems required for continued use of the structure; and the physical capacity of the structure to withstand the repair and/or rehabilitation process without the danger of further damage. 215 Works Works Add Ken Haggard's Brief Architectural History of San Luis Cited Cited Obispo to reference section. Additional Staff recommended changes: Planning Staff made edits to address readability, typographic errors and references throughout and to better group like topics in the City's Municipal Code. There are two substantive changes that staff recommends: I. Relocation of the Post-Disaster Section 14.01.060-065 (from 9-21-10 staff report pp 231- 235) from the Ordinance to an appropriate place in the Municipal Code under Section 15.48 (Safety Placards) to group these provisions within logical topic areas; and 2. Removal of the list describing property conditions that could lead to demolition by neglect. While the current Safety Placard provisions under the Municipal Code do not explicitly address historic resources; the Chief Building Official and Community Development Director are both called to serve as emergency personnel during disasters and will be able to provide input regarding post-disaster treatment of historic structures. Most unreinforced masonry buildings have been retrofitted which means that many of the Master List Resources will be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Staff will bring proposed language for an update of 15.48 to a future Council hearing with the commitment that proposed revisions will reflect the previous direction from Council regarding language and intent. There will most likely be an ability to streamline sections based upon existing language in the Municipal Code. Staff is also recommending that the list of property conditions be removed from the proposed ordinance because these conditions are addressed through the International Property Maintenance Code standards and the Zoning Code and do not need to be reiterated or described in the proposed Ordinance. PH2-6 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines Page 7 The revised drafts before Council tonight show the Emergency response section deleted from the Historic Preservation Ordinance. In addition, the enforcement section has been revised to delete the list of property conditions. Other recommended changes based upon public input and staff review include: Document Section Change Guidelines 1.3 Second Added language to reflect owners' commitment and work to paragraph restore and maintain historic homes and buildings adds to the character of the community. Guidelines 3.1 and 3.2 Re-organized to group provisions within categories that apply to development within historic districts, on historic properties and on historic properties outside of districts. Guidelines 3.4 and 3.5 Replacement of"shall" with"should"in several locations. Guidelines 3.4.3 Removed word "remodel". Definition of Alteration includes remodel and it created confusion. Included explicit exemption for ordinary repair and maintenance. Guidelines 3.4.6 Clarified that interior changes are only addressed for publicly- accessible historic buildings where the interior features are part of the basis for its listing. Guidelines 4.1.3 Additional Uses: Removed B&Bs from R-2 zones. Added language that indicates further zoning ordinance changes may need to occur in order to allow other uses. Ordinance 14.01.01 0134 Clarify that ordinance im lements COSE policies of the GP Ordinance 14.01.01OB9 Added: Explicit statement to indicate City will pursue alternatives prior to initiating penalty proceedings. Ordinance 14.01.020 Definitions moved from back of Ordinance to front. Ordinance 14.01.020(4) Alteration definition updated to clarify that interiors of historic structures are subject to the ordinance only if they are publicly accessible and if the interior was part of the reason for the listing. Additional language to exempt ordinary repair and maintenance. Ordinance 14.01.020 18 Structural feasibility definition added to section. Ordinance 14.01.020 Deleted definition for "disaster" since emergency response section is proposed for deletion. Ordinance 14.01.020(19) Language edits to clarify. (33) (34) (35) 37 Ordinance 14.01.030A CHC appointment section deleted — covered by resolutions and bylaws. No need to repeat. Ordinance 14:01.030B Duties — clarify that the CHC makes recommendations to the & C decision-making bodies. Ordinance 14.01.030D Threatened Structures—section has been deleted.. Ordinance 14.01.055 Historic Gardens, Site Features, Signs, etc. Section has been relocated to clarify that these are features which may be nominated for listing. Ordinance 14.01.060 Listing procedures — language clarified to indicate that CHC PH2-7 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines Page 8 action is a recommendation. Ordinance 14.01.090 Relocated provision for statement of historic significance to section that lists Application Requirements. Clarified that Director may waive the requirement for a qualified professional to prepare the historic report. Ordinance 14.01.100 Demolition section. Relocated from Guidelines. Edits include, clarification to indicate that thresholds do not apply to repairs; that CHC makes recommendation to Council; that Chief Building Official may determine that a building poses an imminent threat and therefore waiting period is not required. Ordinance 14.01.100) Economic hardship provision has been modified to address confidentiality of private financial information and other provisions to ensure action does not pose a"taking"of property. Ordinance 14.01.110B Relocation section has been edited to indicate GP consistency is art of all decisions. Ordinance 14.01.120 Unpermitted demolition section. This section has been renamed and re-organized to reflect that penalties are only intended for unpermitted demolition of a historic resource. Monetary penalty section has been removed. Ordinance 14.01.130D Uses of Historic Preservation Fund — suggested rewording for option 5 to address Council flexibility in using fund for other historic preservation related purposes. Ordinance 14.01.140 Enforcement section — clarify who has authority to enforce ordinance. No enforcement provisions or descriptions of property conditions specific to historic preservation issues will be included other than allowing a longer period of time in which to respond. The enforcement will default to the current City authority to enforce through the International Property Maintenance Code and the Zoning Code. Public Input Several members of the community have expressed that the Ordinance has not been reviewed in enough detail and that there has not been enough community input on the Ordinance and . Guidelines for the Council to be able to take action. Public comment provided at previous Council meetings and an intervening Cultural Heritage Committee meeting on October 25, 2010 included requests to start over with the residents of the historic districts and to not rush the process. Input has been received that owners of properties on the City's list of Historic Resources are not aware that their properties are included on the list. There is no exact threshold for what constitutes adequate public review. The proposed ordinance and guidelines have now been comprehensively reviewed in public forums twice. The first review process took eight months, the second involved two City Council meetings. While there appears to be a desire on the part of some persons for additional review time, it can also be said that multiple opportunities and forums have been made available for public review and comment. Most of the comments made at previous forums have had a substantial effect on the content of the Ordinance and the Guidelines. PH2-8 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines Page 9 Some initial reactions to the proposed Ordinance have not changed despite the changes directed by Council in response to public input. The fears that continue to be expressed are that the proposed regulations will punish people for not performing routine maintenance or that resulting fines will force homeowners out of their homes. None of these outcomes was intended by the proposed Ordinance and the draft has been revised in response to that input. Enforcement Several community members have questioned how the City conducts enforcement and on what it is based. The City relies on several different codes for its authority to enforce regulations: the most applicable codes include Chapter 17.17.075 of the Zoning Code (Neighborhood Preservation) and the International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC by the International Code Council). The Zoning Code standards address property maintenance issues while the IPMC primarily addresses structural and safety issues. Enforcement is conducted in response to filed complaints that have been verified by City staff and follow up is done in compliance with administrative guidelines that have been directing staff conduct since adopted by City Council in 2002. An example of a complaint form has been provided as Attachment 1. Every attempt is made to achieve compliance by collaboration with the property owner. If a verified violation is not resolved despite repeated requests for compliance, the City has the ability to assign administrative fines of$100 to $500. This occurs in approximately 1% of all enforcement cases. Testimony provided at a previous hearing questioned whether the City would enforce complaints equally on properties. For example, would the City enforce a verified violation more stringently on a property located along a highly visible thoroughfare versus a similar violation on a property located in a more remote cul-de-sac? The answer is that both would be enforced equally — no different treatment is given to properties based upon their visibility. A violation on a property located on a heavily traveled thoroughfare may be reported more quickly due to the visibility of the property,but enforcement of violations will be handled consistently regardless of location. What is the benefit of having an ordinance and updated guidelines? Having an historic preservation ordinance will enable the City to apply to become a Certified Local Government (CLG). This State program recognizes jurisdictions with historic preservation programs that are consistent with state and national historic preservation standards. The State Historic Preservation Office has grant funds that are available only to communities with CLG status. While the grants are not large— typically $25,000 or less — these are funds that the City currently cannot apply for that could help fund preservation efforts. Becoming a CLG will also enable the City to access a State-wide community of CLGs where best practices and professional state of the practice discussions occur. However, the City must first adopt an ordinance that meets State standards. The revised draft Ordinance will accomplish this first step. CONCURRENCES PH2-9 i Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines Page 10 The Chief Building Official has reviewed the proposed Guidelines and Ordinance to ensure consistency with existing processes, and authority, and appropriate legal format. FISCAL IMPACT There are no fiscal impacts to the adoption of the proposed Ordinance and Guidelines. No changes are proposed to the development review process. Minor costs for copying and distribution will be incurred once the updated Guidelines and Ordinance are adopted however these costs were anticipated in the Community Development Department budget. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Council could request that additional changes be made to the Ordinance or Guidelines. Specific direction to staff would be needed. 2. The Council could adopt the Guidelines and not the Ordinance. This is not recommended because the eligibility criteria and process are described in the Ordinance. Without an adopted Ordinance the City would not be eligible for CLG status. 3. The Council could continue this item to a future date with direction to staff to return with specific information. ATTACHMENTS 1. Enforcement Complaint form 2. Administrative Citation Guidelines 3. Noticing Resources 4. Legislative Draft of Guidelines 5. Legislative Draft of Ordinance 6. Resolution with Guidelines 7. Resolution with Ordinance Council Reading File: International Property Maintenance Code T:\Council Agenda Reports\Community Development CAR\2010\Historic Preservation\11-9-10\CARI 1-9-10.doc PH2-10 Attachment 1 l city of san lues osispo A Izequest Folz f1E16 investicat,on GII� city of san lues OBtspo. code en foRcement. 919 palm St. san lues OBispo. ca 93401-3218 The City of San Luis Obispo's Community Development Department will investigate violations of Building, Housing and Zoning Regulations. This includes non-permitted construction, substandard housing, use permit and occupancy compliance. If you suspect a violation exists, please fill out this form and return it to the address listed above. Please provide as much of the following information as possible. Should you have questions regarding a potential violation, need clarification of our regulations or if you need assistance filling out this form,please feel free to call Code Enforcement at(805) 781-7179 or(805) 781-7588. Clear Fotm site OR Paucel wheRe the potential violation exists Property-Address: Business Name: If Applicable) Owner or Property Manager Name and Phone Number: summary of alleclea violations Describe the alleged violations and provide all information relevant to the complaint. Summarize any hazardous condition or other nuisance created. to the PCRson Requestlnc, the InvestlGatlon Provide your name, address and a daytime phone number so we can contact you if we need more detailed information or to advise you of the results of our investigation. If you do not provide this information we may not be able to respond to your request. The City of San Luis Obispo will keep this information CONFIDENTIAL to the extent permitted by law. Name: Address: Phone Number: ❑ Check this box if you would like to be advised of the results of the investigation Submit Office use only Date Received: Time: Received By: PH2-11 Attachment 2 RESOLUTION NO.9366(2002 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES IN CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE AND PROCESSING OF ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 1.24 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE AND ESTABLISHINGTHE AMOUNT OF ADMINISTRATIVE FINES PAYABLE UNDER SUCH CITATIONS. WHEREAS,on September 17, 2002, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo introduced for first reading Ordinance No.1426 (2002 Series) which adds new Chapter 1.24 to Title One of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code,entitled"Administrative Code Enforcement Procedures", pertaining to the issuance of administrative citations for San Luis Obispo Municipal Code violations; and WHEREAS,California Government Code Section 53069.4 and San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 1.24 enables the City,acting as a charter city pursuant to Article XI,Sections 5 and 7 of the State Constitution,to impose and collect civil administrative fines in conjunction with the abatement of Municipal Code violations; and WHEREAS,Chapter 1.24 of the Municipal Code also establishes and provides that the City will continue to employ the philosophy of obtaining voluntary compliance from property owners, individuals and businesses who violate the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS,Chapter 1.24 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code provides that the City Council shall by Resolution prepare and promulgate administrative guidelines consistent with the goals and policies of Chapter 1.24 which establishes,among other things,the requirements for the contents of a Notice of Administrative Citation and the requirements for proper service of such a Notice; and WHEREAS,Chapter 1.24 provides that the City Council shall also adopt a Resolution approving and establishing the amounts of the administrative fines to be imposed pursuant to Chapter .1.24 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1.The Administrative Guidelines for Chapter 1.24 of the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code dated September 17,2002, attached hereto as Exhibit A, are hereby approved. SECTION 2.The following Fine Schedule is established for Administrative Citations issued pursuant to Chapter 1.24 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code: A. For a violation of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code,the administrative fine shall be the sum of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) for each such violation. B. For the second violation of the same Code section occurring within twelve(12) months of the prior violation, the administrative fine shall be the sum of Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00). R 9366 PH2-12" Resolution No. 9366 � — � �—• Attachment 2 Page 2 C. For the third violation, or additional violations thereafter,of the same Code section occurring within twelve (12) months of the first violation, the administrative fine'shall be the sum of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00). r SECTION 3. This Resolution shall go into effect upon the final passage and effective date of Ordinance No. 1426 adding new Chapter 1.24 entitled"Administrative Code Enforcement Procedures" to the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. Upon motion of Vice Mayor Marx, seconded by Council Member Mulholland, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members Ewan, Mulholland, and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx, and Mayor Settle. NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 17a'day of September 2002. Mayor Allen K. Se e ATTEST: ? Lee Pric ,C.M.C. City Clerk APPROVED: f G.J rgens C114 Attorney PH2-13 Attachment 2 ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION GUIDELINES ' (September 17,2002) The following Guidelines have been compiled as the basic structure for implementation of the Administrative Citation Program(Chapter 1.24 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code). Individual Departments and Divisions may vary slightly in their specific application of the Citation Program. 1. REQUESTS FOR INVESTIGATION All requests for investigation of a code enforcement matter are to be processed through a designated staff person. This staff person will create an enforcement case, and if appropriate schedule a field investigation, and forward a field investigation report(FIR) form to the appropriate supervisor/coordinator or staff. 2. INVESTIGATION Upon receiving a field investigation report form,investigating staff when necessary may review Permit Plan, the City's Records File(s), and Archive Plans (as needed)in order to prepare for their site investigation. Site investigations will be conducted with staff's safety as a high priority. If there is any indication of a possible hostile or confrontational environment on the part of the property owner or other present party, City staff should consult with their supervisor and should not hesitate to request assistance from the Police Department for the purpose of keeping the peace. Additionally,all investigations will be conducted pursuant to the requirement of law,and in an efficient and courteous manner. Photographs/images will be obtained as needed based on the judgment of the investigators. Each field investigation report form will contain the following information: a. Date of investigation; b. Name of investigator; C. Code sections violated; d. Plain non-technical description of the violation; e. Statement of remedy(what needs to be done); and f. Time frames for follow-up investigations and for final abatement. 3. NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION PREPARATION Digital images/photos, when obtained,will be organized,numbered, and indexed as to date, time and exact location and photographer. This will allow the City the proper foundational basis for using the photograph as evidence at a later time,if necessary. The identified violations on the field investigation report form shall reference the appropriate image/photo numbers that depict the violation. The field investigation report form and the photos/images will be forwarded Exhibit A t PH2-14 Attachment 2 to the designated staff person who shall be responsible for preparing the Notice of Administrative Citation. Once these documents are prepared and reviewed, a final copy will be prepared for posting and/or mailing to the appropriate individual or property or business owner. 4. SERVICE OF NOTICE The Notice of Administrative Citation and any amended Notice of Administrative Citation, shall be served by the following method: a. Personal or Mailed Notice. Personal service or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested,to each owner as required pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 1.24 of the Municipal Code at the address as it appears on the last equalized assessment roll of the County or as otherwise known to staff. The address of the owner shown on the assessment roll shall be conclusively deemed to be the proper address for the purpose of mailing such notice. Simultaneously,a copy of the same Notice shall be sent by first class (regular)mail to the same address. If a notice that is sent by certified mail is returned unsigned,then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to the regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. b. Failure to Receive Notice. The failure of the person with an ownership(title) interest in the property to receive any notice served in accordance with these guidelines or Chapter 1.24 of the Municipal Code shall not affect the validity of any proceedings taken under this Code. If the address of the owner of record,after diligent search,cannot be found,the notice may be served by posting a copy thereof in a conspicuous place upon the property for a period of ten(10)days.. 5. SERVING A NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION Clerical staff may be designated to process all certified mail requests while investigation staff will process all property posting requests themselves. Certified mail returned due to inaccurate addressing will have the mailing information confirmed and be mailed once more. Posting will be used in the event service by mail is unsuccessful. Posted notices will be considered served 10 days after posting on the property in a conspicuous location. Proper posting shall consist of enclosing the Notice in some form of sealed plastic and either securely taping it to the property or stapling or tacking the Notice to a stake and staking the property with the Notice. 6. PROOF OF SERVICE Proof of service of the Notice of Administrative Citation shall be documented at the time of service by a declaration under penalty of perjury executed by the staff person effecting service, declaring the time and manner in which service was made and filed in city records. Exhibit A i 2 PH2-15' Attachment 2 7. CONTENTS OF NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION The Notice of Administrative Citation shall consist of the basic form, attached hereto as Attachment 1, and should contain the following information: a. The correct full name of the owner or owners. b. The date on which an inspection established the Code violation. C. The Municipal Code section violated. d. The City address where the Code violation occurred. e. A narrative description of the violation established by the inspection stated in plain, simple, non-technical language. Photographs of the violation are encouraged. f. A narrative which describes the remedies for the abatement of the identified violation. g. A statement(warning) advising the individual,property owner or business owner that if the described conditions are not abated within the time frame specified,the City may proceed,as authorized by law,to assess an administrative fine as authorized by Chapter 1.24 of the Municipal Code. h. A statement assessing the amount of the fine and setting the effective date of the fine if voluntary compliance is not obtained by the date established in the Notice of Administrative Citation. i. A summary and statement of the procedures necessary to pay the administrative fine. _._ j statement advising that any person having any title interest in the property may appeal the Notice of Administrative Citation to the Hearing Administrator. The statement shall also include instructions as to how to request an appeal. k. A statement that the Code violation is a public nuisance and that collection of unpaid administrative fines may, at the City's option,be enforced as an assessment or lien against the real property. 1. The signature of the staff person issuing the Notice of Administrative Citation. in. The date the Notice of Administrative Citation is issued. n. Any other information deemed necessary by the City for due enforcement or fine collection purposes. 8. RECORDS AND RECORD KEEPING. All final City staff work documents(except those documents identified as"Confidential— Attomey/Client Communications")pertaining to the business of an enforcement case should be immediately sent to.the records division of the appropriate City Department for filing in the street files. Incoming correspondence, reports,surveys,etc. should be immediately sent to the records division for filing in the street files. Enforcement staff may keep duplicates of these documents in their personal files if they wish. No original public records should be kept in places other than the records division. i Exhibit A 3 PH2-is Attachment 3 City of San Luis Obispo Dffice of the City Clerk ?90 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 city of San tuts OBISpO NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Phe City Council will conduct s Public Hearing to consider the revised Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines. The date and time of be hearing are printed below and a description of the hearing is printed on the other side of this card. Phe Council Public Hearing will be held November 9, 2010, in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 990 Palm Street beginning at 7:00 p.m. Jther items may be considered before or after this item. Written comments are encouraged. Public comments are limited to three minutes. Phe agenda will be available before the meeting and also on the City's website at www.slocity.org. Staff reports may be purchased in the "�ity Clerk's office on the Wednesday before the meeting or viewed on the City's website. The Council meeting will be televised live on charter Cable Channel 20. Please note that any court challenge to the action taken on this item may be limited to considering only those issues raised at the Public Hearing described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the City of San Luis Obispo at,or prior to the Public Hearing. IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT CHANGES IN THE CITY'S CODES THAT AFFECT YOUR HISTORIC PROPERTY OR YOUR PROPERTY IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT Description: Continued hearing to consider Cultural Heritage Committee Recommendation to Up- date Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and Update Title 14 of the Municipal Code to Create a Historic Preservation Ordinance (GPI 72-09). The City wants your input as we create balanced ordinances and guidelines that wili help us work together to preserve San Luis Obispo's heri- tage. The City is in the process of drafting a new Ordinance and updating existing Historic Preservation Guidelines. The proposed Ordinance contains the criteria the Cultural Heritage Committee considers when evaluating a property nomination to the Historic Resources List and: • Lists standards used for review of permit requests to alter,demolish or relocate historic structures. • Provides criteria for review of development proposals on properties within historic districts. • Includes enforcement provisions for unauthorized demolition of historic resources. Changes to the Guidelines include: • More design review guidance for permit applications. • Descriptions of each of the historic districts. • Graphics and descriptions of some of the historic building types found in San Luis Obispo. NEED MORE INFORMATION? Documents are available online at: hqp://www.slocity.or-zlcommuni!ydevelopment/index.4m. Copies are also available for review or purchase at the Community Development Department(919 Palm Street)or for review only at the City- County Library(995 Palm Street). HOW TO BE INVOLVED—WE WANT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS AND GET YOUR INPUT! • Submit written input to the City Council by mail to City Council,990 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 or email: slocitycouncil ,slocii .00rg • Contact staff with questions or input: Kim Murry at 781-7274 or kmurrvnaslocitv.ore THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST. WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR PARTICIPATIORM-17 Attachment 3 _ CO 0 a 3 cc C a _ ^ U Q. 3 N CO I-n 30 cc E N V U WO i p L>O CM N CO r— CD -0 O E U c0 � 0 0 lo — ll C -0 N O -0 .O> E .�'3 O in . CO .r 2' 0 u) = '- C CO CO C n N O CO C> E r -oOO U N O CO N - � U, O :3 > O Z , H � Q. cOr � c0 COU IOt E6 VD oasigp sInj ueS 100AS ullud 616 odsigp smZ utS3o Xiio 1 <« C # C CL o E CD - I T I aa omo ' s > _ C16- Q O J C n p O CO 00 e t� E v1 E C ^ V . g r: 3 .•a j. m t � p Eo � F 2i V O Y °.�° PH2-18 c Attachment 3 mom Co 0 D 0 . o E E C', M 0 0 ur CL n o '5� 0 CL CL.L u - .0 o Co Co 0 0 Co U= 2 5 Co CD .2 -0 '2 O_ cc)) M (D oil -p C0 Co C=r U (CD :!:c o -r- Co -0 JR p con Co E , -Z6 a) CL U D t(j r- 12 2 1.....:5 cL 0 2 . ID E fl 0 '(D C �7 T:9 2 Co 7p CM 0 CD 0 u M ..... w x 0cD C CD M r- M C L4 -C cc; E c M coo C z,d 0 (M E 0 E j 0 0 CL CD CL W E Co W 73 0 - - CD 70 -0 CD P 0 (1) w a) 00 X LU S Cl) 32 Co 0 "M U 4 .0 Q) E .9 C M CD C 1= a) 0) L) 0 -0 (D 0) .22 0) C C . N M 0 M '= E E .0 -6 0 C C -= C 0 rn 2 w 'o 'r-: E •fn a) 0 (D 0 E W Q. CM 0 a) 0 Co E =3 r- • Z: 0 a) 0 0 0 -0 OM .- 0 E E cLU " O. co Cn E 5 -- 2 -5 CD Co M 0) Q) CD C C C _ 0 o 0 a) to M Co 0) 0 E M (D r- (D In .2 E 0 C M C E 0 (D E to CL 0 r- C C;)-0 C;):!:� - 0 .0 -0 Co C r- o .U) .s 0 .0 -2 E 0 a) C M Co 'a 0 x o (D Co 0 Lo M a) M o 0 E cb 00 E o E .2 cL > U 0 - C) o 0 0 M :3 a) a) -.p M M cc 0) 0. X 0 r U CL Cb Co 0 U) 0 0 0 Co a) .0 0 CD M C 0 C o " 0 CD CL r- .2 Q) -6 .2 a) (D = w ;;z c' 00 a) Eo o — o a) > o 0. C Cl) u C CD = W a) -r- CD 0 is C o M CL 0 -0 0 M a) 0) rn -0 (D 2 C 0 :"3 w 0 = > a) -Fn C 1) > 0 0 CD cc CU .0 us CL o Co (D C: C 0 u CD -r E co o co > E 0 OE r- 0) 2��— > E .2 0 a CD 0a 0 .0 0 'n -0 En -a E 0 (D 0 M L) 0 0 0 Lu E CD Co = 0 CL a) 02 (D :3 C) 0 -5 w " ou CL C -0 C CD 0 0 " CL.- .0 0. 0 CLU = 2 Co F- EL 64 15 E 045 (D C -0 U W CO -0 U CD — (n to m 0 FE CM �5 -0 C C 0 CO C M CD.— C: :3 O M 0 0 M Co 0 _j (D CA C cD S2 E 0 Z Q) 0 0 a) "ncn 0 u Cr 0 (n -- � -0 -0 U (D a) -- CD 0 E5 rn CL M 0 0 CL 0 0) (D Co 0) = C -6 :3 u " 0 Cn E 0 E o) o " p Co � C cL 0 c E 'w E r- > a) -- �: a) c- -0 CU CM 0 E 'o ("D m (D 0 in '2 c) -0 *Z6 o U) (D 0 X a) 0 -0 " -a a) - " - -0 -Ci CC Q 'o (D �D 0 :3 CD C = o > 0 Cl. C: ; r_ a) - C -:3 C = E 0 — 046 U :t, :3 o 0 N — " u Co CD 0 o cA o ..- M .T 0 6 In 0 r_ -C 0 Com (n Cn CD 0 Cl) 0 CD Cn E Z "a =) -- C Co r 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 .n C (n 16 (D M Q) W =3 0 0 -- 0 :3 (D 0 W Co - i= CD CL 0 0 a) 0 0 -0 (D Q U -0 en 0 0 w — r- -5 0 0 OD T 75 > 5 2 o 0 :L- . > .2 > 0awoo 0 T '5 -0 = 0 0 0 0 CLM .0 Co PH2-19 Attachment 3 I\ & m -0 #§ EU) 5 � R, OC p ® /C: C 2g 2 ,00.100 -COO � - £ o ° � � 0 - CEE ■ p ® � 0 \-5 2 E % 22 far . 2 -0 � _ 9 0 .- Co 0 C / ( . CO �. � \ / o ocoCm � = ' 2 c = f � � Co Cu 15A CL 08 2 . Cu0. � & a 2 /2 $ Co ]� kEO}_ � M ' � - c � I � e � CL Cc§ k .\« kik ■ n� o . c � Co - =2c � � @ o £ Ea nCL @ 8 = £ � 5 � " gym - c Co 0xe @£ � -C EC3o e 3 a)0 �cc .. @ � � � ) -CE 5 § � E bo - �ƒ U » ® �= u � = � � 5 = & 2 d a) Q _ ° oma = c CD 2 ® 2@ $ 22 (D e § 0M Gym ea. 0eac0Q £ E � S £ 0 / \ \ 0 \7 2/ 2 7 = 0 \ o CL cD 5 \ / ] \ S 0k k § � i J b § �■ ( (D \ ( C s c G moo © a § \ 06- E :2 cu % ) o »� ® °° o o = = � & $ 5 (« &c .0 § ® % ■ :5 CL E :5 CL \ § [ \ 5 § ) ) \ _ ; 08 § 3 § 2 § a % � 2 = e _ & oo = � § ( ) o 0 E e neo ; o = o � rn § o / 3 /] rLS [ \ to � \ . ® 7 � \ PH2-2M Attachment 3 ^ § CL 2 ) Co ■ % 0) 2 = o = b � 7 & @ 0 2 E± ¢ §_ $ / ) c c0 � c7 2f © % Z5 CL E � \ g M \Sdo)E E� \ \ k �3 2= U, t0 � o 2 I6 �fk\ k \ \ (D 7f \R /� 7 p Q) \ 7 k2 § § M0 Cc0Co _ 3G E _ ° 5 / — f r- t — .�f E .0 E 2 _ § k § � 7 �± (D� / § CD / v %� E >$(D _ ° . }c - CM Co - § § 0 $ ƒ I og > = ƒ E 2 % � w222 � $ = ■ > b ° ( � ° ° E0 £32 — m = (D % � 03Co 2 2 Ln G § g 0' (D ■ Q)C « m2 § W (DU@ � E _ of cc coo ■ � W » \ k ■ m _ � � 3 a c & % 5 % & = Eea . § 2 / 20 M � ( % CL / q/ U £ So a # -D � ° 2222 t � � $ kkt 2 2 ) E # a em � 2 ° a % o = 3 £ nc c \ ■ oo { c EED § a) L) \ / � \ ƒ/ 2Cu 0 2 S CDe0Q AEG S cin = 8 E � � M0 —'D k k § $ \ fJ § fy2 DEEM . (D 4) r. _ C o / § � k/k C:3 ? d CO \ _ k (D ©�� _ _ @in M e , 2 i v u3ooE0a = @ Qo § w - / . . . . . . . . . \ \ \ \ PH2-2V ?w Attachment 3 � D Cl.- k ) k ■ G ) m > 2 5 = = > E U) ° 5 ) \ � \ \ O k k \ \ -14 / 2 k k \ a % >1 ' � f g � 5 q f k E f � /ƒ■ d e 2 � � © f G -0 a 7 / \ $ m § c = m ( o # S � CO) i 2 \ � \ PH2-2f Attachment 3 ENewspaper of the Central Coast -TRIBUNE 3825 South Higuera•Post Office Box 112•San Luis Obispo,California 93406-0112•(805)781-7800 In The Superior Court of The State of California In and for the County of San Luis Obispo AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION AD#741556 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CI{y o f COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ilr san tuis-omspo STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ss. HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE County of San Luis Obispo AND GUIDELINES REVISED DRAFTS . I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not WILL BE AVAILABLE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE I . interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at OCTOBER 19TH at 5:00 P.M. all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned www.slo6ity.orC1 mmunbdevelooment. was,the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation, These documents will be reviewed by the City Council at-a public' printed and published daily at the City of San Luis bearin§7:00 p.m.on Tuesday,November 9,2010;in the Council Obispo in the above named county and state; that notice Chamber Room in City Hall,990 Palm Street: at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was published in the above-named newspaper and not in any For more information,please contact supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit; Kim Murry at 781-7274 or kmurry@sloclty.org OCTOBER 19, 2010 that said newspaper was duly and regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of I October 19,2010 74151 general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo County,State of California,on June 9, 1952, Case#19139 under the Government Code of the State of California. I certify(or declare)under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and and correct. q /IJVygt-D t. U(Signature of Principal Clerk) DATED:OCTOBER 19,2010 AD COST:$223.68 PH2-23 Page 1 of 1 Murry, Kim From: Murry, Kim Atachmnt 3 Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 2:02 PM Cc: Dunsmore, Phil; Chippendale, Sue Subject: Draft Ordinance and Guidelines The Council reviewed the draft Ordinance and Guidelines at two hearings and provided direction on recommended wording changes including explicit direction to eliminate the monetary penalty section in the Ordinance associated with demolition of historic resources. The revised drafts showing the changes to both the Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines have been posted for public review today and are scheduled to be considered at a public hearing before the City Council on November 9, 2010. We want your input! A link to the web page containing the updated drafts as well as other information associated with the Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines may be found below: Historic Preservation web page Please forward this message and information to others who might be interested and feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you! Kim Murry Deputy Director, Long Range Planning City of San Luis Obispo, Community Development 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo CA 93401 Ph: 805-781-7274 FAX: 805-781-7173 Web: www.slocity.org Email: kmurry(a slocity.orq 11!1/2010 PH2-24 city of San tuts OBISPO 6Raft hist®121C pRescizvati®n pR®cRarn qui6ellnes 1 , Cerro San Luis(fejt),Bishop's Peak and the Town of San Luis Obispo, 1892 council oRa f$ - OU0136R hc 2®1® Deleted: unc j ' Deleted:junc PH2-25 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 City of San Luis Obispo histORic pneseRvation pnogmm Guidelines Adopted by City Council Resolution No (20 10 Series) SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL Dave Romero,Mayor John Ashbaugh Jan Howell Marx Andrew Carter,Vice Mavor Allen Settle„ Deleted: j Deleted: f CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE Deleted:Vire Mayor Dan Carpenter,Chairperson Barbara Breska Buzz Kalkowski Hemalata Dandekar Enr ca_Cost_e...11o. I Deleted:D=Maty Katy Davis Jeff Oliveira City Administration Katie Licthtig,City Manager _ Michael Cod ron,Interim Assistant City Manager Deleted:Sheuy Stanwyce Brigitte Elke,Administrative Analyst Community Development Department John Mandeville,Community Development Director Kim Murry,Deputy Director for Long Range Planning Tim Girvin,Chief Building Official Jeff Hook,Senior Planner Mary Phillips,Planning Intem Amber Piona,Planning Intern Architectural Graphics by Craig Smith City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3218 - 1 - PH2-26 L Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 taste of contents Page Chapter 1: Introduction, Deleted: . - - -= 1.1 Foreword .................................................................................................................4 1.2 Our Town-San Luis Obispo....................................................................................5 Deleted: -� 1.3 Why Preserve San Luis Obispo's History?................................................................6 " Deleted:?.?Cultural Heritage Committee 11 Chapter 2: Historic Preservation Program Pre '_.3 Cultural Heritage Committee Duties m P g2.4 Community Development Director 2.1 How to Use These Guidelines................... ................................................................7 Role n -,.-� 2.5 Related Standards and Policies..................................................................................7 Deleted: i Deleted:Historic Resources outside I Chapter 3: Treatment of Historic Resources, Deleted:Orae Cultural , C , 3.1 Construction In Historic Districts and on Properties with Historic Resources..........9 • ; . Deleted:3.6 Demolition of Historic I 3.2 Construction In Historic Districts................................................................. 10 Resources n 3.3 Jjigodc Resources outside Historic Districts.... ................15 3.7 Relocation of Historic Resources T 3.4 Changes to Historic Resources..................................................................................15 Deleted: 3.5 Reconstruction of Historic Resources........................................................................17 rDeleted: r Deleted:5.1.5 Architectural Style Chapter 4: Preservation Tools and Incentives, Sketchbook q 4.1 Cultural Resource Preservation and Incentive Programs...........................................19 Deleted: Deleted:11 Chapter 5: Appendices, Deleted:3.1.1 5.1 Historic Architectural Styles of San 21 Luis Obispo................................................... . ( — - - —� �' p Deleted:Nein Development in �.2 Historic District Descriptions.................................................................................40 Deleted:3.1. 5.3 Contributing List of Historic Resources.................................................................62 i Deleted:Massing of New Development 5.4 Master List of Historic Resources................................................................74 5.5 Definitions........................... 78 Deleted:. . _. ._ __........... ..... r 5.6 Works Cited and Information Links.......................................................................85 Deleted:3.1. Infill Construction i 5.7 Council Resolution.................................................................................................•86 Deleted: ,Deleted: Oterttcw.... FIGURES Deleted: Deleted:3.1. ,]-.,Historic Districts in San Luis ON ......................................._,............._...10 Deleted:Detailed ,2.Exam les of New Development in Historic Districts.......... ........................................11 , Deleted:_..._..... j. Examples of Massing of new Development in Historic Districts,.....,... ` ................1,2Deleted: r4.Commercial In-fill Construction in Historic Districts.Overview .............................13 Deleted:3.1. _ 5,Commercial In-fill Construction In Historic Districts.Detailed................................. 14 6.Additions to Historic Resources.......... ........ _ . 17 Obispo Deleted:Historic Districts n San Luis ....... ....... ...... p _._Histo _7. Historic Districts in San Luis Obispo.........,.......................,........._._.,,.,......._.............39 __. -9 3.4.1 Deleted:............ .__............ ..... 1 Deleted:5.2.1 Deleted:... ___.. __... ._...... i Deleted:. .. __.. _2_ PH2-27 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Higuera at Marsh Street,looking northeast,ca. 1920s -3- PH2-28 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 chapteR 1: int Duction 1.1 Foreword These guidelines were developed by the City of San Luis Obispo's Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC),a group of seven citizens appointed by the City Council to advise and educate the public and decision makers on historic resource preservation. Historic resources include buildings and other structures, sites, landscapes, and other features that are significant in San Luis Obispo's history. Interest in historic preservation arises out of the community's desire to explain our past and serve as guideposts to the future. Federal, state and local governments have passed laws to protect historic properties that enjoy special merit based on age, architectural style, period, architect,owners or occupants and/or materials used. These guidelines reference those laws,but are sensitive to our community's special heritage as a California Mission community. As an advisory committee to the City Council,the CHC reviews development proposals to determine their effect on the City's historic districts. These guidelines apply to both private and public properties that either have or are considered to be historic resources. The maintenance and preservation of historic sites, structures, and objects is important to the community,and is a key factor in the City's popularity with tourists and in San Luis Obispo's strong"sense of place." To that end, we are all stewards in the preservation and upkeep of our community's rich heritage. From Terrace Hill.looking toward Chorro Valley.with Santa Rosa Street at the left.ca. 1890. -4- PH2-29 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1.2 Our Town—San Luis Obispo Native Americans inhabited California's central coast, including the San Luis Obispo area, as early as 10,000 years B.C. Chumash and Salinan tribes benefitted from the region's mild climate, abundant resources and natural beauty. As a result,the Santa Barbara-San Luis Obispo region supported one of the most densely populated areas of pre-historic California. In the mid- 16t6 century, Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo landed on the central coast in what was later to become Santa Barbara County, and began a period of dramatic change coinciding with the arrival of Europeans. By the late 18ih century, San Luis Obispo had become one of 21 communities in California founded by Franciscan missionaries. The Franciscans came to convert the Native Americans to Christianity and to strengthen Spain's control over Alta California. The mission church became the catalyst for the town's continued development;its plaza was a gathering place for work,trade and festivities. Around the mission,Chumash Indians built tule huts over willow frames while the first soldier-settlers and craftspeople constructed small adobe houses. Each group built structures in keeping with their particular cultural background and drawing from materials immediately at hand. The transition of California from Indian to Spanish to Mexican to American control also brought many changes in construction methods,architectural styles and uses of materials. Many of these cultural periods are still represented in San Luis Obispo's architectural heritage. As the early community grew, people from around the globe brought their culture, skills and ways of life. Consequently, San Luis Obispo's diversity in architectural styles and heritage reflects that diversity and enhances our quality of life. Y m W.rte„'."''�s"" : ir. •. • }.yam \��� ��..yL , Southern Pacific Railroad"Daylight"locomotive on the outskirts of San Luis Obispo, 1937 -5- PH2-30 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 13 Why Preserve San Luis Obispo's History? The Town of San Luis Obispo began with the founding of the Old Mission in 1772. Over the past two centuries the community has experienced many changes. These changes can be appreciated because many of the older building and historic sites are still present. One has only to visit the central business district or wander through surrounding residential areas to imagine what is must have been like before the introduction of automobiles, flat screen television and computers. San Luis Obispo is blessed with original historic buildings and distinctive historic districts that many communities envy. Historic resources lend a sense of permanence and continuity; however, in some respects they are also fragile and vulnerable. The values and character they impart can easily be lost through neglect,demolition and inappropriate remodeling. The City of San Luis Obispo has been fortunate to have owners who care about_the_history of their community and have undertaken the costly and__tme consummgtask of restoring,maintaining and enhancingtheir heir historic homes and commercial buildings._ Their efforts have enhanced the distinctive character of the community. Historic features have community benefits beyond their aesthetic qualities and educational value. San Luis Obispo's historic sites, buildings and other aspects of our "living history" are irreplaceable resources. They are important to the community's economic vitality,quality of life,and unique sense of place. , Deleted:As such,they merit protection 1 from deteriomtion,damage,and inappropriate alteration or demolition. To promote understanding and an appreciation of its history, (an Luis Obispo citizens have Deleted:+ established these Historic Preservation Pro Guidelines hereafter Guidelines'). B working with property owners, developers, neighborhood and civic groups and citizens, the community intends to preserve the most important historic and architecturally significant buildings and sites. These Guidelines are administered by a seven-member citizens' group appointed by the City Council called the Cultural Heritage Committee ("CHC"). The duties of the CHC are further described in the Historic Preservation Ordinance_(Cha gter 14.1 of the Municipal Code). The Deleted:seGuiddines Committee is assisted by staff in the San Luis Obispo Community Development Department ("the Department"). To contact the CHC or for more information, visit the Department at 919 Palm Street in San Luis Obispo, or contact the Department at (805) 781-7170, or www.slocity.org. -6- PH2-31 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Meted: and enrrefdchaptCIZ 2: histORIc pReseRvation pROGRdflthee demolitiorocation ents associated historic resources 2.1 How to Use These Guidelines Deleted:2.2 cultural Heritage Committee!! I Historic preservation starts during the early stages of project planning and design. Property Originally established by Council resolution in 1981,the Cultural Heritage owners, developers, builders, design professionals and others involved in public or private Committee("Committee",or"CHC") development can use these guidelines to anticipate concerns and to design their projects to consists of seven citizens appointed by the City Council and represents the protect important historic resources and avoid delays during development review and citizens of San Luis Obispo. The CHC lopers construction. Highlights of where to find information in this document are listed below: advises property als,Ciowners, staff d design professionals,City staff and decision makers on ways to preserve the a)To determine whether a property is currently listed on either the Contributing or Master List of community's significant historic and archaeological resources. The Historic Resources see Sections 5.3 and 5.4 of the Appendices. To see if a property is located Committee's purpose and duties are within a Historic District see Figure 3.1. established by ordinance(SLOMC T b) For an explanation of treatment of Historic Properties, including construction in Historic The purpose of these guidelines is to implement the City's historic Districts and on properties with listed Historic Resources;and information on what is required in preservation ordinance and to promote a historic preservation report,see Section 3.1-3.8. the public welfare through the identification,protection,enhancement and preservation of those properties, c) For an overview of historic preservation tools and incentives offered by the City see Section structures,sites.artifacts and other cultural resources representing the 4.1. distinctive elements of San Luis Obispo's cultural,educational,social,economic, political and architectural history. Under d)For information about the historic architectural styles of structures found in San Luis Obispo the Municipal Code,the Committee is or the predominant character of the historic districts,see Sections 5.1 and 5.2. ycharged with° resp°nsibilitiest°+ a)Identify,protect,preserve,and promote the continuing use and upkeep of Z Z Related Standards and Policies San Luis Obispo's historic structures, sites and districts.! T. Historic preservation is one of many community goals in the General Plan. It is part of the b)Foster the retention and restoration of community's core values and identity. Preservation embodies the fundamental belief that historic buildings and other cultural resources that promote tourism,economic sustainable, successful communities are those that respect, preserve and celebrate their history vitality,sense of place,and diversity.! and unique character. To help ensure these valuable and finite resources will continue to c)Encourage private stewardship of enhance the lives of San Luis Obispo generations to come,the City Council has adopted several historic buildings and other cultural documents,in addition to these Guidelines,that help protect these resources. They include: resources through incentives where possible.! T. a) General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element,adopted by Council Resolution No. d)Implement the goals and policies of the 9785(2006 Series)—Establishes citywide policies and programs regarding identification Generaclan.¶ and treatment of cultural resources. c)Promote the conservation of valuable material and embodied energy in historic structures through their continued use, b) Historic Preservation Ordinance, San Luis Obispo Municipal Code 14.1 —Discusses Jhe restoration and repair,and on-going j maintenance of historic resources.1 CHC, its duties and describes procedures, historic listing criteria and procedures, n provisions for demolition and relocation of historic structures and economic hardship O Promote the knowledge,unders(...Ltl� rovisions. Deleted:5 j R---- Deleted:XXX Deleted:Eaablishes Deleted:incentives and sanctions for ` non-compliance. -7- PH2-32 C Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 c) Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines, adopted by Council Resolution No. 10120 (2009 Series) — Establishes procedures to be used for the protection of sub-surface cultural resources,both historic and pre-historic features. d) Community Design Guidelines,adopted by Council Resolution No. 9391 (2002 Series)— Establishes site and architectural design standards for development projects, including projects involving historic resources and historic districts,and demolitions. e) Demolition and Moving of Buildings—Appendix Chapter 2, Chapter 201 General, San Luis Obispo Municipal Code — Establishes procedures and requirements for the relocation or demolition of historic buildings. f) $afety--Assessment Placards=Buildings and Construction Title 15.4 ,5an_Lui_s Obispo Formatted:Bullets and Numbering Munici al Code–Establishes procedures and requirements for post-disaster actions. g)–.San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations, Chapter 17.54 – Establishes the Historical, ir Formatted:Bullets and Numbering Preservation Overlay Zone (H) and describes its purposes and application, allowed uses and property development standards. These documents are available at the Department,or on the City's website at www.slocity.org. Z \ ueleted aP> — —� Historic district.Johnson Avenue between Palm and Mill Streets -8- IPIH 2-33 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 chapteR 3: tREatment of histoRic ResouRces 3.1 Construction in Historic Districts and on Properties with Historic Resources 3.1.1 Conformance with design standards. Construction in historic districts and on properties that contain listed historic resources shall conform with the goals and policies of the General Plan, the Historic Preservation_Ordinance,_these Guidelines, the Community Design Guidelines. any applicable specific or area plan, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. 3_1.2 Review of development protects. The Director shall refer a development_ rp oiect application for a property located within a historic district or on a property with a listed Historic Resource to the CHC for review unless the._Director_determines.. -th...e. Droi_e..ctis: -- — -- - -- (a Exem t from the California Environmental QualitwAct;an4 (b)Designed such that it would have no effect on Historic or Archaeological Resources, and (cLConsistent with-1 1.1 above_ 3.1.3 Approval conditions. The CHC may recommend_conditions_or environmental miti ag tion measures for construction in-historic districts or on_properties that contain listed historic resources, The.-Director ARC,-Planning_Commission or City Counci,l,.,_max..lmpose conditions of - --- approval and or environmental mitigation measure fo_r,_plannngactions affecting_Historic and Archaeological Resources. 3.1.4 Environmental review._Development._projects on contain._listed._histori_c resource. on proo_erties located_within historic districts shall be considered environmental-X sensitive__pursuant_to the California Environmental Quality_Act( nd._require at-a Minimum,an initial study to evaluate theprolect's potential effects on the resource except where the Director determines therp oiect. (a)does not involve: 1) a_significant change to the exterior (or interior, subiect to Section 3.4.6) of a historic structure, 2)-relocation or demolition of Dart-or all_of a historic or.potentially historic structure, or dingon a listed historic property or identified archaeological site�or (b)is minor or incidental and has no potential to adversely affect cultural resources. -9- PH2-34 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 3.2 Construction in Historic Districts Figure 1-Historic Districts-in San-Lu-is Obispo,2010 city of san LUIS OBISPO historic JlstRlcts aStree ' . ../ i Downtown � Old Town Ilk le, snak. 3,2.1 Architecturally compatible development within Historic Districts. New structures in Meted:1.2 historic districts shall be designed to be architecturally compatible with the district's prevailing historic character as measured by their consistency with the scale, massing, rhythm, signature architectural elements,exterior materials, siting and street yard setbacks of the district's historic _ structures, as described in Fjgures Z and 3, New structures shall not copy or imitate historic Deleted:f structures,or seek to create the illusion that a new building is historic. Deleted:3.1.1 Deleted:.l.'_ - 10- PH2-35 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 31.2 Architectural compatibilityThe...-CHC...-reviews.._development.._in historic_districts for architectural compatibility with nearby historic resources, and for consistency with applicable design and preservation policies,standards,and historic district descriptions in Section 5.2-_.New _development_should not sharp) con_tract_-with,.,_sign f.cantly...-61ock...publ c..view.. ti. ...._..-- detract from, the historic architectural character of historically designated structures located adjacent to the property to be developed, or detract from the prevailing historic architectural character of the historic district. Figure 2,Examples of New Development in Historic Districts Deleted:3.1 Formatted:Font:12 pt [w�m�n�vv>,rofrn um L'C;tWfi `Dele[ed:..l 1 1Lu.1.^�A'r3�tlP'PEV.B b lifn T"S t&041 CAL C CM9 T9 �Y Formatted:Font:12 pt,Not Bold 7ML' ls1G'sNBGNilLO. �,.�� Formatted:Font:12 pt { Haim 1! fNJIC'HChL tliRlY.lVKfti 0 U . 1'CC.,20Cett5 E��T+ent6n� pwa l mw�aE-�Mm v _ K,%56,FONn Nro Me 6V aMfOMIT PCLhTIR38X1r5 - 11 - PH2-36 C Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 figure 3; -Nample-s of Massing of New Development in Historic Districts Dde� Jm�ii . �... .l Formatted:Font:12 pt !i^JIl 9tFtK^+f L' 1 NLL5 0� P.'EhE!!u fYw L14E*5 �.—�.—.rw,rus a�ezn:a.'s Delete__ PM1'µPF�1ltip4: F.;O!'T'!M;nic:N N i{Vr�ixC f `' �Formatted:Font:12 t ar'nW_Fy35611G ;--CrnUfiur P � tas¢r.�c�wr.+��� / � ta:�;elxcwr;�z+�mR'r - vsua:asf*�-� r , Formatted:.Font:12 pt -r%C:Gfl(j 0YSTGf Pa2?,"S ! ��k'P,YnRCYI di �- ✓ r 17� flli A C I PqX T,'R+y M,-,Wt* of 6TMMURe i' /' V �� a - 12- PH2-37 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Figure A,-_Examples of Commercial In-fill in Historic Distfic Deleted:3.1.3 Accessory structures, New accessory structures shall complement the primary structures historic character through compatibility with its form,massing,color,and on atcTials.1 3.1.4 Additions. Additions to listed historic structures shall maintain the structure's original architectural integrity and shall closely match the building's original architecture,or match Willow that have achieved historic significance in their own right,in terms of scale,to=, massing,rhythm,fenestration,materials, color and architectural Lural 3.1.5 Review of development projects in Historic DistricM. The Director shall refer a development project application for a property located within a historic district to the CHC for review,unless the Director detennines the project is: I (a)Exempt from the California Enviroarnental Quality Act,and 9 i (b)Of such minor or incidental nature that it would have no effect on Historic or COW&EfCIAL IN-MUArchaeological Resources,and I , (c)Consistent with the General Plan and the=Guidelines.1 1 3.1.6 Architectural compatibility. The CHC shall review development in historic districts for architectural compatibility with nearby historicresources,and for consistency with applicable design and preservation policies,standards.and I historic district descriptions in Section 9 5.2. New development shall not sharply ................... contrast with,significantly block public views of,or visually detract from,the historic architectural character i, of historically designated structures located adjacent to the property to be developed, If or detract from the prevailing historic T- architectural character of the historic tai districil Forpriatted:Font:12 pt Font:12 pt Deleted;O,mic, C4*$A9W-CjAj, IN-f9L.s, Deleted: CONTEMMP-Arw -—- - -- --- - - 13- PH2-38 C Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Figure_5_-Commercial In-fill in Historic istricts-Details Deleted:3.1.4 i Deleted: ' 'i Deleted:,Detailed EkTfl}Yr Ue4Y {hf-HLi. ?"LC7URf1 Formatted:Font:12 pt . UPPER I.EYEIF61W {Formatted:Font:12 pt 6M.F ETON 9l'FEGT r f j Formatted:Font:12 pt I '1t7 In/ffj lit R1( ,tvrAL AwONLt-lir OF 6HV t9G4pE FeLM 3; Q oY�ENMR0 PA6A06. Iq -�,----RlrY1TNa A770 6:ALL'.Or NdY WiNl7OY6 Ret->.W 7ES -N.EYJ6tiNG Hip SPKAN&LOCA-TDN - Ak0 t'K/il'CPT7061tRF..LA7P� H _. - - 7D fYl'Bi7RG COM WfC(A.L. IN-Flu- w Ri-g IC pl9TNcr FI'5%PC�i ttvtt- VF-fei'tGAt- -( - ,lNh`/•''1RCi(.7717'.A'-hLE.__ RFW11C�i-rc exl�nx�. - OP HCW PftC-+tC�C f�1A7E3 V t`74bt)f MA460M. I EVi TMA A10". Le OF 7..4V W1 r*W6 FU4,Tlw v erenloY !�pyrga �t:'3nly { a(K.77t.140CA3'X7N -fi4P PFO(OFT7GN RE1+R1't"5,. O TJ E,�QGa7IMv CA85MERCtAL tU-F?t.J_ Qt fltST*gc_ WI TR(cT (COi(TE)C{VFAt. DE016N) -- --_ - 14- PH2-39 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 3 3 Historic Resources outside Historic Districts Deleted:I '— Figure 3.1.5-Historic Districts in San Luis Obispo,2010¶ 3.2.1 Historic Resources outside Historic Districts. Listed Historic Resources located outside of historic districts shall be subject to the same protection and regulations applicable to historic ! IZh resources within historic districts. Formatt ed:Font:12 pt ' Deleted:2 �A Changes to Historic Resources. Deleted:3.3 other Cultural Resources I[ Projects involving an alteration or relocation of a listed historic resource require CHC review,as Deleted:oraheration to an historic described below: -district shall--------........—__--J 3.4.2 Alterations to Historic Resources. Deleted:3.4.1 CHC review.The CHC shall review and make recommence_Kil (a) Application. An application to alter g-listed historic resources shall be made on forms _Deleted:or repair _-------- provided by the Department, including applicable fees and any supplemental information as required to explain the request. (b) Minor Alterations. For minor alterations to listed historic resources, the Director may Deleted:repairs or approve upon making the finding that the proposed work is consistent with the Secretary of the Deleted:repairs or Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties and these Guidelines. If this finding --- .............__..—...._..-1 cannot be made,the Director will refer the matter to the CHC for review and comment. I Deleted:shad (c) Accessory structures. New accessory+ structures_should complement the primary Formatted Font:Not Both structure's historic character through compatibility with its form,massing,color,and materials. ..................... kdLA_d_ditions,_Additions to lied hrstructures should maintain the structure's or final Formatted:Font:Not Bold architectural mte dty_aild clospl -match the buildings original architecture, or match additions that have achieved historic significance in their own right, interms_of scale. form, massi> , Deleted:e .. - rh, hm,fenestration,materials,color and architectural details. Deleted:For minor repairs or alterations to listed histonc resomt (e) Historic preservation report required. If CHC review of a project is required,a historic Formatted,Font.(Default)limes reservation re ort shall be prepared at the applicant's cost unless this requirement is waived b New Roman,No underline J preservation P P e�--- PP 4 X � the Director due to the minor nature of the Drroject or because information is otherwise available Formatted:No underline to enable informed review of the proposed project. Thereport-will be used to determme-if the Formatted:Font:(Default)Times ProR g osal can be found consistent with the findings In subsection New Roman,No underline - --- — -- �' '. Formatted:No underline ,Report content. A historic preservation report shall require CHC approval. The report shall be Formatted:No underline prepared by a qualified professional unless waived bby the Director and shall be based on these Formatted:Font:(Default)Times guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties and New Roman shall include the following: Deleted:a Deleted:(1) Which of the fpm {1) The historic context,period of significance and character-defining features. secretary of the Interior's sm,r darfg Deleted:2 (2)An architectural histo of the resource which includes: �- history Formatted:Indent:Left: 0.5" For., Bullets and Numbering PH2-40 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 .Photographs and drawings which identify the original building, structure, object, and site configuration, -Character defining features of the resource as originally constructed, -Alterations, including those alterations made over time that have achieved status as character defining features, even though not a part of the original resource, and -Alterations not consistent with maintaining the historic integrity of the resource. (3) A program for repair,rehabilitation and preservation of the resource,including a Deleted:a statement of how the proposed program meets the identified treatment optlon._fro..m the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties. _ Formatted:Indent:Left 0 First (f) ,._.._Coosistency_..regp red. _Alterati_ons to..,._listed.historic resources shall,be,.approved_only ;line: o^ 1 upon finding that the proposed work is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards Formatted:Justified,Indent Left: for the Treatment of Historic Pro erties an re sired_historic reservation report. General Plan o First line: o^ policies the Historic Preservation Ordinance,-and these Guidelines_ fr 7, 3.4.3 Percent of historic resource to be preserved. ltlterations of historically-listed buildings shall retain at Deleted:Remodels _N1� least 75% of the original building framework, roof, and *� ' _ exterior bearing walls and cladding, in total, and reuse ;�,os,/ji1�, /Z, original materials to the maximum extent possible. Proposed alterations of greater than 25% of the original r ► building framework,roof,and exterior walls. be&b Deleted:shall to-the re_v_iew process for demolitions Alterations do not Deleted:considered a ='p include ordinary repair or maintenance that is exempfrom. Deleted: and subject to regulation and j Awm a building.�ermit or consistent t_he_Secretary of the review as _ JI j Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Resources. � �+ 3.4.4 Retention of character-defining features.- Formatted:Indent:Lefti.-S' f alterations of historically-listed buildings shall retain Deleted:Remodels character defining features_.New features on primary and Deleted and n j Rehabilitation of the historic secondary building facades, or features visible from a public — Righetti House,2007 area, should be completed in a manner that preserves the Deleted:shall original architectural character, form, scale, and appearance of the building. 3.4.5 Exterior building changes. Exterior changes to historically-listed buildings or resources should not introduce new or conflicting architectural elements and rshould-be architecturally Deleted:shall compatible with the original and/or prevailing architectural character of the building, its setting Deleted:shall and architectural context. Additions to historic buildings shall comply with the Secretary of the Interior's standards to complement and be consistent with the original style of the structure. Building materials used to replicate character-defining features shall match the original materials in terms of size,shape,quality and appearance. - 16- PH2-41 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Deleted:9 Figure 6-Additions in Historic Districts Deleted:s Deleted:3.4.1 Formatted:Font:12 pt ri qa Zi Formatted:Font:12 Pt rl jL MArvolme OF A NEW Acomag iN—A f1(9"1CA.l 3A.6 Interior building changes. Interior changes to publicly-accessible listed historic buildings whose architectural or historic significance is wholly or partially based on interior architectural characters or features shall preserve and restore significant interior architectural features. 3A.7 Acquired historic significance. Changes to listed historic resources that the Director or the CHC determines to have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 3.5 Reconstruction of Historic Resources 3.5.1 Historic building codes. Reconstruction of listed historic structures sll hould.preserve the Deleted:sha original historic character of the historic resource to the maximum extent possible; use of Califomial preservation._�istoric 5.uilding code,is encouraged to accomplish such pres vation. Deleted:h Deleted:b - - ' T_ 3.5.2 Consistency with Standards. Reconstruction shall follow the Secretary of the Interior's r Deleted:s Standards,and shall be based on conclusive evidence such as architectural plans,photos,as-built drawings and other reliable and accurate information. 3.5.3 Mnor variations. The Director or the ARC, on recommendation by the CHC, may approve minor variations from the original design to meet code requirements; provided the overall architectural character is maintained and character defining features are accurately recreated. 17- PH2-42 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Deleted:3.6 Demolition of Historic Resources¶ a 3.6.1 Intent. It is the intent of the City that listed historic resources are an I irreplaceable community resource thatI merit special protection to preserve them for future generations,and shall not be i ' demolished unless Council makes all of the findings listed under Section 3,6,4,1 9 - 3.6.2 Demolition review. The CHC shall I review and matte recommendation to the r Director,ARC or City Council D t _ concerning demolition applications far structures listed in the Inwrntory of i Historic resources.!! Z 1 3.63 Demolition thresholds. Demolition permits for structures which - - are included on the Inventoy of Historic resources shall be required for.1 f (a)Alterations to the resource involving greener than 2540 of the original building C4+5., '! framework,roof,and exterior walls;and9 I i 9 (b)Removal of greater Than?595 of any 1( 6 fra building's mework,roof,and exterior i • t ► �• , scalls:andl i (c)Relocation of such resources to a site 1 outside the city limits.l I Obispo Theater,Monterey at Court Street.demolished in 1976 after afire 9 1 These thresholds shall not apply to repairs to listed historic resources when 1 the CHC or the Director determines such work is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and with these guidelines.j 3.6.4 Required findings for demofitlon of a historic resource.The City Council 1 shall approve an application for demolition of a structure listed in the Inventory of Historic Resources only if Council determines Ihat1 (a)The historic resource is a hazard to public health or safety,and repairs or stabilization is not structurally feasible. Deterioration resulting from the property owner's neglect or failure to maintain the property should not be a justification for demolition.The applicant may be required to provide structural reports,to I the approval of the Community Development Director or City Council,to document that repairs or stabilization are not feasible;andsf n (b)The proposed demolition is 1 consistent with the General Plan;andl. 1 (c) Denial of the application will deprive : the property owner of all economically 1 viable use of the property,at PH2-43 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Histo,._.'reservation Program Guidelines Attachment 4 June 2010 chaptER 4: pReseRvation tools ana incentives 4.1 Cultural Resource Preservation Incentives and Benefit Programs The City intends to establish and maintain incentives to support and encourage the identification, preservation, restoration,rehabilitation, reconstruction and continued use of historic and cultural resources. The City Council may offer these or additional preservation incentives to property owners of listed historic resources,as budget and/or funding sources allow: 4.1.1 Reconstruction after loss. Subject to Director approval, historic resources damaged or destroyed by fire or natural disasters may be reconstructed tomatch their historic appearance as existing before the damage without complying withdevelopment standards for setback, lot coverage,height,parking requirements or other Zoning Regulations. 4.1.2 Modified development standards. Property development standards in the Zoning Regulations and Parking and Driveway Standards may be,relaxetl by an Administrative Use Permit, following procedures set forth in SLOW Chapter 17,58 , if the modifications facilitate the preservation and/or rehabilitation of a historic resource, or serve to reduce or eliminate impacts of development to a historic resource. 4.13 Additional uses.The following additional uses may be allowed on Historic Properties by an Administrative Use Permit: (a) Bed and Breakfast Isms with a gross floor area not exceeding 2,500 square feet or three guest rooms in the Jt-3 and R-4 zones. oeleted:R-2, (b)Re-establishment of the property's histone use(defined as the historic resource's original use when'itopened_or the use•fof which the resource was designed), provided the Director determines such uses`are compatible,with adjacent uses and any required Zoning Code amendments have been completed. (c)Any other use which is determined to be compatible with its surroundings and consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Code Chapter 17.22, and which is logical in terms of the design,location and past use of the historic resource. 4.1.4 Use permit review.(A)To apply for a Use Permit under this Chapter, the property owner or owner's agent shall submit a planning application, fee and supporting information to the Department. The application shall include a historic preservation report, as described in these Guidelines. The CHC shall evaluate whether the proposed land use and related building modifications are consistent with these guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties conformance reasonably necessary to preserve or rehabilitate the historic resource, and shall report its findings to the Director. (B) In granting a Use Permit, the Director shall make the findings pursuant to SLOW Chapter 17.58, including these specific findings: - 19- PH2-44 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 (a) Impacts of the use, including traffic and parking, would not be detrimental to the surrounding area. (b)Flexible development standards and/or uses conform to an approved historic preservation report and are necessary for the preservation and/or rehabilitation of an historic resource. (c) Preservation agreements, contracts or fagade easements between the property owner and City that would provide for preservation, restoration or rehabilitation of exterior or interior features of an historic resource may be required as a condition of the Use Permit. 4.1.5 Rehabilitation tax credits and grants. Historic resources may be eligible for the State Historical Building Code, Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credits, Mills Act Property Tax Reduction Program,Community Development Block Grant and other programs that may be established by state,federal,or non-profit agencies,or by the City Council. 4.1.6 Historic and fagade easements. Property owners may dedicate historic or facade easements to the City or to a non-profit organization to preserve cultural and historic resources. Such dedication may qualify for fee waivers,rehabilitation grants,permit streamlining,Mills Act program participation or other incentives,subject to the approval of the City Council. 4.1.7 Transfer of development credit. For projects that preserve cultural or historic resources on site,the City may enter into an agreement to transfer development credit or density to another appropriate site proportional to the commercial floor area or number of dwellings possible to develop under current zoning if the resource were removed. 4.1.8 Fee waiver or reduction. A property owner may apply for the waiver or reduction of planning, building and engineering application and permit fees for designated historic resources. The City Council may waive some or all fees if it can be demonstrated that the waiver will assist in the preservation of a designated historic resource. 4.1.8 Financial assistance. With City Council approval, the City may use the Historic and Cultural Resource Preservation Trust Fund, State or Federal grants, affordable housing funds or other funding to achieve historic preservation objectives, especially for exceptional preservation projects where multiple community objectives such as affordable housing, historic preservation, removal of spot blight, or more sustainable property development can be achieved with such assistance. 4.1.9 Historic plaque program. Upon available funding,the City may provide standard historic plaques for designated historic properties and at no or reduced cost to property owners. High quality bronze historic plaques will be available to purchase through the City at manufacturer's cost plus handling. 4.1.10 Historic library. Property owners of historic properties shall have use of the CHC reference library in the Department. -20- PH2-45 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 chaptCR 5: appenbices 5.1 Historic Architectural Styles of San Luis Obispo Architectural Style In surveying the City's historic resources,several generalized architectural style categories have been identified to describe the architectural heritage of the City: Spanish Colonial, Victorian, Spanish Eclectic, Craftsman, Main Street or Traditional Americam:Corrimercial, Period Styles, F and Post-World War II. The local mixture of styles reflects the�desi:re of early San Luis Obispo residents and business owners to emulate the architectural styles prevalent in larger urban areas in the United States — styles which were themselves influenced"by historic European architectural styles. In San Luis Obispo, most American architectural,styles are present in large and`small versions. Some are camouflaged by out-of-character additions or'remodels;others representa. combination of styles adapted to the budgets, materials, skills.and'designpreferences prevalent in San Luis Obispo during the building's period of construction(vernacular design). Thus,the architectural renderings below show styles as they should look in a traditional sense,and not all architectural elements will be present in a historic building of that style. To preserve the integrity and value of historic buildings, maintenance, repairs;,remodels,or additions,should preserve or closely match "character-defining" architectural elements of that-style, and�not introduce extraneous or incompatible architectural features. Spanish Colonial,or Adobe, , Spanish Colonial style adobesyere`thp first permanent structures in San Luis Obispo,beginning with the Mission from which the'toiwn-derived,its name. Construction of the Mission began in 1772,but,it;was not.until,the earlyl9u'centurythat adobe buildings became common. From the 1820s to'the mid-1800s,�`the predominate type of structure was of adobe, and in a style characterized by small,single-story structures, thick adobe walls, low sloping tile roofs and wood detailing. These early.. Spanish Colonial Style buildings, also referred to as simply "Adobe" style buildings, did not survive, but a few good examples from the mid-to late 1800s remain,such as,the historic Rodriguez Adobe and the Rosa Butron Adobe. Adobe refers not only,to the building type or style, but also to the type of construction. Adobe structures must,by definition,be built(at least partially)with adobe bricks—large,unfired bricks made with clay-type soil mixed with straw as a binder. The unreinforced adobe walls typically vary from one and one-half to six feet thick, resting on a dirt or rock foundation. Roofs are typically the or wood shingle, resting on heavy wooden roof timbers. Door and window openings are normally surrounded by heavy timbers, often with a prominent timber lintel above window and door openings. Also,there are often arches and porches. If there is a second story it usually has a balcony with railings,a variation often referred to as the"Monterey Style." Of the remaining adobes in and around San Luis Obispo, most were built in the second half of the 1800s. Many were altered through the years with the addition of wood siding, composition -21 - PH2-46 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 roofing, and exterior finishes that in some cases, obscured the adobe structure beneath. Clapboard siding was commonly used to protect adobe blocks from weathering, or to create a more stylish, ornamental appearance. In some cases, adobes were covered with a stucco or plaster finish. i-0i'J �LYitf3"i}�G.fLGP'i r-}1E.4YY YJWGP.N Rii?P `i hFoaE OR�a=S wrfh \� �� { utntx. Examples of this style'. ' Sauer/Adams Adobe,964,Chorro St The Murray Adobe,474 Ivlonierey St The Hays/Lattimef,Adobe at 642 Monterey. _22_ PGI2-47 U - Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Victorian What is generally known as"Victorian style"actually refers to a constellation of styles popular during the 1860s to the early 1900s. Common to this architectural style are examples of European interpretations of classical architecture, including such styles as Gothic Revival, Stick and Eastlake, Queen Anne and Folk Victorian. Many houses within the Old Town and Downtown Historic Districts fall into this general category, often incorporating elements from different styles. This architectural style represents the more ornate,'higher quality wood frame structures built between the late 1800s and the mid-1920s. Characteristic features include: -symmetrically arranged,double-hung windows -diamond`shaped roof shingles -oval or narrow,tall windows highly detailed ornamental`elements -turret and cupola roofs prortunent;wood steps and porch" -shingle facade or roof gable ends -post pier,foundation -steep gable or hip roofs -raised foundations - '2ft.Y P3TG4F-0 /� �fiiPiLSLYt'b .ClO6hTiYC f 7tiUEC` �'i-*c-��, :.y "✓' I CAvm CLW3 A vap ;3 APC%G?Cis"K2X �r .4`�""}' -"�'.- \^` I NPRe, yfMAF:TR:CAL� N ._._.J.. CQI°.+.E'.-lk:1l?NXIeFta. tLUSPf�Fl:tlt '(,�CTIX�.tfiY3� i.K✓,iL` f - VPtN.tpGNr�&M6F,,#?i (SKAGFCE'^ dTh-EY#RK ! Cal'ra6ffi f*ai k'tTN j tfttNMSiaRM- EL.C1ae4[5---'� - i j :^triC iii'-Pi ' Examples of this styles' The Erickson House at 687 Islay Street The Righetti House, 1314 Palm Street The Stanton House,752 Buchon Street 23 PH2-48 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Folk Victorian A Victorian style characterized by simple housing forms with less elaborate detailing than other Victorian houses. Detailing is located primarily along the porch and cornice line. Folk Victorian houses often borrow detailing from Queen Anne and Italianate styles.. Characteristic features include: -symmetrically arranged,double-hung windows -diamond shaped roof shingles -oval or narrow,tall windows -prominent wood steps and porch -shingle fagade or roof gable ends -post pier,fotindation -steep gable or hip roofs -raised foundations ` Air[ f i �MSP 4(.MAWAw rr, m z M'WREur rl;nT 1 "vco Examples of tbis'style include: 756 Palm Street 855 Toro Street. -24- PGI2-49 - Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Colonial Revival/Neoclassical The Colonial Revival style refers to a revival style popular in the early twentieth century that was inspired by the early houses of the Atlantic seaboard. Compared to the highly detailed ornamental elements and asymmetry that defined the Victorian styles,Colonial Revival buildings are symmetrical and relatively austere. Colonial Revival buildings are based on Georgian. Federal, and Dutch Colonial styles and are often fused with Neoclassical decorative elements such as classical porch columns. Closely related to the Colonial Revival style, the Neoclassical style;was a popular style in San Luis Obispo from 1900 to the 1920s. Neoclassical style encompasses both the Classic Box and the Neoclassic Rowhouse. "Rowhouse" as used here refers"to detached,houses often seen in a row. Characteristic features include: -hipped or gambrel roof -raised wood,porc6'with free-standing columns -symmetrical -dormer windows' cear_Nr CAE:tNcep ib'.ri 'M+er_ nF. ,lrc.Cnte $IM�sP+N1 'iv �"�"----......_.-�....Pxkt✓uCCD Mhif�ACr 5±'KCt%r Gt'-:SGC._................... /f� V 'IV I ;PNNTCD Examples of this style include: 1059 Leff Street, The Bradbury Sanitarium,743 Leff, The Bullard House, 1624 Morro Street. -25- PH2-50 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Spanish Ecclectic After the 1915 Panama-California Exposition there was a renewed interest in Spanish Colonial architecture,and California especially began to embrace and reinterpret its Spanish and Mexican past. There are many examples of the Spanish Ecclectic or Spanish Colonial Revival style in houses, commercial and public buildings throughout California where Spanish and Mexican cultural influences were strongest. The Spanish Ecclectic style incorporated many details from different periods of Spanish architecture, and was popular in San LuisTObbispo in the 1920s and 1930s. Characteristic features include: -barrel or flat the roofs -parapets(trowled plaster or stucco) -flat or low-pitch roofs -arched doors and windows -tile chimney cap,vents and drains -ornamental wood and metal accents Gf-µwMCN!'h�MFM. (OF 16'2A� M' p-��f£PI:L LY_}'Ertl J il:.a.W.RNi yyj:eD G$tr9 \l\ f�7-4�+TG+t rtzw . VMT W Examples of this stylerinclude: The M.F.Avila House. 1443 Osos Street The Righetti Apartments, 1305 Palm Street. PH2-51 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Craftsman By the end of the first World War and continuing through the mid-1940s, a distinctive architectural style evolved in California. Strongly influenced by the Greene brothers, a design firm based in California,Craftsman houses featured less ornate detailing than the Victorian style but still relied on extensive use of wood for structural and exterior elements. This style is sometimes referred to as"Craftsman Bungalow." Characteristic features include: -raised concrete or wood porch with tapered columns —clapboard siding or plaster exterior finish -medium to low pitch gable or hip roofs with side eave oyethangs and dormers -wide roof fascia boards -open eaves with exposed rafters,often with custom_ work on rafter ends -post and pier foundations -double hung wood windows with divided lights Of'ul CX�O 1YtTd4 ep" MA-*0IT11 �(f09t'D FA.,Mf- I-r;,sa.8 Sf &0.+m.` WM*6 a l` MCtC4h14.'T HMt 1 CAME Nor, rjr�i 91W FAT"eat+epars wavv,vo—_.� � -,- *�Moa<xon UM p VIM leer MP 1 I --� Mean RP.F CO3*vM X, F„^fGH'JIW rhQn / LA Examples of this style include: The Payne House, 1144 Palm Street 1068 Pismo Street 1034 Church Street. -33- PH2-52 ® ' - Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Classical or Main Street "Classical"or Main Street style of architecture covers a wide range of architectural periods. As with other architectural styles, this style represents a range of architectural influences, including Gothic,Classical Revival,Italianate,and Romanesque styles,re-interpreted to apply to American downtowns and commercial areas. Many of the City's larger commercial structures in the Downtown Historic District fall under this category. Characteristic features include: -extensive use of brick and rustic stonework - cast or wrought iron storefront structures -highly symmetrical window and door - large glass areas(wide bays) openings - Neo-classic prominent cornices -use of towers, columns, pediments and - high and open ground floor for retail sales ornate cornices or friezes rrtasonry_side walls -flat roof with parapets flat roofs`with parapets -use of porch,balconies and/or peristyle. tME- ',DtR.'fi+� RRhh76 ----.t'htEfi^AIY[: VFE y--fLh1" W FS 6nFH'LCG OP-:'¢dC�Ls —'---t I DP NY=GK- 11?- 1 Vtt71t °};lF+\C'IR:ChLf@�A3w5a�a`'J 'y J( f z 1 f � 1 as renw._,%� Examples of this style include: The Sinsheimer Building,849 Monterey Street The Andrews Building,998 Monterey Street The Johnson Building 796 Higuera Street. -34- PGI2-53 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Tudor Revival The Tudor Revival style is one of a series of revivals that gained popularity in the 1920s and 1930s in San Luis Obispo. This revival style is a reinterpretation of late Medieval English houses. Many of the houses in the Mt. Pleasanton-Anholm area fall into this style. Detail characteristics include: Characteristic features include: -steeply gable and hipped roofs -varied eave line height -decorative half-timbering -plaster or brick exterior siding -wooden shingles,occasionally imitating thatch FX N�rYet� ROMP �( Fw,, �'wf tif.':,LIftr+,a -- WITF! Nue.Qs£R l� � ttgti,_� ctua��rG rvr-surae Examples of this style include: The J.J.Dunne House at 59 Benton Way The Vard Shepherd House at 148 Broad Street PH2-54 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Modernistic The Modernistic style refers to both Art Deco and Art Modeme, sometimes called Streamline Modeme. The Modernistic style, popular in the 1930s, was more commonly applied to commercial or public buildings, although it occasionally was used in residential architecture. Relatively few Modernistic structures exist in San Luis Obispo. Characteristic features include -smooth stucco wall cladding -asymmetrical -flat roof -geometric stylized motifs in Art Deco;coping at roof,line in=Art Moderne WAW :Mn U6kCA 01 C/fT:LE1'.-CJ'A y- P1t1YGCG %c)Lt- 0V014w:0:3—.-....._.._.,.....__..y y _ f .•--tPDfF44 lYAUs fhvk'Q*� w h..VI +WMPW*A� ; . . GmeH» Y"4=4'.Tetra Examples of this style include: The Doton Building,777 Higuera Street, The Fremont Theater, 1035 Monterey Street. -36- PH2-55 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.15 Architectural S le Sketchbook from Rehab Right City of Oakland Ddetedc 9 Queen Anne Examples: e -690 Islay ® L -1504 Broad -793 Buchon am Queen Anne Cottage Examples: I ��44fl4g Ilii 1� Single-Story Italianate Examples: -37- PH2-56 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Eastern Shingle Cottage Examples: RR Classic Box Examples: CW 51c Fox r--q- z FF r Neo-Classic Rowhouse Examples: -38- PH2-57 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.2 Historic District Descriptions Figure,7: Historic Districts in San Luis Obispo Deleted:s.2.i city of sin Luis owspo historic Nstivas --- MM Street DawnWwn old Town alt aiilroi i - --i .. 0 osu ozs os M:ks j -39- PH2-58 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 54.1 Old Town Historic District ueretea:9 Setting ¶ 9 Established in 1987, the Old Town Historic District abuts the Railroad district on the southeast and is generally bounded by Pacific and Islay streets on the north and south,and by Santa Rosa and Beach streets on the east and west. As one of the City's oldest residential neighborhoods, Old Town was built up historically around the tum of the twentieth century,with older structures dating back to the 1880s. It consists of five subdivisions: the MissionVineyard Tract recorded in March 1873,the Dallidet Tract recorded in 1876,the Murray Church Tract recorded in 1876, the Ingleside Homestead Tract,recorded in 1887,and the La Vina-Homestead Tract,recorded in 1903.The District encompasses 86.1 acres,or 0.13 square miles. The District's prominent location, located just south-of-and uphill from the Downtown commercial district, made it a desirable neighborhood for the City's emerging merchant class and leading citizens. Here,residents were close to businesses and commerce,but could avoid the flooding and mud that plagued the Downtown. Home sites'were laid out;in regular grid patterns, with relatively wide(60 foot right-of-way)streets and 60 foot wide lots. The resultant wide streets and lot frontages allowed. deep (20+ feet).setbacks and ample landscaping, reinforcing the district's prosperous image:' Today the high'concentration of 100 year old or older residences establishes the District's predominant arch itectura►.and'visual character.. Site Features and Characteristics Common site features and characteristics include: j A. Prominent street yard setbacks of 20 feet or more B. Coach barn(garage)recessed into rear x' *- yard C. Finish floors raised 2 3 above finish grade . . D. Front entries oriented toward street, - , with prominent walk,stairs and porch E. Front building facades oriented parallel to street 1060 Pismo Street,South Elevation -40- PH2-59 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Architectural Character In keeping with its peak period of development between 1880 and 1920, the Old Town District has many examples of High Victorian architecture,a style popular in California during that time period that reflected prosperity, power and discriminating taste. This included several style variations,such as Queen Anne,Italianate, Stick and Gothic Revival influences,especially along the top of the hill within the district roughly aligned with Buchon Street. Other, more modest structures with simpler styles abound in other areas of the district. These buildings were first home to the burgeoning merchant class in San Luis Obispo that emerged during the turn of the century.These styles include Neo-classic Row House,Folk Victorian,and Craftsman Bungalow, with many homes borrowing architectural details from several styles. Most of the houses in this district were designed and constructed by the homes' first occupants or by local builders and were influenced by architectural pattern books of the time period. The shared first story porches along Pismo Street are a good example of a common design feature linking buildings. Predominant architectural features include: A. Two-and rarely three-story houses B. Mostly gable and hip roof types " r C. Highly ornamented roof features, including prominent fascias, r `� bargeboards,gable end treatments, rl--- decorative shingles,prominent t , pediments or cornices A F1 D. Traditional fenestration, such as double-hung, wood sash windows, A divided light windows, ornamental front doors,wood screen doors E. Painted wood surface material, including siding and decorative moldings 1543 Morro Street, East Elevation Although many of the buildings were built at separate times,the pattern,rhythm and repetition of common design elements or detailing of historic building facades along Old Town streets creates a prevailing theme and character for the :y: district. Individually Contributing Elements in the Old Town District Some buildings within the bounds of the Old Town District, constructed outside of the period of significance for the district, 1880- 1920, do not share the elements outlined in - the above description, but have achieved M.F.Avila House, 1443 Osos Street, East Elevation PH2-60 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 historical significance on their own and therefore individually contribute to the historic character of San Luis Obispo. The M.F. Avila House at 1443 Osos Street is an example of a Spanish Revival style building built in the late 1920s that has been placed on the City's Master List as a significant resource,in this case for its craftsmanship as well as its association with a historically significant local person. St. Stephens Episcopal Church at 1344 Nipomo Street built in 1873 is an example of Carpenter Gothic style. The first Episcopal church in San Luis Obispo County, St. Stephens is historically significant both its architecture and its association with the pioneer period of San Luis Obispo. Non-Contributing Elements in the Old Town District Non-contributing buildings are those buildings that both do not meet the criteria outlined above and have not achieved historical significance. Most of the contemporary buildings in the district fall into this category. Non-contributing architectural styles, , materials or site features include: A. Contemporary stucco or other material 1 exterior siding B. Flat or extremely low pitched roof C. Aluminum sliding windows (---------�;,D. Rectilinear, "boxy" shape or very r, 03 r horizontal massing E. Unarticulated wall surfaces The Vista Grande Apartments, 1415 Morro Street,East Elevation. -42- PH2-61 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 ME! Ii III WEI y w f 1059 Leff Street;Biddle House, 559 Pismo Street; 1624, 1636, 1642 Morro Street;and Pismo Buchan Alley from,Santa Rosa Street Deleted:Pir. \1 f l \ \ l , i -43- PGI2-62 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 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 (1850x- 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 4 \ r n Common site features and characteristics include: t A. Buildings located at back of sidewalk with zero street and side setbacks B. Finish floors at grade k C. Recessed front entries oriented toward the streetA D. Front facades oriented toward the �� street E. Trees placed at regular intervals along �f1 the street 721, 717 and 715 Higuera Street,North Architectural Character Elevation 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 -44- PH2-63 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 buildings were designed and built by local builders, including the Maino family, John Chapek• and Frank Mitchell. Predominant architectural features include: ' o` A. One to two stories(occasionally three) B. Flat or low pitched roof,often with a parapet as 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 i facing street. In multi-story structures, windows are vertically oriented, typically with double 10 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 fagade Smith Building and Union H. Use of awnings, historic signs, second-story Hardware Building, 1119 and overhangs and canopies 1129 Garden Street,East I. Use of transom windows above storefronts Elevation 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 o r 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 7 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 j L Doton Building, 777 Higuera Street,North Elevation -45- ]?H2-64 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Creamery building at 570 Higuera is historically significant to San Luis Obispo for its association with the 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: o� ' A. Buildings setback from street or side c property lines B. Building height, form or massing _ ( which contrasts markedly with the prevailing 2-3 story pattern iL C. Wood, metal or other contemporary material siding, or .faux" L _ 5 architectural materials or features. -- D. Asymmetrical arrangement of doors and windows 1010 Nipomo Street, South and West Elevations 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 19'h 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 N B. Coach barn (garage)recessed into rear — yard f . C. Front entries oriented toward the street — with prominent porch and steps J j D. Front facades oriented toward the --- -;. street -- _ r 756 Palm Street, South Elevation -46- IPH2-65 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 The architectural styles in the residential area of the Downtown district are varied and represent several different periods of development in San Luis Obispo. The oldest, vernacular Adobe, dates back the early pioneer period. The Rosa Butr6n de Caner 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 1. Architectural features-Residential: A. One and rarely two story buildings B. Gable and hip roof types predominate C. Traditional fenestration, such as J ' double-hung, wood sash windows, yrr" ornamental front doors, wood screen �`���,�,� doors i D. Painted wood or smooth stucco F,. kt • i siding. — . 469 Dana Street,North Elevation -47- PH2-66 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 i 5 _ Y Y' its t _. �... •. y-.ate z :• a Murray Adobe, 474 Monterey Street;Anderson House, 532 Dana Street;Hotel Wineman, 849 Higuera Street; 762 Higuera Street -48- PH2-67 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.2.3 Chinatown Setting The Chinatown Historic District was established in 1995 to recognize the important contributions of the Chinese community to the City's history and development. As originally developed, Chinatown is an enclave within the Downtown Historic District, and extends one block along both sides of Palm Street between Chorro and Morro Streets. Chinese immigrants arrived in San Luis Obispo in the 1870s and were instrumental in the construction of many transportation projects, including the Pacific Coastal Railroad (1874), the Paso-Cambria Road (now Highway 46)(1876),and sections of the Southern Pacific Railroad.(1886-1894),as well as providing other goods and services for the community.The Chinatown Historic District comprises a small part of the City's original subdivision, the Town of San Luis Obispo, recorded in 1878. It is a very small historic district with an area of 4.4 acres and has I 1 designated resources including one listed on the National Register of Historic Places(Ah Louis Store). The 800 block of Palm Street was the residential, cultural and commercial center for San Luis Obispo's Chinese citizens, beginning in the late 19`h century and lasting for around 70 years. The surviving structures span the district's period of significance, 1884-1945. Although many of the original wood structures in Chinatown were demolished in the 1950s to make room for public parking, the City established a historic district to recognize and preserve the area's remaining historic features. Site Features and Characteristics Common site features/characteristics include: A. Buildings located at back of public Ui ! sidewalks with zero setbacks B. Finish floors at grade level. C. Recessed front entries oriented toward r the street D. Front facades oriented parallel and y- facing the street E. Trees placed at regular intervals along the street 798 Palm St.South and East Elevations Architectural Character Given the limited area of the Chinatown District and the small number of contributing buildings it contains,it is difficult to isolate features within the district that are unique to and separate from -49- 1PH2-68 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 the adjoining Downtown Historic District. See Downtown Historic Description for general architectural features. Only four buildings along Palm Street have a historical association with Chinese-owned businesses and retain unifying architectural details:the Shanghai Low Restaurant at 861 Palm Street,the Mee Heng Low Restaurant at 815 Palm Street,Ah Louis Store at 800 and Chongs Candy Store at 798 Palm Street. Architectural details specific to Chinatown: A. Historic signs with Chinese imagery or characters B. Second story overhang C. Balconies with wood or metal railings D. Use of brick, tile or stucco and bright 4 exterior colors. E. Prominent use of neon for the buildings and signs constructed in the 1940s. F. Rectilinear building forms, predominately with parapet roofs and vertically oriented windows on ground 861 Palm,North Elevation and upper floors. G. Use of roof and projecting signs using Chinese style graphics. Individually Contributing Elements in the Chinatown District =Y Not all historic resources in the Chinatown 4 Historic District were built during the District's period of significance. These buildings were constructed outside of the period of significance of 1890-1940, _ generally do not exhibit the signature o 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. L - By virtue of their significance, these resources also merit preservation. Sauer/Adana Adobe. 964 Chorro Street. An example is the Sauer/Adams Adobe at West Elevation 964 Chorro, a rare two-story wood-covered adobe building built in the 1830s. The Sauer-Adams Adobe is significant for its association with the Mexican era development of San Luis Obispo as well as for the rarity of its two-story, "Monterey Style" design, one of the few remaining of this type in San Luis Obispo County. -50- PH2-69 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Non-Contributing Elements in Chinatown Non -contributing structures are those that both do not meet the criteria outlined above and have not achieved historical significance. Due to its small size and the 1950s demolition of much of the original Chinatown structures, the remaining historic character of Chinatown is especially vulnerable to loss through demolition or incompatible alteration or development. Non-Contributing architectural styles,materials or site features include: A. Buildings set back from street or side property lines B. Building height, form or massing i which greatly contrasts with the prevailing one and two story pattern C. Raised, non-recessed or offset - entrances to buildings ! _ D. Prominent use of metal, glass, -` concrete block masonry or other _ exterior siding materials which visually contrast with the District's signature architectural elements. E. Use of architectural forms or details that contrast sharply with or visually 817 Palm, South-East Elevation detract from the District's signature architectural elements. PH2-70 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 b...y ® CD _ r 817, 815 and 811 Palm Street;close up historic Chop Suey sign at 861 Palm Street;Ah Louis Store 800Pa1m Street;close«p of the and Chinese characters at 815 Palm Street r*� -52- IPH2— / 1 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.2.4 Mill Street Historic District Setting Established in 1987, the Mill Street Historic District is a residential neighborhood bounded by Pepper and Toro Streets on the east and west,and Peach and Palm Streets on the north and south. The Mill Street District is part of one subdivision, The Town of San Luis Obispo, recorded in 1878, although the area informally has been referred to as Fremont Heights. For its land area, Mill Street Historic District has the highest concentration of historic structures of the City's five Historic districts. It is a relatively small district, with an area of 20 acres or 0.03125 square miles,and as of January of 2010 had 84 listed historic properties. The Mill Street district was developed at the turn of the 20th century, with the majority of the 'mom:W existing buildings dating from the 1900s to 1920s,the district's primary period of historical and architectural significance. The district was developed on high ground with originally very wide (100 ft)lots in response to both the seasonal flooding and fires that plagued early development in San Luis Obispo.A few of these wide lots remain in the 1300 block of both Mill Street and Palm Street,but the majority of them were later re-subdivided into 50-60 foot wide lots. Site Features and Characteristics Common site features and characteristics include: A. Trees spaced at regular intervals along the street(especially on Mill Street) B. Distinctive Camphor Trees lining both �' { sides of Mill Street between Johnson and Pepper, a key entry corridor for the district C. Consistent street yard setbacks of 20 feet or more w D. Coach barns(garages) recessed into rear `R yard 11 E. Finish floors raised 2-3 above finish grade ., .,- F. Front entries oriented toward street, with _ — prominent walk,stairs and entry porches. 1344 Mill Street,South Elevation G. Front building facades oriented parallel to street Architectural Character Developed during a population boom in San Luis Obispo circa 1900s-1920s, the district's residential architectural styles reflect the prosperity of its residents. While older and more elaborate residences are located on the 1300 block of both Palm and Mill Streets,the majority of -53 - PH2-72 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 historic homes were more modest residences. The close proximity to the court house meant that Mill Street was home to many county employees, including county assessors, allomeys, and county clerks.The Mill Street District encompasses many different architectural styles,including revival styles popular at the turn of the twentieth century. These styles include Neo-classic Row House, Victorian (with elements of Gothic Revival, Queen Anne, Stick and Eastern Shingle), Tudor Revival, Mission Revival, and Craftsman Bungalow, with many homes borrowing architectural details from more than one style. Most buildings in this district were built by local builders, including E.D. Bray and James Maino and were influenced by architectural pattern books of the time period. Predominant architectural features include: A. One- and occasionally two-story houses 4 B. Mostly gable and hip roof types C. Traditional fenestration, such as double-hung, wood sash windows, — y ' ornamental front doors, wood screen doors D. Ornamental roof features,including prominent fascias,bargeboards, prominent pediments or cornices E. Painted wood or stucco surface material,including siding and molding 1264 and 1270 Palm Street,South Elevation Individually Contributing Elements in the Mill Street District Not all historic resources in the Mill Street Historic District were built during the f� district's period of significance. Those r buildings date from the late 1800s,generally do not exhibit the signature architectural elements described above, but do contribute f to the historic character of San Luis Obispo n 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 Buckley House at 777 Johnson Avenue is a converted carriage 777 Johnson Avenue,East Elevation house built in the 1880s and is significant for its design, specifically the board and batten siding, of which there very few examples are left in the City.The Shipsey House at 1266 Mill Street, a National Register property, is an example of -54- IPH2— /3 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Eastern Stick and significant for both its architectural style and its association with William Shipsey,attorney and mayor of San Luis Obispo from 1898 to1901. Non-Contributing Elements in the Mill Street District 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. Aluminum sliding windows B. Rectilinear,"boxy"shape C. Metal or other contemporary material siding, or "faux" architectural materials or features. D. Unarticulated wall surfaces E. Non-recessed or offset street entries to buildings o 1243 Mill Street,North Elevation -55- 11-H6—/4 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 VI k, r , I-Q P f 3�®l�'• - 1262 Mill Street; 1261 Mill Street; 1143, 1137 and 1127 Peach Street; Righetti House, 1314 Palm Street -56- PH2-75 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.2.5 Railroad Historic District Setting Established in 1998• the Railroad Historic District boundaries follow the historic boundaries of the Southem Pacific rail yard. The district is bounded by railroad right-of-way on the east,from Johnson Avenue on the north to Orcutt Road on the south, on the northwest generally by Leff Street, and on the west by Broad Street and the railroad right-of-way. The district includes a residential and commercial area on the west side of the tracks, and abuts the Old Town Historic District along its northwest and north boundary. The Southem Pacific (or "Espee") standard gauge railroad arrived in San Luis Obispo on May 4•, 1894. By 1901, San Luis Obispo was a part of the completed railroad line from San Francisco to Los Angeles, and served as the main layover and maintenance yard for the coastal route. The SP railroad operated in tandem with the older, narrow gauge railroad, the Pacific Coast Railway, or PCR. The PCR was a regional railway with a station on South and Higuera - the development of a spur line along South connected the PCR with the Southern Pacific rail yard. The Railroad District is a part of nine older subdivisions: the Beebee Phillips Tract recorded in 1874, Fairview Addition recorded in 1887,Haskins Tract recorded in 1887,Ingleside Homestead Tract recorded in 1887,the McBride Tract recorded in 1887, the Loomis Addition recorded in 1887, Maymont Addition recorded in 1888.Loomis and Osgood Re-subdivision recorded in 1894 and the Imperial Addition recorded in 1897. The Railroad District has an area of 80.7 acres or 0.126 square miles and 38 designated historic structures. Development in the Railroad Historic District corresponded to the development of the Southern Pacific Railroad yard. Commercial and residential buildings were constructed to accommodate railway workers, freight and passengers, and employees of Southern Pacific and related businesses. Surviving historic structures date from 1894 to 1945, corresponding with the peak activity of the rail yard and the district's period of significance,and most were constructed from 1894 to 1920. The buildings were laid out in a fairly regular grid near the station, accommodating the curve of the rail line and the diagonal path of Santa Barbara. South of Upham the lots are much larger to accommodate the railroad structures. Site Features and Characteristics Common site features/characteristics include: A. Commercial buildings located at r ze back of sidewalk with zero street } setbacks B. Front building facades oriented parallel to street l C. Finish floors at grade t. a Ila I D. Recessed front entries oriented toward the street ""tel""2 17 Channel Commercial Company, 1880 -57- Santa Barbara Avenue, West Elevation PH2-76 - Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Architectural Character The predominant architectural style within the Railroad Historic District is Railroad Vernacular. Railroad Vernacular is characterized by simplicity of form and detailing, with wood, brick or plaster siding, and is a style favored by railroad construction for its easy construction. As a practical vernacular style it also incorporates other elements of other architectural styles including Classical Revival and Mission Revival. Although many of the buildings within the district were not constructed by the railroad, their use of Railroad Vernacular styles design reflects the unifying focus of the district. The buildings in the Railroad District are a mix of simple,yet elegant houses and practical,industrial-oriented commercial buildings,which create a distinctive neighborhood. The architectural character and important historical elements are described in the Railroad District Plan. The Plan includes design guidelines that illustrate architecturally compatible design treatments for new development. Predominant architectural details include: A. One- and two-story buildings predominate e B. Gable and some hip roof types of low �s to medium pitch, occasionally with ` l " parapets - �, C. Predominantly painted wood siding, with some masonry or smooth plaster wall siding �— D. Traditional fenestration, such as double-hung,wood sash windows,and fixed divided light windows 1901 Santa Barbara,East Elevation E. Rectilinear massing, with equal or lesser volume on second floor F. Simple detailing often along the roof line including brackets Tribune Republic Building, east elevation I 1263 Santa Barbara Avenue �1 s is -58- IPH2-77 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Individually Contributing Elements in the Railroad District Not all designated historic resources in the Railroad Historic District were built during the District's period of significance, 1894-1945. These buildings were constructed outside of the period of significance, 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 Tribune Republic Building, built in 1873, is believed to be the earliest surviving wood commercial building in San Luis Obispo and has been placed on the City's Master List and the National Register of Historic Places for its association with the City's first newspaper. Non-Contributing Elements in the Railroad District 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, j materials or site features include: A. Building height, form, scale or massing which contrasts markedly with the district's prevailing 1 and 2- story buildings B. Metal, contemporary stucco or other contemporary siding, including"faux" architectural details or features that contrast markedly with traditional railroad vernacular forms, details and Modern addition to 1880 Santa Barbara, materials West Elevation C. Asymmetrical arrangement of doors or windows D. Non-recessed or offset street entries to buildings Residential Although the majority of the Railroad District is commercial, there is a small residential area within it which runs along Church Street and Santa Barbara Avenue from Osos to Upham Streets. This area was home to many railroad employees and their families. -59- iC H2— /8 ArLac1 .went 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Site features and characteristics-Residential: A. Residential buildings with modest street setbacks of 10 feet B. Coach barn (garage) recessed into rear yard " f C. Front building facades oriented parallel _ ,'✓ AV, r �J to street. D. Finish floors raised 2-3 above finish grade E. Front entries oriented toward street, with prominent walk,stairs and porch The houses within the residential district are modest,which reflects their early working class 1034 Church St, South Elevation occupants. Within the district are two hotels, the Call/Parkview Hotel at 1703 Santa Barbara and the Park/Reidy Hotel at 1815 Osos which once served as boarding houses for railroad workers. These vernacular buildings have decorative elements from several styles including Craftsman Bungalow, Classical Revival and Folk Victorian. h Architectural features-Residential: A. One and two story buildings B. Gable and some hip roof types of low j j 1 to medium pitch 4 t � C. Painted wood surface material, occasionally smooth stucco wall siding D. Traditional fenestration, such as double-hung, wood sash windows, ornamental front doors, wood screen * , doors 1724 Osos,East Elevation -60- PH2-79 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 rM I w 4. !yY .�TT 3 vy 1 South'ern.Pacific Railroad Depot, 1011 Railroad Avenue;Park/Reidy Hotel 1815 Osos-Street;Sauthern Pacific Railroad Warehouse,1940 Santa Barbara Avenue;and house located at-I789 Santa Barbara Avenue. i r 1 � -61 - PH2-80 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.3 Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources,Updated March 24,2010 Address District or Neighborhood Date listed 1428 Beach Old Town 02/03/87 1520 Beach Old Town 02/03/87 48 Benton Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 1342 Breck East Railroad Area 02/20/07 156 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 207 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 236 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 282 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 301 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 368 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 381 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 397 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 453 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 456 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 457 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 464 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 472 Broad Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 967 Broad Downtown 08/16/83 975 Broad Downtown 08/16/83 1019-23 Broad Downtown 08/16/83 1405 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1408-10 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1418 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1421 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1427 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1505 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1511-13 Broad Old Town 08/16/83. 1519 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1531 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1536 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1544 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 530 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 533 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 540 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 549 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 575 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 578 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 586-88 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 594 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 641 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 -62- PH2-81 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 651 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 654 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 658 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 661 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 665 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 670 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 673 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 676-80 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 677 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 685 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 722 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 770 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 871 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 880 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 885 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 889 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 966 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 973 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 977 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1015 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1035 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1045 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1051 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1057 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1067 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1110 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1118 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1124 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1126 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1132 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1135 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1137 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1144 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1145 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1151 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1152 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1157 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1160 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1165 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1170 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1175 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1176 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1182 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1189 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1190 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 -63 - PH2-82 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 742 Center Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 755 Center Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 30 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 45 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 59 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 63 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 69 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 115 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 128 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 158 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 173 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 183 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 190 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 211 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 360 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 368 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 369 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 395 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 398 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 431 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 453 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 476 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 482 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 487 Chorro Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 940-42 Chorro Downtown 08/16/83 950 Chorro Chinatown 02/03/87 970 Chorro Downtown 08/16/83 978-80 Chorro Downtown 08/16/83 984 Chorro Downtown 08/16/83 1023 Chorro Downtown 02/03/87 1111 Chorro Downtown 02/03/87 1119 Chorro Downtown 02/03/87 1534 Chorro Old Town 02/03/87 1603 Chorro Old Town 02/03/87 882 Church Old Town 02/03/87 888 Church Old Town 02/03/87 893 Church Old Town 02/03/87 971 Church Railroad 02/03/87 972 Church Old Town 02/03/87 1010 Church Railroad 02/03/87 1018 Church Railroad 02/03/87 1022 Church Railroad 02/03/87 1028 Church Railroad 02/03/87 1034 Church Railroad 02/03/87 465 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 -64- PH2-83 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 469 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 507/515 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 522 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 525 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 531 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 543 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 547 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 577 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 579 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 1013 Ella East Railroad 02/20/07 1015 Ella East Railroad 02/20/07 1240 Ella East Railroad 02/20/07 1255 Ella East Railroad 02/20/07 1265 Ella East Railroad 02/20/07 1345 Ella#17 East Railroad 02/20/07 1672 Fairview East Railroad 02/20/07 1110 Garden Downtown 02/03/87 1408 Garden Old Town 02/03/87 1421 Garden Old Town 02/03/87 1425 Garden Old Town 02/03/87 1536 Garden Old Town 02/03/87 1043 George East Railroad 02/20/07 1127 George East Railroad 02/20/07 1205 George East Railroad 02/20/07 1215 George East Railroad 02/20/07 1234 George East Railroad 02/20/07 1236 George East Railroad 02/20/07 673 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 685 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 686 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 698 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 699 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 705 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 715 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 717 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 718-20 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 723 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 725 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 728 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 733 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 746 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 751 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 760-70 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 778 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 779-87 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 -65- PH2-84 Attac')marl# 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 782-90 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 858 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 970 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 995 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 491 Hill Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 1136 Iris East Railroad 02/20/07 1139 Iris East Railroad 02/20/07 1140 his East Railroad 02/20/07 1204 Iris East Railroad 02/20/07 454 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 462 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 468 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 481 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 482 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 530 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 539 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 542 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 550 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 559 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 567 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 572 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 574 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 575 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 641 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 654 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 655 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 662 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 663 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 675 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 676 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 727 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 744 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 752 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 753 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 770 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 827 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 862 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 868/870 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 878 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 879 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 893 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 974 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 976 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 978 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 980 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 -66- PH2-85 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1005 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1011 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1017 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1022 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1029 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1034 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1035 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1040 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1044 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1045 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1053 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1061 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1071 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1117 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1120 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1121 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 772 Johnson Mill 08/16/83 773 Johnson Mill 08/16/83 879 Johnson Mill 02/03/87 949 Johnson Mill 02/03/87 955 Johnson Mill 02/03/87 957 Johnson Mill 02/03/87 1408 Johnson Johnson Avenue 10/07/97 1985 Johnson East Railroad 02/20/07 2105 Johnson East Railroad 02/20/07 968 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 976 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1020 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1027 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1028 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1035 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1045 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1051 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1059 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 754 Lincoln Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 755 Lincoln Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 762 Lincoln Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 785 Lincoln Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 795 Lincoln Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 412 Marsh none 01/05/99 742 Marsh Downtown 02/03/87 778 Marsh Downtown 02/03/87 704 Meinecke Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 706 Meinecke Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 724 Meinecke Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 -67- PH2-86 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 732 Meinecke Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 770 Meinecke Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 780 Meinecke Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 794 Meinecke Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 804 Meinecke Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 1162 Mill Mill 02/03/87 1165 Mill Mill 02/03/87 1168 Mill Mill 02/03/87 1202 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1214 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1217 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1220 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1234 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1237 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1244 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1253 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1261 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1262 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1265 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1307 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1318 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1333 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1343 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1344 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1350 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1351-63 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1360 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1367 Mill Mill 08/16/83 249 Mission Lane Mt.Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 728 Mission Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 734 Mission Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 752 Mission Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 610 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 614 Monterey Downtown 02/03/87 658 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 667 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 679 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 840 Monterey Downtown 02/03/87 857 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 861-63 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 886 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 894 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 895 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 956 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 974-82 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 -68- PH2-87 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1005 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 1009 Monterey Downtown 02/03/87 , 879 Morro Downtown 02/03/87 1009 Morro Downtown 02/03/87 1336 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1346 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1428 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1436 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1444 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1512 Morro Old Town O2/03/87" 1520 Morro Old Town !x.02/03/87 1527 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1528 Morro Old Town 02/03/87, 1535 Morro Old Town 02/03/87, 1536 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1543 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1544 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1604 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1615 Morro Old Town. ', 02/03/87 1720 Morro Old Town . \1.02/03/87 1727 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1729 Morro Old Town02/03/87 1731 Morro Old Town `"02/03/87 1814 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1821 Morro ` `O1d.Town 02/03/87 1829 Morro Old',Town 02/03/87 1845 Morro \_ Old Town 02/03/87 501 Mt.View MuPleasanton/Anholtn 07/09/99 644 Mt.View `Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 676 Mt.View_ Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 764 Murray ` Mt.`Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 807'Murray.., �. Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 814 Murray, \ Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 815 Murray'-,, iMt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 822 Murray ` Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 823 Murray ` ��,! Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 829 Murray Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 836 Murray Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 851 Murray Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 854 Murray Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 859 Murray Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 869 Murray Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 871 Murray Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 883 Murray Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 884 Murray Mt.Pleasanton/Anholm(Old Town) 07/09/99 -69- PH2-88 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 894 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 1415 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1429 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1438 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1516 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1519 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1527 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1528 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1535 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1541 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1341 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1350 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1421 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1511 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1514 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1521 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1522 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1526 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1529 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1533 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1534 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1541 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1542 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1609 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1638 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1641 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1724 Osos Railroad 02/03/87 1734 Osos Railroad 02/03/87 1740 Osos Railroad 02/03/87 1750 Osos Railroad 02/03/87 1814 Osos Railroad 02/03/87 682 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 752 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 756 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 776 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 778 Palm Chinatown 02/03/87 798 Palm Chinatown 08/16/83 811 Palm Chinatown 02/03/87 815 Palm Chinatown 02/03/87 861 Palm Chinatown 02/03/87 1014 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 1020 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 1201 Palm Mill 02/03/87 1208 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1228 Palm Mill 02/03/87 -70- PH2-89 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1236 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1243 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1248 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1250 Palm Mill 02/03/87 1259 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1260 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1264 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1269 Palm Mill 02/03/87 1270 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1317 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1320 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1344 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1347 Palm Mill 02/03/87• 1355 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1359 Palm Mill /�'` 02/03/87 `, 1390 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1134 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1137 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1143 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1151 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1154 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1156 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1163 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1168 Peach —Mill 08/16/83 1206 Peach Mill' 02/03/87 1209 Peach Mill \ 08/16/83 1215 Peach Mille 08/16/83 1221 Peach Mill_ 08/16/83 861 Pepper _ _ Mill 08/16/83 571 Pismo': a Old Town 08/16/83 657 Pismo `91d Town_; 08/16/83 660 Pismo` Old Town/ 08/16/83 663 Pismo Old Town 08/16/83 683 Pismo .. Old Town 08/16/83 729 Pismo \ Old Town 02/03/87 954 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 956 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 958 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 969 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 977 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 979 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 985 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1042 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1050 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1060 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 -71 - PH2-90 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1068 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1109 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1126 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1133 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1145 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1147 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1152 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1155 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1160 Pismo Old Town 02/03%87 1163 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1166 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1171 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1176 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87. 1179 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87, 1185 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87'-, 1190 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1193 Pismo Old Town '� '.02/03/87 907 Rachel East Railroad 02/20/07 2056 Rachel East Railroad 02/20/07 1020 Railroad Railroad 02/03/87 747 Rougeot Mt.Pleasanion/Anholm 07/09/99 750 Rougeot Mt.Pleasanton/Anhol'm '07/09/99 762 Rougeot Mt.Pleasanton%Anholm' _ `07/09/99 783 Rougeot —Mt.Pleasanton/Anhol'm 07/09/99 1908 Ruth East Railroad 02/20/07 1749 Santa Barbara% Railroad 02/03/87 1789 Santa Barbara Railroad 02/03/87 1901 Santa Barbara Railroad," 02/03/87 1414 Santa Rosa- - Old.Town' 02/03/87 1426 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1504 Santa Rosa Old Town_p 02/03/87 1512-Santa-Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1515 Sania.Rosa Old Toum 02/03/87 1520 Santa Rosa•, iOld Town 02/03/87 1521 Santa Rosa, 1\ "Old Town 02/03/87 1530 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1606 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1617 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1624 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1627 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1633 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1705 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1707 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1720 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1728 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 -72- PH2-91 Attachman+ 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1730 Santa Rosa Railroad 02/03/87 1731 Santa Rosa Railroad 02/03/87 2006 Swazey East Railroad 02/20/07 2033 Swazey East Railroad 02/20/07 675 Toro Mill 08/16/83 760 Toro Mill 08/16/83 762 Toro Mill 08/16/83 770 Toro Mill 08/16/83 771 Toro Mill 08/16/83 778 Toro Mill 08/16/83 780 Toro Mill 08/16/83 855 Toro Mill 08/16/83 858 Toro Mill 08/16/83 862 Toro Mill 08/16/83 865 Toro Mill 08/16/83 872 Toro Mill 08/16/83 898 Toro Mill 08/16/83 1423 Toro Old Town 02/03/87 875 Upham Railroad 02/03/87 750 Woodbridge Little Italy 10/02/2001 756 Woodbridge Little Italy 10/02/2001 762 Woodbrige Little Italy 10/02/2001 -73 - PH2-92 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.4 Master List of Historic Resources,updated March 24,2010 *Serial Number: 0000 00 X Sequential National Register Rating Type of Structure Type of Structure Number 1=Already placed on National Register R=Residential 2=Determined eligible for the National Register C=Commercial 3=Eligible for the National Register O=Other 4=Potentially eligible for the National Register 5=Not eligible for the National Register but locally significant Address Historic Name Zone District Serial No.* 1451 ANDREWS ANDREWS ADOBE R-1-S 0001-03R 59 BENTON WAY J.J.DUNNE HOUSE R-1 0165-05R 148 BROAD BRAZIL HOUSE R-1 0002-04R 963 BROAD MANDERSCHEID HOUSE R-3-H Downtown 0003-04R 1345 BROAD ANDERSON HOUSE O-H Old Town 0004-04R 1411 BROAD MAIER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0005-04R 1426 BROAD DUTTON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0006-04R 1435 BROAD MILLER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0007-04R 1445 BROAD FALKENSTEIN HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0008-04R 1504 BROAD VE ITERLINE HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0009-03R 1510 BROAD MCKENNON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0010-04R 1516 BROAD RENETZKY HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0011-04R 1530 BROAD TUCKER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town OO 12-04R 714 BUCHON MYRON ANGEL HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0013-01R 726 BUCHON JESSIE WRIGHT MATERNITY HOME R-2-H Old Town 0014-04R 743 BUCHON BRADBURY SANITARIUM R-2-H Old Town 0015-04R 745 BUCHON BRADBURY HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0016-04R 751 BUCHON KAISER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0017-04R 752 BUCHON STANTON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0018-04R 771 BUCHON BREW HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0019-04R 779 BUCHON UPHAM HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0020-04R 785 BUCHON MARSHALL HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0021-04R 793 BUCHON CROCKER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0022-03R 794 BUCHON FITZGERALD HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0023-03R 850 BUCHON CLARKINORTON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0024-04R 860 BUCHON HOURIHAN HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0025-04R 890 BUCHON PAULSON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0026-04R 896 BUCHON CROSSEIT HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0027-04R 116 CHOPRO MICHAEL C.HALPIN HOUSE R-1 0176-05R 375 CHORRO CHRIS ANHOLM HOUSE R-1 0175-05R 868 CHORRO MANCILLA/FREITAS ADOBE R4 0028-03R 964 CHORRO SAUER/ADAMS ADOBE C-D-H Chinatown 0029-03R 1026 CHORRO WADE BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0100-05C 1029 CHORRO DUGHI BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0101-05C 1033 CHORRO WICKENDEN BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0102-05C 1306 CHORRO REGAN HOUSE O 0030-05R 1318 CHORRO MAZZA HOUSE O 0031-04R 1518 CHORRO BROOKS HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0032-03R 1546 CHORRO FLEUGER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0033-04R 1746 CHORRO ASTON HOUSE R-2 0034-05R -74- PH2-93 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Address Historic Name Zone District Serial No. 1902 CHORRO BITTICK RESIDENCE R-2 0170-05R 1907 CHORRO FINNEY HOUSE R-2 0035-05R 1953 CHORRO OLIVER HOUSE R-2 0163-0SR 466 DANA ROSA BUTRON ADOBE R-3-H Downtown 0036-03R 532 DANA ANDERSON HOUSE R-3-H Downtown 0037-04R 550 DANA BARNEBERG HOUSE O-H-PD Downtown 0038-04R 1500 ETO SOLOMON FOREMAN HOUSE R-I-PD 0166-05R 1119 GARDEN UNION HARDWARE BUILDING C;D-H Downtown 0103-04C 1123 GARDEN SMITH BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0104-05C 1129 GARDEN LAIRD BUILDING C-D-H 3 Downtown 0105-05C 1130 GARDEN STOVER BUILDING i;; C-D-H Downtown 0106-05C 1212 GARDEN GOLDTREEIMCCAFFREY HOUSE C'D, 0039-040 1105 GEORGE EDWARD F.BUSHNELL HOUSE R-2 0154-05R 2132 HARRIS WEILL HOUSE R-?\ ` 0040-04R 50 HIGUERA DIV.OF HIGHWAYS DIST.5 OFF. PF 0156-03C 75 HIGUERA LOOMIS FEED CO.WAREHOUSE C-S-MU , ' , 0107-OSC 236 HIGUERA H.H.WAITE PLANING MILL", C-S-MU 0108-05C 570 HIGUERA GOLDEN STATE CREAMtkY, C-D Downtown 0109-05C 719 HIGUERA GREENFIELD BUILDING /r' 'C-D-H Downtown 0110-05C 726 HIGUERA KLUVER CIGAR FACTORY C-D-H Downtown 011 I-03C 736 HIGUERA CARRISA BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0112-04C 740 HIGUERA VOLLMER GROCERY, C-D-H Downtown Ol 13-05C 767 HIGUERA BANK OF AMERICA BUILDING `C-D-H Downtown 0 14-03C 777 HIGUERA DOTON BUILDING`', C-D-H Downtown 0115-03C 796 HIGUERA JOHNSON BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0 16-OSC 799 HIGUERA COMMERCIAL BANK BUILDING=- C-D-H Downtown 0117-05C 842 HIGUERA :WARDEN/TOWER BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0118-04C 849 HIGUERA •GOLDTREE BLOCK/HOTEL WINEMAN C-D-H Downtown 0119-05C 852 HIGUERA A.F.FITZGERALD BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0120-05C 856 HIGUERA SANDERCOCK TRANSFER BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0120-05C 3897 SO.HIGUERA LONG/BONETTI RANCH : M-SP 0157-04R 1100 IRIS SOUTHERN PACIFIC-WATER TOWER C/OS Railroad 0153-04C 461 ISLAY ERICKSON HOUSE- R-2 0041-04R 463 ISLAY,'- FUMIGALLI HOUSE R-2 0042-05R 497 ISLAY ` VOLLMER HOUSE R-2 0043-05R 535 ISI AY\, SA4DERC6CK HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0044-04R 591 fSLAY, ', SANDERCOCK HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0045-05R 644 ISLAY ': DANA/PARSONS HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0046-05R 670 ISLAY ` FITZPATRICK HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0047-04R 687 ISLAY ERICKSON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0048-03R 690 ISLAY KIMBALL HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0049-04R 790 ISLAY JACKSON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0050-04R 1052 ISLAY KAUFMAN HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0174-05R 777 JOHNSON BUCKLEY HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0051-05R 1720 JOHNSON THE JUDGE'S HOUSE R-2 0052-03R 2030 JOHNSON OLD SLO HIGH SCHOOL CLASSROOM R-2 0175-65R 1019-23 LEFF POST HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0053-04R 1590 LIZZIE LA LOMA DE LA NOPALERA ADOBE R-1-SP 0158-04C 100 MADONNA MADONNA INN C-T,C-T-S 0121-04C 536 MARSH JACK HOUSE C-D 0054-030 547 MARSH KAETZEL HOUSE C-D 0055-04R 774 MARSH SNYDER BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0122-04C -75- PH2-94 1 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Address Historic Name Zone District Serial No. 859 MARSH MASONIC TEMPLE C-D 0123-03C 893 MARSH U.S.POST OFFICE C-D 0124-05C 951 MARSH FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH C-D 0125-03C 981 MARSH FREDERICK HART BUILDING C-D 0125-03C 1117 MARSH ESQUAR HOUSE 0 0056-04R 1129 MARSH RAMAGE HOUSE O 0057-04R 1135 MARSH SHIPMAN HOUSE 0 0058-04R 1141 MARSH THE NURSE'S HOUSE O 0059-04R 1145 MARSH FAULKNER HOUSE 0 0060-04R 1160 MARSH STOVER'S SANITARIUM O 0126-03C 1167 MARSH GRAVES HOUSE O 0061-05R 1305 MARSH REID HOUSE O 0062-05R 1266 MILL SHIPSEY HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0063-OIR 1306 MILL SMITH HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0064-04R 1323 MILL LAIRD HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0172-05R 1330 MILL MUSCIO HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0065-05R 1333 MILL BURCH HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0173-05R 1424 MILL MAINO HOUSE R-2 0066-05R 1460 MILL MUGLER HOUSE R-2 0067-04R 642 MONTEREY HAYS/LATTIMER ADOBE O-H Downtown 0068-03R 664 MONTEREY DR.GEORGE B.NICHOLS HOUSE O-H Downtown 0069-04R 696 MONTEREY CARNEGIE LIBRARY PF-H Downtown 0128-030 747 MONTEREY MURRAY ADOBE PF-H Downtown 0070-030 782 MONTEREY MISSION SAN LUIS OBISPO C-D-S-H Downtown 0127-030 848 MONTEREY SAUER BAKERY C-D-H Downtown 0129-05C 849 MONTEREY SINSHEIMER BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0130-03C 868 MONTEREY MUZIO'S GROCERY C-D-H Downtown 0131-03C 955 MONTEREY ANDERSON HOTEL C-D-H Downtown 0132-05C 962 MONTEREY BRUNNER BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0133-05C 998 MONTEREY ANDREWS BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0135-03C 1035 MONTEREY FREMONT THEATER C-D-H Downtown 0136-03C 1815 MONTEREY MONDAY CLUB C-T-S 0137-03C 2223 MONTEREY MILESTONE MOTEL INN C-T-S 0138-03C 1406 MORRO SNYDER HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0071-04R 1511 MORRO MARTHA DUNLAP HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0167-05R 1624 MORRO BULLARD HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0072-04R 1636 MORRO BAKER HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0073-04R 1642 MORRO ALBERT HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0074-04R 991 NIPOMO HARMONY CREAMERY O-H Downtown 0139-05C 1204 NIPOMO PARSONS HOUSE C-D 0075-05R 1344 NIPOMO ST.STEPHEN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH R-2-H Old Town 0141-030 1407 NIPOMO PATTON HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0076-04R 1428 NIPOMO ROGERS HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0077-OSR 1446 NIPOMO NICHOLS HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0078-05R 978 OLIVE HERITAGE INN C-T 0159-05C 8900SOS TEASS HOUSE 0-H Downtown 0079-04R 976 0SOS COUNTY COURTHOUSE PF-H Downtown 0142-040 1301 0SOS FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH O 0143-030 1429 0SOS FRANK CAMPBELL MITCHELL HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0171-05R 1443 0SOS M.F.AVILA HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0080-03R 17000SOS ALLEN HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0081-05R 1716 0SOS HAGEMAN SANITARIUM R-3-H Old Town 0082-04R -76- PH2-95 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Address Historic Name Zone District Serial No. 1815 0SOS PARK/REIDY HOTEL C-R-S-H Railroad 0144-05C 863 PACIFIC ZION LUTHERAN CHURCH O 0145-04C 1106 PACIFIC KUNDERT MEDICAL BUILDING O 0146-03C 1185 PACIFIC DALLIDET ADOBE O 0083-030 800 PALM AH LOUIS STORE C-D-H Chinatown 0147-03C 990 PALM SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY HALL PF-H Downtown 0164-050 1118 PALM GREGG HOUSE O 0175-0SR 1144 PALM PAYNE HOUSE O 0084-03R 1305 PALM RIGHEiTI APARTMENTS R-3-H Mill Street 0085-05R 1314 PALM RIGHETTI HOUSE R-3-H Mill Street 0086-05R 71 PALOMAR SANDFORD HOUSE R-4 0087-05R 1127 PEACH J.MAINO HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0088-05C 1128 PEACH MAINO/RIGHETTI HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0089-04R 280 PISMO OLD GAS WORKS C-S 0148-04C 559 PISMO BIDDLE HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0090-03R 649 PISMO MCMANUS HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0091-03R 671 PISMO LEWIN HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0092-05R 676 PISMO GREENFIELD HOUSE O-H Old Town 0093-04R 750 PISMO OLD FIRE STATION BUILDING O 0140-03C 1116 PISMO VOLLMER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0094-04R 1123 PISMO THORNE HOUSE R-2-1-1 Old Town 0095-05R 1341 PURPLE SAGE RODRIGUEZ ADOBE R-I-PD 0160-03C 1011 RAILROAD SOUTHERN PACIFIC DEPOT C-S-S-H Railroad 0149-04C 1021 RAILROAD SP TRANSPORTATION CO.BLDG. C-S-S-H Railroad 0168-02C 1335 ROUNDHOUSE SOUTHERN PACIFIC ROUNDHOUSE C-S-S-H Railroad 0169-02C 1499 SAN LUIS DRIVE SLO HIGH SCHOOL GYMNASIUM PF 0155-05C 1703 SANTA BARBARA CALL HOTEL R-3-H Railroad 0096-05R 1717 SANTA BARBARA WILLIAM M.DUFF HOUSE R-3-H Railroad 0161-05R 1725 SANTA BARBARA ALEXANDER GALEWSKI HOUSE R-3-H Railroad 0162-05R 1763 SANTA BARBARA TRIBUNE-REPUBLIC BUILDING R-3-H Railroad 0152-04R 1880 SANTA BARBARA CHANNEL COMMERCIAL COMPANY C-R-S-H Railroad 0151-04C 1940 SANTA BARBARA SOUTHERN PACIFIC WAREHOUSE C-S-S-H Railroad 0150-04C 2243 SANTA YNEZ FAULSTICH HOUSE R-1 0134-05R 1445 SANTA ROSA KINDERGARTEN SCHOOL PF-H Old Town 0097-040 1531 SANTA ROSA ADRIANCE COURT R-3-H Old Town 0098-05R 843 UPHAM CHAPEK HOUSE R-2 0099-05R +is -77- PH2-96 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.5 Defmitions For the purposes of this chapter, certain terms, words and their derivatives shall be defined as specified herein; 1.Accessory Structure: a structure which is subordinate or incidental and directly related to a permitted use or structure on the same parcel. "Accessory structures" that include habitable space, as defined by the California Building Code,shall be no larger than 450 square feet.(Ord. 941-1(part), 1982: prior code—9204.11 (part)) "Accessory structures" are located on the same parcel and are related to the primary structure but are subordinate or incidental,but may include structures that have achieved historic significance in their own right, as determined by the Director,Committee or Council.(see"primary structure"), 2. Adjacent: located on property which abuts the subject property on at least one point of the property line, on the same property, or located on property directly across right-of-way from subject property and able to viewed concurrently. 3,Adverse Effects:effects,impacts or actions that are detrimental or potentially detrimental to a Delete:3 j historic resource's condition,architectural or historical integrity. ......._.._.._..__................................................_......... _...._._... Alteration:.change,repair,replacement,remodel,modification,or new construction to:(1)the Deleted:4 exterior of an historic resource or adjacent building,(2)the fractural elements which support the Delete:any _I exterior walls, roof. or exterior elements of the historic resource or adjacent building, (3) other DeletedL exterior and interior _ l construction on a lot,or(4)character defini_gn ,-features of the interior of a historic resourc te.;_f the 'Delete:Character structure's significance is wholly or partially based on interior features and the resource is Deleted:Defining publicly-accessible. "Alteration" does not include ordinary landscape maintenance unless the landscaping is identified as significant at the time a propertyis este "Alteration" does not Deleted:Features p g ��'-"—"- Delete:,unless the interior is exempt include ordinary prooery maintenance or repair that is exert from a building permit or is from historic review by the Cultural consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Treatment o...f,Histor c„Properties, Heritage committee iDelete:histerree!{y 5,Archaeological Site: those areas where archaeological resources are present and may be larger Deleted:,receives historic"H”zoning,1 or smaller than the project site. An archaeological site may include prehistoric Native American or is identified in an adopted historic ; archaeological site, Historic archaeological sites; sites or natural landscapes associated with preservation report important human events;and Native American Sacred Places and Cultural landscapes. Deleted:s ...... ..... 6 ARC:the Architectural Review Commission as appointed by the City Council. Delete:e 7, California Register: California Register of Historical Resources defined in California PRC Deleted: 5024.1 and in CCR Title 14 Chap 11.5,Sec 4850 et seq.as it may be amended. Deleted: - 8. CHC:the Cultural Heritage Committee as appointed by the City Council Deleted:e 9 Character Defining Features: as outlined in the U.S. Department of the Interior's NationalDeletev : ................................_........._._....._..__......_......._.._..........__..__I 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, -78- PH2-97 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Hist(, :reservation Program Guidelines Attachment 4 June 2010 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,finishes,etc. 100 City:the City of San Luis Obispo. (Deleted:to 11. Community Design Guidelines: the most recent version of the City's Community l Deleted:i I Design Guidelines as adopted and amended from time to time. 113,Contributing Resource or Property: Buildings or other resources at least 50 years old that I Deleted:2 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, Deleted:shall be designated but should be visible to the public. In some cases, buildings or other resources that are less than Contributing Resources. 50 years old,but are nonetheless significant based on architecture,craftsmanship or other criteria as described herein may be designated as a Contributing resource. 13,Council: the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo. Deleted:a 11 Cultural Resource: any prehistoric or historic district,site, landscape,building, structure,or Deleted:a object included in, or potentially eligible for local, State or National historic designation, including artifacts,records,and material remains related to such a property or resource. 11 Demolition: for the purpose of these guidelines, "demolition" refers to any act or failure to {Deleted:s act that destroys,removes,or relocates, in whole or part a historical resource such that its historic or architectural character and significance are materially altered. 1C, Deterioration: the significant worsening of a structure's condition, architectural or historic Deleted:s J integrity,due to lack of maintenance,organisms,neglect,weathering and other natural forces. 17. Director: the Director of the Community Development Department, or another person authorized by the Director to act on his or her behalf. J& Feasible: capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period Deleted:IS.Disaster: "Disaster"shall of time, taking into account cultural, economic, environmental, historic, legal, social and include ere,flood earthquake,landslide. subsidence,tsunami,acts of war or civil technological factors. Structural feasibility means that a building or other structure can be unrest or other catastropbic event as repaired or rehabilitated so as to be safe and usable without.significant loss of historic fabric. declared by the Council,the Governor of the State of California or the President of Factors to be considered when making this determination include the existence_of technology the united states.1 that will allow the design of the work and the ability to repair, supplement or replace load- ¶ bearing members and the thermal and moisture protection systems required for continued use of Deleted:v the structure; and the physical capacity of the structure to withstand the repair and/or Formatted: Underline rehabilitation process without the danger of further damage.. -79- PH2-98 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 19.Historic Building Code:the most recent version of the California_Historical Building-Code, Title 25 Part8 as defined in Sections 18950 to 18961 of Division 12 Part 2.7 of Health and Safety Code...(H_&_...SC),apartof-California.-S,tate.l,aw. 20. Historic Context_Historic context are those patterns themes or trends in historyby which a specific occurrencecance is made clear. 21,Historic District/Historical Preservation District: areas or neighborhoods with a collection Deleted:a or concentration of listed or potentially contributing historic properties or archaeologically significant sites, where historic properties help define the area or neighborhood's unique architectural, cultural, and historic character or sense of place. Historic districts may be, delineated on the official zoning map as Historic (H) overlay zone under San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 17.54. Deleted:I 27 Historic Preservation Program Guidelines: the most recent version of the Historic ret2 1.nt version Building Code:the most recent version o(the California Historical Preservation Program Guidelines,as adopted from time to time. Building Code,Title 25,Parr,8,as defined in Sections 18950 to 18961 of Division 12,Pan 2.7 of Health and Safety 21 Historic Preservation Report. a document which describes preservation, rehabilitation, Code(H&SC),a pan of California State restoration, or reconstruction measures for a historic resource, based on the Secretary of the law. Its purpose is to provide regulations and standards for the rehabilitation, Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties, and which includes standards and preservation,restoration(including guidelines for recommended treatments for preserving the resource., related reconstruction)or relocation as g p g applicable to all historical buildings, structures and properties deemed of 24, Historic Property: aproperty, including land and buildings, which possesses aesthetic, importance to the hisory,architecture,or culture of an area by an appropriate local architectural, cultural,historic or scientific significance, and which is included in,or potentially or state governmental jurisdiction.'l eligible for local, State or National historic designation. 22. Historic Context: Historic context are those patterns,themes or trends in history by which a specific occurrence, 2property,or site is understood and its ,Historic Resource: any building,site,improvement,area or object of aesthetic,architectural, i meaning and significance is made clear.9 cultural, historic or scientific significance, and which is included in, or potentially eligible for rDelete d:3 -i local,State or National historic designation -- Deleted:4 _ 26 Historic Status:historic designation of a listed resource or property as approved b Council. Deleted:A historic preservation epos ! P P PP y i shall require approval by the CHC and 1 the approval shall remain in effect for a 27, Improvement: any building, structure, fence,gate, landscaping, hardscaping, wall, work of period prat leas three yea:f ora he approval date.The Director or on referral art,or other object constituting a physical feature of real property or any part of such feature. from the Director,the CHC may extend or re-adopt an approved program for a period of up to ten years. 28 Inappropriate Alteration: alterations to historic resources which violate these provisions Delved:s and/or the Historic Preservation Ordinance. i Deleted:6 29. Integrity, Architectural or Historical: the ability of a property, structure, site, building, Deleted:t I improvement or natural feature to convey its identity and authenticity, including but not limited Deleted:8 to its original location, period(s) of construction, setting, scale, design, materials, detailing, Deleted:9 workmanship,human values,uses and association. -Deleted:-.3-0--, -80- PH2-99 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 30.Inventory of Historic Resources: the list of historically designated resources and properties Deleted:t consisting of Master List and Contributing Properties List Historic Resources, and any properties, objects, sites, gardens, sacred places and resources subsequently added to the inventory as determined to meet criteria outlined herein and approved by the City Council. 31,Listed Resource:properties and resources included in the Inventory of Historic Resources. Deleted:z 32, Massing: the spatial relationships, arrangement and organization of a building's physical Deleted:-3 bulk or volume. ............... 31 Master List Resource: designation which may be applied to the most unique and important Delete&.4 -J historic properties and resources in terms of a_ge,._architectural or historical s1$n fcance,rarity,_or association with impertant_persons or events In the City's past,..-meeting criteria outlined jn the Deleted:herein Historic Preservation Ordinance. Minor Alteration. Any structural or exterior change to a historic resource which the Deleted:5 Director determines to be consistent with the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, Secretary of the Interior_Standards for.-Treatment._of_Histor.c.,.Properties and other applicable standards. 35, Modern Contributing Resources: designation which may be applied to properties and Deleted:6 resources which are less than 50 years old, but which exemplify or include significant works of - - architecture or craftsmanship or are associated with a person or event significant to the City's history. 36 National Register of Historic Places: the official inventory of districts, sites, buildings. Deleted:7 .-......., structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and culture which is maintained by the Secretary of the Interior under the authority of the Historic Sites Act of 1935 and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. 37,Neglect:the lack of maintenance,repair or protection from natural elements or vandalism ofDeleted:a a listed property, resource, site or structure, which results in significant deterioration, as Deleted:whether intentional ornot, determined by the Director,CHC or City Council based on visual and physical evidence. 38 Non-Contributing Resource: designation which may be applied to properties and resources petaled:9 .. ...................................................................................... in historic districts which are typically less than 50 years old and do not support the prevailing historic character of the district or other listing criteria as outlined jn the Historic Preservation Deleted:herein Ordinance. 39. Preservation: the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain a historic site, Deleted:46 building or other structure's historically significant existing form, integrity, and materials through stabilization,repair and maintenance. 40 Property Owner: the person or entity(pub..lic._or...private)-..holding fee title interest or legal Deleted:l ........--............................-_..._._..._...........-- custody and control of a property. -81 - PH2-100 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 41, Primary Structure: the most important building or other structural feature on a parcel in -Deleted:2- terms of size,scale,architectural or historical significance,as determined by the Committee. 42, Qualified Professional_;an individual meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Deleted:3 Qualifications Standards(36 CFR Part 61 Appendix A) in history, architectural history, historic Deleted:. -----------........................................................................ architecture and other designated categories,or an individual determined by the CHC to have the qualifications generally equivalent to the above standards based on demonstrated experience. 43, Reconstruction: the act or process of recreating the features, form and detailing of a non- -Deleted:4 surviving building or portion of building, structure, object, landscape, or site for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location. ................. 44, Rehabilitation: the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property ',,Deleted-I through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its architectural,cultural,or historic values. 45_. Relocation: removal of a resource from its original site and its re-establishment at another '-Deleted:6 location in essentially the same form,appearance and architectural detailing. 46.Responsible party: any person,business,company or entity,and the parent or legal guardian Deleted:47.Remodel: Altera ion of of any person under the age of eighteen (18) years, who has done any act for which an structure which retains at st 75 perces of the original building framework,roof administrative penalty may be imposed. and exterior bearing walls and cladding, in total,and which reuses the original building materials to the maximum extent 47,Restoration the act or process of accurately depicting the form,features, and character of a possible.T property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period. Deleted:8 J I Deleted:9 48.Scale: the proportions of architectural design that relate to human size or other relative size —Deleted:-5-0. ........................ .......... measure. 49. Secretary of the Interior's Standards: the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the .,Re!ete.d:-5i................................ ........................... Treatment of Historic Properties as published by the U.S. Department of the Interior and as amended from time to time. 50 Setting:the physical area,environment or neighborhood in which a resource is located. Deleted:2 5-L Sensitive Site: a site determined by the Community Development Director, Planning Deleted:3 .....................................................................................-.J Commission, Architectural Review Commission or Council, upon recommendation of the Cultural Heritage Committee, to have special characteristics, constraints or community value such as: historic significance, historic context, creek side location or visual prominence, requiring more detailed development review than would otherwise be required for other similarly zoned lots. -82- PH2-101 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 52. Site: as used in these guidelines,the location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic 'Deleted:s occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined, or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural, or archeological value regardless of the value of _ any existing structure. Deleted:In general terms,site also includes the landscape surrounding a building or other structure and contained 53,Siting:the placement of structures and improvements on a property or site. within an individual parcel or contiguous parcels of land. i 54 Stabilization: the act or process of applying measures designed to reestablish a weather Delete d:6 resistant enclosure and the structural stability of an unsafe or deteriorated property while �eletea:l ..... maintaining the essential form as it exists at present. 55, Statement of Historic Significance:A statement of significance is an,explanation of why a Deleted:e resource is important within its historic context.It explains how the resource meets the eligibility Deleted:analysis-based argument or criteria and integrity thresholds as established by local,state or federal government. 56 Structure: as used here, "structure" includes anything assembled or constructed on the Deleted:9 ground, or attached to anything with a foundation on the ground, including walls, fences, buildings,signs,bridges,monuments,and similar features. 7. Survey: a systematic process for identifying and evaluating a community's resources using i Deleted:60 .. ................._....-- . established criteria. "Survey" may also refer to the documentation resulting from a survey project. �8. Threatened Resource: properties or resources at risk of loss of architectural, cultural or Deleted.61 historic value due to physical alteration,relocation or demolition. 5599.Zoning Code:Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code,as amended from time to time. Deleted:62 -83- PH2-102 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 z1 4q Gf'� d of �✓1_c < � l� Lf ✓� ryry J '4' i , ' m lM o e •z'i-- __...ice'+��•+•t--�/ - Historic Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa. 1772 -84- PH2-103 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.6 Works Cited and Information Links Angel, Myron Ed. History of San Luis Obispo County, of Its Prominent Men and Pioneers. Fresno: Valley Publishers, 1979. Originally published Oakland: Thompson and West, 1883. Bowsher,Alice Meriwether.Design Review in Historic Districts.Washington D.C.: Preservation Press, 1975. California Office of Historic Preservation."Technical Assistance Bulletin#14 Drafting Effective Historic Preservation Ordinances." Sacramento,June 2005. Carr,Paula Juelke."Proposal for Chinatown Historic District."July 1995. Conway, Thor. "Kozak Parking Lot Project, An Archaeological Investigation of Historic SLO, CA."San Luis Obispo:City of San Luis Obispo, 1995. Dart, Louisiana Clayton. Vignettes of History in San Luis Obispo County. San Luis Obispo: Mission Federal Savings, 1978. Friedman, Donald. Historical Building Construction: Design Material and Technology. New York:Norton, 1995. Haggard,Ken. A Brief.4rchitectttral HistooLofSan Luis Obis o_ San Luis Obispo,CA.:Central Coast Books,2008._ Hall-Patton, Mark P. Memories of the Land.• Placenames of San Luis Obispo County. San Luis Obispo;EZ Nature Books, 1994. Harth, Stan,Liz Krieger,Dan Krieger,editors. War Comes to the Middle Kingdom: California's Central Coast Enters World War 11. San Luis Obispo:EZ books, 1991. Hedman, Richard and Andrew Jaszewski. Fundamentals of Urban Design. Washington D.C.: Planners Press, 1984. Jennings, Jan and Herbert Gottfried. American Vernacular Interior Architecture 1870-1940. New York:Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1988. Knighton, Petree A.A Path to Parity:Adopting a Historic Preservation Element to the General Plan.Berkeley:University of California Berkeley,2002. Lovell, Margaret. Historical Resources Survey 11 Completion Report. City of San Luis Obispo, completed January 1992. -85- PH2-104 -- Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 McAlester, Virginia and Lee McAlester.A Field Guide to American Houses.New York: Knopf, 2006. McKeen, Rose. Parade Along the Creek: Memories of Growing Up with San Luis Obispo. San Luis Obispo:Central Coast, 1988. Moms, Marya. Innovative Tools for Historic Preservation. Washington D.C.: The National Trust, 1992. Nelson, Mane Preservation Planning and the Secretary of the,liiterior's Standards: Historic Contents and Surveys. Sacramento: California Office`of Historic Preservation, 14th September 2009. Roche, John J. "A Historical and Architectural Survey of the Central Business District of San Luis Obispo." City and Regional Planning,Department and the School'of Architecture and Environmental Design, California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo. March 1983. San Luis Obispo Fire Department:Souvenir of San Luis Obispo.,San Luis Obispo:Tigner, 1904. San Luis Obispo County Telegram-Tribune_ San Luis Obispo 'Tribune Souvenir Railroad Edition,May 5', 1894. San Luis Obispo:LibraiyAssociates,.1994. Secretary of the Interior..Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. US Department of the Interior 1995. Schmickle, Bill. The 'Politics of. Historic Districts:`°A Primer for Grassroots Preservation. Lanham:Altamira Press,.2007. Stipe, Robert E. ed..A`Richer,Heritage: Historic Preservation in the Twenty first Century. Chapel Hill:University of North Carolina Press,2003. Tonello, Greg.,Architecture.of San<Luis Obispo the Historic Photographs. San Luis Obispo; School` of Architecture and Environmental Design, California Polytechnic State University Califomia,'San Luis Obispo, 1982. U.S. Department of the.Interior. National Parks Service. National Register of Historic Places Registration Form: William Shipsey House, prepared by Betsy Bertrando. Sacramento, 2009. U.S. Department of the Interior.National Parks Service. Bulletin 15:How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Washington D.C.,2002 Wall, Richard. "A Supplemental Survey of the Cultural Resources of San Luis Obispo, California."Masters Thesis,California State.University,Dominguez Hills, 1986. -86- PH2-105 Attachment 4 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Winslow, Carleton. Discovering San Luis Obispo County. San Luis Obispo; School of Architecture and Environmental Design, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 1972. Winter and Company. "Defining Neighborhood Design Character and Developing Design Guidelines," in Cmiding History: A Process for Creating Historic District Guidelines, 1996. 5.7 Council Resolution (to be added) GACDD Doc=mts\ftistoric Preservation Ordinance and GuidelinesMorking Drafts\Elistoricpresen-ationguidelinesupdatc0628 I Ockdra@(vorking).doc -87- PH2-106 Attachment 4 ---- ..--. _ .... --- --- -- Page 7_[1] Deleted Kim Murry 10/8/2010_11.17:00.AM, . 2.2 Cultural Heritage Committee Originally established by Council resolution in 1981, the Cultural Heritage Committee ("Committee", or "CHC") consists of seven citizens appointed by the City Council and represents the citizens of San Luis Obispo. The CHC advises property owners, developers, design professionals, City staff and decision makers on ways to preserve the community's significant historic and archaeological resources. The Committee's purpose and duties are established by ordinance (SLOMC ). The purpose of these guidelines is to implement the City's historic preservation ordinance and to promote the public welfare through the identification,protection, enhancement and preservation of those properties, structures, sites, artifacts and other cultural resources representing the distinctive elements of San Luis Obispo's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural history. Under the Municipal Code, the Committee is charged with the responsibilities to: a) Identify, protect, preserve, and promote the continuing use and upkeep of San Luis Obispo's historic structures, sites and districts. b) Foster the retention and restoration of historic buildings and other cultural resources that promote tourism, economic vitality, sense of place, and diversity. c) Encourage private stewardship of historic buildings and other cultural resources through incentives where possible. d)Implement the goals and policies of the General Plan. e) Promote the conservation of valuable material and embodied energy in historic structures through their continued use, restoration and repair, and on-going maintenance of historic resources. f) Promote the knowledge, understanding and appreciation of the City's distinctive character,cultural resources and history. g) Establish the procedures and significance criteria to be applied when evaluating development project effects on historic resources. H. Fulfill the City's responsibilities as a Certified Local Government under State and Federal regulations and for Federal Section 106 reviews. 23 Cultural Heritage Committee Duties The CHC's duties are to: PH2-107 Attachment 4 a) Establish and maintain historic and cultural resource preservation standards and guidelines for the use by persons planning development projects subject to Cultural Heritage Committee review,and for guiding City and property owner decisions regarding cultural resources in San Luis Obispo. b) Identify and recommend to the Council those properties, areas, sites, buildings, structures or other features having significant historical, cultural, architectural, community, scientific or aesthetic value to the citizens of San Luis Obispo. c) Maintain and update the Master and Contributing Properties Lists of Historic Resources, and Historic Property and Archaeological Site Inventories. d) Review and make recommendations to decision makers on actions that may affect significant archaeological,cultural or historic resources. e) Advise and assist property owners, developers and staff in the application of architectural, historic and cultural preservation standards and guidelines to projects and approvals involving historic sites, districts and structures. 0 Collect and consolidate information about cultural resources and promote, participate in, or sponsor educational and interpretive programs which foster public awareness and appreciation of cultural resources. g) Provide advice and guidance on the restoration, alteration, decoration, landscaping and maintenance of listed resources, and properties within historic preservation districts. h) Administer incentive programs approved by the Council that are directed at preserving and maintaining cultural resources. i) Assist property owners with the preparation of local, state and federal historic nominations to enable property owners to utilize preservation incentives, including the Mills Act and federal tax incentives such as rehabilitation tax credits. j) Function within the guidelines and policies of the Advisory Body Handbook and perform other duties as assigned by Council. 2.4 Community Development Director Role The CHC is assisted by staff of the Community Development Department. The Community Development Director ("Director") is responsible for interpreting and implementing these Guidelines and helping the CHC carry out its duties. Notwithstanding Section 2.3 of these Guidelines, the Director may determine that CHC review is not required for actions or projects that: 1) do not adversely affect historic resources, or 2) are consistent with these guidelines and no public purpose would be served by requiring CHC review. PH2-108 Aftachr,ent Page 15:[21 Deleted Kim Murry 10/8/2010 11:59:00 AM Figure 3.1.5-Historic Districts in San Luis Obispo, 2010 clty o� san lull 013ISPO hlstoulc Nstalcts ip sweet Downtown ' Old Town Ratlroa _..._...... _ —a 0 0.125 015 OS Y s 3.1.7 Approval conditions. The CHC may recommend conditions or environmental mitigation measures for construction in historic districts or on properties that contain listed historic resources. The Director, ARC, Planning Commission or City Council may impose conditions of approval and or environmental mitigation measure for planning actions affecting Historic and Archaeological Resources. 3.1.8 Environmental review. Development projects on properties that contain listed historic resources, and on properties located within historic districts shall be considered environmentally sensitive pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) PH2-109 - Attachment 4 and require at a minimum, an initial study to evaluate the project's potential effects on the resource except where the Director determines the project: (a) does not involve: 1) a significant change to the exterior(or interior, subject to Section 3.4.6) of a historic structure, 2) relocation or demolition of part or all of a historic or potentially historic structure, 3) or grading on a listed historic property or identified archaeological site; or (b) is minor or incidental and have no potential to adversely affect cultural resources. — ..........- -- - ...... ............... -- - -- ---- Page 15:[3]Deleted Kim Murry .,_ 10/13/2010 12:48:.010 PM 3.3 Other Cultural Resources 3.3.1 Historic signs. A sign which contributes to the unique architectural or historic character of a building, site or historic district may be designated as a historic sign and added to the Inventory of Historic Resources. The Director or the ARC may exempt historic signs from complying with the Sign Regulations (SLOMC Ch. 15.40). Such designation shall be subject to the same nomination procedures as Contributing and Master List historic properties, and must meet at least one of the following criteria: The sign is exemplary of technology, craftsmanship or design of the period when it was constructed, uses historic sign materials and means of illumination, and is not significantly altered from its historic period. Historic sign materials shall include metal or wood facings, or paint directly on the fagade of a building. Historic means of illumination shall include incandescent light fixtures or neon tubing on the exterior of the sign. If the sign has been altered, it must be restorable to its historic function and appearance. The sign is well integrated with the site and/or architecture of the building. A sign not meeting either criterion may be considered for inclusion in the inventory if it demonstrates extraordinary aesthetic quality, creativity, or innovation. Page 15:[a].Deleted _ _._ ..-- . _. . loin McRr _ 10/13/2010516:00PM_ 3.4.1 CHC review. The CHC shall review and make recommendations, including plan revisions and conditions to proposed alterations to primary buildings in historic districts. Such changes to historically or architecturally significant buildings or other cultural resources shall be consistent with these guidelines, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Buildings, goals and policies of the General Plan, the Historic Preservation Ordinance, the Community Design Guidelines and any applicable specific or area plan. The CHC shall recommend final action to the appropriate approval body, including recommended plan revisions, findings and conditions to achieve the intent of these guidelines. _Page_15;[5]Deleted_ _- Kim,Murry - _— -- - --10/8/2010146:00 PM- PH2-110 Attachment 4 For minor repairs or alterations to listed historic resources where the director cannot make the finding in Section 3.4.2 (b) and for all other types of alterations of or repairs to listed historic resources, the Director shall require a historic preservation report at the applicant's cost. The CHC shall review the application and the historic preservation report and shall approve the application only upon finding that the proposed work is consistent with the approved historic preservation report, General Plan policies, the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. The Director may determine that a historic preservation report is not required for minor alterations to a listed historic resource for which CHC review is desired where information is available to support review of the proposed project. _Page 15:[6]Deleted_. -_ _-_ -- -- - _ _ Mm Murry _ _- ._10/8/2010-12:36:00,PM__ (1) Which of the four Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties is being proposed for the resource. — --. .... .......... .......-.... .............. . _._.__. .- .... .. ---..... page 18:[7]Deleted Kim,Murry. 10/8/20101 401:00 PM 3.6 Demolition of Historic Resources 3.6.1 Intent. It,is the intent of the City that listed historic resources are an irreplaceable community resource that merit special protection to preserve them for future generations, and shall not be demolished unless Council makes all of the findings listed under Section 3.6.4. 3.6.2 Demolition review. The CHC shall review and make recommendation to the Director, ARC or City Council concerning demolition applications for structures listed in the Inventory of Historic resources. 3.6.3 Demolition thresholds. Demolition permits for structures which are included on the Inventory of Historic resources shall be required for: (a) Alterations to the resource involving greater than 25% of the original building framework, roof, and exterior walls; and (b) Removal of greater than 25% of any building's framework, roof, and exterior walls; and (c) Relocation of such resources to a site outside the city limits. These thresholds shall not apply to repairs to listed historic resources when the CHC or the Director determines such work is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and with these guidelines. 3.6.4 Required findings for demolition of a historic resource. The City Council shall approve an application for demolition of a structure listed in the Inventory of Historic Resources only if Council determines that: PH2-111 Attachment 4 (a) The historic resource is a hazard to public health or safety, and repairs or stabilization is not structurally feasible. Deterioration resulting from the property owner's neglect or failure to maintain the property should not be a justification for demolition. The applicant may be required to provide structural reports, to the approval of the Community Development Director or City Council, to document that repairs or stabilization are not feasible; and (b) The proposed demolition is consistent with the General Plan; and (c) Denial of the application will deprive the property owner of all economically viable use of the property, after application of financial, land use and other incentives available to the property. 3.6.5 Demolition timing. City regulations provide for a 90-day waiting period before demolition of a listed historic resource to allow consideration of alternatives to preserve the building through relocation and/or property trades. The Chief Building Official shall not issue a permit for demolishing a historic resource until: a) public notice requirements in the City's Demolition and Building Relocation Code have been met, b) a construction permit is issued for a replacement building, and c) all permit fees for the new development are paid. Where no new development is proposed, the property owner shall provide to the Director's satisfaction, financial guarantees to ensure demolition plans and conditions of approval are implemented. 3.6.55 Exceptions. In the event that a listed historic resource may pose an imminent demonstrable threat to human life and safety, the Chief Building Official may disregard the 90-day waiting period and issue a permit for demolition. 3.6.6 Historic and architectural documentation. Before the issuance of a demolition permit for structures listed in the Inventory of Historic Resources; the resource and its site shall be documented as specified in City standards, to the satisfaction of the CHC and the Director. The documentation shall be retained in a secure but publicly accessible location. 3.6.7 Historic acknowledgement. An acknowledgment of demolished resources shall be provided through historic signage and/or the reuse or display of historic materials and artifacts on site, at the owner's expense, to the Director's approval. 3.6.8 Code requirements. Demolitions shall follow standards and procedures in the Demolition and Building Relocation Code and California Building Code as locally amended. 3.6.9 Expiration of demolition approval. Demolition approval of a listed historic resource shall expire two years after its date of approval unless a building permit has been issued and construction has begun. A one year extension may be granted by the Director. Additional time extensions shall require reapplication to, and approval by the CHC. PH2-112 Attachment 4 3.7 Relocation of Historic Resources. Relocation has the potential to adversely affect the significance of a historic resource and is discouraged, except where it is the only feasible alternative to demolition. Relocation applications shall be evaluated as follows: (a) Review. The CHC and ARCH shall review applications to relocate structures listed on the Inventory of Historic Resources. (b) Criteria for relocation. Relocation of structures included on the Inventory of Historic Resources, or those that are determined by the CHC or the Director to be potentially historic, is the least preferred preservation method and shall be permitted only when: (1) The relocation will not, in whole or part, change, destroy, or adversely affect the historic, architectural or aesthetic value of the resource; and (2) Preservation of the resource on site is physically infeasible, and relocation is the only feasible option to ensure the preservation of the resource, and Relocation will not adversely affect the character of the historic district where the resource is located or at its proposed location, and The original site and the proposed receiving site are controlled through ownership long term lease or similar assurance by the person(s) proposing relocation, to the Director's approval,and The proposed receiving site is relevant to the resource's historic significance and the relocation will pose no adverse impacts to the surrounding property, and Relocation is consistent with goals and policies of the General Plan, any applicable area or specific plans, and these Guidelines, or (v) The relocation is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition on the site and no other measures for correcting the condition are feasible. (c) Relocation timing. The historic resource shall not be relocated unless the Chief Building Official issues a permit for relocation and all permit or impact fees for new development are paid; or where no new development is proposed, an appropriate security is posted to guarantee that relocation plans are implemented,to the Director's approval. (d) Historical and architectural documentation. Prior to issuance of a construction permit for relocation, the resource and its site shall be historically documented as specified in these Guidelines, to the satisfaction of the CHC and the Director. An acknowledgment of the resource, such as a permanent, weatherproof historic plaque shall PH2-113 Attachment 4 be incorporated on the resource's original site as provided by the applicant or property owner, subject to the approval of the CHC. (e) Relocation plan and procedures. Relocations shall follow a plan approved by the CHC or the Director, standards and procedures in the Demolition and Building Relocation Code,the Califonzia Building Code, and the following: (1) Application for demolition shall be made on forms provided by the Department and shall include information to respond to the criteria in Section 3.8(b). (2) The CHC shall hold a noticed public hearing and recommend action to the ARC or City Council on the application for relocation or demolition of a historic resource, and the ARC or Council shall consider the CHC's recommendation in making the final determination to approve or deny the permit. (3) The ARC or the City Council will not grant an approval for the relocation of a listed historic resource unless one of the following two findings can be made: The resource is a hazard to public health or safety, and repair or stabilization is not structurally feasible. Deterioration resulting from the neglect or failure of the owner to maintain the property will not be considered a basis for making this finding. The Director may require the applicant to provide one or more structural reports to document that repair or stabilization is not feasible, and (ii) Denial of the application will deprive the property owner of all economically viable use of the property, after the application of financial, land use and other incentives available to the property. PH2-114 Attachment 5 DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. (2010 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADDING NEW CHAPTER 14.01 TO TITLE 14(RESERVED)OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, TO INCORPORATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE PROVISIONS (GPI 72-09) WHEREAS, the public hearings were conducted by the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo on January 25th, February 22nd, March 8'h, March 22"d, April 26th, May I I'h, May 24h, June 28th 2010 and by the Architectural Review Commission on May 17th 2010;and WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee took public testimony and modified text of the proposed documents in response to that testimony prior to making a final recommendation to City Council on June 28,2010;and WHEREAS,City staff hosted an informational workshop on August 26, 2010 to gamer additional public input and testimony and has made proposed edits to the documents in response; and WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on September 21, 2010, October 5 2010 and November 9 2010 for the purpose of considering Application GPI 72-09; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law;and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed and considered the exemption from environmental review for the project;and WHEREAS, the Council has duly considered all evidence, including the recommendation of the Cultural Heritage Committee, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff,presented at said hearing. WHEREAS,the City Council finds that the proposed text amendment is consistent with and implements the General Plan,and other applicable City ordinances; BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. Council concurs with the Director's determination that the proposed Historic Preservation Program. Guidelines update is Categorically Exempt from environmental review (Section 15308, Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment). It consists of an action by a regulatory agency as PH2-115 - Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 2 authorized by state or local ordinance, to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment. ,SECTION 2. Findings. The City Council makes the following findings: Deleted:I I. The proposed Ordinance fulfills program 3.6.10 of the Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan which indicates that the City will implement recommendations of the Cultural Heritage Committee's"whitepaper" including adoption of a Historic Preservation Ordinance. Deleted:9 2The proposed Ordinance will allow the City to be eligible to become a Certified Local- <S>The proposed Ordinance meets program 3.6.10 of the Conservation and Government—a state-implemented program that encourages local governments to include open space Element of the General Plan es consideration of historic resources in planning decisions and which can provide the City which ss t e co me city will be prepares to assess the condition of historic with tools, technical training and access to grants to implement historic preservation buildings that may be damaged by disasters and to foster their restoration activities. whenever feasible because it includes post-disaster provisions.I L.--The proposed ordinance will define actions subject to Cultural Heritage Committee- fForrnatlpd: Bullets and Numbering review, roles and process, post disaster response and enforcement ability. The proposed i Formatted: Bullets and Numbering ,J ordinance updates historic resource eligibility criteria and brings the criteria into alignment with the California Register Criteria. 4. The proposed ordinance is exempt from environmental review under Section 15308' Formatted: Bullets and Numbering because it consists of an action by a regulatory agency to assure the maintenance, restoration,enhancement,or protection of the environment. Deleted:I Deleted:I Deleted:14.01.005 Established. SECTION 3. Action. Chapter 14.01 of Title 14 (Reserved) of the San Luis Obispo Delated:, Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows: Deleted:14.01.030 Duties.A 14.01.040 Actions subject to Cultural Title 14: Community Preservation Heritage Committee review.¶ Deleted:045 Chapter 14.01 Historic Preservation Ordinance Deleted:cultural heritage review procedures Sections: Deleted:14.01.060 Post-disaster historic preservation. 14.01.010 Findings and purpose. Deleted:lin be re cnaptMed7q 14.01.020 Definitions Deleted:70 _J 14.01.0V Cultural Heritage Committee—Appointment,Duties,and Actions. Deleted:Nan-compliance wi h }4.01,0400 Community Director role. provisions 14.01.050 JIistoric Resource Designation. Deleted:Dao _ 21 ,14.01.055 Historic Gardens,Features, Signs,and other cultural resources. Deleted:Preservation Pund J 14.01„060 Listing Procedures for Historic Resources Deleted:090 14.01 070 Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing Deleted:Appeals PH2-116 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 3 14.01.089. Historic District Designation Purpose and Application ---- _,- Deleted:. 14.01.090 Process for establishing,or amending a Historic District 14.01.100 Demolition of Historic Resources 14.01.110 Relocation of Historic.Resources 14.01.120 Unpetmined Demolition or Destruction of Historic Resources 14.01.130 Historic Preservation Fund 14.01.140 Enforcement 14.01.150 Appeals 14.01.160 Severability _ _ ____________________________.__.. _._.__ Deleted:14.01.100 Definitions J4.01.010_Findings and Purpose. __ .._._________. - Deleted:9 - -- Formatted: Font: 14 pt , IIId1IIgs._ .._. __._._._______. .. ............ .........._ ....... ...- ....._ .... ...... .. .............. Deleted:14.O1.Z Established . Deleted:. I. The City of San Luis Obispo has a distinctive.physical character and rich history that_', I __ -- _ are reflected in its many cultural resources, such as historic structures and sites. These Deleted:A)Cultural Heritage irreplaceable resources are important to the community's economic vitality, quality of life, andCommittee established. There is hereby 01 established the San Luis Obispo Cultural sense of place, and need protection from deterioration, damage, and inappropriate alteration or Heritage Committee(CHC),consisting of demolition. ' seven members appointed by the Council.9 9 B)Committee membership. The 2. The City of San Luis Obispo has been fortunate to have owners who care about•. Committee shall include,wheneverpossible,a person knowledgeable in local the history of their community and have undertaken the costly and time-consuming task of history,a person with training or restoring, maintaining and enhancing their historic homes and commercial buildings. Their experience in architectural rehabilitation �' or restoration,a person with knowledge of efforts have enhanced the distinctive character and sense of place of the community. : architecture or architectural history,and a person knowledgeable in archaeology �. The California Environmental Quality Act requires special treatment of historic "' Deli`.1 resources and the establishment of clear local guidance for the identification and preservation of ¶ • " Deleted:la.ol.olt such resources lends clarity and certainty to the review of development applications involving historic resources. Deleted' -- Deleted:The Council hereby finds that:¶ Purpose. The broad purpose of this ordinance is promote the public health;_safety and Formatted: rodent:First line: os° welfare through the identification, protection,enhancement and preservation of those properties, Deleted:, structures, sites, artifacts and other cultural resources that represent distinctive elements of San Deleted:la of 012 Luis Obispo's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural history. ------ - Specifically,this ordinance sets forth regulations and procedures to: ��ed' L_Identify, protect, preserve_,_and promote the continuing use and upkeep of San Luis Deleted:A Obispo's historic structures,sites and districts. I Foster the retention and restoration of historic buildings and other cultural resources Deleted:B -------- -- -------- - — —— that promote tourism,economic vitality,sense of place,and diversity. PH2-117 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 4 3. Encourage private stewardship of historic buildings and other cultural resources Deleted:C .................. through incentives where possible. 4,ImpleTFiIt the historic preservation coals and policies of the Conservation and Open fieleted'.D Space Element of the General Plan. 5 Promote the conservation of valuable material and embodied energy in historicDeleted:E ..................... --------- structures through their continued use, restoration and repair, and on-going maintenance of historic resources. 1� Promote the knowledge, understanding and appreciation of the City's distinctive FDeleted--e character,cultural resources,and history. ,7_ Establish the procedures and significance criteria to be applied when evaluating Deleted:G development project effects on historic resources. 81 s Certified Local Government under State and Federal -Deleted H Fulfill the City's respon ibilities as-a regulations and for Federal Section 106 reviews. 9 Establish the policy of the City to pMrsueDeleted:I -All reasonable alternatives to achieve compliance__, with the Ordinance for the protection of historic resources prior to initiating penalty proceedings L r....................... as set forth in Section 'rim—eted: 4.01.140 of this Ordinance.— !oJ Formatted 14.01.020 (prior. 100)_ Definitions. For the purposes of this ordinance, certain terms, Formatted: Font 14 at words and their derivatives are u d as follows: Deleted shall b,defined 1. Accessory Structure: a structure.which is subordinate or incidental and directly related to a permitted use or structure on the same parcel. "Accessory structures" that include habitable space, as defined square feet. Ord. 941-1( art)J981 -pd,,,,ode—9204.11 (part)) "Accessot�structures" are located on the same parcel and are related to the primary structure but are,subordinate—0 structures that have achieved historic significance in their own rightas1L ...in. ed by the e Director,Committee.or Council.(see"pdmarys- 2. Adiacent: located on property which abuts the subject property on at least one point of the property line, on the same property, or located on property directly.across right-of-way from subject property and able to viewed concurrently. 3.Adverse Effects:effects, impacgi.gr —ental qr_pqtentiallv detrimental to a .................. historic resource's condition,architectura_I_or historical integrity. PH2-118 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 5 4 Alteration:change repair,replacement,,^remodel, modification•or new construction to: 1 Deleted:any the exterior of an historic resource or adjacent building (2) the structural elements which Formatted: Not Highlight sport the exterior walls roof, or exterior elements of the historic resourceor adjacent Deleted:exterior and interior building, (3)other construction on a lot, or(4)character defining features of the interior of a Deleted:c historic resource if the structure's significance is wholly or partially based on interior features Deleted:o and the resource is publicly-accessible. "Alteration" does not include ordinary landscape _ Deleted:F maintenance unless the landscaping is identified as significant at the time a property is listed, _ pedes,,unless the interior is exempt "Alteration" also does not include ordinary property maintenance or repair that is exempt from historic review by the Cultural from a building permit_ or is ponsistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Heritage Committee Treatment of Historic Properties. Deleted:,receives adoptetoricd "H-zoning, ng, oris identified in an adopted historic preservation report 5.Archaeological Site: those areas where archaeological resources are present and may be larger Deleted: or smaller than the project site An archaeological site may include prehistoric.Native American Deleted:exempt from disae innary archaeological site Historic azchaeolo igcal sites sites or natural, la...ndscape..s_associated with e;ewdna important human events.•and Native American Sacred Places and Cultural landscapes. 6 ARC: the Architectural Review Commission as appointed by the City Council. 7 California Register: California Register of Historical Resources defined in California PRC 5024.1 and in CCR Title 14 Chap 11.5,Sec 4850 et sed as it.may.be amended. 8 CHC:the Cultural Heritage Committee as appointed by the City Council. 9 Character Defining Features: 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, Me 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, finishes,etc. 10 City the City of San Luis Obispo. 11 Communiq Design Guidelines: the most recent version of the City's Community Design Guidelines as adopted and amended from time to time. 12 Contributing Resource or Property Buildings or other resources at least 50 years old that maintain their orieinal 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, but should be visible to the public In some cases buildings or other resources that are less than 50 gars old but are nonetheless s_igriificant based on architecture craftsmanship or other criteria as described herein may be designated as a Contributingresource_ PH2-119 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 6 13.CounciltheCouncilof the City of San Luis,Obispo_ 14.Cultural Resource: any prehistoric or historic district, site, landscape,building,structure,or object included in, or potentially eligible for local State or National historic designation, including artifacts records,and material remains related to such atorty or resource. 15.Demolition: for the purpose of this ordinance,"demolition"refers to any act or failure to act that destroys, removes,or relocates, in whole or part a historical resource such that its historic or architectural character and significance are materially altered. 16. Deterioration: the significant worsening of a structure's condition,,_architectural,or historic intggretydue to lack of maintenance,organisms,neglect,_weathering;and,other natural forces._ 17. Director: the Director of the Community Development Department, or another person authorized by the Director to act on his or her behalf. M. Feasible: capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period Deleted:18.Disaster. -Disaster"shall of time, taking into account cultural economic.environmental historic, legal, social and include fire,flood,earthquake,landslide, subsidence;tsunami,acts offw u•ar or cnil technolopjcal factors. Structural feasibility means that a building or other structure can be unrest•or other eauastrophic event as repaired or rehabilitated so as to be safe and usable without significant loss of historic Fabric: declared by the Council,the Governor ofthe state of California or the President of Factors to be considered when making this determination include the existence of technology that the united states.¶ will allow the design of the work and the ability to repair, supplement or replace load-bearing ¶ members and the thermal and moisture protection systems required for continued use of the Deleted:9 structure; and the physical capacity of the structure to withstand the repair and/or rehabilitation tr-oneatted: underline process without the danger of further damage. J9.Historic Building Code: the most recent version of the California Historical Building Code,- :. Deleted:zo Title 25, Part. 8, as defined in Sections 18950_to.....18961 of Division 12. Part 2.7 of Health and Formatted: space Before: 0 pt Safety Code(H&SC),a part of California State law. , After .o art _. Deleted:Its purpose is to provide regulations and standards for the 20 Historic Context: Historic context are those patterns, themes or trends in history by __ rehabilitation,presm•atlon,restoration which a specific occurrence, property, or site is understood and its meaning and significance (including related reconstruction)or relocation as applicable to all historical is made clear. buildings,structures and properties deemed of importance to the history, architecture,or culture of an area by an 2L Historic District/Historical Preservation District: areas or neighborhoods with a collection appropriate local or state governmental or concentration of listed or potentiate contributing historic..p.jigp ties or archaeologically jurisdiction. significant sites, where historic properties helpp_define the,_area or nekhborhood's unique Deleted:I architectural, cultural, and historic character or sense of place. Historic districts maw be, I Deleted:z delineated on the official zoning map as Historic _fH)_overlak zone under San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 17.54. PH2-120 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 7 22, Historic Preservation Program Guidelines: the most recent version of the Historic {Deletes d J Preservation Program Guidelines,as adopted and,amende"d_from..time to time. 23, Historic Preservation Report. a document which describes preservation rehabilitationf Deleted:a .............. restorationor reconstruction measures for a._historic resource,-based on ry the Secretaof the —-._..............................._ ........ Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic_Properties,._and whi.c..h_includes standards-and guidelines for recommended treatments for preserving the resource., Deleted:A historic preservation report -- -- - ._.... ......_.. shall require approval by the CHC and the approval shall remain in effect for a period 24, Historic Property a property, including land and buildings which possesses aesthetic of at least three years from the approval architectural cultural historic or scientific significance, and which is included in or otenttall date.The Director or on referral from the —gn P y Director,the CHC may extend or re-adopt eligible for local, State or National historic designation.tion. an approvedpmgmm for a period of up to ten years.¶ 25,Historic Resource: anybuildin site,im rovement area or object of aesthetic architectural Detetea:s cultural, historic or scientific_sgnificance�and_w_hich_Is mcluded in, or potentially eligible„for Deletea:s local State or National historic_destgnatio_..n,. 26,Historic Status: historic designation of a listed resource or property as approved by Council Deleted:7 7. Improvement_an�bui_I,ding�structure fencegatelandscap.ing, hardscaping,,.walhwork of _ Deleted:a art,or other object constituting a physical feature of real property or any..paR of such feature, Z$.Inappropriate Alteration: alterations to historic resources which are inconsistent with these {Deleted:s J provisions and/or the Historic Preservation Pro...gram_Guideline..s.._ 29 Integrity Architectural or Historical: the ability of a property structures site building Deteted:l improvement or natural feature to convey its identity and authenticity, including but not limited ' {Deleted:o x to its original location period(s) of construction setting scale design materials detailing, workmanship,yrses and association. Deleted:hmnan values, 30. Inventory of Historic Resources: the list of historically designated resources and properties Deleted:t consisting of Master List and Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources and any properties obiects sites gardens sacred places and resources subsequently added to the inventory as determined to meet criteria outlined herein and approved by the City Council 3 Listed_Resource:properties and resources included the Inventoty_of Historic Resources. Deletee:z 3Z, Massing: the spatial relationships arrangement and organization of a building s physical _ _ ��eted:a — J bulk or volume. 33, Master List Resource: designation which may be applied to the most unique and important , .- Deleted:a ..._....... -.._..--- historic properties and resources in terms of age architectural or historical significance rarity, or association with important persons or events in the City's ast meeting criteria outlined herein PGI2-121 - Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page S 34r Minor Alteration. Any structural or._exterior_change,...toahistoric resource which the - " Deleted:s Director determines to be c_o...nsistent. with the Historic Preservation Program_Gui-deletes, ..........._. .-. ... Secretary of the Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Pro-perttes and.,,other.applicab..le standards. Mu Modern Contributing Resources: designation which may be applied to properties and T Deleted:a I resources which are less than_M old�but which exernplify or,.include significant.works of ---._..........................._.._......_..— architecture or craftsmanship or are associated with a person or event significant to the City's history, 34, National Register of Historic Places: the official inventory of districts sites buildings, Deleted:7 ................ ............. ........._.._..... structures,and obiects significant in American history,architecture engineering archaeology and culture which is maintained by the Secretary of the Interior under the authority of the Historic Sites Act of 1935 and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. 37,Neglect:_the lack Of maintenaneeirepair..0T.protection_from.-natural„-elements,or;-vandal,isinof lDeleted:8 a listed ro resource site or structure which results in .significant deteriorations as ._ l Deleted:whether intentional or not, —p_.-perty,._.._.j-pe i --- .�. - -- determined by_thp rector or City Council base...d..._o...n..visual,,,and_physical evidence_ 38,Non-Contributing Resource: desig_tta_fton which may be applied to properties and resources Deleted1.:s in ort-t historic districts which are typically less than 50 years d do _old-an _not supphe.prevaili g historic character of the district-or other listine.criteria as outlined_herein. R- Preservation: the act or grocess_of anp,lyinlmeasures-,necessary.to sustain a historic site, Deleted:40 --� building or other structure's historically significant existing form�._..mteglj and materials through_stabi,lization,repair and maintenance.. 40 Pro.e , r—yt Owner: the person or enti .,(public or pnvatel_holdine fee,-title;interest_or legal _ _- Deleted:r J custody and-control of a property. 4L Primary Structure: the most important building or other structural feature on aparcel in _ . - I Deleted:z _._.._...— --- terms of size,scale,architectural or historical significance as determined by the Committee 4Qualified Professional;.an_individual meetingthe Secreta of Professional ry _ . --`Deleted:3 Qualifications Standards (36 CFR,Part 61 Appendix A)in history, architectural histo_rv. historic Deleted:. architecture and other designated:categories or an_individual determined,by the_CHC to have the ---.- ._ ........_ ..................... qualifications izencrally equivalent to the above standards based on demonstrated_experience.. 43, Reconstruction: the act or process of recreating the features form and detailing of a non- LDeletea:4 surviving building orportion_of building, structure-pbject,landscape, or site..-for.-the,,pu ose of -- -' rMlicating its appearance ata specific period of time and in its historic location. PH2-122 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 9 4A Rehabilitation: the act or process of gjaKmc, possible a compatible use for a pro Deleted:5 through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving._those r)ortions or features which ............. convey its architectural,cultural,or historic values. 45, Relocation: removal of a resource from its original site and its re-establishment at another ................................ location in essentially the same form,appearance and architectural detailing. .4k Responsible PaM: any person, business, corporation or entity, and the parent or legal Deleted:47.Remodel: Alteration,of a structure which retains at least 75 percent guardian of any person under the age of eighteen (18) years, who has committed, permitted, of the original building frantework,roof directed or controlled any act constituting a violation of this ordinance. and exterior bearing walls and cladding,in total,and which reuses the original building materials to the maximum extent 47, Restoration the act or process of accurately depicting the form features, and character ofa possible.I MOM asit app -Td_-at a particularperiod-of time by means of the removal of features from ea other eriods -in its histo and reconstruction of missin features from the restoration period. Formatted: Not p Highlight 48, Scale: the proportions of architectural design that relate to human size or other relative sizet Deleted:9 measure. -L Deleted:so 11 -49. Secretary of the Interior's Standards: the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the_ Deleted:51 Treatment of Historic Properties as published by the U.S. Department of the Interior and as amended from time to time. 50,Setting: the physical area,environment or neighborhood in which a resource is located. Dieted:2 5L Sensitive Site: a site determined by the Community Development Director, Planning_ ........................ Commission, Architectural Review Commission or Council, upon recommendation of the Cultural Heritage Committee, to have special characteristics, constraints or community value such as: historic significance, historic context, creek side location or visual prominence, requiring more detailed development review than would otherwise be required for other similarly zoned lots. Site: as used in this ordinance, the location of a significant event,,A_t)rehistoric or historic_ Deleted:4 occupation or agbyLtL cLr a buildingor structure, pt nk -rmined ,�Kh fteT-�taq ing, -d. whe-re the location itself possesses historic, cultural or archeological,_value rep-ardicss of the value of any existing structure. Deleted:In general terms,site also includes the landscape surrounding a building or other structure and contained 53,Siting: the placement of structures and improvements on a property or sitewithin an individual parcel or contiguous parcels of land. Deleted:5 54, Stabilization: the act or process. of applying measures designed to reestablish a weather -? !!�i:I resistant enclosure and the structural stability of an unsafe or.deteriorated property. whit vejema:6 maintaining the essential form as it exists at present. PH2-123 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 10 . Deleted:7 55�Statement of Historic 4mificance: /.,n..Pxplanagon--ofwby,_a-resource„isimportant within Deleted: statementersibniaea-eei-- s a its historic context._It explains.how, the resource.,meets the ellglb lity_criteria and _integrity Deleted:analysis-based argument or thresholds as established bylocal�slate or federal,.government.,,. Deleted:s K Structure: as used here, "structure” includes an3qhing assembled or constructed on the {Deleted:9 ground, or..,_.attached_to anything with a foundation...on...the_ Inc.ludin wa..11s._.fences, Deleted:eo J groun.� ..._ _. _. _..._ buildingysjpis�hn es,monuments,andsmilar features. Deleted:6i J Fonnatted: Font: 14 pt 57.Survey: a systematic process for identifying and evaluating community's historic resources Deleted:2 using established criteria. "Survey"may also refer to the documentation resulting from a survey I Deleted:14.01.021 J1 ip oiect• I Deleted:and consist of seven members $8. Threatened Resource: proDerties_or resources at risk_of,lossof architectural „cultural or I who are appointed historic value due to physical alteration,relocation or demolition. Deleted:([ycui Deleted:([year] ,59.Zoning Code:Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code,as amended from time to time. Deleted:14.01.022 Removal and reappointment. t Committee members shall sent at the 14.01.0N Cultural Heritage Committee(CHC). pleasure of the Council and may be - reappointed,provided that no appointee shall serve more than two consecutive full , Committee membership and terms. terms(eight years).Appointment to a partial term of office following an unscheduled vacancy shall not preclude The City shall have a Cultural Heritage Committee (the "CHC" or"Committee"), consisting of the appointee from serving two consecutive full terms following seven members who shall be appointed by the City Council ("Council")for terms of up to four completion of the partial term;provided years, which shall commence immediately upon appointment by the Council consistent with that the partial term is less than two years. Resolutions 6157 11987 Series) and 6593/1989 Series), and CHC Bylaws or as subsequently; I Deleted: amended. Deleted:14.01.030 Deleted:A A, Duties. -- —-- —The CHC shall make recommendations to decision-making bodies on the following: Deleted:Establish and Recomm Deleted'M storic and Archaeological Resource Preservation?,Eoggm-guidelines,that implement this Deleted:m ) ordinance and provide detailed__gu da o persons planning development projects subject to (Deleted:aimtaim 7 Cultural Heritage Committee review, and for City and property owner decisions regarding Deleted:h ) cultural resources in San Luis Obispo. Once adopted--- City Council. a record copy of the Deleted:cultural guidelines shall be maintained in the office of the-City Clerk and in the CommunittvDeve_.lo_pment 1 oeleced "�f`� Deparlrnent. - Copies shall be available on the C.Ity s website and_printed versions,will be Deleted p available at cost. ortions reorde .—' - -.p ._. __' '.._ ..___-_g+. Deleted:standards and Procedures.] �. Deleted: for thY�e ,use byW�n�v Deleted:guiding Deleted.I PH2-124 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page I I 1 fro erties or inclusion on the City's List of Historic Resources-;hose properties,areas,sites, Deleted:a buildings, structures or other features having significant historical, cultural, architectural, (Deleted:Identify...and recommend to community'scientific or aesthetic value to the citizens of San Luis Obispo. the council._Master and contributing resource lists (77P) ...I2] 3,TJte Master and Contributing Properties Lists of Historic Resources,and Historic Property and f Deleted:C Archaeological Site Inventoriey I Deleted:Maintain and update...t.... l.J consistent with City Council direct ,,,l3,]� 4 Actions subject to discretionary_Ci _re view_andapprova_.I.that may affect significant Deleted:D. ; archaeological,cultural or historic resources. r Deleted:Review and make recommendations to decision makers on... 5 T_,he application of architectural,historic,and cultural preservation standards and guidelines to �Ddetea:E projects and approvals involving historic sites,districts,and structures. fDeleted:Advise and assist property movers,developers and staff C, Cpnsolidation oinformation about cultural resources and promotion„ participation, in, or ���:r sponsorship of educational and interpretive programs ;hat foster public awareness and Deleted:Collect and... appreciation of cultural resources. 161 f Deleted:........which -__ 7 Guidance on the restoration, alteration, decoration, landscaping and maintenance related t_o.. Deleted:c development or demolition applications invo__&Jisted resources,and properties within historic Del Provide advice and...gy,. preservation districts. (Deleted:of 8,.Incentive programs approved by the Council that are directed at preserving and maintaining f Deleted:H cultural resources.., Deleted:Administer...i...(wouldn•t council always approve any incentives, suchthat the CHC is not administering, 9 Information fo; property owners preparing local, state and federal historic nominations to but making recommendations7)t }utilize preservation incentives, including the Mills Act and federal tax incentives, such as Deleted:I ( .. lU rehabilitation tax credits. Deleted:Assist...with the anon of..enable property owners to „111 0 Function within the guidelines and policies of the Advisory Body Handbook and perform (Deleted:f other duties as assigned by Council. C. Actions Subject to Cultural Heritage Committee Review. lDeleted_14.m_ow The Committee shall review and make recommendations to the Director. Architectural Review Commission, Planning Commission or City Council,_on aoDlications,and development review Deleted: the following actions j pro'ec which include any of the following. Deleted: and applications,... ( X321 1 I,Changes to the Inventory of Historic Resources. r Deleted:A 2,Changes to historic districts and applications to establish new historic districts. Deleted:a _ Ji PH2-125 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 12 3 Statements of historic significance and historic inventories for existing and proposed historic Deleted:c districts. Deleted.o - D¢leted:or adjacent to 4,. New construction, additions or alterations located inhistoric districts, or-on historically listed . Deleted:at _ J properties,or sensitive archaeological sites. Deleted:E Deleted:(Master,Contributing or 5 Applications to demolish or relocate listed istoiic resources or structures. both?) Deleted:F 6 Projects and actions referred to the Committee by the Community Development Director Deleted:G ("Director"),Architectural Review Commission,Planning Commission,or Council. Deleted:D.Fees.Councilshall,by resolution,establish the fee(sJ far applications and submissions made 7 Actions of public agencies that may affect historic or cultural resources within the City. pursuant to this ordinance and adopted Historic Preservation Program guidchnes.9 , 4.01 0�4QCommunity Development Director Role I t Formatted: Font: 14 pt The CHC is assisted by staff of the Community Development Department. The Community Ioeletea.Y Development Director ("Director") is responsible for interpreting and implementing this Formatted: Font:14 pt,No ordinance and helping the CHC carry out its duties. Notwithstanding Section 14.01.0�PC 11-55 underline and 7 of this ordinance, the Director may determine that CHC review is not required for actions Deleted:04s _ or projects that: 1) do not adversely affect historic resources, or 2) are consistent with this Formatted: Font: 14 pt,No ordinance, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and the Historic Preservation Program underline Guidelines and no public purpose would be served by requiring CHC review. Deleted:4 Formatted: Not Highlight 14.01.00,Historicesource Designation Deleted:a k Deleted:14.01.050 Cultural Heritage The following classifications shall be used to designate historic resources and properties. The Review Procedures y N primary categories of historic significance are "Master List' and "Contributing" properties. , The Committee shall prepare and maintain Historic and Archaeological Resource Contributing properties include those properties that by virtue of their age, design and Preservation Program Guidelines d[ appearance, contribute to and embody the historic character of the neighborhood or historic Formatted: Font: 14 pt district jn which they are located. Deleted:4 A.Master List Resources. The most unique and important resources and properties in terns of Deleted:si ape,architectural or historical significance,rarity,or association with important persons or events Formatted: Font: 14 pt in the City's past,which meet one or more of the criteria outlined in Section 14.01.Q7(, Deleted:are Deleted:The Master List includ 2 B.Contributing Resources or Properties.Buildings or other resources at least 50 years old that Deleted:or neighborhood maintain their original or attained historic and architectural character, and contribute, either by Deleted:ing themselves or in conjunction with other structures, to the unique or historic character of a Deleted:5 neighborhood, district, or to the City as a whole. They need not be located in a historic district, Formatted: Not Highlight but should be visible to the public. In some cases,buildings or other resources that are less than Deleted:a 50 years old,but are nonetheless significant based on architecture,craftsmanship or other criteria Formatted: Highlight®� as described in Section 14.01.07q may be designated as a Contributing Resource. Deleted:s3 PH2-126 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 13 C.Non-Contributing.Buildings,properties and other features in historic districts which are less than 50 years old, have not retained their original architectural character,or which do not support the prevailing historic character of the district. _ Deleted:I D.Threatened Structuress.Structures or 14.01.055 Historic Gardens, Site Features, Signs, and Other Cultural_ features at imminent risk ofaltemtion, Resources removal or relocation,or loss of historic significance through neglect. The Director or CHC may designate A. Historic Site and landscape features. Historic gardens, site features and improvements, Threatened Structures.based on the criteria in Section 14.01.053,fm a period accessory structures, signs, Native American Sacred Places, cultural landscapes and areas or not to exceed six months to allow obiects of archaeological, architectural, cultural or historic si ifi_cance not art of a desi ated sufficient time. owing this period.significance --1 � —� —�-----�-- of the structure. During this period, property may be added to the Inventory of Historic Resources through...CHC review and...Council. demolilion will not be allowed.t approval as specified herein. t Formatted: font: 14 pt J B. Cultural Resources on public property. Cultural and historic features on Public Property, such as Bishop's Peak granite walls and curbing, sidewalk embossing, ornamental manhole covers and hitching posts, may be added to the Inventory of Historic Resources through CHC review and Council approval as specified herein. C. Sign. A sign which contributes to the unique architectural or historic character of a building,site or historic district may be designated as a historic sign. Signs that meet at least one of the following criteria may be designated historic: (1)The sign is exemplary of technology, craftsmanship or design of the period when it was constructed, uses historic sign materials and means of illumination, and is not significantly altered from its historic period.Historic sign materials shall include metal or wood facings,or paint directly on the faoade of a building.Historic means of illumination shall include incandescent light fixtures or neon tubing on the exterior of the sign. If the sign has been altered, it must be restorable to its historic function and appearance._ (2)The sign is well integrated with the site and/or architecture of the building, MA sign not meeting either criterion may be considered for inclusion in the inventory if it demonstrates extraordinary aesthetic quality,creativity,or innovation. 14.01.060 Listing Procedures for Historic ResourcesDeleted:5 . (Deleted:2 .... A.Application for historic listing. The property owner mayrequest that resource to be addedtFormatted Font 14 pt J to the Master or Contributing List of Historic resources by submitting a completed application to Deleted:initiate the process for J the Community Development Department ("Department"'), accompanied by all available {Deleted: information documenting the historic significance and architectural character of the resource. r u2-127 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 14 The CHC, ARC,_Planning qommission may also recommend, or City Council may directly Deleted:This process can also be request,the addition of a resource to the Master or Contributing List of Historic Resources. inHiated by ' Deleted-.t J3. Review process_The CHC shall review all applications for historic listing,,whether initiated .. Deleted:.9 by the City or a propM owner_to determine,if a-proper proposed for listing meets eligibility criteria for historic listin The.._CHC will review the eli ibili. nte..ria.fora proposed listing-at Dom ' irmecilc noticed public hearin The [rector shall provide notification to the prop owner and public, . ', (Deleted:s as required by City standards. At the public hearing, or in no case more than 60 days from the 1Deleted:n appliwtion may hearing date, the CHC shall forward a recommendation on the application to the City Council. Deleted:if _ The City Council will take an action on the application to add or not add the resource to the Deleted:ae a manes the �� Master or Contributing List of Historic Resources. The decision of the City Council is final. Deleted:have been me, q. Deleted:. C.Removal from historic fisting. It is the general intention of the Citynot to remove a property Deleted: from historic listing. Council may, however, rezone a property to remove Historic Overlay seneauied by the Zoning, or remove the property from historic listing if the structure on the property no longer neparunent and ine meets eligibility criteria for listing,following the process for listingset forth herein. Deleted:to j4.k .Q70_Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing Formatted: Font•. 14 pt I Deleted:6 I When determining if a property should be designated as a listed Historic or Cultural Resource, Deletee:53 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, - Deleted: (3J Style: Describes the form of a building, such as size structural shape and details Deleted: 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; Formatted: Indent: Lee: 0.s^ `Formatted: Bullets and Numbering b. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity although the Formatted_Indent: Left: 0.5- structure .5 structure reflects a once popular style; (Formatted: gullets and Numbedng_D c. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a particular social Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" j milieu and period of the community; and/or the uniqueness of hybrid styles and how Formatted: Bullets and Numbering these styles are put together. PH2-128 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 15 (22) Design: Describes the architectural concept of a structure and the quality of artistic (—Deleted:b 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 Formatted: Indent: Left: craftsmanship(even if not necessarily unique); -�Formatted.. Bullets and Numbering J h, An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among carpenter-builders, Deleted:( although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not be superior. Deleted:ii) ..... ........ Deleted:c (3)Architect: Describes the professional (an individual or firm)directly responsible for f Formatted Bullets and Numbering the building design and plans of the structure. The architect will be evaluated as a � 1 reference to: (Deleted: Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" notable architect (e.g., Wright, Morgan), including architects who made Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" significant contributions to the state or region, or an architect whose work influenced Formatted: Bullets and Numbering development of the city,state or nation. Deleted:(d)sign: A sign which contributes to the unique architectural or historic character of a building,site or b_An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship,made significant contributions to San historic district may be designated as a historic sign. Signs that meet at least one Luis Obispo (e.g., Abrahams who, according to local sources, designed the house at of the following criteria may be designated 810 Osos-Frank Avila's father's home-built between 1927—30). historicy <#>The sign is exemplary of technology, craftsmanship or design of the period X.Historic Criteria when it was constructed,uses historic sign materials and means of illumination, and is not significantly altered from its ()History—Person: Associated with the lives of persons important to local,California, historic period.Historic sign materials shall include metal or wood facings,or or national history.Historic person will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which paint directly on the facade of a building. a person or group was: Historic means of illumination shall include incandescent light fixtures or neon tubing on the exterior of the sign.If a. Significant to the community as a public leader (e.g., mayor, congress member, the sign has been altered,it must be restorable to its historic function and etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognition - locally, regionally, or appearance.I nationally. <g>The sign is well integrated with the site and/or architecture of the building.¶ <q>A sign not meeting either criterion b. Significant to the community as a public servant or person who made early,unique, may be considered for inclusion in the inventory if it demonstrates extraordinary or outstanding contributions to the community, important local affairs or institutions aesthetic quality,creativity,or innovation. (e.g., council members, educators, medical professionals, clergymen, railroad (Deleted:a Officials). Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" Formatted: Bullets and Numbenng (2J History—Event: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" the broad pattens of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the For„ : Bullets and Numbering United States. Historic event will be evaluated as a measure of: Deletes:b PH2-129 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 16 (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 r6eleted_c 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: -- — — Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5- a. Early, .5"a_Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the historic Formatted: Bullets and Numbering effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected with the building(e.g., {r Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5^ County Museum). 1 Formatted: Bullets and Numberriing, � i Deleted:a b. Secondary patterns of local history, but closely associated with the building (e.g., Deletetf:b Park Hotel). (Deleted:e I Deleted:11 C. Integrity: Authenticity of an historical resource's physical identity evidenced by the ¶ 14.01.070 survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance. Integrity Deleted:54 will be evaluated by a measure of: Deleted: Historic Gardens,Site Features,and Other Cultural (1� Whether or not a structure occupies its original site and/or whether or not the Resourcest original foundation has been changed,if known. A.Historic Site and landscape features. Historic gardens,site features and improvements,accessory structures,signs, (7) The degree to which the structure has maintained enough of its historic character Native American sacred Places,cultural or appearance to be recognizable as an historic resource and to convey the reason(s) landscapes and meas or objects of archaeological,architectural,cultural or for its significance. historic significance not part of a designated property may be added to the Inventory of Historic Resources through (3) The degree to which the resource has retained its design, setting, materials, CHC review and Council approval as workmanship, feeling and association. specified herein.t 9 B.Cultural Resources on public :4.01.080 Historic District Designation Purpose and Application property. Cultural and historic features � l on public properly,such as Bishop's Peak r granite walls and curbing,sidewalk embossing,ornamental manhole covers A.Historic(H)District designation. All properties within historic districts shall be designated and hitching posts,may be added to the by an"H"zoning. Properties zoned"H"shall be subject to the provisions and standards as Inventory of Historic Resources through CHC review and Council approval as provided in Ordinance 17.54(Zoning)-of the Municipal Code. specified heein.ux'-nal B.Purposes of Historic Districts.The purposes of historic districts and H zone designation are Formatted: Font: 14 pt to: I Del...... _55.........._..._.. -- ..._................_._._ PH2-130 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 17 (j) Implement cultural resource _preservation policies of the General Plan, the Deleted: preservation provisions of adopted area plans, the. Historic Preservation and Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines,and Q Identify.and preserve definable,unified geographical entities that possess a significant Deleted:b concentration,linkage,or continuity of sites,buildings,structures,or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development; (3) Implement historic preservation provisionsof adopted area and neighborhood Deleted:c .. .. .......... 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 Del (5)Promote the public understanding and appreciation of historic resources. C Eligibility for incentives. PropertieszoHeti as Historic Preservation _(H)shall be eligible for. EDe)�-�e�,gnioed preservation incentive and benefit programs as established herein, in the Guidelines and other local,state and federal programs. D. Where applied. The (H) designation may be applied to areas or neighborhoods with a collection or concentration of listed historic properties or archaeologically significant sites, or where historic properties help define an area or neighborhood's unique architectural and historic character or sense of place. E. "H" district combined.A Historic Preservation Overlay District(H)may be combined with any zoning district,and shall be shown by adding an"H"to the base zone designation. H district boundaries shall be drawn to follow property lines or right-of-way lines, and asset forth in the Zoning Regulations. J401.090.Process for Establishing or Amendin2 Historic Districts: Deleted:F.Statement of historic . . . . .... . significance.A Historic(H)desipation shall include a statement of historic A. Initiating or amending Historic Districts. Any person may initiate the process to establish significance as described herein,and be prepared by a qualified professional,as or alter the boundaries of a Iiistoric Preservation D,;stiict. The process can also be initiated by listed in the City's List of'Qualified • I the CHC,ARC,Planning Commission or City Council. I Historians. rornatiWd. Font: 14 pt B. Application. An application to establish or alter the boundaries of a Historic Preservation Deleted:ss District shall be submitted to the Department. The application shall meet the requirements for I Deleted:h rezoning as described in the Zoning Regulations. The application and supporting information L and plans shall be submitted to the Department and shall include: Deleted-d PH2-131 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 18 (y A map (8-1/2" x I1") from the official zoning map, with the area to be changed Deleted: shaded or outlined in a heavy,black line,with the proposed area to be changed clearly labeled,and (2) Information showing how the application meets the criteria to establish or alter a Deleted:n historic district designation. (3) A Statement of historic significance. A statement of historic significance shall be-- _ Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75^ re ared by a qualified professional, as listed in the City's List of Qualified Historians. The Director may waive the requirement that the statement..-b..e._prepared b a qualifigd.professional if the applicant provides adequate information to enable informed review of the proposed district. C. Contents. Statements of Historic Si ificance shall include, but not be limited to the followings W A visual and written description of the district's boundaries. Deleted:. ------------- Q A description of the district's azchitectural, historic, and cultural resources, character_ _- .- {petered:n --- and significance, including a historic survey documenting the period of significance and how historic properties meet adopted local,state and where applicable,federal criteria for historic listing. (3)Preservation goals and concerns for the district including but not limited to; Deleted: _q Identification of preservation pnontiesyimportant features, goals and objectives, and b. Identification of potential obstacles to preservation,and c.Identification of historic land use policies and goals for future land use,and d. Special considerations for development review of projects both involving and not involving historic resources. (4) Graphic and written design guidelines applicable to the district's preservation goals {Deleted:d historic character and features which shall include but not be limited to: . ............. (g) Guidelines for projects involving historic resources focused on preserving the Deleted:i district's character and significant archeological, architectural, and historic features, and (1.)Guidelines for proiects within the district but not involving historically designated 1 Deleted:a properties, focused on maintaining street character and compatibility with the district's historic character while not mimicking historic styles. _ Formatted: Font:Not Italic } PH2-132 Deleted:D AttaiLn i} J Deleted:a Deleted:Describes t...;Refers t t Ordinance No.(2010 Series) Deleted:p...) •..r2 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Deleted:(ii) Page 19 Deleted:(iii)...;and .., 3 Deleted:b D Review. The CHC shall review the application and make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall review the CHC recommendation and rezoning Del;;; application and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council shall review the Deleted:d:5� Deleted: Historic D>SmM application and the recommendations of the CHC and Planning Commission, and approve or � disapprove the application. The CHC, Planning Commission and the City Council shall each °� 0 h _ r conduct a public hearing on the application and the notice of such hearings shall be completed as UPJeLed:istoric p"sen•ation D provided in the City's Notification Procedures. (Deleted:d (Deleted:istrict. Designation of a H F, Review criteria. When considering a Historic Preservation District application the Formatted reviewing body shall consider the both of the following criteria: Deleted:It Deleted:istoe Presen otic. (1� Environmental Design Continuity: The inter-relationship of structures and their Deleted:d relationship to a common environment;Tete continuity, spatial relationship, and visual ........ Deleted:isMcgshall require aez character of a street neighborhood, or area. Environmental design continuity is . , ` Deleted:a comprised of: ® Deleted:)A visual and written g c Deleted:i) p. Symbolic importance to the community of a key structure in the area—and the ' degree to which it serves as a conspicuous and pivotal landmark (e.g., easily Deleted: Identification ofpres accessible to the public,helps to establish a sense of time and place);or r l Deleted:ii) t Deleted: Identifcation of pro 30 Compatibility of structures with neighboring structures in their setting on the basis of j: Deleted:iii) .. period, style(form, height, roof lines), design elements, landscapes, and natural features; ` Deleted: Identification of hist ••• u and how these combine together to create an integral cultural, historic,or stylistic setting; ``.; Deleted:iv of Deleted:d. ._. . V% Deleted: Special consideration •„ 12 c. Similarity to and/or compatibility of structures over 50 years of age which, 1`1 Deleted:-) collectively,combine to form a geographically definable area with its own distinctive Delete character, Formatted ...T131 (2) Whether the proposed district contains structures which meet criteria for inclusion on Deleted: f1a1 the City's List of Historic Resources. rFormatted�Deleled:a.a I 14.01.10.0_Demolition of Historic Resources Deletes.-1.6.1 Formatted 15 ` A. Intent. Kisted historic resources are an igMlaceable community resource that merit Deleted:It is the intent of the City that I special protection to preserve them for future generations,and shall not be demolished unless Fomwtted r... 16 the City ,Council makes all of the findings ,specified in rection 14.01AQ9 D, provided Deleted:listed �_JrJlj however,that these thresholds shall not apply to repairs to listed historic resources that do not yrmatted .• 18 require a building permit, or where the CHC or the Director has determined such work is Deleted:I consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic . Formatted Properties and with the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. t9 Deleted:?^.t Formatted L2bij PH2-133 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 20 ,B. Demolition review. The CHC shall review and make recommendation to the City Council Deleted:3.6.2 concerning_demolition a_plications for structures listed in the Inventory of Historic resources. Deleted: -- Formatted: Font: 12 pt C. Demolition thresholds. Demolition permits for structures which are included on the Deleted:3.6.3 J Inventor�of Historic resources shall be required for: Formatted: Font: 12 pt � I Alterations to or removal of greater than 25% of the origine al_building_framwork, roof Deleted.a and exterior walls;and (Formatted ...........:..-:_1341 -- I Deleted:b Q)Relocation of such resources to a site outside the city limits. Formatted: Font: lz pt Deleted:These thresholds shall not apply to repairs to listed historic resources p. Required findings for demolition of a historic resource. The decision-making body shall that are exempt from building permit m approve an application for demolition of a structure listed in the Inventory of Historic Resources when the CHC or the Director determines such work is consistent with the Secretary only if it determines that the proposed demolition is consistent with the General Plan and: of the Interior's standards for the Treatment of Historic Propenies and with ' the Historic Presen-alion Program Ul The historic resource is a hazard to public health or safe!y, and repair or stabilization is not Guidelines.¶ structurally feasible. Deterioration resulting from the property owner's neglect or failure toFormatted maintain the property should not be a justification for demolition. The applicant may be required Deleted:3.6.0 to provide structural reports, to the approval of the Community Development Director or City rr`Formatted Council,to document that repairs or stabilization are not feasible;or ___ Formatted:- Font: (Defau lt) Imes s. New Roman (2) Denial of the application will constitute-an-economic hardship as described under findings 1- rDeleteie, s 3 of Section J. ;Deleted:b `Formatted: Not Highlight �. Demolition timing. , City regulations provide for a 90-da waiting period before demolition Deleted:3.6.5 of a listed historic resource to allow consideration of alternatives to preserve the building through --� ... 3 relocation and/or property trades. The Chief Building Official shall not issue a permit Fog r r(Formatted _= -- demolishing a historic resource,except where a the Chief Buildin Official determines a listed , Deleted a ---- ------ historic resource may pose an imminent demonstrable threat to human life and safety until: `Formatted rl Deleted: (J1 public notice requirements in the City's Demolition and Building Relocation Code have been tF rmatted: Font: 12 pt met;and �Deittad: b j0D a construction permit is issued for a replacement building;.and Formatted j39] - --- Q) all permit fees for the new development are paid. Where no new development is proposed, Deleted:, the property owner shall provide to the Director's satisfaction, financial guarantees to ensure Formatted: Font: 12 pt j demolition plans and conditions of approval are implemented. Deleted:c ll • '�Formatted: Font: 12 pt F `Ustoric and architectural documentation. Before the issuance of a demolition permit for r - -' •"' +—' Deleted:Exceptions. In the event that structures listed in the Inventory of Historic Resources, the resource and its site shall be a listed historic resource may pose an documented as specified in City standards,to the satisfaction of the CHC and the Director. The imminent demonstrable threat to human documentation shall be retained in a secure,but publicly accessible,location. I I life and safety,the Chief Buildin L40Deleted:3.6.6 `Formatted PH2-134 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 21 G,Historic acknowledgement.An acknowledgment of demolished resources shall be provided "I_Deleted:3.6.7— through historic signage and/or the reuse or display of historic materials and artifacts on site atFormatted Fon[ i2 pt the owner's expense,to the Director's approval. —. Code requirements.Demolitions shall follow standards and procedures in the Demolition 1 deleted:3 s s l and Building Relocation Code and California Building Code as locally amended, 'Formatted: Font: 1z pt f. Expiration of demolition approval Demolition approval of a listed historic resource shall Deleted:3.6.9 expire two years after its date of approval„ unless a building Dermit has been issued and {Formatted Font 12 pt construction has begun. A one year extension may be granted by the Director. Additional time ('For::matted: Font: 12 pt extensions shall require reapplication to,and approval by the CHC. ..................._, ,f. Economic Hardship.An economic hardship provision is established to ensure that denial of . -- LDeleted:14 m o7s I a demolition permit does not.impose undue hardship on the owner of:a h,i-.to...ric..al-resource_If-the applicant presents evidence clearly demo nstrati;ato the_satisfaction-_of,-the._CHC._or_.the,City Council that the action will cause an..:extreme hardship, the CHC may reco—mmend a proval and the Council may approve or conditionally approve a demolition or other application to_modify listed historic resource even though it does not meet one or more standards set forth herein. The applicant shall be resQonsible forprovidin substantiation of the claim-to the ptrector,,who,shall - .- {Deleted:CHC review the information with the Director ofFinanceand make a io1_nt recommendation,-lo_the - I Deleted: which shall then make a CHC on the hardshiprequest. The CHC shall consider and make a recommendation to the recommendation J Council regarding the financial impacts of denial of the demolition permit. Private financial L Deleted-Council information shall be maintained in confidence by the City. The CHC„is authorized to request that the applicant furnish information,documentation and expert testimony..the.cost,of which shall be paid by the applicant, to be considered by the Committee in its related findings. All additional required information shall be provided by a qualified individual or firm approved by the Director. In determining whether extreme hardship exists, the Committee ,and_Council.._shall consider evidence that demonstrates: LDeleted:a R)Denial of the application will diminish the value of the _subject property-so as_to leave , Deleted:and all I substantially no economic value,after considering ether means f offkttmgthe costs of retaining ,'_ - Deleted:involving the,histroic resource includin but not limited to ax abatements financial assistance, building _ ... _e—__ —.g.+--._.._.. -_._.._. ��___ -"l Deleted:incentives including code modifications,changes in allowed uses,g nts;orDeleted: etc have been explored to reher a the assetted economic hardship Sale or rental of the propertyra is im ctical_when_com aged to,the..cost ofholding _X" property for uses permitted in the zoning district:or �Deleted:bI ---� — .Deleted:c � Utilization of the property for lawful purposes is prohibited or impractical; Deleted:d)Rental at a reasonable rate of l return is not feasible.¶ X4.01.11.0 Relocation of Historic Resources. Deleted 37 �rrrlatted Font 14 pt .� Relocation has the potential to adversely affect-the-significance.of a historic_...resource..and is �Deleted:2 discouraged...._Relocation applications shall be evaluated as follows: Formatted: Font: 14 pc l Formatted Font 12 pt PH2-135 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Formatted ja?1 Page 22 (Formatted 14311 ;Formatted ...1441 71,Review. The CHC and ARCH shall review applications to relocate structures listed on the Formatted Lash Inventory of Historic Resources. Formatted Formatted ...1471 a B, Criteria for relocation. Relocation of structures included on the Inventory of Historic . Deleted:significantly Resources,or those that are determined by the CHC or the Director to be potentiallxhistoric, Formatted L?el� is the least oreferred preservation method and shall_be permitted-_.onlwwhen relocation-is Deleted: - - — consistent withog als and olicies of the General Plan�any_app i able area or speci.fic_plans, Formatted ;,,•Iggla and the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines,and: Formatted :...Iso]j Formatted ,-51� (1) The relocation will not significantly change, destroy, or ,adversely affect the �,---— - - matted historic,architectural or aesthetic value of the resource:and L5� Formatted '...1531, . Formatted '—-540 (21-Relocation will not have a significant adverse effect ort the character of the -- - -----—=•�-"'-- Formatted - historic district or neighborhood, or sun•oundingoroperties where the resource is located or at its proposed location and Formatted j561 -- - - Formatted ' ,LS (3)The original site and the proposed receiving site are controlled through ownership Formatted sa �... long term lease or similar assurance_by_the person�s..j ,proposing relocation,,_.to.,the Fomuatted- _ _ _ --Ljsgij Director's approval,and Formatted [...1601) 'I Deleted: (4)TAT he proposed receiving site is relevant to the..resource's"-historic signifcanc,�,and �Formatted (",•�6tlj i"mOVed_LO 2 abOVe�,;�It• Deleted:the relocation will posy...-L6ZJ Formatted (a The relocation is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition on the site and no other measures for correcting the condition are feasible formatted ".'1641) Formatted {GGI The pr,gposed relocation meets the findings required under Section J for FO^"atted � Deleted:Relocation is consisn j6 demolition of a historic resource. --- '�Formatted j6 C. Relocation timing. The historic resource shall not be relocated unless the Chief Building ,Deleted'5-------- -- 11 Oficial issues a perm _ ) it for relocation and all permit or impact fees for new development are Deleted: paid, or where no new development is proposed, an appropriate security is posted to guarantee Formatted ;• -6� that relocation plans are implemented,to the Director's approval. Formatted ,...(701 j Deleted:7 .. JD,Historical and architectural documentation. Prior to issuance of a construction permit for Formatted �t relocation the resource and its site shall be historically documented as specified.-herei"rt to the Formatted ; 1721 satisfaction of the CHC and the Director. An acknowledgment of the resource, such as a " Formatted [7311 permanent, weatherproof historic plaque shall be incorporated on the resource's original site aswrmattea - j74�j provided by the applicant or property owner,subject to the approval of the CHC. Fort Deleted: in(hese Guidelines Formatted 76 PH2-136 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 23 9,Relocation plan and procedures. Relocations shall follow a plan approved by the CHC or Formatted: Font:Bold the Director, standards and procedures in the Demolition and Building Relocation Code, theFormatted: Font: 12 pt California Building Code,and the following Deleted:s (1) Application for relocation shall be made on forms provided by the Department and Deli`b shall include information to respond to the criteria in subsgetion$,of this Section. Deleted:s � Formatted: Font:Bold (2) The CHC shall hold a noticed public hearing and recommend action to the ARC or Formatted: Font: Bold City Council on the application for relocation of a historic resource, and the ARC or Formatted: Font: Bold Council shall consider the CHC's recommendation in making the final determination Deleted:14.01.060 Post-Disaster to approve or deny the permit. Historic Preservation.9 9 14.01.061 Purpose and goals.) (3) The ARC or the City Council will not grant an approval for the relocation of a 14.01.062 Emergency Response Committee(ERC)esmblished.1 listed historic resource unless the criteria for relocation under subsection B of 14.01.063 Provisions and fee waiver.) this Section can be met. 14.01.064 stabilization of historic buildings.) 14,01.065 Demolition of historic DELETE THE POST-DISASTER HISTORIC PRESERVATION SECTION. STAFF buildings.) 14.01.066 City assistance.) WILL RETURN WITH PROPOSED REVISIONS TO MC 15.48 TO ADDRESS 1 HISTORIC RESOURCES, 14.01.061 Purpose and goals.) 1 Purpose: California is a seismically J4.01JZO Unpermitted Demolition or Destruction of Resources active=a. State-witic cxpericnccF.„ 1 t Deleted:14.01.070 A. Preservation of listed historic resources. The pumose of this Section is to prevent '' Deleted:Non-Compliauce With unpermitted active demolition or demolition by neglect by ensuring that listed historic resources Deleted:Provisions are maintained in good repair,and free from structural defects and safety hazards, consistent with Deleted:Protection of Historic ,,, 2 the International Propeily Maintenance Code, Property Maintenance Standards (SLO MC Ch. Deleted: 14.01.071 sevcmbilit ... 3 17.17), and standards as specified herein. Alteration or demolition in whole or part, of any Deli:074 significant features or characteristics of a listed historic property or resource requires City - authorization,pursuant to Section 14.01.L00. Deleted,a Deleted:Historic Resource 4 D. Enhanced Penalties for Unpermitted Demolition. In addition to penalties otherwise Formatted: Font: 1a pt provided for violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code and this Chapter, the City Deleted`s Council,following notice and a public hearing,may impose the following enhanced penalties for Deli:i unpermitted demolition of a listed resource, as defined herein, where a property owner has Deleted:,,,which anbx aegra ,,, 5 willfully demolished, or directed or allowed the demolition of a listed resourc-q, or where the Formatted: Font: Bold Property owner has failed to comply with notices to correct violations of this Code,such that the Formatted: Font:Bold,Highlight continuance of such violations may result in the unpermitted demolition of the listed historic Formatted: Font:Bold resource(either active or by neglect): Formatted: Font:Bald Deleted: (11.Restoration,The owner may be required to restore the property or structure to its', Formatted: Indent, Left: 0.5” appearance prior to the violation to the satisfaction of the Director. Deleted: Deleted: PH2-137 Allachn it 5 Deleted: . ...9 � 83 Deleted: Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) :; Formatted _ ^, gql� GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Deleted: - Page 24 l Deleted:shall be - Fatmatte!d ,(2) Building permit restriction. City may prohibit the owner s) successors, or assigns -'®"--"'-"' .. 85 Deleted:y from obtaining a building permit for development of the subject property for a period of ---- °° up to five(5)vears from the date of violation,unless such permit(s) is for the purpose of Deleted:,CWmra He cageL n,ra 86 complying with provisions of this ordinance. In cases where thispenalty is imposed, the Deleted:compliance with this e 8 Ci!y shall: Deleted: -- a.�Initiate proceedings to_place_a_deed_restrictio..n._.o..n._the_.propel�to,ensure �Deleted:E.Enhanced � enforcement of this restriction..__.. (Deleted:D. �I b,Requirethe propert�owner_to maintain_the„property_cluri_ngthe.period ofDeleted:T development restriction in conformance with standards set forth in this ordinance. (Deleted:he city shall use prod .., 88 ji ....... 89 &,Initiate action to remove..any such restriction wit._hin ten(10).days of.. Formatted correction or compliance. Subsequent development.applications shall be subject.._.. Formatted qo ._..---__to CEQA review and conditions of development shalla...d..dress_the demolition of Deleted:so I the historic resource_ Formatted Deleted:14.01.072 Enforcement 3j�Loss. of preservation benefits. Any historic..preservation.._b_.enefits previously - - Deleted:Legal authority and(... 92 granted to_the affectedroermay be subject to revo..catlon,. 44) Other remedies. These enhanced Denaltie�re non-exclusive, in addition to and not Deleted:, in lieu of penalries otherwise Drov_Ided for violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Deleted: City Attorney Code and this Cater including but not limited to,._admtm strative citations, criminal ,�t : � d7 and their desi),nees al on,-civil fines and ublic nuisance roceedin s. (Deleted:conformance ~� ._ --- -- --- P_ .. g. _. _ . Deleted:60 days to correct the 95 J4.01.130 Historic and cultural resource preservation fund established. Deh ted:by the Chref Budding Official Deleted:where appropriate. The Historic and Cultural Resource Preservation Fund (`Fund") is hereby established to Deleted:with an approved app ... 96 provide provide for the conservation, preservation, restoration and rehabilitation of historic and Deleted:Failure to dernmatrat,•" 7971 1 cultural resources in the City of San Luis Obispo. The Council shall provide the policy Deleted:The D;rector shall ha L.. direction for funding and expenditures from the Fund. Deleted:14.01.073 Enforcer 99 r` {{Deleted:Penalties or anon ,1 f 1 t ...11001 A. Program Administration. The Director shall administer the Fund, following �,Deleted:C specific procedures and funding priorities adopted by the Council. l �`Deleted:D.Work stoppage. ••• 101 f1l; Deleted:in any respect B. furpose. The purpose of the Fund is to provide funds for historic preservation Deleted:;ran cries are im o projects within the City. All funds deposited in the Fund shall be used for the y p: •••[1021 conservation, preservation, restoration and rehabilitation of historic or cultural ljJ �.Deleted:to enforce resources,as provided in this section and as directed by the Council : Deleted:ment or j I” l Deleted: these regulations 1. Financial Administration. Financial administration of the Fund shall be by the Deleted:. ) City Finance Director or designee, in accordance with State and local law. %' (Deleted* where a property prope tyy oa 103 Any interest earned on the fund shall accrue to the funds, unless Council Meted:for specifically designates such funds for another purpose. l Deleted:for unapproved dem .•. 104 Deleted:violations of this ordinance Deleted::1 105 Deleted:(a)Fine. The owner .. 106 Deleted:b t Deleted:)Building permit rrre, ,,,11071 (..1 Deleted:correcting a building L—M-83 `( 1 ...,.110 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 25 2. Grants, Gifts and Donations. The Finance Director shall deposit into the fund any grants, gifts, donations, rents, royalties, or other financial support earmarked by Council for historic or cultural resource preservation. C. Cultural_Ileritage Committee Role. The Committee shall advise the Council on ,.- Formatted: Font: Bold the Fund regarding: 1. Criteria for use and award of funds; 2. Entering into any contract,lease,agreement,etc.for use of funds; 3. Any other action or activity necessary or appropriate to achieve the Fund . purposes and the intent of this ordinance. D. ,Uses of Fund._ The Fund may be used_for. 1) the identification and protection of Fomtattea: Font: Bom cultural resources,including preparation of historic surveys and design guidelines,2) for the repair, restoration, rehabilitation, preservation and maintenance of historical buildings, features, or archaeological sites, 3) for public education on cultural resources, 4) for real property acquisition. if there is a willing property owner, including lease, purchase, sale, exchange or other forms of real property transfer or acquisition to protect significant historic resources, or 5) any other historic preservation related purpose approved by the Council,_Council decisions on the use Deleted: provided tha Counea of funds are final. --- determines such actions are necessary to preserve the resource and in the best interests of the City sE. Loans_and _Grants. The Fund may be used, upon Council approval and Formatted: ForK: recommendation by the Committee, for loans and grants to public agencies, nonprofit organizations and private entities to carry out the purposes of this ordinance. F. Preservation Agreements. Loans, grants_or other financial assistance shall require - Formatted: Font: Bold execution of an agreement between the City and the recipient to ensure that such award or assistance carries out the purposes of this ordinance and is consistent with applicable State and local standards. G. FundingEligibility_ The Fund_shall be used to benefit properties on the_Master or Forma -. Ltted: Font:Bold Contributing Properties List, or for other properties or uses deemed eligible by the Council upon recommendation by the Committee. 14.01.14.0 Enforcement. Deietea:s - Formatted: Font: 14 p[ A. The Director, Chief Building Official and Citv Attorney and their designees are hereby 1Formatted: Font: la pt authorized to enforce the provisions of this ordinance._ PH2-139 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 26 {Deleted:C —� ,li. Time to correct. Prior to assessment of any penalty or initiation of any prosecution for any ! Deleted:.including,but not limited to roof or violation of this Chapter, the Director shall provide written notice of non-compliance to property the securing fencof ing, openings,site wall repairs,fencing,site lighting,site owners. Notice shall be by certified and regular mail. Following mailing of notice, property cleanup.private security services,or other owner shall have 60 days to correct the violation or to inform the City why an extension is messar deemed reasonable and necessaryto protect the resource and warranted. Additional time to correct the violation may be allowed where the prooerty owner is public health and safety exercising._due..diligence in acting to correct noticed violations..._.._The_Director_.shall_have the Deleted:D authoritV to Dlace reasonable conditions on such an extension_Notwithstanding these provisions. Deleted:14.01.160 if the Director or the Chief Building Official determines there is an imminent threat to a listed II Deleted:9 historic or cultural resource, the Director shall notify,-the„.propertyowner of_the„.imminent threat ¶ J and property owner shall be required to provide -gr eent measures deemed reasonable and Deleted:any of the necessary to protect the public health and safety and for the protection of the resource within 72 Deleted:guilty of a misdemeanor and j hours of notification Deleted:and subject to penalty as set I`forth under that chapter C. Work stoppage. In addition to any other fines, penalties or enforcement provisions set forth (,Deleted:n in this ordinance, failure to comply with an approved aPPl-ication shall const-tute rounds for - - isl -- immediate stoppage of the work involved in the noncompliance until the matter is resolved. i meted:e J Formatted: Font: 14 pt D. violation - Penalty. Every property owner and/or responsible part as defined in this (Formatted: Indent: Left: 0^ chapter who violates provisions of this chaoter is subiect toenal as set forth in chapter 1.1211r (peleDed;090 administrative enforcement as set forth under chapter 1_24 of the,,Municipal Code.. Deleted:7 ” Formatted: Font: 14 pt .. - 14,01,L0 Appeal$ Deleted:the Director or Committee are appealable to the Council and shall be riled with the City Clerk.Action on Decisions of a?n city official or body under the provisions of this,chapter_are_.appealable in appeals shall be considered at a public accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 1.20 of the Municipal Code. nearing, - Deleted:Where applicable,claims of • ewnomic hardship shall include sufficient 14.01,.1.6.0 Severability. evidence documenting that ordir l 61 Formatted Font: 14 pt Should any section or other portion of this ordinance be determined unlawful or unenforceable by (Deleted:071 a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining section(s) and portion(ss) of this ordinance shall Deleted:s be considered severable and shall remain in full force and effect. lFormatted: Font: 14 pt Deleted:14.01.100 Definitiof.,.11171 SECTION 4. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council iDeleted:' - -- members voting for and against,shall be published at least five(5)days prior to its final passage, Del` ` in the Telegram-Tribune,a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall :Deleted:CHC go into effect at the expiration of thirty(30)days after its final passage. Deleted:or City Council base j1181; {Deleted:I JNTRODUCED on theX day of ovember, 2010 AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Deleted:2i° Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the_day of 2010, on the following roll Formatted: Superscript call vote: �.Deleted:8eptember PH2-140 Attachment 5 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 27 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor David F.Romero ATTEST: City Clerk Elaina Cano APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney I Christine Dietrick TACouncil Agenda ReponsTommunity Development CAR\2010Wistoric PreservationWraft Ordinance Resotution.DOC PH2-141 Attachment 5 Page 10:[1]Deleted Kim Murry 10/$/2010 10:32:00 AM Establish and Recommend to the City Council _.Page 11:[2]DeletedIGm Murry_ 10/14/2010 5:21:00 PM Identify Page 11:[2]Deleted Kim Murry 10/14/2010 5:21:00 PM and recommend to the Council Page 11:[2]Deleted Km,Murry 10/4/2010 7:33:00 AM Master and Contributing resource lists (???) Page 11:_[3]Deleted . - Kim,Murry.._.. _. _. 10/14/2010 5:22:00 P,M. Maintain and update Page 11;,[3]Deleted Kim.Murry, 10/14/2010 5:22:00 PM, t Page11:.,[3]Deleted_ Kim Murry 10/34/2010 5.21:06,PM consistent with City Council direction Page 11:_[4]Deleted Kim Murry _ 10/14/2010 5:22:00 PM Review and make recommendations to decision makers on _Page 11:.[4]Deleted_ _ _ _ Kim Murry 10/14/2010 5:22:00_PM .. a Page-11:[4]Deleted IGm Murry_ 10/8/201010:33:00 AM (??) -Page_11::[5]Deleted _ _ Kim Murry _ 10/14/2010 5:221:0010M. Advise and assist property owners, developers and staff in .............-_ .._...._. _.... ..... ........ - ....... -- ------ _,Page 11:,[5]Deleted _ Kim Murry, _ _ _ 10/1412010.5:23:00 PM_ t Page 11:[6]Deleted _ 10m Murry 10/14/2010,5:23:00 PM Collect and Page 11:;[6]Deleted Kim Murry_ 10/14/2010 5:23:00 PM c Page 11:;[6]Deleted Kim Murry _ _ _ _ 10/14/2010 5:23:00 PM e _.._.. --............_...-.............--................_...-...-....-------..-._.-..-...-... ---- -..............._. Page 11:[7]Deleted 1.Christine Dietrick 10/17/2010 3:35:00 PM e Page 11:[7]Deleted 1.Christine Dietrick 10/17/2010 3:36:00 PM e Page 11:[7]Deleted .3.Christine Dietridc 10/3/2010 10:03:00 PM which Page 11:.18].Deleted_.. _ 1Gm,Murry. . ..10/14/2010 51:24:1010-PIM-1; Provide advice and -- . . -..... . .-- .... Page 11.18]_Deleted-._.. ___ -.._..... Kim Murry __ _ 10/14/2010 5.24:00 PM_. g _Page 11:[Q].DeletedIGm.Murry .. _ .. .10/14/1010 5:24p00 PM_.- Administer PH2-142 Attachment 5 Page 11:[9].Deleted. Kim;Murry 10/14/2010 5:24:00 PM i Page 11:[9].Deleted Kim Murry 10/14/2010 5:24:00 PM (wouldn't council always approve any incentives, suchthat the CHC is not administering, but making recommendations?) Page 11:[10]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/3/201010:14:00 PM I Page 11:.[10]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/3/2010 10:14.00 PM --- _................. -- Page 11:[11]Deleted _ _., Kim Murry 10/14/2.010 5:25:00 PM Assist Page_11:.[11]Deleted _ Kim,Murry,_ _ _ 10/14/20105:251:0O.PM with the Page 11:[11]DeletedIGm Murry. 10/14/20105:25:00 PM ation of Page 11:,,[11],Deleted_ Kim Murry 10/14/2010 5:25:00 PM enable property owners to -- - ......... ......._........................._...... ....._........... . . ...... ......... -------- ---- Page 11:,[12]Deleted.. _ Kim Murry 10/18/2010 6.23:00 PM_ and applications, Page 11:[12]Deleted_ Kim Murry 10/18/2010 6:24:00 PM Page 12:[13]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/17/2010 4:14:00 PM 14.01.050 Cultural Heritage Review Procedures. . The Committee shall prepare and maintain Historic and Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines that implement this ordinance and set forth the guidelines for cultural heritage review. These documents shall require Council approval. A record copy of the guidelines shall be maintained in the office of the City Clerk and in the Community Development Department. Copies shall be available on the City's website and printed versions will be available at cost.. — - - --._._..._.._._...._......._.._........... ..._.._... — Page 12:[14]Deleted I Christine.Dietrick 10/17/2010 4:33:00 PM The Master List includes the City's most important historic resources in terms of age, architectural or historical significance, rarity, or association with important persons or events in the City's past. Page 19:'[15]Deleted, Kim Murry 10/13/2010 2:23:00 PM Describes t Page 19:,[15]Deleted Kim Murry _ 10/13/201012:23:010 PM ; Refers to Page 19::[15]Deleted Kim Murry_ 10/13/2010 2:23:00 PM t -..— --- —...__...._..._........_...................................................--............_......................................................_....... .._.--- Page 19::[16]Deleted 3.Christine Dietrick 10/17/2010 9:35:00 PM (I ---- __............_....................................................--- ._._............................_......--------------- --- Page 19:.[16]Deleted 3.Christine Dietrick 10/17/2010 9:35:00 PM' PH2-143 � Attachment 5 Page 19:[1]Deleted Kim Murry 10/13/2010 2:23:00 PM Describes t Page 19:[i]Deleted lam Murry 10/13/2010 2:23:00 PM ; Refers to Page 19:[1]Deleted Kim Murry 10/13/2010 2:23:00 PM t Page 19:[2].Deleted 3.Christine Dietrick 10/17/2010 9:35:00 PM (1 Page 19:[2]Deleted J.Christine Dietrick 10/17/2010 9:35:00 PM ) Page 19:,[3]Deleted ].Christine Dietrick 10/17/2010 9:36:00 PM (iii) Page 19:[3]Deleted 7.Christine Dietrick 10/17/2010 9:38:00 PM ; and Page 19:[4]Deleted Kim Murry 10/19/2010 11:38:00 AM 14.01.100 Page 19:.[5]Deleted lam Murry 10/18/2010 6:59:00 PM Historic District Documentation: A. Documentation required. Statements of Historic Significance, as described herein, shall be adopted by the CHC at an advertised public hearing prior to recommending designation of a H Page 19:[6]Formatted ].Christine Dietrick 10/17/2010 9:41:00 PM Highlight Page 19:[7]Deleted IOm Murry 10/18/2010 6:59:00 PM istrict shall require rezoning with an ."H.77, overlay zone, asdescribed m Zoning Regulations (Ch, 17, SLOM_C). Statements of historic significance shall be reviewed by the CHC at an advertised public hearing. Statements associated with an application to modify an existing district shall be adopted following the same public hearing and notification requirements. B. Contents. Statements of Historic Significance shall include, but not be limited to the following; (1 Page 19:.[8]Deleted Kim Murry 10/18/2010 6:59:00 PM A visual and written description of the district's boundaries. (b) A description of the district's architectural and historic character. (c2) A description of the district's architectural, historic, and cultural resources and significance, including a historic survey documenting the period of significance and how historic properties meet adopted local, state and where applicable, federal criteria for historic listing. PH2-144 Attachment 5 (0) Preservation goals and concerns for the district including but not limited to; q Page 19:[9]Deleted Kim Murry 10/18/2010 6:59:00 PM Identification of preservation priorities, important features, goals and objectives, and b. Page 19.:_[10]Deleted Kim Murry 10/18/2010 6:59:00 PM Identification of prominent or unique obstacles to preservation, and C. Page 19:,[11]Deleted, _ Kim Murry 10/18/20106:59,•00 PM_ Identification of historic land use policies and goals for future land use, and ...- -- -..-... -- ----- ---------- Page 19:,[12],Deleted Kim Murry 10/18/2010 6:59:00 PM Special considerations for development review of projects both involving and not involving historic resources.. (e4) Graphic and written design guidelines applicable to the district's preservation goals, historic character and features which shall include, but not be limited to: (i) Guidelines for projects involving historic resources; focused on preserving the district's character and significant archeological, architectural, and historic features; and (ii) Guidelines for projects within the district but not involving historically designated properties, focused on maintaining street character and compatibility with the district's historic character while not mimicking historic styles. Page 19:[13]Formatted_ Km Murry 10/19/2010 10:55:00 AM Font: 14 pt _Page 19:;[14]Formatted Kim Murry 10/19/201610:55:00 AM Font: 14 pt Page.19:[15]Formatted.. Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 19:,,[15]Formatted . . _ Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt ---- .. .......- ........ -- .— ......... -- - Page 19:[16]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 19:[16]Formatted Kim Murry _ 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page.19:[17]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010.8:54:00 AM . listed under Page 19:[17]Deleted I Christine DietricIk 10/18/2610 8:59:00 AM Page 19:[18]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM PGI2-145 Attachment 5 C. Page 19:[25]Deleted Kim Murry 10/18/2010 6:59:00 PM Identification of historic land use policies and goals for future land use, and __ .— - ........-.. .........................................................................................................................................................---- - Page 19.-[26]Deleted Kim Murry 10/18/2010 6:59:00 PM Special considerations for development review of projects both involving and not involving historic resources. (e4) Graphic and written design guidelines applicable to the district's preservation goals, historic character and features which shall include, but not be limited to: (i) Guidelines for projects involving historic resources, focused on preserving the district's character and significant archeological, architectural, and historic features; and (ii) Guidelines for projects within the district but not involving historically designated properties, focused on maintaining street character and compatibility with the district's historic character while not mimicking historic styles. Page 19:[27]Formatted Kim Murry 10/19/2010 10:55:00 AM Font: 14 pt - —... ------........._......................................................................................_._........_........................................................----.._.._._._..._.........._................-- Page 19:[28]Formatted Kim Murry 10/19/2010 10:55:00 AM Font: 14 pt Page 19:[29]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 19:[29]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 19:[30]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 19:[30]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 19:[31]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 8:54:00 AM listed under Page 19:[31]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 8:59:00 AM Page 19:[32]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt ----..-..- --- ._.._..............................._.._...--------._............._..........................---...-...............-_.............................._....... — Page 19:[32]Formatted IGm Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 19:[33]Formatted Kim Murry 10/13/2010 2:25:00 PM Highlight Page 19:[33]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt ----- -----._.._.._..- -........ _..---- - — Page 20:[34]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt PH2-146 Attachment 5 Page 20:[34]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[35]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[35]Formatted Kim Murry —� 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[36]Formatted - Kim Murry _._..-......._.__..._..-._..._10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[36]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[36]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[36]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[37]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[37]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[37]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[37]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt .. ---....._............_.........._._..._..._..._.............................................................................................................................._............................................_..._...._............... Page 20:[37]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[38]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[38]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[39]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt ----- ------......_........................-....._.._......................_.... -------._._......_. ._...... Page 20:[39]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[40]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:06:00 AM Exceptions. In the event that a listed historic resource may pose an imminent demonstrable threat to human life and safety, the Chief Building Official may disregard the 90-day waiting period and issue a permit for demolition. — --- _.__............._......................_................................................................................................_............................................... Page 20:[41]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[41]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 20:[41]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 22:[42]Formatted Kim Murry 10/19/201010:56:00 AM Font: Bold — __.._._._._.._..._.._._.._.._..._..._... - -----------..—._....._.........._........_-........-._...........--- —.. Page 22:[43]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM PH2-147 Attachment 5 Font: 12 pt Page 22:[44].Formatted natted 10m Murry 10/19/201010:56:00 AM Font:Bold Page 22- [45]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 1157.00 P,M Font: 12 pt ................................................................................. ......................................................................................­.--—----�­�.................. Page 22.[4]Formatted [Um Murry 10/1/2010 12.57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 22-[47]Formatted 10m Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 Pt Page 22:[48]Formatted IGm Murry 10/1/2010 2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 22.-_[49]Formatted Kim,,Mur_ry.,, 10/1/2010 2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt .....................----------------1.......... ..........................I.,....................11...... 22-[50]Formatted, Kim Murry 10/19/20101141;00 AM Indent:Left: 0.5" Page 22..[51]Pcirrhatted Kim Murry ....... .... 10/1/2010 12.57:06 PM Font: 12 pt Page.22.[52]Formatted lam Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00PM, Font: 12 pt Page 22.[53]Formatted lam Murry, 10/1/2610 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ Page 22:[54]Formatted 10m Murry 10/1/2010 12.57.00 PM_. Font: 12 pt Page22:.[SS]Formatted Kim Murry, 10/10/2010 11:41:00 AM,-,! Indent:Left: 0.5" - Page 21.,[56]Formatted Idm Murry- PM---- Font: 12 pt Page 22:.[57]Formatted,-.-, ­­ '' KimMurry., 10/1/2010 12:57:00 Font: 12 pt ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Page 22:[58]Formatted Kim Murry 10/19/2010 11:41:00 AM Indent:Left: 0.5" Page 22:.[59]Formatted IGm Murry_ 10/1/101012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 22:,[60]Formatted lain Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:60 PM, Font: 12 pt Page:22.[61]Formatted, 1Gm Murry Font: 12 pt ............................................................................... ............................................................................................. ...................................... ............................. ...... ............... --- Page 22_[62]Deleted, 1,Chris-brie Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:28:00 AM the relocation will pose no significant adverse impacts to the surrounding property, and Page 22:[63]Formatted Kim Murry, 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt ............................................................. Paige 22:[64]Formatted Vim Murry - - - 10/1/201012 57:00_PM Font: 12 pt Page 22:.[65]Formatted.,,,_._ VJm Murry.__._.__ 10/19/201011:42:00 AM_ PH2-148 Attachment 5 Indent: Left: 0.5",First line: 0",Tabs: 0.88", Left+Not at 0.75" + 5.75" Page 22:[66].Formatted_ Kim Murry 10/1/201012:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 22:[67]Deleted 3 Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:32:00 AM Relocation is consistent with goals and policies of the General Plan, any applicable area or specific plans, and the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, OR ----- - ... ......................... ....... .. — Page 22:[68]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM Font: 12 pt Page 22:[69]Formatted Kim Murry 10/1/2010 12:57:00112M Font: 12 pt Page 22:.[70]Formatted _ _ IGm Murry, 10/19/201011:42,00 AM._, Tabs: 0.5",List tab+Not at 0.75" ----- ................... ....._... — Page_22,[71]Formatted _ IGm Murry 10/1/201012:57;00,PM.. Font: 12 pt _Page 22:[72],Formatted Kim Murry, _ 10/19/201010.56:00 AM__; Font:Bold Page 22;.[73].Formatted ......._ Kim Murry_„ 10/1/2010 12:57:00 PM__; Font: 12 pt Page 22:[74]Formatted Kim Murry 10/19/2010 10:56:00 AM Font: Bold ----- ---------- -- - Page 22:[75]Formatted._ Kim Murry` , 10/1/2010 12:57:00 P-M_ Font: 12 pt _.Page 22:_[76]Formatted_, _ _ Km Murry10/1/201012.57:00.PM Font: 12 pt Page 23:,t77I.De1eted,_._ _ _ IGm.Murry_ _10/8/201011:04:00AM 14.01.060 Post-Disaster Historic Preservation. 14.01.061 Purpose and goals. 14.01.062 Emergency Response Committee (ERC) established. 14.01.063 Provisions and fee waiver. 14.01.064 Stabilization of historic buildings.. 14.01.065 Demolition of historic buildings. 14.01.066 City assistance. 14.01.061 Purpose and goals. Purpose: California is a seismically active area. State-wide experience shows that earthquakes can seriously damage or destroy important historic buildings. The 2003 San Simeon Earthquake and 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake demonstrated that historic buildings can be lost through actions taken by public agencies after an earthquake. These actions usually occur within ten days after a declared emergency. This would also apply to damage by fire, wind and flood. The purpose of these regulations is to facilitate recovery following a disaster in a way that balances the need to protect public health and safety, the economic interests of property owners and the need to preserve the PH2-149 Attachment 5 community's most important historic buildings. These standards implement and are consistent with California Public Resources Code Section 5028 pertaining to natural disaster damage to historic properties. Goals: It is the goal of the City of San Luis Obispo to: (a) Continue to identify and designate archetypal or particularly significant historical structures within the City of San Luis Obispo. Such properties are identified by the Council as having the highest historical value by virtue of their unique architectural, historical or cultural significance, and are included in the Master List of Historic Resources. (b) Continue to preserve Master List resources and provide for their stabilization, restoration and/or reconstruction in the event of a disaster such as earthquake, fire, windstorm, or flooding. (c) Establish post-disaster historic preservation procedures that are consistent with state and local law, and specifically SLOW Section 15.48; and (d) Establish an Emergency Response Committee that will develop, implement and monitor procedures for stabilization or demolition of Master List buildings which are damaged by an earthquake or other disaster. (e) Integrate post-disaster historic preservation with the City's disaster planning and emergency response protocols. 14.01.062 Emergency Response Committee (ERC) established. (a) The Council hereby establishes an "Emergency Response Committee" (ERC). The ERC's membership shall consist of: i) Community Development Director("Director") ii) City Engineer iii) Chief Building Official iv) Fire Marshall v) Cultural Heritage Committee member vi) Citizen Architect or Engineer The Council, upon the recommendation of the Committee shall appoint members under subsection (a)(v) and (a)(vi), and shall appoint alternates for both positions. Committee members shall serve on a volunteer basis for 2-4 year terms. City officials on the Committee may be represented by their designees. The ERC shall meet as needed, and shall be convened by the Director. All decisions shall require a majority vote of the quorum of ERC members. A quorum shall consist of four PH2-150 Attachm8 t 5 Committee members. The citizen architect or engineer should be knowledgeable in historic building construction and preservation methods, to assist the City and owners of historically-listed buildings. The citizen architect or engineer should be registered as a Disaster Service Worker with the Office of Emergency Services. 14.01.063 Provisions and fee waiver. If a Master List resource is damaged by a disaster, the following provisions shall guide actions of the City and owners of Master List properties. City development review and permit fees for restoration or reconstruction of Master List properties may be reduced or waived by the City Council to facilitate preservation of significant historic resources and to expedite recovery from the disaster. 14.01.064 Stabilization of historic buildings. Within the first 90 days of a disaster, the City shall work with the property owners and all agencies concerned for the shoring and stabilization of Master List buildings that the ERC or Chief Building Official determines to be hazardous buildings. The following provisions shall apply unless waived by the Council: (a) As per SLOMC 15.48, placards shall be used to identify buildings the Chief Building Officer determines to be restricted or unsafe to occupy. In addition, buildings on the Master List of Historic Resources that are determined to be restricted or unsafe to occupy shall be clearly labeled by the City with the words "Master List Historic Building- This Placard is not a Demolition Order." (b) Members of the ERC shall be "on-call" as stated in Section 14.01.062(e), and should be able to assist disaster personnel and advise owners on emergency stabilization measures for Master List resources, consistent with City authority granted by law under emergency conditions. (c) City shall maintain a list of qualified architects and engineers, and make the list available to owners of Master List resources, to assist in preparing shoring and stabilization programs. (d) Owners of Master List resources shall submit a written report prepared by a qualified architect or engineer, outlining shoring and stabilization measures to be taken to the ERC for review and recommendation to the Chief Building Official for approval. (e) Members of the ERC, owners of Master List buildings, and owners' representatives shall have physical access to hazardous Master List buildings, at the Community PGI2-151 Attachment 5 Development Director's discretion, to recommend appropriate shoring and stabilization measures to be undertaken to the Chief Building Official. (f) Stabilization actions should occur within the time period specified by the ERC. A construction permit shall be obtained for stabilization actions, unless the requirement is waived by the City oris exempt from permit requirements. 14.01.065 Demolition of historic buildings. If a Master List resource is damaged by a disaster, demolition of the structure may be authorized under the provisions of the California Building Code (CBC) and under following provisions: The issuance of a demolition permit is governed by the provisions of this ordinance, which shall serve as local amendments to the procedures contained in the CBC. Removal or destruction of any character-defining feature of a Master List building, as determined by the Director or Chief Building Official, constitutes a demolition. Recommendations regarding stabilization methods and emergency demolition shall be made by the ERC. Within 90 days of the initial date of the disaster, demolition permits shall not be issued unless the Director or Chief Building Official, upon the recommendation of the ERC, determines that earlier demolition is necessary to: i) eliminate an imminent, demonstrable threat to human life and/or undamaged property on adjacent streets or sites; or ii) provide access for emergency vehicles and personnel where no alternative route or service strategy is available. (b) After 90 calendar days following the initial date of the disaster, the issuance of demolition permit for a Master List building is subject to the normal permit processing procedures for demolition or relocation of historic buildings. The CHC shall make a recommendation to the Architectural Review Commission regarding demolition of Master List buildings. To recommend approval of a demolition permit application, the CHC must determine that: i) The historic resource is a hazard to public health or safety, and repairs, stabilization, preservation or rehabilitation is not structurally feasible. Deterioration resulting from the neglect or failure of the owner to maintain the property need not be considered in making this finding. The applicant shall provide one or more structural reports to document that repairs or stabilization are not feasible. ii) Denial of the application will deprive the property owner of the economically viable use of the property, after application of financial, land use and other incentives available to the property. PH2-152 Attachment 5 ii) The proposed demolition is consistent with the General Plan and the California Environmental Quality Act. (c) To assist in the determination required by subsection (b), property owners shall submit a written report prepared by a licensed architect or engineer, knowledgeable in historic building construction, assessing the condition of the damaged building and evaluating strategies and costs for its restoration or reconstruction. As a condition of any permit to demolish a Master List building or portion thereof that remains after a disaster, the owner shall provide photo-documentation to the Director showing building setbacks from property line, floor area, height, exterior architectural details, building form and materials, in a form acceptable to the CHC. The ERC or CHC shall use photo-documentation to determine if any architectural features should be saved for reuse on the reconstructed building. If the property owner is unwilling or unable to save the identified architectural features, the City may, at its option, store the features for later use, consistent with Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, with the agreement of the property owner. Cost of City storage of the features if any will be borne by the property owner. iii) The ERC reserves the right to consider third-party assessments of the structural condition of the Master List building prepared by qualified professionals. 14.01.066 City assistance. To assist owners of buildings on the Master List of Historic Resources with stabilization, restoration and reconstruction work, the City shall: (a) Maintain photographic records of the exteriors of Master List buildings. (b) Give priority to the processing of applications and the issuance of building permits for restoration and reconstruction work. (c) Provide and distribute information brochures to local disaster personnel and Master List building owners with information describing funding sources, policies, and laws applicable to historical buildings, seismic hazard mitigation and response strategies, and historic preservation measures following a disaster. (d) Make available any of the applicable benefits listed in Chapter 4 of the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. PH2-153 Attachment 5 Page 23:[78]Deleted ].Christine Dietrick 10/18/201010:38:00 AM Protection of Historic Resources _..-- ----------------_..—--— Page 23:[79]Deleted Kim Murry 10/8/201011:04:00 AM 14.01.071 Severability 14.01.072 Legal authority and enforcement 14.01.073 Enforcement 14.01.074 Historic Property Protection Standards 14.01.075 Economic Hardship 14.01.076 Historic and cultural resources trust fund 14.01.071 Severability. Should any section or other portion of this ordinance be determined unlawful or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining section(s) and portion(s) of this ordinance shall be considered severable and shall remain in full force and effect. ---- ..._................-.._............. -..._........_......._.._......._........_..._.............................._................._.._..._..._............_..._._.._..-- - - __.-....... Page 23:[80]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:39:00 AM Historic Resource Preservation Page 23:[81]Deleted Kim Murry 10/18/2010 7:08:00 PM ... which allow degradation of the resource by the elements, which allow degradation of the resource by the elements.that C Page 24:[82]Deleted Kim Murry 10/19/201011:45:00 AM Page 24:[82]Deleted Kim Murry 10/18/2010 7:09:00 PM Page 24:[83]Deleted Kim Murry 10/19/201011:46:00 AM -........_........_............_.-...__._-__.._..... _.. — Page 24:[83]Deleted Kim Murry 10/19/2010 11:46:00 AM Page 24:[83]Deleted Kim Murry 10/19/2010 11:46:00 AM Page 24:[83]Deleted Kim Murry 10/19/201011:46:00 AM ........................................................................_................_..............._.........._._._......_._.._....._............... —------ -._......_.._.... Page 24:[83]Deleted Kim Murry 10/19/2010 11:46:00 AM Page 24:[83]Deleted Kim Murry 10/19/201011:46:00 AM Page 24:[84]Formatted Kim Murry 10/18/2010 7:10:00 PM Indent: Left: 0.5" Page 24:[85]Formatted km Murry 10/18/2010 7:10:00 PM PH2-154 _ Attachment 5 Indent: Left: 0.5" Page 24:[86]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 10:31:00 AM Cultural Heritage Committee, Council Page 24:[87]Deleted J.Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 10:31:00 AM compliance with this ordinance and adopted Historic Preservation Program guidelines. C. Time to correct. Director shall provide written notice of non-compliance to property owners. Notice shall be by certified mail or other method approved by the City attorney. Following receipt of notice, property owner shall have Page 24:[88]Deleted J.Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM he City shall use procedures described in Chapter 1.24 of the Municipal Code and Administrative Citation Guidelines Page 24:[89]Formatted _Kim Murry 10/19/2010 10:57:00 AM Font: 14 pt - -- --- .__._._.._......._.._.__.._._......_.. _....----..........-- ,Page 24:.[901 Formatted .__ _ ._ Kim Murry, 10/19/201010:57:00 AM Font: (Default)Times New Roman, 14 pt Page 24:[90]Formatted Kim Murry _ 10/19/2010 10:57:00 AM Font: 14 pt -_Page 24.[91]Formatted _ _ _ Kim.Murry_ -. _ . . .. . ._ .10/19/2010 11:49:00 AM, ; Space After: Opt ....._......_..._................._...-._............_..........._...................... ._._........................._.._........_._...__..._. - .._.__._._...._ Page 24:[92]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 10:31:00 AM Legal authority and enforcement Page 24:[93]Deleted J.Christine Dietridc 10/18/2010 10:31:00 AM A. Authority. The Director, Chief Building Official and Page 24:,[94]Deleted J.Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 10:31:00 AM and their designees are hereby authorized to enforce the provisions of this ordinance. B. Fees. Council shall, by resolution, establish the fee(s) for applications and submissions made pursuant to this ordinance, fines, and fees for non- Page 24:[95]Deleted J.Christine Dietrick 10/18/201010:31:00 AM 60 days to correct the violation or to inform the City why an extension is warranted. Additional time to correct the violation may be allowed PH2-155 Attachment 5 Page 24i[96]Deleted J.Christine Dietrick 10/18/201010:33:00 AM with an approved application shall constitute grounds for immediate stoppage of the work involved in the noncompliance until the matter is resolved. Page 24:[97]Deleted J.Christine Dietrick�— 10/18/201010:31:00 AM Failure to demonstrate timely response to correct the violation may result in enforcement penalties Page 24:[98]Deleted 3.Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 10:31:00 AM The Director shall have the authority to place reasonable conditions on such an extension consistent with the Administrative Guidelines adopted pursuant to Chapter 1.24 of the Municipal Code. Page,24:[99]Deleted IGm Murry 9/27/2010 3:25:00 PM 14.01.073 Enforcement. A. Violations. Violating the provisions of this ordinance or of the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, failure to obey an order issued- by those authorized to enforce it, or failure to comply with a condition of approval of any discretionary City approval, certificate or permit issued under this ordinance shall constitute a misdemeanor. B. Failure to protect property. No property owner or other responsible party shall cause or permit, by action or inaction, alteration of, damage to, deterioration, or demolition of in whole or part, of any significant features or characteristics of a listed historic property or resource without first having obtained proper city authorization. Page 24:[100]Deleted J.Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM Penalties for unauthorized demolition. Except where imminent threat to a listed historic resource exists, t -- ._..._.._...._..----._..._._..--- - .._.. ---- -- - Page 24:[101]Deleted J.Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 10:33:00 AM D. Work stoppage. In addition to any other fines, penalties or enforcement provisions set forth in this ordinance, failure to comply Page 24:.[102]Deleted 3.Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM if any fines are imposed in conjunction with ......................._-......--..........._...._..-._.............._._....._..._............._....._.__..------.---.--..._._..---Page 24:,[163]Deleted 3.Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM PH2-156 Attachment 5 where a property owner has failed to comply with notices to correct violations that may result in the unapproved demolition of the listed historic resource (either active or by neglect). If a listed historic resource is demolished or altered without City authorization, the owner may be required to restore the property or structure to its appearance prior to the violation to the satisfaction of the Director.. This shall be in addition to and not in lieu-of any criminal prosecution and penalty, and applicable fines otherwise available to address violations of the Municipal Code. Following notice and public hearing, the Council, may enforce the following penalties Page 24:[104]Deleted I Christine Dietiick 10/18/2010 9;51:00 AM for unapproved demolition (either active or by neglect) of a listed historic resource Page 24:[105]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM Page 24:14q§]Deleted ] Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9;411:0.10 AM' (a) Fine. The owner of the listed historic property may be assessed a one time fine of up to $10,000 per violation, as established by Council. In addition, the City may assess a fine ranging from $100 to $5,000 per day, up to a maximum of 30 days, for continuing violations. __...... ...... . ... Page 24:[107]Deleted ] Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM. Building permit restriction. City may prohibit the owner(s), successors, or assigns from obtaining a building permit for development of the subject property for a period of up to five (5) years from the date of violation, unless such permit(s) is for the purpose of -._...-- .........................................................................................._....._....._......................._...........................................................................__._._.._._....._..........._.......................... Page 24:[108]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM correcting a building or zoning code violation or for complying Page 24-[109]Deleted I Christine:Dletrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM complying with provisions of this ordinance. Page.24:[110]Deleted 7.Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51100 AM City shall initiate proceedings to place a deed restriction on the property to ensure enforcement of this restriction. The property owner shall be required PH2-157 Attachment 5 to maintain the property during that period in conformance with standards set forth in this ordinance. City shall initiate action to remove any such deed restriction within ten (10) days of correction or compliance. Subsequent development applications shall be subject to CEQA review to include evaluation of demolition of the historic resource. --- -- - - ------------ -------- -- Page:24:[111]Deleted ] Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM ( _._...................-................................................._.............._................._........_..........._.-.._...---.........................................- Page 24:[112]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM b) Loss of preservation benefits. Any historic preservation benefits previously granted to the affected property may be subject to revocation. ...--...._._.......................................------..__......................._......................................................_..._..._........._..._..-...-_....-............_........................_.....__....... Page 24:[113]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010,9:51:00 AM (d) Restoration required. Any responsible party who demolishes or alters a property or structure in violation of this ordinance may be required to restore the property or structure to its appearance prior to the violation to the satisfaction of the Director. This shall be in addition to and not in lieu of any criminal prosecution and penalty, and applicable fines. .._..._._..._..._........................._........._...-...-..._.._......._.........................................................................................--..._.._...._.._........-..-..-...-,..........................:.......... Page.24:[114]Deleted J.Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM ( Page 24:[115]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010 9:51:00 AM c) Other remedies. In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, Page 26e[116]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/18/2010.10:57:00 AM. Where applicable, claims of economic hardship shall include sufficient evidence documenting that ordinance enforcement would cause serious economic deprivation to the property owner(s). - -- --- -- ....... ............. .........- ......... - -- -- ----- Page 26:[117]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/3/2010 10:29:00 PM 14.01.100 Definitions. For the purposes of this ordinance, certain terms, words and their derivatives shall be defined as specified herein; 1. Accessory Structure: a structure which is subordinate or incidental and directly related to a permitted use or structure on the same parcel. "Accessory structures" that include habitable space, as defined by the California Building Code, shall be no larger than 450 square feet. (Ord. 941-1(part), 1982: prior code — 9204.11 (part)) "Accessory structures" are located on the same parcel and are related to the primary structure but are subordinate or incidental, but may include structures that have achieved historic PH2-158 Attachment 5 significance in their own right, as determined by the Director, Committee or Council. (see "primary structure") 2. Adjacent: located on property which abuts the subject property on at least one point of the property line, on the same property, or located on property directly across right-of- way from subject property and able to viewed concurrently. 3. Adverse Effects: effects, impacts or actions that are detrimental or potentially detrimental to a historic resource's condition, architectural or historical integrity. 4 Alteration: any change, repair, replacement, modification, or new construction to: (1) the exterior of an historic resource or adjacent building, (2) the exterior and interior structural elements which support the exterior walls, roof, or exterior elements of the historic resource or adjacent building, (3) other construction on a lot, or (4) Character Defining Features of the interior of a historic resource, unless the interior is exempt from historic review by the Cultural Heritage Committee. "Alteration" does not include ordinary landscape maintenance unless the landscaping is identified as significant at the time a property is listed, receives historic "H" zoning, or is identified in an adopted historic preservation report. 5. Archaeological Site: those areas where archaeological resources are present and maybe larger or smaller than the project site. An archaeological site may include prehistoric Native American archaeological site, Historic archaeological sites; sites or natural landscapes associated with important human events; and Native American Sacred Places and Cultural landscapes. 6. ARC: the Architectural Review Commission as appointed by the City Council. 7. California Register: California Register of Historical Resources defined in California PRC 5024.1 and in CCR Title 14 Chap 11.5, Sec 4850 et seq. as it may be amended. 8. CHC: the Cultural Heritage Committee as appointed by the City Council. 9. Character Defining Features: 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, finishes, etc. 10. City: the City of San Luis Obispo. 11. Community Design Guidelines: the most recent version of the City's Community Design Guidelines as adopted and amended from time to time. PH2-159 Attachment 5 12. Contributing Resource: Buildings or other resources at least 50 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, but should be visible to the public. In some cases, buildings or other resources that are less than 50 years old, but are nonetheless significant based on architecture, craftsmanship or other criteria as described herein may be designated as a Contributing resource. 13. Council: the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo. 14. Cultural Resource: any prehistoric or historic district, site, landscape, building, structure, or object included in, or potentially eligible for local, State or National historic designation, including artifacts, records, and material remains related to such a property or resource. 15. Demolition: for the purpose of this ordinance, "demolition" refers to any act or failure to act that destroys, removes, or relocates, in whole or part a historical resource such that its historic or architectural character and significance are materially altered. 16. Deterioration: the significant worsening of a structure's condition, architectural or historic integrity, due to lack of maintenance, organisms, neglect, weathering and other natural forces. 17. Director: the Director of the Community Development Department, or another person authorized by the Director to act on his or her behalf. 18. Disaster: "Disaster" shall include fire, flood, earthquake, landslide, subsidence, tsunami, acts of war or civil unrest, or other catastrophic event as declared by the Council, the Governor of the State of California or the President of the United States. 19. Feasible: capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account cultural, economic, environmental, historic, legal, social and technological factors. 20. Historic Building Code: the most recent version of the California Historical Building Code, Title 25, Part, 8, as defined in Sections 18950 to 18961 of Division 12, Part 2.7 of Health and Safety Code (H&SC), a part of California State law. Its purpose is to provide regulations and standards for the rehabilitation, preservation, restoration (including related reconstruction) or relocation as applicable to all historical buildings, structures and properties deemed of importance to the history, architecture, or culture of an area by an appropriate local or state governmental jurisdiction. PH2-160 Attachment 5 21. Historic Context: Historic context are those patterns, themes or trends in history by which a specific occurrence, property, or site is understood and its meaning and significance is made clear. 22. Historic District/Historical Preservation District: areas or neighborhoods with a collection or concentration of listed or potentially contributing historic properties or archaeologically significant sites, where historic properties help define the area or neighborhood's unique architectural, cultural, and historic character or sense of place. Historic districts may be, delineated on the official zoning map as Historic (H) overlay zone under San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 17.54. 23. Historic Preservation Program Guidelines: the most recent version of the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, as adopted from time to time. 24. Historic Preservation Report. a document which describes preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, or reconstruction measures for a historic resource,based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties, and which includes standards and guidelines for recommended treatments for preserving the resource. A historic preservation report shall require approval by the CHC and the approval shall remain in effect for a period of at least three years from the approval date. The Director or on referral from the Director, the CHC may extend or re-adopt an approved program for a period of up to ten years. 25. Historic Property: a property, including land and buildings, which possesses aesthetic, architectural, cultural, historic or scientific significance, and which is included in, or potentially eligible for local, State or National historic designation. 26. Historic Resource: any building, site, improvement, area or object of aesthetic, architectural, cultural, historic or scientific significance, and which is included in, or potentially eligible for local, State or National historic designation. 27. Historic Status: historic designation of a listed.resource or property as approved by Council. 28. Improvement: any building, structure, fence, gate, landscaping, hardscaping, wall, work of art, or other object constituting a physical feature of real property or any part of such feature. 29. Inappropriate Alteration: alterations to historic resources which violate these provisions and/or the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. 30. Integrity, Architectural or Historical: the ability of a property, structure, site, building, improvement or natural feature to convey its identity and authenticity, including but not limited to its original location, period(s) of construction, setting, scale, design, materials, detailing, workmanship, human values, uses and association. PH2-161 Attachment 5 31. Inventory of Historic Resources: the list of historically designated resources and properties consisting of Master List and Contributing Properties List Historic Resources, and any properties, objects, sites, gardens, sacred places and resources subsequently added to the inventory as determined to meet criteria outlined herein and approved by the City Council. 32. Listed Resource: properties and resources included in the Inventory of Historic Resources. 33. Massing: the spatial relationships, arrangement and organization of a building's physical bulk or volume. 34. Master List Resource: designation which may be applied to the most unique and important historic properties and resources meeting criteria outlined herein. 35. Minor Alteration. Any structural or exterior change to a historic resource which the Director determines to be consistent with the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and other applicable standards. 36. Modern Contributing Resources: designation which may be applied to properties and resources which are less than 50 years old, but which exemplify or include significant works of architecture or craftsmanship. 37. National Register of Historic Places: the official inventory of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and culture which is maintained by the Secretary of the Interior under the authority of the Historic Sites Act of 1935 and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. 38. Neglect: the lack of maintenance, repair or protection from natural elements or vandalism of a listed property, resource, site or structure, whether intentional or not, which results in significant deterioration, as determined by the Director —..._.._-._................................_......................................................................................._.._......-............................................_......---..._.._......._.._....... _---- --.. Page 26:[118]Deleted I Christine Dietrick 10/3/2010 10:29:00 PM or City Council based on visual and physical evidence. 39. Non-Contributing Resource: designation which may be applied to properties and resources in historic districts which are typically less than 50 years old and do not support the prevailing historic character of the district or other listing criteria as outlined herein. 40. Preservation: the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain a historic site, building or other structure's historically significant existing form, integrity, and materials through stabilization, repair and maintenance. PH2-162 Attachment 5 41. Property Owner: the person or entity (public or private) holding fee title interest or legal custody and control of a property. 42. Primary Structure: the most important building or other structural feature on a parcel in terms of size, scale, architectural or historical significance, as determined by the Committee. 43. Qualified Professional. an individual meeting the Secretary of the Interiors Professional Qualifications Standards (36 CFR Part 61 Appendix A) in history, architectural history, historic architecture and other designated categories, or an individual determined by the CHC to have the qualifications generally equivalent to the above standards based on demonstrated experience. 44. Reconstruction: the act or process of recreating the features, form and detailing of a non-surviving building or portion of building, structure, object, landscape, or site for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location. 45. Rehabilitation: the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations,- and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its architectural, cultural, or historic values. 46. Relocation: removal of a resource from its original site and its re-establishment at another location in essentially the same form, appearance and architectural detailing. 47. Remodel: Alteration of a structure which retains at least 75 percent of the original building framework, roof and exterior bearing walls and cladding, in total, and which reuses the original building materials to the maximum extent possible. 48. Responsible party: any person, business, company or entity, and the parent or legal guardian of any person under the age of eighteen (18) years, who has done any act for which an administrative penalty may be imposed. 49. Restoration the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period. 50. Scale: the proportions of architectural design that relate to human size or other relative size measure. 51. Secretary of the Interior's Standards: the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as published by the U.S. Department of the Interior and as amended from time to time. PH2-163 Attachment 5 52. Setting: the physical area, environment or neighborhood in which a resource is located. 53. Sensitive Site: a site determined by the Community Development Director, Planning Commission, Architectural Review Commission or Council, upon recommendation of the Cultural Heritage Committee, to have special characteristics, constraints or community value such as: historic significance, historic context, creek side location or visual prominence, requiring more detailed development review than would otherwise be required for other similarly zoned lots. 54. Site: as used in this ordinance, the location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined, or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural, or archeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. In general terms, site also includes the landscape surrounding a building or other structure and contained within an individual parcel or contiguous parcels of land. 55. Siting: the placement of structures and improvements on a property or site. 56. Stabilization: the act or process of applying measures designed to reestablish a weather resistant enclosure and the structural stability of an unsafe or deteriorated property while maintaining the essential form as it exists at present. 57. Statement of Historic Significance: A statement of significance is an analysis-based argument or explanation of why a resource is important within its historic context. It explains how the resource meets the eligibility criteria and integrity thresholds as established by local, state or federal government. 58. Structure: as used here, "structure" includes anything assembled or constructed on the ground, or attached to anything with a foundation on the ground, including walls, fences,buildings, signs,bridges, monuments, and similar features. 59. Survey: a systematic process for identifying and evaluating a community's resources using established criteria. "Survey" may also refer to the documentation resulting from a survey project. 60. Threatened Resource: properties or resources at risk of loss of architectural, cultural or historic value due to physical alteration, relocation or demolition. 61. Zoning Code: Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code, as amended from time to time. PH2-164 Attachment 6 RESOLUTION NO. (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADOPTING UPDATED HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM GUIDELINES (GPI 72-09) WHEREAS, in February 1987, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 6158 establishing Historical Preservation Program Guidelines in order to promote preservation of historic buildings and sites and maintain our community's heritage; and WHEREAS, the Historical Preservation Program Guidelines were amended by City Council resolution No. 6857 in August 1990 but have not been updated since that time; and WHEREAS,program 3.6.3 of the Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan specifies that the Cultural Heritage Committee and Architectural Review Commission will provide specific guidance on the construction of new buildings within historic districts; and WHEREAS, program 3.6.10 of the Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan indicates that the City will implement recommendations of the Cultural Heritage Committee's"whitepaper'; and WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee prepared the Updated Draft Guidelines based on General Plan policies and public input received at nine public hearings; and WHEREAS, at its June 28, 2010 meeting the Cultural Heritage Committee endorsed the June 2010 Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines (GPI 72-09) WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on September 21, 2010, October 5, 2010, and November 9, 2010 and to consider the proposed Guidelines and changes made in response to public input;and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Cultural Heritage Committee's recommendation and the Community Development Deputy Director's determination that adoption of updated Historic Preservation Program Guidelines is categorically exempt from environmental review because it consists of an action by a regulatory agency, as authorized by state or local ordinance to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows/or that(whatever action is needed): SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. Council concurs with the Director's determination that the proposed Historic Preservation Program Guidelines update is Categorically Exempt from environmental review (Section 15308, Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment). It consists of an action by a regulatory agency as authorized by state or local ordinance, to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment. R PH2-:14 4 Attachment 6 Resolution No. (2010 Series) Page 2 SECTION 2. Guidelines Approval. The updated Historic Preservation Program Guidelines are hereby approved as recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee and amended by Council and will become effective upon the associated Historic Preservation Ordinance, introduced on the 91h day of November, 2010 becoming effective. Upon motion of ,seconded by and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 2010. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: 'stine Dietrick V -City Attorney PGI2-165 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 City of San Luis Obispo histoum pResEizvation puoc,Ram cuibelines Adopted by City Council Resolution No (2010 Series) SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL Dave Romero,Mayor John Ashbaugh Jan Howell Marx Andrew Carter,Vice Mayor Allen Settle CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE Dan Carpenter, Chairperson Barbara Breska Buzz Kalkowski Hemalata Dandekar Enrica Costello Katy Davis Jeff Oliveira City Administration Katie Licthtig, City Manager Michael Codron, Interim Assistant City Manager Brigitte Elke,Administrative Analyst Community Development Department John Mandeville,Community Development Director Kim Murry, Deputy Director for Long Range Planning Tim Girvin,Chief Building Official Jeff Hook, Senior Planner Mary Phillips, Planning Intern Amber Piona, Planning Intern Architectural Graphics by Craig Smith City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 - 1 - PH2-166 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 taBte of contents Page Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Foreword .................................................................................................................4 1.2 Our Town—San Luis Obispo....................................................................................5 1.3 Why Preserve San Luis Obispo's History?................................................................6 Chapter 2: Historic Preservation Program 2.1 How to Use These Guidelines....................................................................................7 2.5 Related Standards and Policies..................................................................................7 Chapter 3: Treatment of Historic Resources 3.1 Construction in Historic Districts and on Properties with Historic Resources..........9 3.2 Construction in Historic Districts..............................................................................10 3.3 Historic Resources outside Historic Districts............................................................15 3.4 Changes to Historic Resources..................................................................................15 3.5 Reconstruction of Historic Resources........................................................................17 Chapter 4: Preservation Tools and Incentives 4.1 Cultural Resource Preservation and Incentive Programs...........................................19 Chapter 5: Appendices 5.1 Historic Architectural Styles of San Luis Obispo...................................................21 5.2 Historic District Descriptions.................................................................................40 5.3 Contributing List of Historic Resources.................................................................62 5.4 Master List of Historic Resources................................................................74 5.5 Definitions...............................................................................................................78 5.6 Works Cited and Information Links.......................................................................85 5.7 Council Resolution..................................................................................................86 FIGURES 1. Historic Districts in San Luis Obispo..........................................................................10 2. Examples of New Development in Historic Districts..................................................11 3. Examples of Massing of new Development in Historic Districts................................12 4. Commercial In-fill Construction in Historic Districts,Overview ...............................13 5. Commercial In-fill Construction in Historic Districts, Detailed..................................14 6. Additions to Historic Resources..................................................................................17 7. Historic Districts in San Luis Obispo.........................................................................39 - 2 - PH2-167 Attachment 6 city of San IDIS OBISp0 b12art 111 sto121 c pizesemation pRoqzam qui6Etines II ) Cerro San Luis (left), Bishop's Peak and the Town of San Luis Obispo, 1892 council ORAft - octoBEIZ 2010 PGI2-168 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 - a Higuera at Marsh Street, looking northeast, ca. 1920s - 3 - PH2-169 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 chaptem is Dntwbuctoorll 1.1 Foreword These guidelines were developed by the City of San Luis Obispo's Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC), a group of seven citizens appointed by the City Council to advise and educate the public and decision makers on historic resource preservation. Historic resources include buildings and other structures, sites, landscapes, and other features that are significant in San Luis Obispo's history. Interest in historic preservation arises out of the community's desire to explain our past and serve as guideposts to the future. Federal, state and local governments have passed laws to protect historic properties that enjoy special merit based on age, architectural style, period, architect, owners or occupants and/or materials used. These guidelines reference those laws, but are sensitive to our community's special heritage as a California Mission community. As an advisory committee to the City Council, the CHC reviews development proposals to determine their effect on the City's historic districts. These guidelines apply to both private and public properties that either have or are considered to be historic resources. The maintenance and preservation of historic sites, structures, and objects is important to the community, and is a key factor in the City's popularity with tourists and in San Luis Obispo's strong "sense of place." To that end, we are all stewards in the preservation and upkeep of our community's rich heritage. � L o From Terrace Hill,looking toward Chorro Valley,with Santa Rosa Street at the left,ca. 1890. -4 - PH2-17® Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1.2 Our Town—San Luis Obispo Native Americans inhabited California's central coast, including the San Luis Obispo area, as early as 10,000 years B.C. Chumash and Salinan tribes benefitted from the region's mild climate, abundant resources and natural beauty. As a result, the Santa Barbara-San Luis Obispo region supported one of the most densely populated areas of pre-historic California. In the mid- 16t' century, Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo landed on the central coast in what was later to become Santa Barbara County, and began a period of dramatic change coinciding with the arrival of Europeans. By the late 18'h century, San Luis Obispo had become one of 21 communities in California founded by Franciscan missionaries. The Franciscans came to convert the Native Americans to Christianity and to strengthen Spain's control over Alta California. The mission church became the catalyst for the town's continued development; its plaza was a gathering place for work, trade and festivities. Around the mission, Chumash Indians built tule huts over willow frames while the fust soldier-settlers and craftspeople constructed small adobe houses. Each group built structures in keeping with their particular cultural background and drawing from materials immediately at hand. The transition of California from Indian to Spanish to Mexican to American control also brought many changes in construction methods, architectural styles and uses of materials. Many of these cultural periods are still represented in San Luis Obispo's architectural heritage. As the early community grew, people from around the globe brought their culture, skills and ways of life. Consequently, San Luis Obispo's diversity in architectural styles and heritage reflects that diversity and enhances our quality of life. �r Ti :(�• _ ti� /�y�y,r-. <�• r. .... `,� .�.AA ,� �=J: _ Fye . Southern Pacific Railroad "Daylight"locomotive on the outskirts of San Luis Obispo, 1937 - 5 - PH2-171 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1.3 Why Preserve San Luis Obispo's History? The Town of San Luis Obispo began with the founding of the Old Mission in 1772. Over the past two centuries the community has experienced many changes. These changes can be appreciated because many of the older building and historic sites are still present. One has only to visit the central business district or wander through surrounding residential areas to imagine what is must have been like before the introduction of automobiles, flat screen television and computers. San Luis Obispo is blessed with original historic buildings and distinctive historic districts that many communities envy. Historic resources lend a sense of permanence and continuity; however, in some respects they are also fragile and vulnerable. The values and character they impart can easily be lost through neglect, demolition and inappropriate remodeling. The City of San Luis Obispo has been fortunate to have owners who care about the history of their community and have undertaken the costly and time-consuming task of restoring, maintaining and enhancing their historic homes and commercial buildings. Their efforts have enhanced the distinctive character of the community. Historic features have community benefits beyond their aesthetic qualities and educational value. San Luis Obispo's historic sites, buildings and other aspects of our "living history" are irreplaceable resources. They are important to the community's economic vitality, quality of life, and unique sense of place. To promote understanding and an appreciation of its history, San Luis Obispo citizens have established these Historic Preservation Program Guidelines (hereafter "Guidelines"). By working with property owners, developers, neighborhood and civic groups and citizens, the community intends to preserve the most important historic and architecturally significant buildings and sites. These Guidelines are administered by a seven-member citizens' group appointed by the City Council called the Cultural Heritage Committee ("CHC"). The duties of the CHC are further described in the Historic Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 14.1 of the Municipal Code). The Committee is assisted by staff in the San Luis Obispo Community Development Department ("the Department"). To contact the CHC or for more information, visit the Department at 919 Palm Street in San Luis Obispo, or contact the Department at (805) 781-7170, or www.slocity.org. - 6 - PH2-172 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 chaptM 2: histoRic paeseuvation pnocRam 2.1 How to Use These Guidelines Historic preservation starts during the early stages of project planning and design. Property owners, developers, builders, design professionals and others involved in public or private development can use these guidelines to anticipate concerns and to design their projects to protect important historic resources and avoid delays during development review and construction. Highlights of where to fmd information in this document are listed below: a)To determine whether a property is currently listed on either the Contributing or Master List of Historic Resources see Sections 5.3 and 5.4 of the Appendices. To see if a property is located within a Historic District see Figure 3.1. b) For an explanation of treatment of Historic Properties, including construction in Historic Districts and on properties with listed Historic Resources; and information on what is required in a historic preservation report see Section 3.1-3.8. c) For an overview of historic preservation tools and incentives offered by the City see Section 4.1. d) For information about the historic architectural styles of structures found in San Luis Obispo or the predominant character of the historic districts, see Sections 5.1 and 5.2. 2.2 Related Standards and Policies Historic preservation is one of many community goals in the General Plan. It is part of the community's core values and identity. Preservation embodies the fundamental belief that sustainable, successful communities are those that respect, preserve and celebrate their history and unique character. To help ensure these valuable and finite resources will continue to enhance the lives of San Luis Obispo generations to come, the City Council has adopted several documents, in addition to these Guidelines, that help protect these resources. They include: a) General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element, adopted by Council Resolution No. 9785 (2006 Series)— Establishes citywide policies and programs regarding identification and treatment of cultural resources. b) Historic Preservation Ordinance, San Luis Obispo Municipal Code 14.1 — Discusses the CHC, its duties and describes procedures, historic listing criteria and procedures, provisions for demolition and relocation of historic structures, and economic hardship provisions. - 7- PH2-173 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 c) Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines, adopted by Council Resolution No. 10120 (2009 Series) — Establishes procedures to be used for the protection of sub-surface cultural resources, both historic and pre-historic features. d) Community Design Guidelines, adopted by Council Resolution No. 9391 (2002 Series) — Establishes site and architectural design standards for development projects, including projects involving historic resources and historic districts, and demolitions. e) Demolition and Moving of Buildings — Appendix Chapter 2, Chapter 201 General, San Luis Obispo Municipal Code — Establishes procedures and requirements for the relocation or demolition of historic buildings. f) Safety Assessment Placards — Buildings and Construction Title 15.48, San Luis Obispo Municipal Code—Establishes procedures and requirements for post-disaster actions. g) San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations, Chapter 17.54 — Establishes the Historical Preservation Overlay Zone (H) and describes its purposes and application, allowed uses and property development standards. These documents are available at the Department, or on the City's website at www.slocity.org. -3 -_- Historic district,Johnson Avenue between Palm and Mill Streets - 8 - IPH2-11 4 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 chapte,R 3: tReatment of histoRic ResouRces 3.1 Construction in Historic Districts and on Properties with Historic Resources 3.1.1 Conformance with design standards. Construction in historic districts and on properties that contain listed historic resources shall conform with the goals and policies of the General Plan, the Historic Preservation Ordinance, these Guidelines, the Community Design Guidelines, any applicable specific or area plan, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. 3.1.2 Review of development projects. The Director shall refer a development project application for a property located within a historic district or on a property with a listed Historic Resource to the CHC for review, unless the Director determines the project is: (a) Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act,and (b) Designed such that it would have no effect on Historic or Archaeological Resources, and (c)Consistent with 3.1.1 above. 3.1.3 Approval conditions. The CHC may recommend conditions or environmental mitigation measures for construction in historic districts or on properties that contain listed historic resources. The Director, ARC, Planning Commission or City Council may impose conditions of approval and or environmental mitigation measure for planning actions affecting Historic and Archaeological Resources. 3.1.4 Environmental review. Development projects on properties that contain listed historic resources, and on properties located within historic districts shall be considered environmentally sensitive pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and require at a minimum, an initial study to evaluate the project's potential effects on the resource except where the Director determines the project: (a)does not involve: 1) a significant change to the exterior (or interior, subject to Section 3.4.6) of a historic structure, 2) relocation or demolition of part or all of a historic or potentially historic structure, or 3) grading on a listed historic property or identified archaeological site; or (b) is minor or incidental and has no potential to adversely affect cultural resources. -9- PH2-175 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 3.2 Construction in Historic Districts Figure 1 - Historic Districts in San Luis Obispo, 2010 city of san Luis OBISpa histonic dtstnicts , Bl serest . .��� •��'�(� _.. - �'g,� .*thy, •� Downtown ?r< \ Y' •'\ Old Town i _..r. o oils 025 3.2.1 Architecturally compatible development within Historic Districts. New structures in historic districts shall be designed to be architecturally compatible with the district's prevailing historic character as measured by their consistency with the scale, massing, rhythm, signature architectural elements, exterior materials, siting and street yard setbacks of the district's historic structures, as described in Figures 2 and 3. New structures shall not copy or imitate historic structures,or seek to create the illusion that a new building is historic. - 10 - PH2-176 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 3.2.2 Architectural compatibility. The CHC reviews development in historic districts for architectural compatibility with nearby historic resources, and for consistency with applicable design and preservation policies, standards, and historic district descriptions in Section 5.2. New development should not sharply contrast with, significantly block public views of, or visually detract from, the historic architectural character of historically designated structures located adjacent to the property to be developed, or detract from the prevailing historic architectural character of the historic district. Figure 2-Examples of New Development in Historic Districts �nyrnN� rnsst>,t�wJ.Auo x�N j CLMPONCP!'it5-�FVLhlC"m Trf0 .. °'Y><Qf1N3,N!t�TiT9PiCAL 6i emmmN ✓ Or -M£ Na;CfiEGRNCYA. p ®� ns ;N5IDf4CRL'SiRW'1'UfB5 ..__. t---�wrnn� x,,�,,r�r•�tin��N HISfbRiG?L�JtFtCTURLk.� EUMM KLIMv Nv455,FORd. Nm �51GN COMPONENT' REah77DN5FllP5_�---...._..—.._—_-.—_..� PGI2-1r''J r''J / / Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Figure 3-Examples of Massing of New Development in Historic Districts Or_Mf- E' NtznLw�''r., G!5?Wc I •. -fA.�/Cr,KF�r,�Et�T"f�Y +' N�taflomRtiri'a� �� 7---tT-- , VT x. � � 1I t'X63!!HG�h✓ ' C,4TN..Y.'./j/ j _...�.�..s3`P�ILn� l F ti- I.4 1i C+rpr^..rvre j M 661N& OF ersocru&B - 12 - PH2-178 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Figure 4-Examples of Commercial In-fill in Historic Districts �oNunERC tAL IN-FII�c. GONT"ExNfzkL Ve6l(m l I i LEI Cron WaF-clAL_ IN-PUt tokr>=ntpa�RY v6�u = 13 - PH2-179 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Figure 5-Commercial In-fill in Historic Districts-Details urreK t EVEifi STeP t 6hG= Mom JiFEET El . MOW- of NEN( ne4oa f-ELKnrF, Q V_ _ `D ERMk&FACA e IWY7}}�A ANb Clkl Cf _ -"—NAY WtNGbwS Rv!-n'[E5 'TD EYJ611NC� --ARC, 1-Uchi7GN7k�+ ` AHD fwo"LM tcejw COMMEFCIA� pU�F1u- IU h}15'TDRIG DISft�IGT (cotrt>�tPOFrd� PRMfTo;W_ WlaTtcAu MA9�Wr ANO 5CA e___ FalvTe*V exw; t*. H�FIZANTkL AtA6NMrKr ofL Near me e. FEt h7JE.c5 'V EXi6v7* FhGAs;,e., (44 r MND ARD oa+LE or NPP mnnavS R544.ga! "r0 ffxm,'C, �IPWWONAL vEfT ti>:iGffl_tfi' FV4.A175,'v"fP _, EXi�tlt� E�tfKT 5r/CINGi GOChT1ChV '" - .No PFOYaF1�oN RC�,.MES_ GbhV�'.BF.CtN.. tN-flU. tN HfST�RtG tJ1571L(cT - 14- PH2-180 r City of San Luis Obispo -Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines Attachment 6 June 2010 3.3 Historic Resources outside Historic Districts 3.2.1 Historic Resources outside Historic Districts. Listed Historic Resources located outside of historic districts shall be subject to the same protection and regulations applicable to historic resources within historic districts. 3.4 Changes to Historic Resources. Projects involving an alteration or relocation of a listed historic resource-require CHC review, as described below: 3.4.2 Alterations to Historic Resources. (a) Application. An application to alter a listed historic resources shall be made on forms provided by the Department, including applicable fees and any supplemental information as required to explain the request. (b) Minor alterations. For minor alterations to listed..historic resources, the Director may approve upon making the finding that the proposed work is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties and these Guidelines. If this finding �' cannot be made, the Director will refer the1 matter to'the CHC for review and comment. (c) Accessory structures. _ New accessory structures should complement the primary structure's historic chard t r.through compatibility with its form;massing, color, and materials. (d) Additions. Additions to listed historic stru'ctur'es should maintain the structure's original architectural integrity acid closely`rriatch the building's original architecture, or match additions that have achieved historic,significance_in`their'own right, in terms of scale, form, massing, rhythm, fenestration, matenals;.color and architectural details. (e) ,Historic preservation 'report'req-Dred. If CHC review of a project is required, a historic preservation report shall be prepared,at'the applicant's cost unless this requirement is waived by the Director due to the minor nature of the project or because information is otherwise available to enable informed.review of the proposed project. The report will be used to determine if the proposal can be fourid_consstent with the findings in subsection (f). Report content. A historic preservation report shall require CHC approval. The report shall be prepared by a qualified professional unless waived by the Director and shall be based on these guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties and shall include the following: (1) The historic context, period of significance and character-defining features. (2) An architectural history of the resource which includes: - 15 - PH2-.181 City of San Luis Obispo-Drart Historic Preservation Program Guidelines Aftachment 6 June 2010 -Photographs and drawings which identify the original building, structure, object, and site configuration, -Character defining features of the resource as originally constructed, -Alterations, including those alterations made over time that have achieved status as character defining features, even though not a part of the original resource, and *Alterations not consistent with maintaining the historic integrity of the resource. (3) A program for repair, rehabilitation and preservation of the resource, including a statement of how the proposed program meets the identified treatment option from the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties. (f) Consistency required. Alterations to listed historic resources shall be approved only upon finding that the proposed work is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, any required historic preservation report, General Plan policies, the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and these Guidelines. 3.4.3 Percent of historic resource to be preserved. Alterations of historically-listed buildings shall retain at least 75% of the original building framework, roof, and exterior bearing walls and cladding, in total, and reuse �,a, ■ ,,:. original materials to the maximum extent possible. OL Proposed alterations of greater than 25% of the original building framework, roof, and exterior walls will be subject to the review process for demolitions. Alterations do not r=" : , _ include ordinary repair or maintenance that is exempt from a building permit or is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic 1' Resources. 3.4.4 Retention of character-defining features. Alterations of historically-listed buildings shall retain character defining features. New features on primary and secondary building facades, or features visible from a public Rehabilitation of the historic Righetti House, 2007 area, should be completed in a manner that preserves the original architectural character, form, scale, and appearance of the building. 3.4.5 Exterior building changes. Exterior changes to historically-listed buildings or resources should not introduce new or conflicting architectural elements and should be architecturally compatible with the original and/or prevailing architectural character of the building, its setting and architectural context. Additions to historic buildings shall comply with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards to complement and be consistent with the original style of the structure. Building materials used to replicate character-defining features shall match the original materials in terms of size, shape, quality and appearance. - 16 - PH2-182 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Figure 6-Additions in Historic Districts TV e:r,} tlrT C3 ❑t. 13 ti 7 DO '^..1MILhi< 5='rtLE AGL''Maj O,�T°-f1 -mChGE F�uVtTt�P! AM (NG_OP A NEW At7DRtON, iN �4_f�N9t NCA 91 twfel o 3.4.6 Interior building changes. Interior changes to publicly-accessible listed historic buildings whose architectural or historic significance is wholly or partially based on interior architectural characters or features shall preserve and restore significant interior architectural features. 3.4.7 Acquired historic significance. Changes to listed historic resources that the Director or the CHC determines to have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 3.5 Reconstruction of Historic Resources 3.5.1 Historic building codes. Reconstruction of listed historic structures should preserve the original historic character of the historic resource to the maximum extent possible; use of California Historic Building code is encouraged to accomplish such preservation. 3.5.2 Consistency with Standards. Reconstruction shall follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, and shall be based on conclusive evidence such as architectural plans, photos, as-built drawings and other reliable and accurate information. 3.5.3 Minor variations. The Director or the ARC, on recommendation by the CHC, may approve minor variations from the original design to meet code requirements; provided the overall architectural character is maintained and character defining features are accurately recreated. - 17 - PH2-183 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 ' ++t i N" l Obispo.Theater,Monterey at Court Street, demolished in 1976 after a fire - 18 - PH2-184 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines) Attachment 6 June 2010 chaptEu 4: pitESEizvation toots ana incentives 4.1 Cultural Resource Preservation Incentives and Benefit Programs The City intends to establish and maintain incentives to support and encourage the identification, preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction and continued use of historic and cultural resources. The City Council may offer these or additional preservation incentives to property owners of listed historic resources, as budget and/or funding sources allow: 4.1.1 Reconstruction after loss. Subject to Director approval, historic resources damaged or destroyed by fire or natural disasters may be reconstructed to match their historic appearance as existing before the damage without complying with development standards for setback, lot coverage, height, parking requirements or other Zoning Regulations. 4.1.2 Modified development standards. Property development standards in the Zoning Regulations and Parking and Driveway Standards may be relaxed by an Administrative Use Permit, following procedures set forth in SLOW Chapter 17.58, if the modifications facilitate the preservation and/or rehabilitation of a historic resource, or serve to reduce or eliminate impacts of development to a historic resource. 4.1.3 Additional uses. The following additional uses may be allowed on Historic Properties by an Administrative Use Permit: (a) Bed and Breakfast Inns with a gross floor area not exceeding 2,500 square feet or three guest rooms in the R-3 and R-4 zones. (b) Re-establishment of the property's historic use (defined as the historic resource's original use when it opened or the use for which the resource was designed), provided the Director determines such uses are compatible with adjacent uses and any required Zoning Code amendments have been completed. (c) Any other use which is determined to be compatible with its surroundings and consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Code Chapter 17.22, and which is logical in terms of the design, location and past use of the historic resource. 4.1.4 Use permit review. (A) To apply for a Use Permit under this Chapter, the property owner or owner's agent shall submit a planning application, fee and supporting information to the Department. The application shall include a historic preservation report, as described in these Guidelines. The CHC shall evaluate whether the proposed land use and related building modifications are consistent with these guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties conformance reasonably necessary to preserve or rehabilitate the historic resource, and shall report its findings to the Director. (B) In granting a Use Permit, the Director shall make the findings pursuant to SLOW Chapter 17.58, including these specific findings: - 19 - PH2-185 _ Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 (a) Impacts of the use, including traffic and parking, would not be detrimental to the surrounding area. (b) Flexible development standards and/or uses conform to an approved historic preservation report and are necessary for the preservation and/or rehabilitation of an historic resource. (c) Preservation agreements, contracts or fagade easements between the property owner and City that would provide for preservation, restoration or rehabilitation of exterior or interior features of an historic resource may be required as a condition of the Use Permit. 4.1.5 Rehabilitation tax credits and grants. Historic resources may be eligible for the State Historical Building Code, Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credits, Mills Act Property Tax Reduction Program, Community Development Block Grant and other programs that may be established by state, federal,or non-profit agencies,or by the City Council. 4.1.6 Historic and fade easements. Property owners may dedicate historic or fagade easements to the City or to a non-profit organization to preserve cultural and historic resources. Such dedication may qualify for fee waivers,rehabilitation grants,permit streamlining, Mills Act program participation or other incentives, subject to the approval of the City Council. 4.1.7 Transfer of development credit. For projects that preserve cultural or historic resources on site,the City may enter into an agreement to transfer development credit or density to another appropriate site proportional to the commercial floor area or number of dwellings possible to develop under current zoning if the resource were removed. 4.1.8 Fee waiver or reduction. A property owner may apply for the waiver or reduction of planning, building and engineering application and permit fees for designated historic resources. The City Council may waive some or all fees if it can be demonstrated that the waiver will assist in the preservation of a designated historic resource. 4.1.8 Financial assistance. With City Council approval, the City may use the Historic and Cultural Resource Preservation Trust Fund, State or Federal grants, affordable housing funds or other funding to achieve historic preservation objectives, especially for exceptional preservation projects where multiple community objectives such as affordable housing, historic preservation, removal of spot blight, or more sustainable property development can be achieved with such assistance. 4.1.9 Historic plaque program. Upon available funding, the City may provide standard historic plaques for designated historic properties and at no or reduced cost to property owners. High quality bronze historic plaques will be available to purchase through the City at manufacturer's cost plus handling. 4.1.10 Historic library. Property owners of historic properties shall have use of the CHC reference library in the Department. - 20 - PH2-186 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 chapteu s: appenNces 5.1 Historic Architectural Styles of San Luis Obispo Architectural Style In surveying the City's historic resources, several generalized architectural style categories have been identified to describe the architectural heritage of the City: Spanish Colonial, Victorian, Spanish Eclectic, Craftsman, Main Street or Traditional American Commercial, Period Styles, and Post-World War II. The local mixture of styles reflects the desire of early San Luis Obispo residents and business owners to emulate the architectural styles prevalent in larger urban areas in the United States — styles which were themselves influenced by historic European architectural styles. In San Luis Obispo, most American architectural styles are present in large and small versions. Some are camouflaged by out-of-character additions or remodels; others represent a combination of styles adapted to the budgets, materials, skills and design preferences prevalent in San Luis Obispo during the building's period of construction (vernacular design). Thus, the architectural renderings below show styles as they should look in a traditional sense, and not all architectural elements will be present in a historic building of that style. To preserve the integrity and value of historic buildings, maintenance, repairs, remodels or additions should preserve or closely match "character-defining" architectural elements of that style, and not introduce extraneous or incompatible architectural features. Spanish Colonial or Adobe Spanish Colonial style adobes were the first permanent structures in San Luis Obispo, beginning with the Mission from which the town derived its name. Construction of the Mission began in 1772, but it was not until the early 19`h century that adobe buildings became common. From the 1820s to the mid-1800s, the predominate type of structure was of adobe, and in a style characterized by small, single-story structures, thick adobe walls, low sloping tile roofs and wood detailing. These early Spanish Colonial Style buildings, also referred to as simply "Adobe" style buildings, did not survive, but a few good examples from the mid- to late 1800s remain, such as the historic Rodriguez Adobe and the Rosa Butron Adobe. Adobe refers not only to the building type or style, but also to the type of construction. Adobe structures must, by definition,be built(at least partially) with adobe bricks—large,unfired bricks made with clay-type soil mixed with straw as a binder. The unreinforced adobe walls typically vary from one and one-half to six feet thick, resting on a dirt or rock foundation. Roofs are typically tile or wood shingle, resting on heavy wooden roof timbers. Door and window openings are normally surrounded by heavy timbers, often with a prominent timber lintel above window and door openings. Also, there are often arches and porches. If there is a second story it usually has a balcony with railings, a variation often referred to as the "Monterey Style." Of the remaining adobes in and around San Luis Obispo, most were built in the second half of the 1800s. Many were altered through the years with the addition of wood siding, composition -21 - PH2-187 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 roofing, and exterior finishes that in some cases, obscured the adobe structure beneath. Clapboard siding was commonly used to protect adobe blocks from weathering, or to create a more stylish, ornamental appearance. In some cases, adobes were covered with a stucco or plaster finish. Low 1,gMN6 71Le, 609,�, 'NMMN 96W Or- HAAT („bt<5 TIM.Et;-5 A _ties Ln OGgdS AR70E 0R0c6 wtTR .�GfEtt1N� f'LA5TBF- t VANPW f WW o�uirrs Examples of this style:,, Sauer/Adams Adobe, 964,Chorro St The Murray Adobe,474 Monterey St- The t The Hays/Lattimec Adobe at 642 Monterey. � t -22 - PH2-188 - Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Victorian What is generally known as "Victorian style" actually refers to a constellation of styles popular during the 1860s to the early 1900s. Common to this architectural style are examples of European interpretations of classical architecture, including such styles as Gothic Revival, Stick and Eastlake, Queen Anne and Folk Victorian. Many houses within the Old Town and Downtown Historic Districts fall into this general category, often incorporating elements from different styles. This architectural style represents the more ornate,,higher quality wood frame structures built between the late 1800s and the mid-1920s. Characteristic features include: -symmetrically arranged,double-hung windows -diamond shaped roof shingles -oval or narrow,tall windows highly detailed ornamentalelements -turret and cupola roofs prominent,;wood steps and porch -shingle fagade or roof gable ends -post pier foundation -steep gable or hip roofs -raised foundations T{lR.tEP kU7 CVPALA Fila",-t.i= �A7f'a �Jj .__...._..,5'tbtM1U''•"f'?dCAL-WFOW, 5rrarncRlcAc-�. -"" ,... Cb1C�E-r�r�ExtEFIOF. _ A9fbVnETf�k'kt�PNS1� � �® _ i'RN�N/S � r r X-c:0VLA?tVF ML_IGATIy '---i R�M:NE}1T-S E 1r3RGU5 3fAG=GYM SYf1:Ya:Ewf.}.Y -� _ CCNCfEG P6iGYt W i?M .�;X=NAMGEti'Ai- �LsxldPN i-..._—_-_• .' ''� Moe 3IEN{ s Examples of this style:' The Erickson House at 687 Islay Street The Righetti House, 1314 Palm Street The Stanton House, 752 Buchon Street -23 - PH2-189 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Folk Victorian A Victorian style characterized by simple housing forms with less elaborate detailing than other Victorian houses. Detailing is located primarily along the porch and cornice line. Folk Victorian houses often borrow detailing from Queen Anne and Italianate styles. Characteristic features include: -symmetrically arranged, double-hung windows -diamond shapedroof shingles -oval or narrow, tall windows -prominent wood steps and porch -shingle fagade or roof gable ends -post pier:foundation -steep gable or hip roofs -raised foundations 'I - 1 q-W r` r f i _ t _ t Fro&%&VeN .1Y1RE At*ARC wiuctas f EL'�G,4 Ptbr FlEi.,"Vf* PRb30A9t(thl Examples of this`style1includ`e- 156 Palm Street 855 Toro Street. -24- PH2-190 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Colonial RevivaUNeoclassical The Colonial Revival style refers to a revival style popular in the early twentieth century that was inspired by the early houses of the Atlantic seaboard. Compared to the highly detailed ornamental elements and asymmetry that defined the Victorian styles, Colonial Revival buildings are symmetrical and relatively austere. Colonial Revival buildings are based on Georgian, Federal, and Dutch Colonial styles and are often fused with Neoclassical decorative elements such as classical porch columns. Closely related to the Colonial Revival style, the Neoclassical style'was a popular style in San Luis Obispo from 1900 to the 1920s. Neoclassical style encompasses..,both the Classic Box and the Neoclassic Rowhouse. "Rowhouse" as used here refers to detached.houses often seen in a row. Characteristic features include: -hipped or gambrel roof -raised wood porch with free-standing columns -symmetrical -dormer windows' carTj e� Dpc PAy,.M(.LeA ypMMETNChL oR hCCf%V_ WWW'W TD /T-.... Piht-h6cEA tMt.+.c••t�iic� 5l'P�T'f.Is-5PC / TO 9fFSfsT J MTP Cjzw xtflTS - WRMEF � rr �! �J� • 411 4 Y 5u!PWR6.i WITR - EtAiUflLLtf#!11ei1"(d I i�6 SFk7fl'CY�f=P Cgld-C•N�uG rypy2CNrM_ PNUTEP ll1N W W5 - WCW tID111G or- Examples FExamples of this style include: 1059 Leff Street, The Bradbury Sanitarium, 743 Leff, The Bullard House, 1624 Morro Street. -25 - PH2-191 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Spanish Ecclectic After the 1915 Panama-California Exposition there was a renewed interest in Spanish Colonial architecture, and California especially began to embrace and reinterpret its Spanish and Mexican past. There are many examples of the Spanish Ecclectic or Spanish Colonial Revival style in houses, commercial and public buildings throughout California where Spanish and Mexican cultural influences were strongest. The Spanish Ecclectic style incorporated many details from different periods of Spanish architecture, and was popular in San Luis Qbiispo in the 1920s and 1930s. Characteristic features include: -barrel or flat tile roofs -parapets (trowled plaster or stucco) -flat or low-pitch roofs -arched doors and windows -tile chimney cap, vents and drains -ornamental wood and metal accents ' (Cf V[LCCr} A:L,E1.'ta----� J^-----'l>'�`WEi.Lf FLATAf .. F':.k4P C�aX PRD WtN Wdt, ----\ �� f 'I,h1`iM LGW^ VV\ / ft7c+t Rar_v . VENT6 Ve3NY5 Avf J� .. .. p t I! Examples of this stylclude: The M.F. Avila House, 1443 Osos Street The Righetti Apartments, 1305 Palm Street. PH2-192 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Craftsman By the end of the first World War and continuing through the mid-1940s, a distinctive architectural style evolved in California. Strongly influenced by the Greene brothers, a design firm based in California, Craftsman houses featured less ornate detailing than the Victorian style but still relied on extensive use of wood for structural and exterior elements. This style is sometimes referred to as"Craftsman Bungalow." Characteristic features include: -raised concrete or wood porch with tapered columns -clapboard siding or plaster exterior finish -medium to low pitch gable or hip roofs with side eave ovehangs and dormers -wide roof fascia boards -open eaves with exposed rafters, often with custom'work on rafter ends -post and pier foundations -double hung wood windows with divided lights yaw B.WE'M Tel TML6-----� �! OOEs£f3 i MZVI! \ Y--5k2t-C 8105 ' M I'N WN rtT60 tW.f- CtTcn CLflp WITH c-)%j�tcu6 et�crcr unscvy_:wrn+ tMvea WYCf. L : ---IZE7 Mo Her- '— �� C•M1�GFA W,itCFffE.qc J KNOW wax,rtaa+min tnr�o / or--rAerfro C0.oWi5—_ Examples of this style include: The Payne House, 1144 Palm Street 1068 Pismo Street 1034 Church Street. - 33 - PH2-193 �.� Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Classical or Main Street "Classical" or Main Street style of architecture covers a wide range of architectural periods. As with other architectural styles, this style represents a range of architectural influences, including Gothic, Classical Revival, Italianate, and Romanesque styles, re-interpreted to apply to American downtowns and commercial areas. Many of the City's larger commercial structures in the Downtown Historic District fall under this category. Characteristic features include` -extensive use of brick and rustic stonework - cast or wrought`iron storefront structures -highly symmetrical window and door - large glass areas.(wide bays) openings - Ned'-classic promihet t cornices -use of towers, columns, pediments and high and open ground-floor for retail sales ornate cornices or friezes .11_-'masonry side walls , -flat roof with parapets flat roofs with parapets -use of porch, balconies and/or peristyle. vee OF -,Wow Oi :!L�Te77-^--eyTma the we FLAY res GOPNICP6 OK FF�Ie8e5� / OF 0NG'•K- OF/ wf- F•u6nG BtDtl84tORt= PhP-rt PerS 9�MMefAClcti�2N.1Us'NC�7 ` Use ce WIUR%pe) 0 — I s Its Examples of this style include: The Sinsheimer Building, 849 Monterey Street The Andrews Building, 998 Monterey Street The Johnson Building 796 Higuera Street. - 34 - PH2-194 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Tudor Revival The Tudor Revival style is one of a series of revivals that gained popularity in the 1920s and 1930s in San Luis Obispo. This revival style is a reinterpretation of late Medieval English houses. Many of the houses in the Mt. Pleasanton-Anhohn area fall into this style. Detail characteristics include: Characteristic features include: -steeply gable and hipped roofs -varied eave line height -decorative half-timbering ` -plaster or brick exterior siding -wooden shingles, occasionally imitating thatch GX NIP PEP KOF HAt,F-T..MftT4 , WIY}.} I°LASTBR ..� ._ . PRE#1.6- RG�P OY� hGGENT AF'<.UNTX / ..� � �'�.�"'� .-�--�MPLEI RFL65Sf•A VP6 w4fmc' "l ! BN CRYWhYj f. UT RxR. Examples of this style include: The J.J. Dunne House at 59 Benton Way The Vard Shepherd House at 148 Broad Street PH2-195 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Modernistic The Modernistic style refers to both Art Deco and Art Moderne, sometimes called Streamline Moderne. The Modernistic style, popular in the 1930s, was more commonly applied to commercial or public buildings, although it occasionally was used in residential architecture. Relatively few Modernistic structures exist in San Luis Obispo. Characteristic features include -smooth stucco wall cladding -asymmetrical -flat roof -geometric stylized motifs in Art Deco; coping at roof line in ArtModerne SxCVM K011 vvil t WA A.�uFPK.P.--` F Ett 60mijG y \ SmmW FACno1 i �R�wa»�a '"� SrexPea wew mh<°,et;vr� -i i'LRI?ANTh!- W OW .u�P^�MITeFED PhTTHRT.', Wt}�CiTL 'fYP� i Examples of this style include: The Doton Building, 777 Higuera Street, The Fremont Theater, 1035 Monterey Street. - 36 - PH2-196 - Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.15 Architectural Style Sketchbook(from Rehab Right,City of Oakland) Queen Anne Examples: -690 Islay ® '` -1504 Broad t -793 Buchon Queen Anne Cottage Examples: ®® �� Sflflflfl Single-Story Italianate Examples: - 37- PH2-197 - Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Eastern Shingle Cottage Examples: 17 Classic Box Examples: CtA55,C BOX L-1 El i . Neo-Classic Rowhouse Examples: - 38 - PH2-198 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.2 Historic District Descriptions Figure 7: Historic Districts in San Luis Obispo city of sari Luis osispo histoizic Oistvicts 4 V min street n V OW Town -A T, '-T--- -I.AOUTH"........ Railroa ............... - 39 - PH2-199 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.2.1 Old Town Historic District Setting Established in 1987, the Old Town Historic District abuts the Railroad district on the southeast and is generally bounded by Pacific and Islay streets on the north and south, and by Santa Rosa and Beach streets on the east and west. As one of the City's oldest residential neighborhoods, Old Town was built up historically around the turn of the twentieth century, with older structures dating back to the 1880s. It consists of five subdivisions: the Mission Vineyard Tract recorded in March 1873, the Dallidet Tract recorded in 1876, the Murray Church Tract recorded in 1876, the Ingleside Homestead Tract, recorded in 1887, and the La Vina Homestead Tract, recorded in 1903. The District encompasses 86.1 acres, or 0.13 square miles. The District's prominent location, located just south of and uphill from the Downtown commercial district, made it a desirable neighborhood for the City's emerging merchant class and leading citizens. Here,residents were close to businesses and commerce,but could avoid the flooding and mud that plagued the Downtown. Home sites were laid out in regular grid patterns, with relatively wide (60 foot right-of-way) streets and 60 foot wide lots. The resultant wide streets and lot frontages allowed deep (20+ feet) setbacks and ample landscaping, reinforcing the district's prosperous image. Today the high concentration of 100 year old or older residences establishes the District's predominant architectural and visual character. Site Features and Characteristics Common site features and characteristics include: A. Prominent street yard setbacks of 20 �! feet or more B. Coach barn (garage) recessed into rear - yard C. Finish floors raised 2 3 above finish f._ grade -•• •��� ah t+�''' ,- D. Front entries oriented toward street, with prominent walk, stairs and porch E. Front building facades oriented parallel to street 1060 Pismo Street, South Elevation -40- PH2-200 n Attach L City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Architectural Character In keeping with its peak period of development between 1880 and 1920, the Old Town District has many examples of High Victorian architecture, a style popular in California during that time period that reflected prosperity, power and discriminating taste. This included several style variations, such as Queen Anne, Italianate, Stick and Gothic Revival influences, especially along the top of the hill within the district roughly aligned with Buchon Street. Other, more modest structures with simpler styles abound in other areas of the district. These buildings were first home to the burgeoning merchant class in San Luis Obispo that emerged during the turn of the century. These styles include Neo-classic Row House, Folk Victorian, and Craftsman Bungalow, with many homes borrowing architectural details from several styles. Most of the houses in this district were designed and constructed by the homes' fust occupants or by local builders and were influenced by architectural pattern books of the time period. The shared first story porches along Pismo Street are a good example of a common design feature linking buildings. Predominant architectural features include: A. Two- and rarely three-story houses B. Mostly gable and hip roof types C. Highly ornamented roof features, including prominent fascias, ,r bargeboards, gable end treatments, 1 decorative shingles,prominent r7 C>' pediments or cornices ��'} �r D. Traditional fenestration, such as double-hung, wood sash windows, divided light windows, ornamental front doors,wood screen doors ~' E. Painted wood surface material, including siding and decorative moldings 1543 Morro Street, East Elevation Although many of the buildings were built at separate times, the pattern,rhythm and repetition of common design elements or detailing of historic building facades along Old Town streets creates a prevailing theme and character for the district. Individually Contributing Elements in the h X Old Town District Some buildings within the bounds of the Old Town District, constructed outside of the period of significance for the district, 1880- 1920, do not share the elements outlined in the above description, but have achieved M.F. Avila House, 1443 Osos Street, East Elevation PH2-201 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 historical significance on their own and therefore individually contribute to the historic character of San Luis Obispo. The M.F. Avila House at 1443 Osos Street is an example of a Spanish Revival style building built in the late 1920s that has been placed on the City's Master List as a significant resource, in this case for its craftsmanship as well as its association with a historically significant local person. St. Stephens Episcopal Church at 1344 Nipomo Street built in 1873 is an example of Carpenter Gothic style. The fust Episcopal church in San Luis Obispo County, St. Stephens is historically significant both its architecture and its association with the pioneer period of San Luis Obispo. Non-Contributing Elements in the Old Town District Non-contributing buildings are those buildings that both do not meet the criteria outlined above and have not achieved historical significance. Most of the contemporary buildings in the district fall into this category. Non-contributing architectural styles, , materials or site features include: A. Contemporary stucco or other material exterior siding B. Flat or extremely low pitched roof a;41 C. Aluminum sliding windows r r- � �'• D. Rectilinear, "boxy" shape or very W � horizontal massing E. Unarticulated wall surfaces The Vista Grande Apartments, 1415 Morro Street, East Elevation. -42 - PH2-202 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 r.� .. l i ilii dA� y FQ �'•. ".l1µ y �. i t H 1059 Leff Street; Biddle House, 559 Pismo Street; 1624, 1636, 1642 Morro Street; and Pismo Buchon Alley from Santa Rosa Street -43 - PH2-203 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 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 (1850x- 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 o . Common site features and characteristics include: A. Buildings located at back of sidewalk - with zero street and side setbacks f B. Finish floors at grade C. Recessed front entries oriented toward J the street D. Front facades oriented toward the 1 street - -� E. Trees placed at regular intervals along ` the street 721, 717 and 715 Higuera Street, North Architectural Character Elevation 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 -44 - PH2-2®4 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 buildings were designed and built by local builders, including the Maino family, John Chapek, 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 JUI — ) 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 fagade Smith Building and Union H. Use of awnings, historic signs, second-story Hardware Building, 1119 and overhangs and canopies 1129 Garden Street, East I. Use of transom windows above storefronts Elevation 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. k 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 i ' = '. remaining Pioneer False front buildings. The Golden State _ Doton Building, 777 Higuera Street, North Elevation -45 - PH2-2®5 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Creamery building at 570 Higuera is historically significant to San Luis Obispo for its association with the 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, iia �o materials or site features include: _ A. Buildings setback from street or side L r=- C7- property lines II a B. Building height, form or massing ��- which contrasts markedly with the prevailing 2-3 story pattern racy C. Wood, metal or other contemporary _ material siding, or "faux" ILL architectural materials or features. D. Asymmetrical arrangement of doors and windows 1010 Nipomo Street, South and West Elevations 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 191h 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 ~ d fences at sidewalk B. Coach barn (garage) recessed into rear yam ' C. Front entries oriented toward the street - with prominent porch and steps y } D. Front facades oriented toward the street 756 Palm Street, South Elevation -46 - IPH2-2®6 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 The architectural styles in the residential area of the Downtown district are varied and represent several different periods of development in San Luis Obispo. The oldest, vernacular Adobe, dates back the early pioneer period. The Rosa Butr6n 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 o' . C. Traditional fenestration, such as f .. double-hung, wood sash windows, r ornamental front doors wood screen 6'` t , 00b,� »� doors D. Painted wood or smooth stucco t siding. 469 Dana Street, North Elevation -47 - PH2-207 i Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 LJ ��. '—�` l•7 .. � ._��..,,�_ o xt.1. l te e 1 �` 5� !•' �—' � fes•— �v� t� I. MA (pA �, d C iY ' a c.,�`Qoe awoo o ob Murray Adobe, 474 Monterey Street;Anderson House, 532 Dana Street; Hotel Wineman, 849 Higuera Street; 762 Higuera Street -48 - FH2-2®8 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.2.3 Chinatown Setting The Chinatown Historic District was established in 1995 to recognize the important contributions of the Chinese community to the City's history and development. As originally developed, Chinatown is an enclave within the Downtown Historic District, and extends one block along both sides of Palm Street between Chorro and Morro Streets. Chinese immigrants arrived in San Luis Obispo in the 1870s and were instrumental in the construction of many transportation projects, including the Pacific Coastal Railroad (1874), the Paso-Cambria Road (now Highway 46) (1876), and sections of the Southern Pacific Railroad.(1886-1894),as well as providing other goods and services for the community. The Chinatown Historic District comprises a small part of the City's original subdivision, the Town of San Luis Obispo, recorded in 1878. It is a very small historic district with an area of 4.4 acres and has 11 designated resources including one listed on the National Register of Historic Places (Ah Louis Store). The 800 block of Palm Street was the residential, cultural and commercial center for San Luis Obispo's Chinese citizens, beginning in the late 19`h century and lasting for around 70 years. The surviving structures span the district's period of significance, 1884-1945. Although many of the original wood structures in Chinatown were demolished in the 1950s to make room for public parking, the City established a historic district to recognize and preserve the area's remaining historic features. Site Features and Characteristics Common site features/characteristics include: A. Buildings located at back of public sidewalks with zero setbacks B. Finish floors at grade level. �T l ( { C. Recessed front entries oriented toward the street _ D. Front facades oriented parallel and facing the street E. Trees placed at regular intervals along the street 798 Palm St, South and East Elevations Architectural Character Given the limited area of the Chinatown District and the small number of contributing buildings it contains, it is difficult to isolate features within the district that are unique to and separate from -49 - PH2-2®9 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 the adjoining Downtown Historic District. See Downtown Historic Description for general architectural features. Only four buildings along Palm Street have a historical association with Chinese-owned businesses and retain unifying architectural details: the Shanghai Low Restaurant at 861 Palm Street, the Mee Heng Low Restaurant at 815 Palm Street, Ah Louis Store at 800 and Chongs Candy Store at 798 Palm Street. Architectural details specific to Chinatown: - A. Historic signs with Chinese imagery or characters B. Second story overhang C. Balconies with wood or metal railings J D. Use of brick, rile or stucco and bright J exterior colors. , E. Prominent use of neon for the buildings and signs constructed in the 1940s. F. Rectilinear building forms, predominately with parapet roofs and vertically oriented windows on ground 861 Palm, North Elevation and upper floors. G. Use of roof and projecting signs using Chinese style graphics. Individually Contributing Elements in the Chinatown District QL,„ cy a Not all historic resources in the Chinatown Historic District were built during the ' District's period of significance. These buildings were constructed outside of the period of significance of 1890-1940, -" 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. Sauer/Adams Adobe, 964 Chorro Street, An example is the Sauer/Adams Adobe at West Elevation 964 Chorro, a rare two-story wood-covered adobe building built in the 1830s. The Sauer-Adams Adobe is significant for its association with the Mexican era development of San Luis Obispo as well as for the rarity of its two-story, "Monterey Style" design, one of the few remaining of this type in San Luis Obispo County. - 50 - PH2-2 1 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Non-Contributing Elements in Chinatown Non -contributing structures are those that both do not meet the criteria outlined above and have not achieved historical significance. Due to its small size and the 1950s demolition of much of the original Chinatown structures, the remaining historic character of Chinatown is especially vulnerable to loss through demolition or incompatible alteration or development. Non-Contributing architectural styles, materials or site features include: A. Buildings set back from street or side property lines B. Building height, form or massing which greatly contrasts with the prevailing one and two story pattern - °u`A� C. Raised, non-recessed or offset entrances to buildings i D. Prominent use of metal, glass, concrete block masonry or other _ exterior siding materials which _ visually contrast with the District's signature architectural elements. E. Use of architectural forms or details that contrast sharply with or visually 817 Palm, South-East Elevation detract from the District's signature architectural elements. -51 - PH2-2 1 1 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 rn '1 b i _ t CryfirI 1 'J 19 ,1 _ 817, 815 and 811 Palm Street; close tip historic Chop Suey sign at 861 Palm Street;Ah Louis Store 800 Palm Street; close tip of the and Chinese characters at 815 Palm Street �*s - 52 - PH2-B 12 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.2.4 Mill Street Historic District Setting Established in 1987, the Mill Street Historic District is a residential neighborhood bounded by Pepper and Toro Streets on the east and west, and Peach and Palm Streets on the north and south. The Mill Street District is part of one subdivision, The Town of San Luis Obispo, recorded in 1878, although the area informally has been referred to as Fremont Heights. For its land area, Mill Street Historic District has the highest concentration of historic structures of the City's five Historic districts. It is a relatively small district, with an area of 20 acres or 0.03125 square miles,and as of January of 2010 had 84 listed historic properties. The Mill Street district was developed at the turn of the 20`h century, with the majority of the existing buildings dating from the 1900s to 1920s, the district's primary period of historical and architectural significance. The district was developed on high ground with originally very wide (100 ft) lots in response to both the seasonal flooding and fires that plagued early development in San Luis Obispo. A few of these wide lots remain in the 1300 block of both Mill Street and Palm Street,but the majority of them were later re-subdivided into 50-60 foot wide lots. Site Features and Characteristics Common site features and characteristics include: A. Trees spaced at regular intervals along �- the street(especially on Mill Street) B. Distinctive Camphor Trees lining both ' ;?.: . > sides of Mill Street between Johnson and ` Pepper, a key entry corridor for the district r•'yrs^ ' .k:w C. Consistent street yard setbacks of 20 feet vjjb, or more D. Coach barns (garages) recessed into rear yb �- � ,zi + E. Finish floors raised 2-3 above finish grade .� F. Front entries oriented toward street, with — — prominent walk, stairs and entry porches. -� G. Front building facades oriented parallel 1344 Mill Street, South Elevation to street Architectural Character Developed during a population boom in San Luis Obispo circa 1900s-1920s, the district's residential architectural styles reflect the prosperity of its residents. While older and more elaborate residences are located on the 1300 block of both Palm and Mill Streets, the majority of - 53 - PH2-213 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 historic homes were more modest residences. The close proximity to the court house meant that Mill Street was home to many county employees, including county assessors, attorneys, and county clerks. The Mill Street District encompasses many different architectural styles, including revival styles popular at the turn of the twentieth century. These styles include Neo-classic Row House, Victorian (with elements of Gothic Revival, Queen Anne, Stick and Eastern Shingle), Tudor Revival, Mission Revival, and Craftsman Bungalow, with many homes borrowing architectural details from more than one style. Most buildings in this district were built by local builders, including E.D. Bray and James Maino and were influenced by architectural pattern books of the time period. 7. Predominant architectural features include: A. One- and occasionally two-story houses B. Mostly gable and hip roof types C. Traditional fenestration, such as Jdouble-hung, wood sash windows, d, ornamental front doors, wood screen doors �s6 m„ D. Ornamental roof features, including a: Y' prominent fascias,bargeboards, prominent pediments or cornices E. Painted wood or stucco surface material, including siding and molding 1264 and 1270 Palm Street, South Elevation Individually Contributing Elements in the Mill Street District Not all historic resources in the Mill Street _ n Historic District were built during the : district's period of significance. Those buildings date from the late 1800s, generally t l do not exhibit the signature architectural elements described above, but do contribute to the historic character of San Luis Obispo or 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 Buckley House at 777 Johnson Avenue is a converted carriage 777 Johnson Avenue, East Elevation house built in the 1880s and is significant for its design, specifically the board and batten siding, of which there very few examples are left in the City. The Shipsey House at 1266 Mill Street, a National Register property, is an example of - 54 - ?H2-2 1 4 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Eastern Stick and significant for both its architectural style and its association with William Shipsey, attorney and mayor of San Luis Obispo from 1898 to 1901. Non-Contributing Elements in the Mill Street District 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. Aluminum sliding windows B. Rectilinear, "boxy"shape C. Metal or other contemporary material ` siding, or "faux" architectural -- materials or features. D. Unarticulated wall surfaces E. Non-recessed or offset street entries to buildings _, eo 1243 Mill Street, North Elevation - 55 - PH2-2 1 5 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 �Il o 1262 Mill Street; 1261 Mill Street; 1143, 1137 and 1127 Peach Street; Righetti House, 1314 Palm Street - 56- IM-216 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.2.5 Railroad Historic District Setting Established in 1998, the Railroad Historic District boundaries follow the historic boundaries of the Southem Pacific rail yard. The district is bounded by railroad right-of-way on the east, from Johnson Avenue on the north to Orcutt Road on the south, on the northwest generally by Leff Street, and on the west by Broad Street and the railroad right-of-way. The district includes a residential and commercial area on the west side of the tracks, and abuts the Old Town Historic District along its northwest and north boundary. The Southern Pacific (or "Espee") standard gauge railroad arrived in San Luis Obispo on May 4`h, 1894. By 1901, San Luis Obispo was a part of the completed railroad line from San Francisco to Los Angeles, and served as the main layover and maintenance yard for the coastal route. The SP railroad operated in tandem with the older, narrow gauge railroad, the Pacific Coast Railway, or PCR. The PCR was a regional railway with a station on South and Higuera - the development of a spur line along South connected the PCR with the Southem Pacific rail yard. The Railroad District is a part of nine older subdivisions: the Beebee Phillips Tract recorded in 1874, Fairview Addition recorded in 1887, Haskins Tract recorded in 1887, Ingleside Homestead Tract recorded in 1887, the McBride Tract recorded in 1887, the Loomis Addition recorded in 1887, Maymont Addition recorded in 1888, Loomis and Osgood Re-subdivision recorded in 1894 and the Imperial Addition recorded in 1897. The Railroad District has an area of 80.7 acres or 0.126 square miles and 38 designated historic structures. Development in the Railroad Historic District corresponded to the development of the Southern Pacific Railroad yard. Commercial and residential buildings were constructed to accommodate railway workers, freight and passengers, and employees of Southern Pacific and related businesses. Surviving historic structures date from 1894 to 1945, corresponding with the peak activity of the rail yard and the district's period of significance, and most were constructed from 1894 to 1920. The buildings were laid out in a fairly regular grid near the station, accommodating the curve of the rail line and the diagonal path of Santa Barbara. South of Upham the lots are much larger to accommodate the railroad structures. Site Features and Characteristics Common site features/characteristics include: -- � A. Commercial buildings located at ` 1i back of sidewalk with zero street I f setbacks - B. Front building facades oriented { ' parallel to street ' C. Finish floors at grade r . , . D. Recessed front entries oriented toward the street - Channel Commercial Company, 1880 - 57 - Santa Barbara Avenue, West Elevation PH2-217 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Architectural Character The predominant architectural style within the Railroad Historic District is Railroad Vernacular. Railroad Vernacular is characterized by simplicity of form and detailing, with wood, brick or plaster siding, and is a style favored by railroad construction for its easy construction. As a practical vernacular style it also incorporates other elements of other architectural styles including Classical Revival and Mission Revival. Although many of the buildings within the district were not constructed by the railroad, their use of Railroad Vernacular styles design reflects the unifying focus of the district. The buildings in the Railroad District are a mix of simple, yet elegant houses and practical, industrial-oriented commercial buildings,which create a distinctive neighborhood. The architectural character and important historical elements are described in the Railroad District Plan. The Plan includes design guidelines that illustrate architecturally compatible design treatments for new development. Predominant architectural details include: f I A. One and two-story buildings e predominate 4—. 1� o B. Gable and some hip roof types of low 2 to medium pitch, occasionally with parapets C. Predominantly painted wood siding, with some masonry or smooth plaster F wall siding D. Traditional fenestration, such as double-hung, wood sash windows, and fixed divided light windows 1901 Santa Barbara, East Elevation E. Rectilinear massing, with equal or lesser volume on second floor F. Simple detailing often along the roof line including brackets Tribune Republic Building, east elevation .'" 1263 Santa Barbara Avenue g'� 0 - V -ss - P H 2-218 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Individually Contributing Elements in the Railroad District Not all designated historic resources in the Railroad Historic District were built during the District's period of significance, 1894-1945. These buildings were constructed outside of the period of significance, 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 Tribune Republic Building, built in 1873, is believed to be the earliest surviving wood commercial building in San Luis Obispo and has been placed on the City's Master List and the National Register of Historic Places for its association with the City's first newspaper. Non-Contributing Elements in the Railroad District 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. Building height, form, scale or massing which contrasts markedly with the district's prevailing 1 and 2- -_ story buildings B. Metal, contemporary stucco or other contemporary siding, including "faux" architectural details or features that contrast markedly with traditional railroad vernacular forms, details and Modern addition to 1880 Santa Barbara, materials West Elevation C. Asymmetrical arrangement of doors or windows D. Non-recessed or offset street entries to buildings Residential Although the majority of the Railroad District is commercial, there is a small residential area within it which runs along Church Street and Santa Barbara Avenue from Osos to Upham Streets. This area was home to many railroad employees and their families. - 59 - IPH2-2 1 9 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Site features and characteristics-Residential: A. Residential buildings with modest street setbacks of 10 feet B. Coach barn (garage) recessed into rear yard ► P!V C. Front building facades oriented parallel to street. D. Finish floors raised 2-3 above finish grade E. Front entries oriented toward street, with prominent walk, stairs and porch The houses within the residential district are modest, which reflects their early working class 1034 Church St, South Elevation occupants. Within the district are two hotels, the Call/Parkview Hotel at 1703 Santa Barbara and the Park/Reidy Hotel at 1815 Osos which once served as boarding houses for railroad workers. These vernacular buildings have decorative elements from several styles including Craftsman Bungalow, Classical Revival and Folk Victorian. Architectural features-Residential: A. One and two story buildings B. Gable and some hip roof types of low to medium pitch C. Painted wood surface material, occasionally smooth stucco wall siding D. Traditional fenestration, such as double-hung, wood sash windows, ornamental front doors, wood screen doors 1724 Osos, East Elevation - 60 - PH2-220 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 r _ --J}_f If a JLL 1J. Vli�l - ' __ r • �� I ��\ M �tfQ _ O Southern Pacific Railroad Depot, 1011 Railroad Avenue;Park/Reidy Hotel 1815 Osos Street; Southern Pacific Railroad Warehouse,1940 Santa Barbara Avenue; and house located at 1789 Santa Barbara Avenue. -61 - PH2-22 1 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.3 Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources, Updated March 24,2010 Address District or Neighborhood Date listed 1428 Beach Old Town 02/03/87 1520 Beach Old Town 02/03/87 48 Benton Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 1342 Breck East Railroad Area 02/20/07 156 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 08/18/98 207 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 08/18/98 236 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 282 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 301 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 08/18/98 368 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 381 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 08/18/98 397 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 453 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 456 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 457 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 464 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 08/18/98 472 Broad Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 08/18/98 967 Broad Downtown 08/16/83 975 Broad Downtown 08/16/83 1019-23 Broad Downtown 08/16/83 1405 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1408-10 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1418 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1421 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1427 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1505 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1511-13 Broad Old Town 08/16/83. 1519 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1531 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1536 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 1544 Broad Old Town 08/16/83 530 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 533 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 540 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 549 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 575 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 578 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 586-88 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 594 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 641 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 - 62 - PH2-222 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 651 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 654 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 658 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 661 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 665 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 670 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 673 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 676-80 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 677 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 685 Buchon Old Town 08/16/83 722 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 770 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 871 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 880 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 885 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 889 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 966 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 973 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 977 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1015 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1035 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1045 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1051 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1057 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1067 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1110 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1118 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1124 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1126 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1132 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1135 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1137 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1144 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1145 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1151 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1152 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1157 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1160 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1165 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1170 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1175 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1176 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1182 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1189 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 1190 Buchon Old Town 02/03/87 -63 - PH2-223 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 742 Center Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 755 Center Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 01/05/99 30 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 45 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 01/05/99 59 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 63 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 69 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 115 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 128 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 01/05/99 158 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 01/05/99 173 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 183 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 190 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 211 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 360 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 01/05/99 368 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 05/04/99 369 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 395 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 398 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 431 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 05/04/99 453 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 476 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 482 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 487 Chorro Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 05/04/99 940-42 Chorro Downtown 08/16/83 950 Chorro Chinatown 02/03/87 970 Chorro Downtown 08/16/83 978-80 Chorro Downtown 08/16/83 984 Chorro Downtown 08/16/83 1023 Chorro Downtown 02/03/87 1111 Chorro Downtown 02/03/87 1119 Chorro Downtown 02/03/87 1534 Chorro Old Town 02/03/87 1603 Chorro Old Town 02/03/87 882 Church Old Town 02/03/87 888 Church Old Town 02/03/87 893 Church Old Town 02/03/87 971 Church Railroad 02/03/87 972 Church Old Town 02/03/87 1010 Church Railroad 02/03/87 1018 Church Railroad 02/03/87 1022 Church Railroad 02/03/87 1028 Church Railroad 02/03/87 1034 Church Railroad 02/03/87 465 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 -64- PH2-224 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 469 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 507/515 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 522 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 525 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 531 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 543 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 547 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 577 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 579 Dana Downtown 02/03/87 1013 Ella East Railroad 02/20/07 1015 Ella East Railroad 02/20/07 1240 Ella East Railroad 02/20/07 1255 Ella East Railroad 02/20/07 1265 Ella East Railroad 02/20/07 1345 Ella#17 East Railroad 02/20/07 1672 Fairview East Railroad 02/20/07 1110 Garden Downtown 02/03/87 1408 Garden Old Town 02/03/87 1421 Garden Old Town 02/03/87 1425 Garden Old Town 02/03/87 1536 Garden Old Town 02/03/87 1043 George East Railroad 02/20/07 1127 George East Railroad 02/20/07 1205 George East Railroad 02/20/07 1215 George East Railroad 02/20/07 1234 George East Railroad 02/20/07 1236 George East Railroad 02/20/07 673 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 685 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 686 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 698 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 699 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 705 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 715 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 717 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 718-20 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 723 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 725 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 728 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 733 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 746 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 751 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 760-70 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 778 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 779-87 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 - 65 - PH2-225 - Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 782-90 Higuera Downtown 08/16/83 858 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 970 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 995 Higuera Downtown 02/03/87 491 Hill Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 07/09/99 1136 Iris East Railroad 02/20/07 1139 Iris East Railroad 02/20/07 1140 Iris East Railroad 02/20/07 1204 Iris East Railroad 02/20/07 454 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 462 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 468 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 481 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 482 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 530 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 539 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 542 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 550 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 559 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 567 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 572 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 574 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 575 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 641 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 654 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 655 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 662 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 663 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 675 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 676 Islay Old Town 08/16/83 727 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 744 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 752 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 753 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 770 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 827 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 862 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 868/870 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 878 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 879 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 893 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 974 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 976 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 978 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 980 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 -66 - PH2-226 - Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1005 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1011 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1017 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1022 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1029 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1034 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1035 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1040 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1044 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1045 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1053 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1061 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1071 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1117 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1120 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 1121 Islay Old Town 02/03/87 772 Johnson Mill 08/16/83 773 Johnson Mill 08/16/83 879 Johnson Mill 02/03/87 949 Johnson Mill 02/03/87 955 Johnson Mill 02/03/87 957 Johnson Mill 02/03/87 1408 Johnson Johnson Avenue 10/07/97 1985 Johnson East Railroad 02/20/07 2105 Johnson East Railroad 02/20/07 968 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 976 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1020 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1027 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1028 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1035 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1045 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1051 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 1059 Leff Old Town 02/03/87 754 Lincoln Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 755 Lincoln Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 762 Lincoln Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 05/04/99 785 Lincoln Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 05/04/99 795 Lincoln Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 412 Marsh none 01/05/99 742 Marsh Downtown 02/03/87 778 Marsh Downtown 02/03/87 704 Meinecke Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 706 Meinecke Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 724 Meinecke Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 -67- PH2-227 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 732 Meinecke Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 770 Meinecke Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 780 Meinecke Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 794 Meinecke Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 804 Meinecke Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 05/04/99 1162 Mill Mill 02/03/87 1165 Mill Mill 02/03/87 1168 Mill Mill 02/03/87 1202 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1214 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1217 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1220 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1234 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1237 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1244 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1253 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1261 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1262 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1265 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1307 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1318 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1333 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1343 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1344 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1350 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1351-63 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1360 Mill Mill 08/16/83 1367 Mill Mill 08/16/83 249 Mission Lane Mt. Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 728 Mission Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 734 Mission Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 752 Mission Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 610 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 614 Monterey Downtown 02/03/87 658 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 667 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 679 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 840 Monterey Downtown 02/03/87 857 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 861-63 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 886 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 894 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 895 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 956 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 974-82 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 -68 - PH2-228 �- Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1005 Monterey Downtown 08/16/83 1009 Monterey Downtown 02/03/87 879 Morro Downtown 02/03/87 1009 Morro Downtown 02/03/87 1336 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1346 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1428 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1436 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1444 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1512 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1520 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1527 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1528 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1535 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1536 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1543 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1544 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1604 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1615 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1720 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1727 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1729 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1731 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1814 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1821 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1829 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 1845 Morro Old Town 02/03/87 501 Mt. View Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 644 Mt. View Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 07/09/99 676 Mt. View Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 764 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 807 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 07/09/99 814 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 815 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 822 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 823 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 829 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 07/09/99 836 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 07/09/99 851 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 854 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 07/09/99 859 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 07/09/99 869 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 07/09/99 871 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 883 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 07/09/99 884 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn(Old Town) 07/09/99 - 69 - PH2-229 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 894 Murray Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 1415 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1429 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1438 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1516 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1519 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1527 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1528 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1535 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1541 Nipomo Old Town 08/16/83 1341 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1350 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1421 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1511 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1514 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1521 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1522 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1526 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1529 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1533 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1534 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1541 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1542 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1609 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1638 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1641 Osos Old Town 02/03/87 1724 Osos Railroad 02/03/87 1734 Osos Railroad 02/03/87 1740 Osos Railroad 02/03/87 1750 Osos Railroad 02/03/87 1814 Osos Railroad 02/03/87 682 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 752 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 756 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 776 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 778 Palm Chinatown 02/03/87 798 Palm Chinatown 08/16/83 811 Palm Chinatown 02/03/87 815 Palm Chinatown 02/03/87 861 Palm Chinatown 02/03/87 1014 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 1020 Palm Downtown 02/03/87 1201 Palm Mill 02/03/87 1208 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1228 Palm Mill 02/03/87 -70 - PH2-230 - Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1236 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1243 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1248 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1250 Palm Mill 02/03/87 1259 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1260 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1264 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1269 Palm Mill 02/03/87 1270 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1317 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1320 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1344 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1347 Palm Mill 02/03/87 1355 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1359 Palm Mill 02/03/87 1390 Palm Mill 08/16/83 1134 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1137 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1143 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1151 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1154 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1156 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1163 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1168 Peach Mill 08/16/83 1206 Peach Mill 02/03/87 1209 Peach Mill 08/16/83 1215 Peach Mill 08/16/83 1221 Peach Mill 08/16/83 861 Pepper Mill 08/16/83 571 Pismo Old Town 08/16/83 657 Pismo Old Town 08/16/83 660 Pismo Old Town 08/16/83 663 Pismo Old Town 08/16/83 683 Pismo Old Town 08/16/83 729 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 954 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 956 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 958 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 969 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 977 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 979 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 985 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1042 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1050 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1060 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 - 71 - PH2-231 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1068 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1109 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1126 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1133 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1145 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1147 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1152 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1155 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1160 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1163 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1166 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1171 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1176 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1179 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1185 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1190 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 1193 Pismo Old Town 02/03/87 907 Rachel East Railroad 02/20/07 2056 Rachel East Railroad 02/20/07 1020 Railroad Railroad 02/03/87 747 Rougeot Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 750 Rougeot Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 07/09/99 762 Rougeot Mt. Pleasanton/Anhohn 07/09/99 783 Rougeot Mt. Pleasanton/Anholm 07/09/99 1908 Ruth East Railroad 02/20/07 1749 Santa Barbara Railroad 02/03/87 1789 Santa Barbara Railroad 02/03/87 1901 Santa Barbara Railroad 02/03/87 1414 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1426 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1504 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1512 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1515 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1520 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1521 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1530 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1606 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1617 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1624 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1627 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1633 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1705 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1707 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1720 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 1728 Santa Rosa Old Town 02/03/87 - 72 - PH2-232 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 1730 Santa Rosa Railroad 02/03/87 1731 Santa Rosa Railroad 02/03/87 2006 Swazey East Railroad 02/20/07 2033 Swazey East Railroad 02/20/07 675 Toro Mill 08/16/83 760 Toro Mill 08/16/83 762 Toro Mill 08/16/83 770 Toro Mill 08/16/83 771 Toro Mill 08/16/83 778 Toro Mill 08/16/83 780 Toro Mill 08/16/83 855 Toro Mill 08/16/83 858 Toro Mill 08/16/83 862 Toro Mill 08/16/83 865 Toro Mill 08/16/83 872 Toro Mill 08/16/83 898 Toro Mill 08/16/83 1423 Toro Old Town 02/03/87 875 Upham Railroad 02/03/87 750 Woodbridge Little Italy 10/02/2001 756 Woodbridge Little Italy 10/02/2001 762 Woodbrige Little Italy 10/02/2001 -73 - PH2-233 - Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.4 Master List of Historic Resources, updated March 24, 2010 *Serial Number: 0000 00 X Sequential National Register Rating Type of Structure Type of Structure Number 1 =Already placed on National Register R—Residential 2=Determined eligible for the National Register C=Commercial 3=Eligible for the National Register O=Other 4=Potentially eligible for the National Register 5=Not eligible for the National Register but locally significant Address Historic Name Zone District Serial No.* 1451 ANDREWS ANDREWS ADOBE R-1-S 0001-03R 59 BENTON WAY J.J.DUNNE HOUSE R-1 0165-05R 148 BROAD BRAZIL HOUSE R-1 0002-04R 963 BROAD MANDERSCHEID HOUSE R-3-H Downtown 0003-04R 1345 BROAD ANDERSON HOUSE O-H Old Town 0004-04R 1411 BROAD MAIER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0005-04R 1426 BROAD DUTTON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0006-04R 1435 BROAD MILLER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0007-04R 1445 BROAD FALKENSTEIN HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0008-04R 1504 BROAD VETTERLINE HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0009-03R 1510 BROAD MCKENNON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0010-04R 1516 BROAD RENETZKY HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0011-04R 1530 BROAD TUCKER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0012-04R 714 BUCHON MYRON ANGEL HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0013-01R 726 BUCHON JESSIE WRIGHT MATERNITY HOME R-2-H Old Town 0014-04R 743 BUCHON BRADBURY SANITARIUM R-2-H Old Town 0015-04R 745 BUCHON BRADBURY HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0016-04R 751 BUCHON KAISER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0017-04R 752 BUCHON STANTON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0018-04R 771 BUCHON BREW HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0019-04R 779 BUCHON UPHAM HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0020-04R 785 BUCHON MARSHALL HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0021-04R 793 BUCHON CROCKER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0022-03R 794 BUCHON FITZGERALD HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0023-03R 850 BUCHON CLARK/NORTON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0024-04R 860 BUCHON HOURIHAN HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0025-04R 890 BUCHON PAULSON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0026-04R 896 BUCHON CROSSETT HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0027-04R 116 CHORRO MICHAEL C.HALPIN HOUSE R-1 0176-05R 375 CHORRO CHRIS ANHOLM HOUSE R-1 0175-05R 868 CHORRO MANCILLA/FREITAS ADOBE R-4 0028-03R 964 CHORRO SAUER/ADAMS ADOBE C-D-H Chinatown 0029-03R 1026 CHORRO WADE BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0100-05C 1029 CHORRO DUGHI BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0101-05C 1033 CHORRO WICKENDEN BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0102-05C 1306 CHORRO REGAN HOUSE O 0030-05R 1318 CHORRO MAZZA HOUSE O 0031-04R 1518 CHORRO BROOKS HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0032-03R 1546 CHORRO FLEUGER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0033-04R 1746 CHORRO ASTON HOUSE R-2 0034-05R - 74 - PH2-234 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Address Historic Name Zone District Serial No. 1902 CHORRO BITTICK RESIDENCE R-2 0170-05R 1907 CHORRO FINNEY HOUSE R-2 0035-05R 1953 CHORRO OLIVER HOUSE R-2 0163-05R 466 DANA ROSA BUTRON ADOBE R-3-H Downtown 0036-03R 532 DANA ANDERSON HOUSE R-3-H Downtown 0037-04R 550 DANA BARNEBERG HOUSE O-H-PD Downtown 0038-04R 1500 ETO SOLOMON FOREMAN HOUSE R-1-PD 0166-05R 1119 GARDEN UNION HARDWARE BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0103-04C 1123 GARDEN SMITH BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0104-05C 1129 GARDEN LAIRD BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0105-05C 1130 GARDEN STOVER BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0106-05C 1212 GARDEN GOLDTREE/MCCAFFREY HOUSE C-D 0039-04C 1105 GEORGE EDWARD F.BUSHNELL HOUSE R-2 0154-05R 2132 HARRIS WEILL HOUSE R-2 0040-04R 50 HIGUERA DIV.OF HIGHWAYS DIST.5 OFF. PF 0156-03C 75 HIGUERA LOOMIS FEED CO.WAREHOUSE C-S-MU 0107-05C 236 HIGUERA H.H.WAITE PLANING MILL C-S-MU 0108-05C 570 HIGUERA GOLDEN STATE CREAMERY C-D Downtown 0109-05C 719 HIGUERA GREENFIELD BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0110-05C 726 HIGUERA KLUVER CIGAR FACTORY C-D-H Downtown 0111-03C 736 HIGUERA CARRISA BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0112-04C 740 HIGUERA VOLLMER GROCERY C-D-H Downtown 0113-05C 767 HIGUERA BANK OF AMERICA BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0114-03C 777 HIGUERA DOTON BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0115-03C 796 HIGUERA JOHNSON BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0116-05C 799 HIGUERA COMMERCIAL BANK BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0117-05C 842 HIGUERA WARDEN/TOWER BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0118-04C 849 HIGUERA GOLDTREE BLOCK/HOTEL WINEMAN C-D-H Downtown 0119-05C 852 HIGUERA A.F.FITZGERALD BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0120-05C 856 HIGUERA SANDERCOCK TRANSFER BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0120-05C 3897 SO.HIGUERA LONGBONETTI RANCH M-SP 0157-04R 1100 IRIS SOUTHERN PACIFIC WATER TOWER C/OS Railroad 0153-04C 461 ISLAY ERICKSON HOUSE R-2 0041-04R 463 ISLAY FUMIGALLI HOUSE R-2 0042-05R 497 ISLAY VOLLMER HOUSE R-2 0043-05R 535 ISLAY SANDERCOCK HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0044-04R 591 ISLAY SANDERCOCK HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0045-05R 644 ISLAY DANA/PARSONS HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0046-05R 670 ISLAY FITZPATRICK HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0047-04R 687 ISLAY ERICKSON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0048-03R 690 ISLAY KIMBALL HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0049-04R 790 ISLAY JACKSON HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0050-04R 1052 ISLAY KAUFMAN HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0174-05R 777 JOHNSON BUCKLEY HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0051-05R 1720 JOHNSON THE JUDGE'S HOUSE R-2 0052-03R 2030 JOHNSON OLD SLO HIGH SCHOOL CLASSROOM R-2 0175-05R 1019-23 LEFF POST HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0053-04R 1590 LIZZIE LA LOMA DE LA NOPALERA ADOBE R-1-SP 0158-04C 100 MADONNA MADONNA INN C-T,C-T-S 0121-04C 536 MARSH JACK HOUSE C-D 0054-030 547 MARSH KAETZEL HOUSE C-D 0055-04R 774 MARSH SNYDER BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0122-04C - 75 - PH2-235 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Address FIistoric Name Zone District Serial No. 859 MARSH MASONIC TEMPLE C-D 0123-03C 893 MARSH U.S.POST OFFICE C-D 0124-05C 951 MARSH FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH C-D 0125-03C 981 MARSH FREDERICK HART BUILDING C-D 0125-03C 1117 MARSH ESQUAR HOUSE 0 0056-04R 1129 MARSH RAMAGE HOUSE 0 0057-04R 1135 MARSH SHIPMAN HOUSE 0 0058-04R 1141 MARSH THE NURSE'S HOUSE 0 0059-04R 1145 MARSH FAULKNER HOUSE O 0060-04R 1160 MARSH STOVER'S SANITARIUM O 0126-03C 1167 MARSH GRAVES HOUSE O 0061-05R 1305 MARSH REID HOUSE O 0062-05R 1266 MILL SHIPSEY HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0063-01R 1306 MILL SMITH HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0064-04R 1323 MILL LAIRD HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0172-05R 1330 MILL MUSCIO HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0065-05R 1333 MILL BURCH HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0173-05R 1424 MILL MAINO HOUSE R-2 0066-05R 1460 MILL MUGLER HOUSE R-2 0067-04R 642 MONTEREY HAYS/LATTIMER ADOBE O-H Downtown 0068-03R 664 MONTEREY DR.GEORGE B.NICHOLS HOUSE O-H Downtown 0069-04R 696 MONTEREY CARNEGIE LIBRARY PF-H Downtown 0128-030 747 MONTEREY MURRAY ADOBE PF-H Downtown 0070-030 782 MONTEREY MISSION SAN LUIS OBISPO C-D-S-H Downtown 0127-030 848 MONTEREY SAUER BAKERY C-D-H Downtown 0129-05C 849 MONTEREY SINSHEIMER BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0130-03C 868 MONTEREY MUZIO'S GROCERY C-D-H Downtown 0131-03C 955 MONTEREY ANDERSON HOTEL C-D-H Downtown 0132-05C 962 MONTEREY BRUNNER BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0133-05C 998 MONTEREY ANDREWS BUILDING C-D-H Downtown 0135-03C 1035 MONTEREY FREMONT THEATER C-D-H Downtown 0136-03C 1815 MONTEREY MONDAY CLUB C-T-S 0137-03C 2223 MONTEREY MILESTONE MOTEL INN C-T-S 0138-03C 1406 MORRO SNYDER HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0071-04R 1511 MORRO MARTHA DUNLAP HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0167-05R 1624 MORRO BULLARD HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0072-04R 1636 MORRO BAKER HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0073-04R 1642 MORRO ALBERT HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0074-04R 991 NIPOMO HARMONY CREAMERY O-H Downtown 0139-05C 1204 NIPOMO PARSONS HOUSE C-D 0075-05R 1344 NIPOMO ST.STEPHEN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH R-2-H Old Town 0141-030 1407 NIPOMO PATTON HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0076-04R 1428 NIPOMO ROGERS HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0077-05R 1446 NIPOMO NICHOLS HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0078-05R 978 OLIVE HERITAGE INN C-T 0159-05C 890 0SOS TEASS HOUSE O-H Downtown 0079-04R 976 0SOS COUNTY COURTHOUSE PF-H Downtown 0142-040 1301 0SOS FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH O 0143-030 1429 0SOS FRANK CAMPBELL MITCHELL HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0171-05R 1443 0SOS M.F.AVILA HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0080-03R 1700 0SOS ALLEN HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0081-05R 1716 0SOS HAGEMAN SANITARIUM R-3-H Old Town 0082-04R - 76 - PH2-236 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Address Historic Name Zone District Serial No. 1815 0SOS PARK/REIDY HOTEL C-R-S-H Railroad 0144-05C 863 PACIFIC ZION LUTHERAN CHURCH O 0145-04C 1106 PACIFIC KUNDERT MEDICAL BUILDING O 0146-03C 1185 PACIFIC DALLIDET ADOBE O 0083-030 800 PALM AH LOUIS STORE C-D-H Chinatown 0147-03C 990 PALM SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY HALL PF-H Downtown 0164-050 1118 PALM GREGG HOUSE O 0175-05R 1144 PALM PAYNE HOUSE O 0084-03R 1305 PALM RIGHETIT APARTMENTS R-3-H Mill Street 0085-05R 1314 PALM RIGHETTI HOUSE R-3-H Mill Street 0086-05R 71 PALOMAR SANDFORD HOUSE R-4 0087-05R 1127 PEACH J.MAINO HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0088-05C 1128 PEACH MAINO/RIGHETFI HOUSE R-2-H Mill Street 0089-04R 280 PISMO OLD GAS WORKS C-S 0148-04C 559 PISMO BIDDLE HOUSE R-3-H Old Town 0090-03R 649 PISMO MCMANUS HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0091-03R 671 PISMO LEWIN HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0092-05R 676 PISMO GREENFIELD HOUSE O-H Old Town 0093-04R 750 PISMO OLD FIRE STATION BUILDING O 0140-03C 1116 PISMO VOLLMER HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0094-04R 1123 PISMO THORNE HOUSE R-2-H Old Town 0095-05R 1341 PURPLE SAGE RODRIGUEZ ADOBE R-1-PD 0160-03C 1011 RAILROAD SOUTHERN PACIFIC DEPOT C-S-S-H Railroad 0149-04C 1021 RAILROAD SP TRANSPORTATION CO.BLDG. C-S-S-H Railroad 0168-02C 1335 ROUNDHOUSE SOUTHERN PACIFIC ROUNDHOUSE C-S-S-H Railroad 0169-02C 1499 SAN LUIS DRIVE SLO HIGH SCHOOL GYMNASIUM PF 0155-05C 1703 SANTA BARBARA CALL HOTEL R-3-H Railroad 0096-05R 1717 SANTA BARBARA WILLIAM M.DUFF HOUSE R-3-H Railroad 0161-05R 1725 SANTA BARBARA ALEXANDER GALEWSKI HOUSE R-3-H Railroad 0162-05R 1763 SANTA BARBARA TRIBUNE-REPUBLIC BUILDING R-3-H Railroad 0152-04R 1880 SANTA BARBARA CHANNEL COMMERCIAL COMPANY C-R-S-H Railroad 0151-04C 1940 SANTA BARBARA SOUTHERN PACIFIC WAREHOUSE C-S-S-H Railroad 0150-04C 2243 SANTA YNEZ FAULSTICH HOUSE R-1 0134-05R 1445 SANTA ROSA KINDERGARTEN SCHOOL PF-H Old Town 0097-040 1531 SANTA ROSA ADRIANCE COURT R-3-H Old Town 0098-05R 843 UPHAM CHAPEK HOUSE R-2 0099-05R - 77 - PH2-237 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.5 Definitions For the purposes of this chapter, certain terms, words and their derivatives shall be defined as specified herein; 1. Accessory Structure: a structure which is subordinate or incidental and directly related to a permitted use or structure on the same parcel. "Accessory structures" that include habitable space, as defined by the California Building Code, shall be no larger than 450 square feet. (Ord. 941-1(part), 1982: prior code — 9204.11 (part)) "Accessory structures" are located on the same parcel and are related to the primary structure but are subordinate or incidental, but may include structures that have achieved historic significance in their own right, as determined by the Director, Committee or Council. (see"primary structure"). 2. Adjacent: located on property which abuts the subject property on at least one point of the property line, on the same property, or located on property directly across right-of-way from subject property and able to viewed concurrently. 3. Adverse Effects: effects, impacts or actions that are detrimental or potentially detrimental to a historic resource's condition,architectural or historical integrity. 4 Alteration: change, repair, replacement,remodel,modification, or new construction to: (1) the exterior of an historic resource or adjacent building, (2) the structural elements which support the exterior walls, roof, or exterior elements of the historic resource or adjacent building, (3) other construction on a lot, or(4) character defining features of the interior of a historic resource if the structure's significance is wholly or partially based on interior features and the resource is publicly-accessible. "Alteration" does not include ordinary landscape maintenance unless the landscaping is identified as significant at the time a property is listed. "Alteration" also does not include ordinary property maintenance or repair that is exempt from a building permit or is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties. 5. Archaeological Site: those areas where archaeological resources are present and may be larger or smaller than the project site. An archaeological site may include prehistoric Native American archaeological site, Historic archaeological sites; sites or natural landscapes associated with important human events;and Native American Sacred Places and Cultural landscapes. 6. ARC: the Architectural Review Commission as appointed by the City Council. 7. California Register: California Register of Historical Resources defined in California PRC 5024.1 and in CCR Title 14 Chap 11.5, Sec 4850 et seq. as it may be amended. 8. CHC: the Cultural Heritage Committee as appointed by the City Council. 9. Character Defining Features: 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, -78 - PH2-238 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 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, finishes, etc. 10. City: the City of San Luis Obispo. 11. Community Design Guidelines: the most recent version of the City's Community Design Guidelines as adopted and amended from time to time. 12. Contributing Resource or Property: Buildings or other resources at least 50 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, but should be visible to the public. In some cases, buildings or other resources that are less than 50 years old, but are nonetheless significant based on architecture, craftsmanship or other criteria as described herein may be designated as a Contributing resource. 13. Council: the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo. 14. Cultural Resource: any prehistoric or historic district, site, landscape, building, structure, or object included in, or potentially eligible for local, State or National historic designation, including artifacts, records, and material remains related to such a property or resource. 15. Demolition: for the purpose of these guidelines, "demolition" refers to any act or failure to act that destroys, removes, or relocates, in whole or part a historical resource such that its historic or architectural character and significance are materially altered. 16. Deterioration: the significant worsening of a structure's condition, architectural or historic integrity, due to lack of maintenance, organisms, neglect, weathering and other natural forces. 17. Director: the Director of the Community Development Department, or another person authorized by the Director to act on his or her behalf. 18. Feasible: capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account cultural, economic, environmental, historic, legal, social and technological factors. Structural feasibility means that a building or other structure can be repaired or rehabilitated so as to be safe and usable without significant loss of historic fabric. Factors to be considered when making this determination include the existence of technology that will allow the design of the work and the ability to repair, supplement or replace load- bearing members and the thermal and moisture protection systems required for continued use of the structure; and the physical capacity of the structure to withstand the repair and/or rehabilitation process without the danger of further damage. - 79 - PH2-239 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 19. Historic Building Code: the most recent version of the California Historical Building Code, Title 25, Part, 8, as defined in Sections 18950 to 18961 of Division 12, Part 2.7 of Health and Safety Code(H&SC), a part of California State law. 20. Historic Context: Historic context are those patterns, themes or trends in history by which a specific occurrence, property, or site is understood and its meaning and significance is made clear. 21. Historic District/Historical Preservation District: areas or neighborhoods with a collection or concentration of listed or potentially contributing historic properties or archaeologically significant sites, where historic properties help define the area or neighborhood's unique architectural, cultural, and historic character or sense of place. Historic districts may be, delineated on the official zoning map as Historic (H) overlay zone under San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 17.54. 22. Historic Preservation Program Guidelines: the most recent version of the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines,as adopted from time to time. 23. Historic Preservation Report. a document which describes preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, or reconstruction measures for a historic resource, based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties, and which includes standards and guidelines for recommended treatments for preserving the resource. 24. Historic Property: a property, including land and buildings, which possesses aesthetic, architectural, cultural, historic or scientific significance, and which is included in, or potentially eligible for local, State or National historic designation. 25. Historic Resource: any building, site, improvement, area or object of aesthetic,architectural, cultural, historic or scientific significance, and which is included in, or potentially eligible for local, State or National historic designation. 26. Historic Status: historic designation of a listed resource or property as approved by Council. 27. Improvement: any building, structure, fence, gate, landscaping, hardscaping, wall, work of art,or other object constituting a physical feature of real property or any part of such feature. 28. Inappropriate Alteration: alterations to historic resources which violate these provisions and/or the Historic Preservation Ordinance. 29. Integrity, Architectural or Historical: the ability of a property, structure, site, building, improvement or natural feature to convey its identity and authenticity, including but not limited to its original location, period(s) of construction, setting, scale, design, materials, detailing, workmanship, human values,uses and association. - 80 - PH2-240 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 30. Inventory of Historic Resources: the list of historically designated resources and properties consisting of Master List and Contributing Properties List Historic Resources, and any properties, objects, sites, gardens, sacred places and resources subsequently added to the inventory as determined to meet criteria outlined herein and approved by the City Council. 31. Listed Resource: properties and resources included in the Inventory of Historic Resources. 32. Massing: the spatial relationships, arrangement and organization of a building's physical bulk or volume. 33. Master List Resource: designation which may be applied to the most unique and important historic properties and resources in terms of age, architectural or historical significance, rarity, or association with important persons or events in the City's past, meeting criteria outlined in the Historic Preservation Ordinance. 34. Minor Alteration. Any structural or exterior change to a historic resource which the Director determines to be consistent with the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, Secretary of the Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties and other applicable standards. 35. Modern Contributing Resources: designation which may be applied to properties and resources which are less than 50 years old, but which exemplify or include significant works of architecture or craftsmanship or are associated with a person or event significant to the City's history. 36. National Register of Historic Places: the official inventory of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and culture which is maintained by the Secretary of the Interior under the authority of the Historic Sites Act of 1935 and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. 37. Neglect: the lack of maintenance, repair or protection from natural elements or vandalism of a listed property, resource, site or structure, which results in significant deterioration, as determined by the Director, CHC or City Council based on visual and physical evidence. 38. Non-Contributing Resource: designation which may be applied to properties and resources in historic districts which are typically less than 50 years old and do not support the prevailing historic character of the district or other listing criteria as outlined in the Historic Preservation Ordinance. 39. Preservation: the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain a historic site, building or other structure's historically significant existing form, integrity, and materials through stabilization, repair and maintenance. 40. Property Owner: the person or entity (public or private) holding fee title interest or legal custody and control of a property. - 81 - PH2-241 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 41. Primary Structure: the most important building or other structural feature on a parcel in terms of size, scale, architectural or historical significance, as determined by the Committee. 42. Qualified Professional: an individual meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards (36 CFR Part 61 Appendix A) in history, architectural history, historic architecture and other designated categories, or an individual determined by the CHC to have the qualifications generally equivalent to the above standards based on demonstrated experience. 43. Reconstruction: the act or process of recreating the features, form and detailing of a non- surviving building or portion of building, structure, object, landscape, or site for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location. 44. Rehabilitation: the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its architectural, cultural, or historic values. 45. Relocation: removal of a resource from its original site and its re-establishment at another location in essentially the same form, appearance and architectural detailing. 46.Responsible party: any person,business, company or entity, and the parent or legal guardian of any person under the age of eighteen (18) years, who has done any act for which an administrative penalty may be imposed. 47. Restoration the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period. 48. Scale: the proportions of architectural design that relate to human size or other relative size measure. 49. Secretary of the Interior's Standards: the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as published by the U.S. Department of the Interior and as amended from time to time. 50. Setting: the physical area, environment or neighborhood in which a resource is located. 51. Sensitive Site: a site determined by the Community Development Director, Planning Commission, Architectural Review Commission or Council, upon recommendation of the Cultural Heritage Committee, to have special characteristics, constraints or community value such as: historic significance, historic context, creek side location or visual prominence, requiring more detailed development review than would otherwise be required for other similarly zoned lots. - 82 - PH2-242 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 52. Site: as used in these guidelines, the location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined, or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural, or archeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. 53. Siting: the placement of structures and improvements on a property or site. 54. Stabilization: the act or process of applying measures designed to reestablish a weather resistant enclosure and the structural stability of an unsafe or deteriorated property while maintaining the essential form as it exists at present. 55. Statement of Historic Significance: A statement of significance is an explanation of why a resource is important within its historic context. It explains how the resource meets the eligibility criteria and integrity thresholds as established by local, state or federal government. 56. Structure: as used here, "structure" includes anything assembled or constructed on the ground, or attached to anything with a foundation on the ground, including walls, fences, buildings, signs,bridges, monuments, and similar features. 57. Survey: a systematic process for identifying and evaluating a community's resources using established criteria. "Survey" may also refer to the documentation resulting from a survey project. 58. Threatened Resource: properties or resources at risk of loss of architectural, cultural or historic value due to physical alteration,relocation or demolition. 59. Zoning Code: Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code, as amended from time to time. - 83 - PH2-243 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo- Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 E 2 ...� I y {( f s o l `t QD ` "F j ».. 0YYa" ('In o ® �';. 4 ...,�,._•Cs-,ice.✓%__.. _ iL 5w -, a J �e Historic Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa, 1772 - 84- PH2-244 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 5.6 Works Cited and Information Links Angel, Myron Ed. History of San Luis Obispo County, of Its Prominent Men and Pioneers. Fresno: Valley Publishers, 1979. Originally published Oakland: Thompson and West, 1883. Bowsher, Alice Meriwether. Design Review in Historic Districts. Washington D.C.: Preservation Press, 1975. California Office of Historic Preservation. "Technical Assistance Bulletin#14 Drafting Effective Historic Preservation Ordinances." Sacramento,June 2005. Carr,Paula Juelke. "Proposal for Chinatown Historic District."July 1995. Conway, Thor. "Kozak Parking Lot Project, An Archaeological Investigation of Historic SLO, CA." San Luis Obispo: City of San Luis Obispo, 1995. Dart, Louisiana Clayton. Vignettes of History in San Luis Obispo County. San Luis Obispo: Mission Federal Savings, 1978. Friedman, Donald. Historical Building Construction: Design Material and Technology. New York: Norton, 1995. Haggard, Ken. A Brief Architectural History of San Luis Obispo. San Luis Obispo, CA.: Central Coast Books,2008. Hall-Patton, Mark P. Memories of the Land: Placenames of San Luis Obispo County. San Luis Obispo;EZ Nature Books, 1994. Harth, Stan, Liz Krieger, Dan Krieger, editors. War Comes to the Middle Kingdom: California's Central Coast Enters World War IT San Luis Obispo: EZ books, 1991. Hedman, Richard and Andrew Jaszewski. Fundamentals of Urban Design. Washington D.C.: Planners Press, 1984. Jennings, Jan and Herbert Gottfried. American Vernacular Interior Architecture 1870-1940. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1988. Knighton, Petree A. A Path to Parity: Adopting a Historic Preservation Element to the General Plan. Berkeley: University of California Berkeley, 2002. Lovell, Margaret. Historical Resources Survey II Completion Report. City of San Luis Obispo, completed January 1992. - 85 - PH2-245 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 McAlester, Virginia and Lee McAlester. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Knopf, 2006. McKeen, Rose. Parade Along the Creek: Memories of Growing Up with San Luis Obispo. San Luis Obispo: Central Coast, 1988. Morris, Marya. Innovative Tools for Historic Preservation. Washington D.C.: The National Trust, 1992. Nelson, Marie Preservation Planning and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards: Historic Contexts and Surveys. Sacramento: California Office of Historic Preservation, 14th September 2009. Roche, John J. "A Historical and Architectural Survey of the Central Business District of San Luis Obispo." City and Regional Planning Department and the School of Architecture and Environmental Design, California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo. March 1983. San Luis Obispo Fire Department: Souvenir of San Luis Obispo. San Luis Obispo: Tigner, 1904. San Luis Obispo County Telegram-Tribune. San Luis Obispo Tribune Souvenir Railroad Edition, May 5`h, 1894. San Luis Obispo: Library Associates, 1994. Secretary of the Interior. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. US Department of the Interior 1995. Schmickle, Bill. The Politics of Historic Districts: A Primer for Grassroots Preservation. Lanham: Altamira Press, 2007. Stipe, Robert E. ed. A Richer Heritage: Historic Preservation in the Twenty-first Century. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003. Tonello, Greg. Architecture of San Luis Obispo the Historic Photographs. San Luis Obispo; School of Architecture and Environmental Design, California Polytechnic State University California, San Luis Obispo, 1982. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Parks Service. National Register of Historic Places Registration Form: William Shipsey House, prepared by Betsy Bertrando. Sacramento, 2009. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Parks Service. Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Washington D.C.,2002 Wall, Richard. "A Supplemental Survey of the Cultural Resources of San Luis Obispo, California."Masters Thesis, California State University,Dominguez Hills, 1986. - 86 - PH2-246 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Winslow, Carleton. Discovering San Luis Obispo County. San Luis Obispo; School of Architecture and Environmental Design, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 1972. Winter and Company. "Defining Neighborhood Design Character and Developing Design Guidelines," in Guiding History: A Process for Creating Historic District Cruidelines, 1996. 5.7 Council Resolution (to be added) GACDD Documents\Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines\Working Drafts\{istoricpreservationguidel inesupdate0628I Ochcdraft(work ing).doc - 87 - PH2-247 Attachment 7 DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. (2010 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADDING NEW CHAPTER 14.01 TO TITLE 14 (RESERVED) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, TO INCORPORATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE PROVISIONS (GPI 72-09) WHEREAS, the public hearings were conducted by the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo on January 25h, February 22nd, March 8`h, March 22nd, April 26`h, May I Ith, May 24"', June 28`" 2010 and by the Architectural Review Commission on May 17'h 2010; and WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee took public testimony and modified text of the proposed documents in response to that testimony prior to making a final recommendation to City Council on June 28, 2010; and WHEREAS, City staff hosted an informational workshop on August 26, 2010 to gamer additional public input and testimony and has made proposed edits to the documents in response; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on September 21, 2010, October 5, 2010 and November 9, 2010 for the purpose of considering Application GPI 72-09; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed and considered the exemption from environmental review for the project; and WHEREAS, the Council has duly considered all evidence, including the recommendation of the Cultural Heritage Committee, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed text amendment is consistent with and implements the General Plan, and other applicable City ordinances; BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. Council concurs with the Director's determination that the proposed Historic Preservation Program Guidelines update is Categorically Exempt from environmental review (Section 15308, Actions by Regulatory PH2-248 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 2 Agencies for Protection of the Environment). It consists of an action by a regulatory agency as authorized by state or local ordinance, to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment. SECTION 2. Findings. The City Council makes the following findings: 1. The proposed Ordinance fulfills program 3.6.10 of the Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan which indicates that the City will implement recommendations of the Cultural Heritage Committee's "whitepaper" including adoption of a Historic Preservation Ordinance. 2. The proposed Ordinance will allow the City to be eligible to become a Certified Local Government—a state-implemented program that encourages local governments to include consideration of historic resources in planning decisions and which can provide the City with tools, technical training and access to grants to implement historic preservation activities. 3. The proposed ordinance will define actions subject to Cultural Heritage Committee review, roles and process, post disaster response and enforcement ability. The proposed ordinance updates historic resource eligibility criteria and brings the criteria into alignment with the California Register Criteria. 4. The proposed ordinance is exempt from environmental review under Section 15308 because it consists of an action by a regulatory agency to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment. SECTION 3. Action. Chapter 14.01 of Title 14 (Reserved) of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows: Title 14: Community Preservation Chapter 14.01 Historic Preservation Ordinance Sections: 14.01.010 Findings and purpose. 14.01.020 Definitions 14.01.030 Cultural Heritage Committee—Appointment, Duties, and Actions. 14.01.040 Community Director role. 14.01.050 Historic Resource Designation. 14.01.055 Historic Gardens, Features, Signs, and other cultural resources. 14.01.060 Listing Procedures for Historic Resources PH2-249 Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 3 14.01.070 Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing 14.01.080 Historic District Designation Purpose and Application 14.01.090 Process for establishing or amending a Historic District 14.01.100 Demolition of Historic Resources 14.01.110 Relocation of Historic Resources 14.01.120 Unpermitted Demolition or Destruction of Historic Resources 14.01.130 Historic Preservation Fund 14.01.140 Enforcement 14.01.150 Appeals 14.01.160 Severability 14.01.010 Findings and Purpose. A. Findings. 1. The City of San Luis Obispo has a distinctive physical character and rich history that are reflected in its many cultural resources, such as historic structures and sites. These irreplaceable resources are important to the community's economic vitality, quality of life, and sense of place, and need protection from deterioration, damage, and inappropriate alteration or demolition. 2. The City of San Luis Obispo has been fortunate to have owners who care about the history of their community and have undertaken the costly and time-consuming task of restoring, maintaining and enhancing their historic homes and commercial buildings. Their efforts have enhanced the distinctive character and sense of place of the community. 3. The California Environmental Quality Act requires special treatment of historic resources and the establishment of clear local guidance for the identification and preservation of such resources lends clarity and certainty to the review of development applications involving historic resources. B. Purpose. The broad purpose of this ordinance is to promote the public health, safety and welfare through the identification, protection, enhancement and preservation of those properties, structures, sites, artifacts and other cultural resources that represent distinctive elements of San Luis Obispo's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural history. Specifically, this ordinance sets forth regulations and procedures to: 1. Identify, protect, preserve, and promote the continuing use and upkeep of San Luis Obispo's historic structures, sites and districts. 2. Foster the retention and restoration of historic buildings and other cultural resources that promote tourism, economic vitality, sense of place, and diversity. PH2-250 J1 Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 4 3. Encourage private stewardship of historic buildings and other cultural resources through incentives where possible. 4. Implement the historic preservation goals and policies of the Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan. 5. Promote the conservation of valuable material and embodied energy in historic structures through their continued use, restoration and repair, and on-going maintenance of historic resources. 6. Promote the knowledge, understanding and appreciation of the City's distinctive character, cultural resources, and history. 7. Establish the procedures and significance criteria to be applied when evaluating development project effects on historic resources. 8. Fulfill the City's responsibilities as a Certified Local Government under State and Federal regulations and for Federal Section 106 reviews. 9. Establish the policy of the City to pursue all reasonable alternatives to achieve compliance with the Ordinance for the protection of historic resources prior to initiating penalty proceedings as set forth in Section 14.01.140 of this Ordinance.. 14.01.020 Definitions. For the purposes of this ordinance,.certain terms, words and their derivatives are used as follows: 1. Accessory Structure: a structure which is subordinate or incidental and directly related to a permitted use or structure on the same parcel. "Accessory structures" that include habitable space, as defined by the California Building Code, shall be no larger than 450 square feet. (Ord. 941-1(part), 1982: prior code — 9204.11 (part)) "Accessory structures" are located on the same parcel and are related to the primary structure but are subordinate or incidental, but may include structures that have achieved historic significance in their own right, as determined by the Director, Committee or Council. (see"primary structure"). 2. Adjacent: located on property which abuts the subject property on at least one point of the property line, on the same property, or located on property directly across right-of-way from subject property and able to viewed concurrently. 3. Adverse Effects: effects, impacts or actions that are detrimental or potentially detrimental to a historic resource's condition, architectural or historical integrity. PH2-251 p Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 5 ' 4. Alteration: change, repair, replacement, remodel, modification, or new construction to: (1) the exterior of an historic resource or adjacent building, (2) the structural elements which support the exterior walls, roof, or exterior elements of the historic resource or adjacent building, (3) other construction on a lot, or (4) character defining features of the interior of a historic resource if the structure's significance is wholly or partially based on interior features and the resource is publicly-accessible. "Alteration" does not include ordinary landscape maintenance, unless the landscaping is identified as significant at the time a property is listed. "Alteration" also does not include ordinary property maintenance or repair that is exempt from a building permit, or is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties. 5. Archaeological Site: those areas where archaeological resources are present and may be larger or smaller than the project site. An archaeological site may include prehistoric Native American archaeological site, Historic archaeological sites; sites or natural landscapes associated with important human events; and Native American Sacred Places and Cultural landscapes. 6. ARC: the Architectural Review Commission as appointed by the City Council. 7. California Register: California Register of Historical Resources defined in California PRC 5024.1 and in CCR Title 14 Chap 11.5, Sec 4850 et seq. as it may be amended. 8. CHC: the Cultural Heritage Committee as appointed by the City Council. 9. Character Defining Features: 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, finishes, etc. 10. City: the City of San Luis Obispo. 11. Community Design Guidelines: the most recent version of the City's Community Design Guidelines as adopted and amended from time to time. 12. Contributing Resource or Property: Buildings or other resources at least 50 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, but should be visible to the public. In some cases, buildings or other resources that are less than 50 years old, but are nonetheless significant based on architecture, craftsmanship or other criteria as described herein may be designated as a Contributing resource. PH2-252 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 6 13. Council: the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo. 14. Cultural Resource: any prehistoric or historic district, site, landscape, building, structure, or object included in, or potentially eligible for local, State or National historic designation, including artifacts, records, and material remains related to such a property or resource. 15. Demolition: for the purpose of this ordinance, "demolition" refers to any act or failure to act that destroys, removes, or relocates, in whole or part a historical resource such that its historic or architectural character and significance are materially altered. 16. Deterioration: the significant worsening of a structure's condition, architectural or historic integrity, due to lack of maintenance, organisms, neglect, weathering and other natural forces. 17. Director: the Director of the Community Development Department, or another person authorized by the Director to act on his or her behalf. 18. Feasible: capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account cultural, economic, environmental, historic, legal, social and technological factors. Structural feasibility means that a building or other structure can be repaired or rehabilitated so as to be safe and usable without significant loss of historic fabric. Factors to be considered when making this determination include the existence of technology that will allow the design of the work and the ability to repair, supplement or replace load-bearing members and the thermal and moisture protection systems required for continued use of the structure; and the physical capacity of the structure to withstand the repair and/or rehabilitation process without the danger of further damage. 19. Historic Building Code: the most recent version of the California Historical Building Code, Title 25, Part, 8, as defined in Sections 18950 to 18961 of Division 12, Part 2.7 of Health and Safety Code(H&SC), a part of California State law. 20. Historic Context: Historic context are those patterns, themes or trends in history by which a specific occurrence, property, or site is understood and its meaning and significance is made clear. 21. Historic District/Historical Preservation District: areas or neighborhoods with a collection or concentration of listed or potentially contributing historic properties or archaeologically significant sites, where historic properties help define the area or neighborhood's unique architectural, cultural, and historic character or sense of place. Historic districts may be, delineated on the official zoning map as Historic (H) overlay zone under San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 17.54. PH2-253 Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 7 22. Historic Preservation Program Guidelines: the most recent version of the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, as adopted and amended from time to time. 23. Historic Preservation Report. a document which describes preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, or reconstruction measures for a historic resource, based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties, and which includes standards and guidelines for recommended treatments for preserving the resource. 24. Historic Property: a property, including land and buildings, which possesses aesthetic, architectural, cultural, historic or scientific significance, and which is included in, or potentially eligible for local, State or National historic designation. 25. Historic Resource: any building, site, improvement, area or object of aesthetic, architectural, cultural, historic or scientific significance, and which is included in, or potentially eligible for local, State or National historic designation. 26. Historic Status: historic designation of a listed resource or property as approved by Council. 27. Improvement: any building, structure, fence, gate, landscaping, hardscaping, wall, work of art, or other object constituting a physical feature of real property or any part of such feature. 28. Inappropriate Alteration: alterations to historic resources which are inconsistent with these provisions and/or the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. 29. Integrity, Architectural or Historical: the ability of a property, structure, site, building, improvement or natural feature to convey its identity and authenticity, including but not limited to its original location, period(s) of construction, setting, scale, design, materials, detailing, workmanship, uses and association. 30. Inventory of Historic Resources: the list of historically designated resources and properties consisting of Master List and Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources, and any properties, objects, sites, gardens, sacred places and resources subsequently added to the inventory as determined to meet criteria outlined herein and approved by the City Council. 31. Listed Resource: properties and resources included in the Inventory of Historic Resources. 32. Massing: the spatial relationships, arrangement and organization of a building's physical bulk or volume. 33. Master List Resource: designation which may be applied to the most unique and important historic properties and resources in terms of age, architectural or historical significance, rarity, or association with important persons or events in the City's past meeting criteria outlined herein. PH2-254 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 8 34. Minor Alteration. Any structural or exterior change to a historic resource which the Director determines to be consistent with the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, Secretary of the Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties and other applicable standards. 35. Modern Contributing Resources: designation which may be applied to properties and resources which are less than 50 years old, but which exemplify or include significant works of architecture or craftsmanship or are associated with a person or event significant to the City's history. 36. National Register of Historic Places: the official inventory of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and culture which is maintained by the Secretary of the Interior under the authority of the Historic Sites Act of 1935 and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. 37. Neglect: the lack of maintenance, repair or protection from natural elements or vandalism of a listed property, resource, site or structure, which results in significant deterioration, as determined by the Director or City Council based on visual and physical evidence. 38. Non-Contributing Resource: designation which may be applied to properties and resources in historic districts which are typically less than 50 years old and do not support the prevailing historic character of the district or other listing criteria as outlined herein. 39. Preservation: the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain a historic site, building or other structure's historically significant existing form, integrity, and materials through stabilization, repair and maintenance. 40. Property Owner: the person or entity (public or private) holding fee title interest or legal custody and control of a property. 41. Primary Structure: the most important building or other structural feature on a parcel in terms of size, scale, architectural or historical significance, as determined by the Committee. 42. Qualified Professional: an individual meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards (36 CFR Part 61 Appendix A) in history, architectural history, historic architecture and other designated categories, or an individual determined by the CHC to have the qualifications generally equivalent to the above standards based on demonstrated experience. 43. Reconstruction: the act or process of recreating the features, form and detailing of a non- surviving building or portion of building, structure, object, landscape, or site for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location. PH2-255 Ordinance No. (2010 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 9 44. Rehabilitation: the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its architectural, cultural, or historic values. 45. Relocation: removal of a resource from its original site and its re-establishment at another location in essentially the same form, appearance and architectural detailing. 46. Responsible party: any person, business, corporation or entity, and the parent or legal guardian of any person under the age of eighteen (18) years, who has committed, permitted, directed or controlled any act constituting a violation of this ordinance. 47. Restoration the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period. 48. Scale: the proportions of architectural design that relate to human size or other relative size measure. 49. Secretary of the Interior's Standards: the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as published by the U.S. Department of the Interior and as amended from time to time. 50. Setting: the physical area, environment or neighborhood in which a resource is located. 51. Sensitive Site: a site determined by the Community Development Director, Planning Commission, Architectural Review Commission or Council, upon recommendation of the Cultural Heritage Committee, to have special characteristics, constraints or community value such as: historic significance, historic context, creek side location or visual prominence, requiring more detailed development review than would otherwise be required for other similarly zoned lots. 52. Site: as used in this ordinance, the location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined, or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural, or archeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. 53. Siting: the placement of structures and improvements on a property or site. 54. Stabilization: the act or process of applying measures designed to reestablish a weather resistant enclosure and the structural stability of an unsafe or deteriorated property while maintaining the essential form as it exists at present. PH2-256 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 10 55. Statement of Historic Significance: An explanation of why a resource is important within its historic context. It explains how the resource meets the eligibility criteria and integrity thresholds as established by local, state or federal government. 56. Structure: as used here, "structure" includes anything assembled or constructed on the ground, or attached to anything with a foundation on the ground, including walls, fences, buildings, signs,bridges,monuments, and similar features. 57. Survey: a systematic process for identifying and evaluating a community's historic resources using established criteria. "Survey" may also refer to the documentation resulting from a survey project. 58. Threatened Resource: properties or resources at risk of loss of architectural, cultural or historic value due to physical alteration, relocation or demolition. 59. Zoning Code: Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code, as amended from time to time. 14.01.030 Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC). A. Committee membership and terms. The City shall have a Cultural Heritage Committee (the "CHC" or "Committee"), consisting of seven members who shall be appointed by the City Council ("Council") for terms of up to four years, which shall commence immediately upon appointment by the Council consistent with Resolutions 6157 (1987 Series) and 6593 (1989 Series), and CHC Bylaws or as subsequently amended. B. Duties. The CHC shall make recommendations to decision-making bodies on the following: 1. Historic and Archaeological Resource Preservation Program guidelines that implement this ordinance and provide detailed guidance to persons planning development projects subject to Cultural Heritage Committee review, and for City and property owner decisions regarding cultural resources in San Luis Obispo. Once adopted by the City Council, a record copy of the guidelines shall be maintained in the office of the City Clerk and in the Community Development Department. Copies shall be available on the City's website and printed versions will be available at cost. PH2-257 Ordinance No. (2010 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 11 1 Properties for inclusion on the City's List of Historic Resources - those properties, areas, sites, buildings, structures or other features having significant historical, cultural, architectural, community, scientific or aesthetic value to the citizens of San Luis Obispo. 3. The Master and Contributing Properties Lists of Historic Resources, and Historic Property and Archaeological Site Inventories. 4. Actions subject to discretionary City review and approval that may affect significant archaeological, cultural or historic resources. 5. The application of architectural, historic, and cultural preservation standards and.guidelines to projects and approvals involving historic sites, districts, and structures. 6. Consolidation of information about cultural resources and promotion, participation in, or sponsorship of educational and interpretive programs that foster public awareness and appreciation of cultural resources. 7. Guidance on the restoration, alteration, decoration, landscaping and maintenance related to development or demolition applications involving listed resources, and properties within historic preservation districts. 8. Incentive programs approved by the Council that are directed at preserving and maintaining cultural resources. 9 Information for property owners preparing local, state and federal historic nominations to utilize preservation incentives, including the Mills Act and federal tax incentives, such as rehabilitation tax credits. 10. Function within the guidelines and policies of the Advisory Body Handbook and perform other duties as assigned by Council. C. Actions Subject to Cultural Heritage Committee Review. The Committee shall review and make recommendations to the Director, Architectural Review Commission, Planning Commission or City Council on applications and development review projects which include any of the following: 1. Changes to the Inventory of Historic Resources. 2. Changes to historic districts and applications to establish new historic districts. PH2-258 Ordinance No. (2010 Series) Anachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 12 3. Statements of historic significance and historic inventories for existing and proposed historic districts. 4. New construction, additions or alterations located in historic districts, or on historically listed properties, or sensitive archaeological sites. 5. Applications to demolish or relocate listed historic resources or structures. 6. Projects and actions referred to the. Committee by the Community Development Director ("Director"),Architectural Review Commission, Planning Commission, or Council. 7. Actions of public agencies that may affect historic or cultural resources within the City. 14.01.040 Community Development Director Role The CHC is assisted by staff of the Community Development Department. The Community Development Director ("Director") is responsible for interpreting and implementing this ordinance and helping the CHC carry out its duties. Notwithstanding Section 14.01.030C 1-5 and 7 of this ordinance, the Director may determine that CHC review is not required for actions or projects that: 1) do not adversely affect historic resources, or 2) are consistent with this ordinance, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and no public purpose would be served by requiring CHC review. 14.01.050 Historic Resource Designation 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 Resources or Properties. Buildings or other resources at least 50 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, but should be visible to the public. In some cases, buildings or other resources that are less than. 50 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. PH2-259 Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 13 C. Non-Contributing. Buildings, properties and other features in historic districts which are less than 50 years old, have not retained their original architectural character, or which do not support the prevailing historic character of the district. 14.01.055 Historic Gardens, Site Features, Signs, and Other Cultural Resources A. Historic Site and landscape features. Historic gardens, site features and improvements, accessory structures, signs, Native American Sacred Places, cultural landscapes and areas or objects of archaeological, architectural, cultural or historic significance not part of a designated property may be added to the Inventory of Historic Resources through CHC review and Council approval as specified herein. B. Cultural Resources on public property. Cultural and historic features on public property, such as Bishop's Peak granite walls and curbing, sidewalk embossing, ornamental manhole covers and hitching posts, may be added to the Inventory of Historic Resources through CHC review and Council approval as specified herein. C. Sign. A sign which contributes to the unique architectural or historic character of a building, site or historic district may be designated as a historic sign. Signs that meet at least one of the following criteria may be designated historic: (1)The sign is exemplary of technology, craftsmanship or design of the period when it was constructed, uses historic sign materials and means of illumination, and is not significantly altered from its historic period. Historic sign materials shall include metal or wood facings, or paint directly on the fagade of a building. Historic means of illumination shall include incandescent light fixtures or neon tubing on the exterior of the sign. If the sign has been altered, it must be restorable to its historic function and appearance. (2)The sign is well integrated with the site and/or architecture of the building. (3)A sign not meeting either criterion may be considered for inclusion in the inventory if it demonstrates extraordinary aesthetic quality, creativity, or innovation. 14.01.060 Listing Procedures for Historic Resources 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, 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. PH2-260 a I I Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 14 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 60 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. 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 PH2-261 Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 15 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. (, 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 terns 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: PH2-262 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 16 (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). 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) f(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 (I)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: PH2-263 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 17 (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. D. Where applied. The (H) designation may be applied to areas or neighborhoods with a collection or concentration of listed historic properties or archaeologically significant sites, or where historic properties help define an area or neighborhood's unique architectural and historic character or sense of place. E. "H" district combined. A Historic Preservation Overlay District (H) may be combined with any zoning district, and shall be shown by adding an"H"to the base zone designation. H district boundaries shall be drawn to follow property lines or right-of-way lines, and as set forth in the Zoning Regulations. 14.01.090 Process for Establishing or Amending Historic Districts: A. Initiating or amending Historic Districts. Any person may initiate the process to establish or alter the boundaries of a Historic Preservation District. The process can also be initiated by the CHC, ARC, Planning Commission or City Council. B. Application. An application to establish or alter the boundaries of a Historic Preservation District shall be submitted to the Department. The application shall meet the requirements for rezoning as described in the Zoning Regulations. The application and supporting information and plans shall be submitted to the Department and shall include: PH2-264 Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 18 (1) A map (8-1/21V x I I") from the official zoning map, with the area to be changed shaded or outlined in a heavy,black line, with the proposed area to be changed clearly labeled, and (2) Information showing how the application meets the criteria to establish or alter a historic district designation. (3) A Statement of historic significance. A statement of historic significance shall be prepared by a qualified professional, as listed in the City's List of Qualified Historians. The Director may waive the requirement that the statement be prepared by a qualified professional if the applicant provides adequate information to enable informed review of the proposed district. C. Contents. Statements of Historic Significance shall include, but not be limited to the following; (1) A visual and written description of the district's boundaries. (2) A description of the district's architectural, historic, and cultural resources, character and significance, including a historic survey documenting the period of significance and how historic properties meet adopted local, state and where applicable, federal criteria for historic listing. (3) Preservation goals and concerns for the district including but not limited to; q Identification of preservation priorities, important features, goals and objectives, and b. Identification of potential obstacles to preservation, and c. Identification of historic land use policies and goals for future land use, and d. Special considerations for development review of projects both involving and not involving historic resources. (4) Graphic and written design guidelines applicable to the district's preservation goals, historic character and features which shall include,but not be limited to: (a) Guidelines for projects involving historic resources, focused on preserving the district's character and significant archeological, architectural, and historic features; and (b) Guidelines for projects within the district but not involving historically designated properties, focused on maintaining street character and compatibility with the district's historic character while not mimicking historic styles. PH2-265 Ordinance No. (2010 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 19 D. Review. The CHC shall review the application and make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall review the CHC recommendation and rezoning application and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council shall review the application and the recommendations of the CHC and Planning Commission, and approve or disapprove the application. The CHC, Planning Commission and the City Council shall each conduct a public hearing on the application and the notice of such hearings shall be completed as provided in the City's Notification Procedures. E. Review criteria. When considering a Historic Preservation District application, the reviewing body shall consider the both of the following criteria: (1) Environmental Design Continuity: The inter-relationship of structures and their relationship to a common environment; The continuity, spatial relationship, and visual character of a street, neighborhood, or area. Environmental design continuity is comprised of: a. Symbolic importance to the community of a key structure in the area—and the degree to which it serves as a conspicuous and pivotal landmark (e.g., easily accessible to the public,helps to establish a sense of time and place); or b. Compatibility of structures with neighboring structures in their 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; or c. Similarity to and/or compatibility of structures over 50 years of age which, collectively, combine to form a geographically definable area with its own distinctive character. (2) Whether the proposed district contains structures which meet criteria for inclusion on the City's List of Historic Resources. 14.01.100 Demolition of Historic Resources A. Intent. Listed historic resources are an irreplaceable community resource that merit special protection to preserve them for future generations, and shall not be demolished unless the City Council makes all of the findings specified in Section 14.01.100 D, provided however, that these thresholds shall not apply to repairs to listed historic resources that do not require a building permit, or where the CHC or the Director has determined such work is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and with the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. PH2-266 I! i Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 20 B. Demolition review. The CHC shall review and make recommendation to the City Council concerning demolition applications for structures listed in the Inventory of Historic resources. C. Demolition thresholds. Demolition permits for structures which are included on the Inventory of Historic resources shall be required for: (1) Alterations to or removal of greater than 25% of the original building framework, roof, and exterior walls; and (2) Relocation of such resources to a site outside the city limits. D. Required findings for demolition of a historic resource. The decision-making body shall approve an application for demolition of a structure listed in the Inventory of Historic Resources only if it determines that the proposed demolition is consistent with the General Plan and: (1) The historic resource is a hazard to public health or safety, and repair or stabilization is not structurally feasible. Deterioration resulting from the property owner's neglect or failure to maintain the property should not be a justification for demolition. The applicant may be required to provide structural reports, to the approval of the Community Development Director or City Council, to document that repairs or stabilization are not feasible; or (2) Denial of the application will constitute an economic hardship as described under findings 1- 3 of Section J. E. Demolition timing. , City regulations provide for a.90-day waiting period before demolition of a listed historic resource to allow consideration of alternatives to preserve the building through relocation and/or property trades. The Chief Building Official shall not issue a permit for demolishing a historic resource, except where a the Chief Building Official determines a listed historic resource may pose an imminent demonstrable threat to human life and safety, until: (1) public notice requirements in the City's Demolition and Building Relocation Code have been met; and (2)) a construction permit is issued for a replacement building; and (3) all permit fees for the new development are paid. Where no new development is proposed, the property owner shall provide to the Director's satisfaction, financial guarantees to ensure demolition plans and conditions of approval are implemented. F. Historic and architectural documentation. Before the issuance of a demolition permit for structures listed in the Inventory of Historic Resources, the resource and its site shall be documented as specified in City standards, to the satisfaction of the CHC and the Director. The documentation shall be retained in a secure,but publicly accessible, location. PH2-267 i Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 21 G. Historic acknowledgement. An acknowledgment of demolished resources shall be provided . through historic signage and/or the reuse or display of historic materials and artifacts on site, at the owner's expense, to the Director's approval. H. Code requirements. Demolitions shall follow standards and procedures in the Demolition and Building Relocation Code and California Building Code as locally amended. I. Expiration of demolition approval. Demolition approval of a listed historic resource shall expire two years after its date of approval, unless a building permit has been issued and construction has begun. A one year extension may be granted by the Director. Additional time extensions shall require reapplication to, and approval by the CHC. J. Economic Hardship. An economic hardship provision is established to ensure that denial of a demolition permit does not impose undue hardship on the owner of a historical resource. If the applicant presents evidence clearly demonstrating to the satisfaction of the CHC or the City Council that the action will cause an extreme hardship, the CHC may recommend approval, and the Council may approve or conditionally approve a demolition or other application to modify a listed historic resource even though it does not meet one or more standards set forth herein. The applicant shall be responsible for providing substantiation of the claim to the Director, who shall review the information with the Director of Finance and make a joint recommendation to the CHC on the hardship request. The CHC shall consider and make a recommendation to the Council regarding the financial impacts of denial of the demolition permit. Private financial information shall be maintained in confidence by the City. The CHC is authorized to request that the applicant furnish information, documentation and expert testimony, the cost of which shall be paid by the applicant, to be considered by the Committee in its related findings. All additional required information shall be provided by a qualified individual or firm approved by the Director. In determining whether extreme hardship exists, the Committee and Council shall consider evidence that demonstrates: (1)Denial of the application will diminish the value of the subject property so as to leave substantially no economic value, after considering other means of offsetting the costs of retaining the histroic resource, including, but not limited to, tax abatements, financial assistance, building code modifications, changes in allowed uses, grants;;or (2)Sale or rental of the property is impractical, when compared to the cost of holding such property for uses permitted in the zoning district; or (3)Utilization of the property for lawful purposes is prohibited or impractical; 14.01.110 Relocation of Historic Resources. Relocation has the potential to adversely affect the significance of a historic resource and is discouraged. Relocation applications shall be evaluated as follows: PH2-268 Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 22 A. Review. The CHC and ARCH shall review applications to relocate structures listed on the Inventory of Historic Resources. B. Criteria for relocation. Relocation of structures included on the Inventory of Historic Resources, or those that are determined by the CHC or the Director to be potentially historic, is the least preferred preservation method and shall be permitted only when relocation is consistent with goals and policies of the General Plan, any applicable area or specific plans, and the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, and: (1) The relocation will not significantly change, destroy, or adversely affect the historic, architectural or aesthetic value of the resource; and (2) Relocation will not have a significant adverse effect on the character of the historic district or neighborhood, or surrounding properties where the resource is located or at its proposed location, and (3) The original site and the proposed receiving site are controlled through ownership long term lease or similar assurance by the person(s) proposing relocation, to the Director's approval, and (4) The proposed receiving site is relevant to the resource's historic significance; and [moved to 2 above]; OR (5) The relocation is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition on the site and no other measures for correcting the condition are feasible, OR (6) The proposed relocation meets the findings required under Section J for demolition of a historic resource. C. Relocation timing. The historic resource shall not be relocated unless the Chief Building Official issues a permit for relocation and all permit or impact fees for new development are paid; or where no new development is proposed, an appropriate security is posted to guarantee that relocation plans are implemented, to the Director's approval. D. Historical and architectural documentation. Prior to issuance of a construction permit for relocation, the resource and its site shall be historically documented as specified herein, to the satisfaction of the CHC and the Director. An acknowledgment of the resource, such as a permanent, weatherproof historic plaque shall be incorporated on the resource's original site as provided by the applicant or property owner, subject to the approval of the CHC. PH2-269 1 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 23 E. Relocation plan and procedures. Relocations shall follow a plan approved by the CHC or the Director, standards and procedures in the Demolition and Building Relocation Code, the California Building Code, and the following: (1) Application for relocation shall be made on forms provided by the Department and shall include information to respond to the criteria in subsection B of this Section. (2) The CHC shall hold a noticed public hearing and recommend action to the ARC or City Council on the application for relocation of a historic resource, and the ARC or Council shall consider the CHC's recommendation in making the final determination to approve or deny the permit. (3) The ARC or the City Council will not grant an approval for the relocation of a listed historic resource unless the criteria for relocation under subsection B of this Section can be met. 14.01.120 Unpermitted Demolition or Destruction of Resources A. Preservation of listed historic resources. The purpose of this Section is to prevent unpermitted active demolition or demolition by neglect by ensuring that listed historic resources are maintained in good repair, and free from structural defects and safety hazards, consistent with the International Property Maintenance Code, Property Maintenance Standards (SLO MC Ch. 17.17), and standards as specified herein. Alteration or demolition in whole or part, of any significant features or characteristics of a listed historic property or resource requires City authorization, pursuant to Section 14.01.100. B. Enhanced Penalties for Unpermitted Demolition. In addition to penalties otherwise provided for violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code and this Chapter, the City Council, following notice and a public hearing, may impose the following enhanced penalties for unpermitted demolition of a listed resource, as defined herein, where a property owner has willfully demolished, or directed, or allowed the demolition of a listed resource, or where the property owner has failed to comply with notices to correct violations of this Code, such that the continuance of such violations may result in the unpermitted demolition of the listed historic resource(either active or by neglect): (1) Restoration: The owner may be required to restore the property or structure to its appearance prior to the violation to the satisfaction of the Director. (2) Building permit restriction. City may prohibit the owner(s), successors, or assigns from obtaining a building permit for development of the subject property for a period of up to five (5) years from the date of violation, unless such permit(s) is for the purpose of PH2-270 Ordinance No.(2010 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 24 complying with provisions of this ordinance. In cases where this penalty is imposed, the City shall: a. Initiate proceedings to place a deed restriction on the property to ensure enforcement of this restriction. b. Require the property owner to maintain the property during the period of development restriction in conformance with standards set forth in this ordinance. c. Initiate action to remove any such deed restriction within ten (10) days of correction or compliance. Subsequent development applications shall be subject to CEQA review and conditions of development shall address the demolition of the historic resource. (3) Loss of preservation benefits. Any historic preservation benefits previously granted to the affected property may be subject to revocation. (4) Other remedies. These enhanced penalties are non-exclusive, in addition to and not in lieu of, penalties otherwise provided for violations of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code and this Chapter, including, but not limited to, administrative citations, criminal prosecution, civil fines, and public nuisance proceedings. 14.01.130 Historic and cultural resource preservation fund established. The Historic and Cultural Resource Preservation Fund ("Fund") is hereby established to provide for the conservation, preservation, restoration and rehabilitation of historic and cultural resources in the City of San Luis Obispo. The Council shall provide the policy direction for funding and expenditures from the Fund. A. Program Administration. The Director shall administer the Fund, following specific procedures and funding priorities adopted by the Council. B. Purpose. The purpose of the Fund is to provide funds for historic preservation projects within the City. All funds deposited in the Fund shall be used for the conservation, preservation, restoration and rehabilitation of historic or cultural resources, as provided in this section and as directed by the Council 1. Financial Administration. Financial administration of the Fund shall be by the City Finance Director or designee, in accordance with State and local law. Any interest earned on the fund shall accrue to the funds, unless Council specifically designates such funds for another purpose. 2. Grants, Gifts and Donations. The Finance Director shall deposit into the fund any grants, gifts, donations, rents, royalties, or other financial support earmarked by Council for historic or cultural resource preservation. PH2-271 Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 25 C. Cultural Heritage Committee Role. The Committee shall advise the Council on the Fund regarding: 1. Criteria for use and award of funds; 2. Entering into any contract, lease, agreement, etc. for use of funds; 3. Any other action or activity necessary or appropriate to achieve the Fund purposes and the intent of this ordinance. D. Uses of Fund. The Fund may be used for: 1) the identification and protection of cultural resources, including preparation of historic surveys and design guidelines, 2) for the repair, restoration, rehabilitation, preservation and maintenance of historical buildings, features, or archaeological sites, 3) for public education on cultural resources, 4) for real property acquisition if there is a willing property owner, including lease, purchase, sale, exchange or other forms of real property transfer or acquisition to protect significant historic resources, or 5) any other historic preservation related purpose approved by the Council. Council decisions on the use of funds are final. E. Loans and Grants. The Fund may be used, upon Council approval and recommendation by the Committee, for loans and grants to public agencies, nonprofit organizations and private entities to carry out the purposes of this ordinance. F. Preservation Agreements. Loans, grants or other financial assistance shall require execution of an agreement between the City and the recipient to ensure that such award or assistance carnes out the purposes of this ordinance and is consistent with applicable State and local standards. G. Funding Eligibility: The Fund shall be used to benefit properties on the Master or Contributing Properties List, or for other properties or uses deemed eligible by the Council upon recommendation by the Committee. 14.01.140 Enforcement. A. The Director, Chief Building Official and City Attorney and their designees are hereby authorized to enforce the provisions of this ordinance. B. Time to correct. Prior to assessment of any penalty or initiation of any prosecution for any violation of this Chapter, the Director shall provide written notice of non-compliance to property owners. Notice shall be by certified and regular mail. Following mailing of notice, property owner shall have 60 days to correct the violation or to inform the City why an extension is PH2-272 Ordinance No. (20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 26 warranted. Additional time to correct the violation may be allowed where the property owner is exercising due diligence in acting to correct noticed violations. The Director shall have the authority to place reasonable conditions on such an extension. Notwithstanding these provisions, if the Director or the Chief Building Official determines there is an imminent threat to a listed historic or cultural resource, the Director shall notify the property owner of the imminent threat and property owner shall be required to provide urgent measures deemed reasonable and necessary to protect the public health and safety and for the protection of the resource within 72 hours of notification. C. Work stoppage. In addition to any other fines, penalties or enforcement provisions set forth in this ordinance, failure to comply with an approved application shall constitute grounds for immediate stoppage of the work involved in the noncompliance until the matter is resolved. D. Violation – Penalty. Every property owner and/or responsible party, as defined in this chapter who violates provisions of this chapter is subject to penalty as set forth in chapter 1.12 or administrative enforcement as set forth under chapter 1.24 of the Municipal Code. 14.01.150 Appeals Decisions of any city official or body under the provisions of this chapter are appealable in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 1.20 of the Municipal Code. 14.01.160 Severability. Should any section or other portion of this ordinance be determined unlawful or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining section(s) and portion(s) of this ordinance shall be considered severable and shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty(30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the 9 h day of November, 2010 AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the— day of , 2010, on the following roll call vote: PH2-273 Attachment 7 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 27 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: City Clerk Elaina Cano APPROVED AS TO FORM: ty Attorney J. Christine Dietrick T:\Council Agenda Reports\Community Development CAR\2010ffstoric Preservation\Draft Ordinance Resolution.DOC PH2-274 council memoizanbum ctty of san lues osis o, aammistuat�on aEpautmerit,_-_�_�,� r_y�r I DATE: November 9, 2010 RECEIVED TO: City Council NOV 0 9 1010 FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manage SLO CITY CLERK SUBJECT: Historic Preservation Ordinance Ci imments It The attached e-mail dated November 3rd was sent to the City Council along with other members of the community. Council Member Ashbaugh forwarded this communication to City staff with three questions (also included in the attachment). Staff will be prepared to respond to these questions during tonight's meeting. RED FILE rd , mnefl, — MEETING AGENDA doouNcm c(=DM QCrrYMGR crRTDM DATE !1 Q o ITEM # PE;- eCM� ME °W Q��►TTff0 p'aanmo dP0LICB0W WPM dPAPM&UCDM ntmm irUMDM p,RD a1Y NM dcOUNCU_ irarY MOR p CLM GACounciftm memos\Council Memo-HPO questions.doc Page 1 of 4 C, Codron, Michael From: Ashbaugh, John Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:05 AM To: Mandeville, John; Murry, Kim Cc: Lichtig, Katie; Dietrick, Christine; Codron, Michael Subject: FW: Historic Neighborhoods At Risk It does not appear that any City staff were copied on this e-mail, so I would ask that John (and Kim, if and when she is available) provide the Council with some perspective on these assertions - particularly the ones that are highlighted with my own queries. Thank you. -----Original Message----- From: Peg Pinard [mailto:pinardmat@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 3:13 PM To: Susan Coward; Shelly Johnson; Saro Rizzo; Babak Naficy Cc: Cheryl Burcheri; Larry Hoyt; Sandra Rowley; Steve Rebuck; Lynn Neal; Mary Maloney; Roy Parsons; Jo Ann Arnold Switzer; Lisa Smith; A Riley; Kendra Miller; Andrea Weinstein; Marsha G. Forrest;jacobsen jennings; Celeste Wilson; Carrow, Cathy; Jeanne Newell; Gayle Mills; gardenbuff45@aol.com; Romero, Dave; Marx, Jan; Carter, Andrew; Allen Settle; Ashbaugh, John; Ryan Miller; Annmarie Cornejo SLO Cornejo; David Congalton; Julie Lynem; Bill Morem; McDonald Robert Subject: Historic Neighborhoods At Risk Susan, Please post this on our website. Thanks, Peg When the onerous ($10,000 per infraction and up to $5,000 a day for 30 days) fines were removed from the proposed historic ordinance, it may have been tempting to think that was the end of the horrendous impact this ordinance would have on historic neighborhoods. Not so. As part of this ordinance and guidelines, the city intends to grant itself the power to: (Ch.4.1.3.b) "Re-establishment of the property's historic use...provided the Director determines such uses are compatible with adjacent uses." and (c) "Any other uses which is determined to be compatible with its surroundings and..." Basically, this new power for the Planning Director and the Cultural Heritage Committee will undo the protections that our current zoning laws provide. Right now, people who have moved into what they thought was a 11/9/2010 Page 2 of 4 residential neighborhood have the reasonable expectation that it will remain so. This new provision will undo that: Query: Would the new ordinance in fact, enable a change in use for a historic properly with the Director's approval (and subiect to CHC review) .to a "historic use" that would not otherwise be permissible under the Zoning Ordinance? (i so I agree with Peg that this provision deserves another look) As background for this issue let me briefly explain why the Old Town Neighborhood Association was created and why some of these issues were so controversial then...and are now being resurrected in the guise of"incentives" by those who seem to have no idea what it takes to maintain a 'neighborhood', much less really care about historic preservation. About 30 years ago, the Old Town area was being subjected to a number of requests to turn homes in the residential neighborhoods into offices. Many of us were young and knew very little about the effects of zoning. We liked our homes, could exchange our energy as labor to fix them up, liked being near downtown, and thought this would be a good place to raise our children. The idea that 'the house next door' could become a vacant building after 5, at night, weekends and holidays was not something we had even considered when we moved into this neighborhood. We began to realize that the security of our neighborhood would be compromised if we had the turnovers of strangers, and the traffic and parking impact of their cars, constantly throughout the day. Faced with applications for the conversion of what were currently lived-in homes, we had a big wake-up call. After having to speak against multiple requests for these 'office conversions' we finally organized and confronted the city with being honest with residents about what did the city want for this area. The city said it liked having the historic homes but then was doing everything to make it difficult to live here. For instance, there was a huge 'right-of-way' on Broad St. that was never disclosed to residents who bought on that street, residents couldn't plant trees in front of their own homes, and there were pressures on the city council from those who said this area would be better off as offices. Many of us had put everything we had into purchasing our homes and this was a complete shock to us. Besides the ability to live in our own homes, there was an even greater community benefit to having this area remain residential. The history of"downtowns" in California gave a very clear picture that, where downtowns lost their surrounding residential areas, those downtowns eventually deteriorated. It was just a matter of time before the absence of neighbors walking around, the absence of people who could hear if there was a cry for help, and just the high transiency of the area made it feel unsafe. People didn't go through a 'no man's land' for dinner, theater and other downtown uses - especially at night. This pattern was documented over and over again. 11/9/2010 Page 3 of 4 In bringing this to the attention of downtown business leaders, we were able to work together to come up with an effective and reasonable plan that met both of our needs. A few blocks were designated for office expansion, and the rest were to be kept sacrosanct! No more intrusions! No more constant threats to change what could happen next door. Residents could buy homes in Old Town, fix them up, and feel secure that this would remain a nice residential area in which to live. They would not have to feel in constant jeopardy that, if they missed a city 'notice' or couldn't drop what they were doing to go down and protest, that they would end up without neighbors. uestion: 1 remember well the Old Town Neighborhood Association campaign from the time it was launched in 1978 by Peg, along with Penny Rappa and many others —and I remember that her efforts were effective at the time as she describes here. It is my understanding, too, that the zoning protection that was established then for downtown residential neighborhoods has been maintained in the 1994 General Plan and in subsequent actions by the Planning Commission and Council. Is there anything in the ordinance that is before us on Tuesday that would compromise the residential integrity of the neighborhoods surrounding downtown? Now that you know the background, perhaps you can appreciate the absolute irresponsibility of the city proposing to leave "allowable uses" in the hands of a planning director. This undoes everything we worked for, thought we had accomplished, both for the security of the residents of this city and for the betterment of the town as a whole. Every 'exception' that is made (no matter how many justifications are made to allow it) becomes the basis for the next exception. It is beyond comprehension how any planner could think that introducing such 'exceptions' to the zoning laws of a neighborhood would add to the quality of life for residents.. In an area that is already fragile due to a very high number of non- owner occupied homes, anything that would take away the remaining sense of stability, will be what finally turns the tide of'livability'. Families will just keep moving out, as many (over approx. 60%) already have. Some of the 'old uses' that have been in our neighborhood include: fraternities, a sanitarium, a maternity hospital, a general hospital, doctor's offices, machine shops, hair salons, and even a house of ill-repute...and that's just in a couple of blocks. I'm sure other blocks have even more uses that they can add. ue : Would the new ordinance enable an owner of a historic property to obtain Director's approval— or even Council approval for any of the uses she notes here? (You may pass on the reference to "houses of ill repute" —1 believe I know the answer to that one already). 11/9/2010 Page 4 of 4 It's a 'life lesson' that many of us have learned... if you take things for granted, and don't protect them, that, eventually you will lose them. We've done well with the existing zoning protections and have even flourished. But these city provisions to, basically, put residents and homeowners under constant threat again, will undo all that. And, if that happens, no ordinance will be able to buy back the good will and pride that the city currently experiences from historic (district) homeowners. Sincerely, Peg Pinard 11/9/2010 Page 1 of 4 As part of our objection to the city's categorical exemption of itself to prepare an environmental review of the proposed historical ordinance and guidelines we would like to present these pictures for the record as a statement of the city's lack of performance in being stewards to two of the oldest historical structures in the city. These structures have been owned by the City of San Luis Obispo for many years. The city has indicated that it was preparing to exempt itself from being subject to the same historical ordinance that it was going to require for city residents. Submitted by Peg Pinard, et. al. Nov. 7, 2010 RECENED ------- -t NOV 0 9 2010 t Yl J 1• 1Y1` fT. � _T j - � SLO CITY CLERK RED FILE MEETING AGENDA DATE!i 919P ITEM # PNa.- A- S .( S J 'I__.___—.- -_�� On Uzzie Street r- - bard co email: recoullicm CIT UrA P DIR IrASSTCM IR6 IB W ArrORM IR W 0-8wORIG If POLICE CWEF d ff PrtUBUAIE IB °PARK56RECDIR Cr__rr IrU77LDIR CrEIRM D SLOCnYNEWS IfCOUNCII. I(�GR The city's issue for the rest of us was to secure property. People have obviously been getting into this one. 11/9/2010 Page of r 11/9/2010 i l y IM �t 1/ / i a 1. Page 3 of 4 • r ti ROSA BUTRON ADOBE c. 1860 On Dana Street nF - r D � r5. T�..,-. �'�7:="lav �5•."1 • ,moi.; �` y.�vl Grp `� CGI 1j _ I ' r � 4 the city's issue for the rest of us was lack of paint to protect structures 11/9/2010 Page 4 of 4 t�� L The eaves are rotted out in many locations of �� r r Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5605 (20101109) The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.esel.com 11/9/2010 I I I �����uu�iiiiu��►►������`������� council m e m o rza n a u m city_oFsan luis_s spo,.community Oevelopm nt Oepautment, hard co • entad: DATE: November 9, 2010 0'��� d�pnDm V CRY Mt3R mial lR TO: Mayor& Council IrAMCM IrF=CHW �A7MRM WPWDM VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manage ar��o grPw«cw FROM: John Mandeville, Communi Devel pment Director d II d NEW rmE4 SHR DAt BY: Kim Murry, Long Range Planning dsiocrffNM WWuNCM ir,crff meae SUBJECT: November 9t° Council Item PH2 — Historic Preservation c Guidelines The Council has received several emails with comments related to the Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines scheduled to be considered on November 9t'. Staff has reviewed the emails, summarized the input (shown in italics) and provided responses below. 1. Program LUE 2.15 of the General Plan requires the City to start with the neighborhoods when new regulations are proposed. No meetings were held in the neighborhoods. No input from neighborhood residents was obtained. Land Use Element program 2.15 indicates the City will work with the neighborhoods to develop neighborhood wellness action plans. While a City-wide ordinance for historic preservation is not a "neighborhood wellness plan", it does have relevance to the historic districts and to the listed properties located within and outside of historic districts. One workshop was held "in the neighborhood" outside of a public hearing. In addition to the required legal notices, additional noticing and information was provided to property owners on the list of historic resources. Recent input from residents in the neighborhoods — Old Town in particular - is reflected in the draft documents being considered by the Council. Some of the issues identified by the Old Town neighborhood are not covered under the draft ordinance and guidelines: traffic, noise, parking and other related issues are associated with the area's proximity to the downtown core activities rather than the area's collection of historic structures. As such, these issues, while still of neighborhood concern, have not been addressed through the ordinance or guidelines. 2. Notification process was improper and inadequate. A review of the project file indicates that the required legal notification was provided for all public hearings. The City has strived to provide the community with opportunities to participate in the process of adopting the proposed ordinance. Input from community members was incorporated directly into the ordinance and guidelines during the hearing process and recent input from community members has also resulted in RECEIVED page t of 5 . RED FILE NOV 0 9 2010 MEETING AGENDA SLO CITY CLERK DATE l is ITEM # 9#9 I Council Memorandum (Historic Preservation Ordinance) changes to both documents. Information regarding the outreach efforts has previously been provided to Council and is summarized at the end of this memo. 3. The City added enforcement fines as a way to make money. The enforcement fines initially proposed as part of the ordinance have been removed. Although many jurisdictions in the State do include fines as part of their preservation ordinance, the Council did not support penalty fines and directed their removal from the draft ordinance. 4. The City does not have "clean hands" and therefore cannot exempt the ordinance and guidelines from environmental review. The City has not protected its adobes; is responsible for loss of historic structures in the Court Street, Chinatown and Garden Street Terraces projects; and is exempting itself from the ordinance. The proposed ordinance and guidelines are categorically exempt from environmental review per CEQA Guidelines Section 15308 because they are an action taken by the City to protect the environment. . While the City has not completely restored its adobes, it has worked to protect and stabilize them. The Rosa Butron adobe has had repairs done over the years to stabilize and secure the building. The Rodriguez adobe has been fully restored on the exterior. Interior improvements are not scheduled until programming for that adobe has been determined. The Murray adobe in Mission Plaza is restored and the exposed adobe bricks on its exterior are an aesthetic and educational resource. Of all of the adobes, the La Loma adobe is in most need of repairs. CDBG funds have been awarded for stabilization work on that adobe and construction is expected to begin after the first of the year. The ordinance would require environmental review for projects that propose demolition of historic structures. The City is not exempting itself from the ordinance and guidelines. The Council explicitly stated that it wanted to ensure that the City would be subject to the adopted rules and regulations. 5. The City has stated that it would use 90% of any grants obtained for staff salaries. City policy requires Council approval for grant applications. The City's grant application policies require identification of the associated work program and any resources needed to administer the grant before the application is made. Normally, grants are specific to the amount of funding (if any) allowed to be used to cover administrative costs. Staff is not aware of any grant that would permit over 20%to be used for administrative costs. 6. The City has withheld information through poor minutes of the CHC hearings and lack of a legislative draft. Page 2 of 5 Council Memorandum (Historic Preservation Ordinance) The preparation of action minutes are standard practice for all City advisory bodies and the City Council. A legislative draft of the ordinance and updated guidelines has been provided. Since most of the guidelines sections were being relocated to the draft ordinance, nearly all of the existing guidelines is proposed for deletion and replacement with new sections. A chart of changes proposed was provided to Council during previous hearings and is included in the current agenda report. 7. Changes are being proposed to zoning regulations without evaluation. Public input regarding Chapter 4 of the draft Guidelines pointed out that several uses listed were not in the table of allowed uses in the Zoning Code. Staff has recommended clarifying language in Chapter 4 to indicate only those uses allowed by the Zoning Code (or Zoning Code as amended) and consistent with the General Plan would be allowed. No changes to the Zoning Code are proposed at this time. 8. New regulations should be set aside until better days. Ordinance makes it more difficult to replace historic buildings. Demolition threshold should be set case by case. Historic preservation report is too expensive. Current Guidelines and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) already require the City to address demolition of historic buildings in its decision-making process. While the Zoning Ordinance defines demolition as alteration of more than 50% of a structure, the historic preservation documents define this as alteration of 25% or more of a historic structure in recognition of how much historic integrity is related to the fabric of the building. There is no evidence that the proposed changes will exacerbate the effects of the current recession. The design review process to evaluate changes to historic buildings is already in place and the proposed ordinance and guidelines will not change how that review occurs. The draft ordinance allows the Director to waive the requirement for a historic preservation report if the information is available for the decision-making process. 9. Why must our distinctive character be fixed in the late 1800- early 1900 architecture and character? The City's character is based on many things but the physical manifestation of the City's history is characterized by periods of Indian, Spanish, Mexican and American influence with the most robust physical development occurring after settlement associated with the Mission era. The ordinance and guidelines haven't arbitrarily chosen a specific architectural style to preserve but rather look to find ways for development to reuse or be compatible with some of the older buildings that reflect the City's history regardless of architectural style. 10. Must I request a re-zone to be removed from the historic resources list and how did 1 get on the list in the first place? Page 3 of 5 Council Memorandum (Historic Preservation Ordinance) Many properties were added to the list of historic resources in the mid-1980's after the City performed a survey to identify historic resources. Those recommendations were reviewed and approved by Council and zoning on properties within historic districts was updated to reflect the "H" overlay. In order to be removed from the list of historic resources, an application similar to one requesting to be placed on the list would be required. In order to request removal of the "H" overlay, an owner would need to file a rezone request to adjust the boundaries of the historic district to exclude their property. 11. How will the CHC determine economic hardship? The Council will make the determination regarding economic hardship for historic resource demolition requests that do not meet the identified criteria. The applicant will provide information that will be held in confidence by the City to support the request. Notification (continuation of question #2): Legal Ads for ARC and CHC hearings Postcards sent to owners of properties on historic resources list in advance of four hearings/workshops Email updates to over 50 people on interest list February 19 March 3 April 21 May 7 July 15 August 11 August 27 September 15 September 21 September 22 October 6 October 19 November 8 Display ad for March CHC workshop Sampling of local media coverage: hM2://www.sanluisobispo.com/2010/09/22/1298280/san-luis-obispo-historic-homes.htm I httt)://www.sanluisobisno.com/2010/09/21/1296864/cultural-heritage-committee-wants.hnnl Page 4 of 5 C� Council Memorandum (Historic Preservation Ordinance) htti)://www.sanluisobisRO.com/2010/09/18/129420 I/vieyMoint-whats-written-is-what.htmI http://www sanluisobispo com/2010/09/18/1294200/viewpoint-support-proposal-support.htmI http://www sanluisobispo com/2010/09/08/1280927/is-proposed-law-for-slos-historical.hnnI http•//www sanluisobispo com/2010/08/26/1265102/property-preservation-plan-causes.hrml http•//www sanluisobispo com/2010/04/29/1122676/viewpoint-historic-sites-key-to.htmi htti)://www.sanluisobispo.com/2010/04/24/111651 I/letters-to-the-editor-425.html hn://www sanluisobispo com/2010/03/19/1073745/watchful-eye-over-slos-historic.htm] hn://www newtimesslo com/news/4920/historic-preservation-ordinance-hits-home/ Informational brochure mailed to owners of properties on historic resources list - Summer 2010 Staff responded to invitations to speak to AIA, Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Association, SLO Board of Realtors, Save our Downtown, & Chamber Subcommittee Workshop August 2010 with display ad Staff responded to numerous phone calls and emails from interested property owners and met with several interested property owners to discuss and incorporate changes Display ad in Tribune on October 19"' indicating availability of documents and of Council meeting on November 9`h Informational brochure mailed to owners of properties on historic resources list - October 2010 Large postcards (shown in Attachment 3 of November 9 staff report) mailed to owners of properties on historic resources list with wording suggested by property owner in Old Town Channel 20 slides (Attachment 3 of November 9`h staff report) Display ad placed by SLO Board of Realtors in November 8't' Tribune Page 5 of 5 RECE�, ]ED NOV 0 9 2010 �L� CITT, 4 al k4 From: pinardmat@aol.com [mailto:pinardmat@aol.com] Sent:Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:24 PM To: Romero, Dave; Marx, Jan; acarter@slorcity.org; Settle, Allen; Ashbaugh,John; Murry, Kim Ce: Iwoodward@parks.ca.gov; rmcdonald@newtimes; bmorem@thetribunenews.com; dcongalton@charter.net; sierraclub8@gmail.com; jtrompeter@ksby.com Subject: Challenge to the City's Claim for an Exemption--Part 1 herd coyr. ems: .rcouxco. dcnD Dui November 4, 2010 AMCM RED FILE 0 �'"`R Submitted by Peg Pinard dens rna�.cgae . 714 Buchon St. MEETING AGENDA DIR DATE l q �o ITEM # PN a X118° T M �D°` San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 °'SL0CnYNM arW N`L WTMMGR a.eaK Brief Background: My husband and I: - restored the historic Myron Angel Home in San Luis Obispo and -submitted it for listing in the State and National Registers of Historic Places. -We then helped to organize the city's first Historic District -thereby making many other homes eligible for the Mills Act. We -co-founded the city's first neighborhood group, the Old Town Neighborhood Association. -This resulted in the city's first Historic Preservation Guidelines and the establishment of the City's Cultural Heritage Committee; -former Mayor of San Luis Obispo -former Supervisor, San Luis Obispo County For the Record RE: Proposed Historical Ordinance and Guidelines Refute: San Luis Obispo City's claim for an exemption from environmental review City's Claim: "The proposed ordinance is exempt from environmental review under Section 15308 because it consists of an action by a regulatory agency to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment." This categorical exemption is not supported by the evidence.. Introduction: The City of San Luis Obispo has a General Plan that was evaluated through anEIR which was approved by the City Council. This proposed ordinance was not done in compliance with the General Plan therefore the city is not entitled to categorically exempt itself from CEQA review. It is a false assumption to claim that, because the topic is historic preservation that anything proposed is "good". There are many negative impacts to this ordinance and guidelines that have not been identified. There are significant environmental consequences that have been ignored and are not mitigated During the last General Plan update the city did extensive outreach into the neighborhoods andreceived phenomenal public involvement in return. So much so, that, at times, the meetings had to be moved to the Veteran's Hall in order to accommodate everyone. The public involvement was so effective that the city decided to incorporate and codify the process into its General Plan. The key elements were: early and meaningful involvement with residents and meetings held in the neighborhoods. This was specifically meant to make it convenient for residents to attend, to make sure that residents were informed about the issues, and to facilitate discussion. That process, along with the environmental analysis, was codified as section 2.15 of the General Plan. The city did not follow the General Plan withthis proposed ordinance and guidelines. Instead, the city did a top-down approach and unveiled an essentially finished document for the public to comment on. There was no input from the neighborhoods into the formation of the. document, prompting most residents to inquire; "What problem was the city trying to solve?" There was no survey, no input solicited from the owners of historical resources as to what difficulties they might have been experiencing in restoring their historic homes or how the city might help to make restorations, rehabilitations or maintenance easier. When asked if the city didn't already have the laws it needed to enforce building safety and structural integrity, the city responded that, yesit did, but that they wanted more money. This effort by the city to see historical resources simply as a way to make more money has a number of very significant negative environmental impacts. For the past 30 years, the existing Guidelines have been working very well with families returning to the historical downtown neighborhoods and the resurgence of restoration projects throughout the historical neighborhoods. Young families, especially, are able to exchangetheir 'sweat-equity" and everyone benefits. The existing Guidelines were formulated to 'help', basically, the carrot approach. There were a number of assisting programs to encourage preservation, one of which was a short term, low interest loan program that helped residents do the repairs required in order to get a long-term bank loan. Most often this involved money for a foundation. The existing Guidelines have been very effective. In contrast,the word 'help' doesn't even appear in this proposed ordinance. It is designed as a legislative hammer. This 180 degree shift from what had been successful, in how to approach the goal of historic preservation, has a significant environmental impact and should be subject to CEQA review. Another important component for achieving the goal of historic. preservation has been the quality of life for residents living in historic districts. That people like living here is the number one reason they take care of their homes.That is another reason that Section 2.15 of the General Plan was written the way it was. Too many decisions had been made at the staff level and without the council receiving input from the residents who Lived in these historic neighborhoods. Programs were incorporated into the existing Guidelines based on the input from those residents. The existing Guidelines were veryeffective and, as a result, we have one of the most successful, historical downtown residential areas in the state. However, recently,the city has been ignoring its own laws and has been allowing city actions to degrade the quality of life for its residents. The city did not follow the General Plan. There were no meetings in the neighborhoods, residents of the historical neighborhoods were not part of the process, real problems aren't being addressed, therefore 'quality of life' will be significantly affected. According to CEQA,information, involvement and an open process are the key components to effective stewardship of our environment and historic preservation. At each step, this did not happen with the city's process and will be enumerated below. As the court determined in Valley Adv. v. City of Fresno (2/15/08) "A categorical exemption cannot be applied to a project that may result in an adverse impact on a historical resource." Points in Evidence. A. The City of San Luis Obispo failed to follow Section 2.15.E of the General Plan which states that: "To help residents preserve and enhance their neighborhoods, the city WILL: Involve residents early in reviewing proposed public and private project that could have neighborhood impacts, by notifying residents and property owners and holding meetings at convenient times and places within the neighborhoods." This did not happen. There were no meetings in the neighborhoods. The city's process was inconsistent with the General Plan and their claim for an exemption should be denied. 8. 1. Notification:There was improper, deficient and misleading "notification". On the main body of the postcard, which is what is intended to be read, and carries the main message, the city used a preprinted form that had nothing to do with the ordinance. It was the same postcard that the city used for notifying residents of a building project in their area, such as a garage addition. The only reference to hearings for the proposed new laws was on the front side of the postcard in tiny print to the left of the address along with the return address and postmark. 2. The city also claimed that, since every successive meeting was a continuance of the first one, that they did not need to re-notify residents of subsequent meetings. For the one public informational meeting the city finally agreed to (very late in the process), the city sent a postcard with the wrong date and meeting place. By the time the city sent a correction, people were very confused as to which postcard was the correct one. 3. The city did not meet its notification requirement on another count. This ordinance affects everyone in a historical district yet the city only sent postcards to Master List and Contributing listed property owners. Everyone else who will be directly impacted with this new law received no notification. C. The city does not come to the CEQA determination with "clean hands". The city's own actions do not ensure "maintenance. I V restoration enhancement or protection of the environment." as the city claims. 1. For the record, we submit pictures of the city's own historic adobes and the negligence the city has demonstrated (Transmittal Part 2). Even in good economic times, the city did not protect these very unique, historic assets. The city is not a responsible regulatory agency for the protection of historic structures. 2. Also, as evidence of its lack of "clean hands", the city is responsible for the greatest number of demolitions of historic structures. In order to accommodate new development the city approved the demolitions of (then) existing historical resources for the Copeland's Downtown Center Development, Copeland's Court Street Development, Copeland's Chinatown Development and, most recently, a significant portion of a downtown block is to be demolished for the Garden Street Development. 3. Additional evidence for lack of being a responsible regulatory agency, and therefore not entitled to an exemption from environmental review, is the city's immediate response, in writing, of its intention to exempt itself from being covered by this ordinance. 4. Additional lack of 'clean hands' actions: This ordinance is really about the city discovering a new revenue source - its not about historic preservation. In describing why they wanted to become a Certified Local Government (CLG), the city stated that it would be using 90% of any grant money for staff salaries. There is no disclosure of the actual costs that this ordinance is going to require from the residents of the city. The city did not disclose that city residents would need to provide a 40% Grant match, the city did not disclose that participation in a CLG would include the registration, transportation, lodging and meal costs for the 7- member Cultural Heritage Commission and staff to attend a mandatory annual conference, nor were there calculations disclosed to the public for the hours of staff time required for providing reports to the state as well as any grant proposals. Yet, on the radio, staff claimed that participation in the CLG was 'revenue neutral'. Honesty, openness and transparency is expected. D. The city cannot exempt itself from environmental review and CEQA because the city has been the main cause of destruction and deterioration to other historic properties in the historic districts. Through improper filling-in of drainage swales and lack of maintenance in its creeks, the city has caused flood damage to historic homes. The city has caused damage to sidewalks in historic districts, demolition of historical features in the historic districts, and even thwarted residents' efforts to improve their historic properties through the building inspector's lack of knowledge and intimidating threats. E. The city cannot exempt itself from environmental review and CEQA due to its deliberate actions to withhold information from the public about this ordinance. Besides insufficient notification...: 1. When making changes to a document, the city has traditionally prepared a "legislative draft" which means that the adopted text of the documents are provided and text revisions are marked as follows: new additions are underlined and deletions are indicated by stfiiEeeuts. This way, any member of the public can pick up the document and easily identify and understand the proposed changes. This did not occur. 2. In fact, when this omission was pointed out to the city, the city said they would go back and prepare the "legislative draft" for the public. It wasn't until late August, after boasting that they had a legislative draft ready, that what the city posted on its website was a sham. The city posted the existing Historic Preservation Guidelines with one line drawn through the entire document. The new proposed ordinance was simply added in its entirety. There was no way anyone could have figured out what had changed. It was not legislative draft, even though the city posted and identified it as one on its website. This was deceptive and manipulative. It was not an action to support an exemption from CEQA. 3. In addition, the manner of taking minutes of the Cultural Heritage Committee changed and left the public without the usual access to be informed about any action or discussion taking place with the Commission. This is unlike any other CLG community's minutes that we have read. Other cities' minutes demonstrate the usual (albeit brief) descriptions of discussions along with motions made and who made them, and comments from the public. There was no information about the discussion, votes or even any (,D reporting of the points made in SLO's CHC minutes. This brings into question the legal sufficiency of the recording of actions by a city advisory committee. At the very least, it had the effect of keeping information from being available to the public. CEQA court decisions and comments indicate that information and disclosure are very important. In Section 21005, CEQA's addresses those concerns whenit says that "Information disclosure provisions which precludes relevant information from being presented to the public...may constitute a prejudicial abuse of discretion..." F. 1. There was no analysis of the historical, social and economic. impacts of the new ordinance.. There are groundless presumptions that, because the topic is "historic preservation", that anything proposed is good. This is a false assumption. There are very significant environmental impacts to what the city is proposing. The city has been operating under Historic Preservation Guidelines for the past 30+ years and these have been proven to be very effective in the preservation of historic neighborhoods. Those Guidelines were based on the concept of 'help'- of using what we've learned, sharing that information with others and trying to make it easier for others to take care of their historic homes. As such, people have been willing and even encouraged to participate in restoring and maintaining these older structures. The word 'help' doesn't even appear in the new ordinance. It had been replaced with words like "failure to obey orders" and other verbiage meant to convey coercion. These changes in method and direction have environmental impacts and consequences that need to be evaluated. 2. History has demonstrated that the most effective method for the preservation of historical structures has come when people want to do the work, not when they are forced to do it. This about-face in the manner in which the city deals with homeowners will, most definitely, have a significant effect. That effect needs to be evaluated. 3. Socially and demographically, this city has already lost a significant number of its home-owner-occupied residences. Where cities experience very high transience and where effective safety methods such as "neighborhood watch" are not able to operate, then people leave and neighborhoods decline. We have seen this happen when residents experience a substantially diminished quality of life. Ironically, because the city is not looking at the factors that encourage and support residents living in historic structures, it will be the cause of, and bring about, the very actions it claims it wants to avoid. The city has taken the fact that, so far, residents have enjoyed living here for granted. It has ignored the fact that more and more people are moving out again. This ordinance, along with the city's willful disregard of the General Plan, has already had a negative effect and will continue to have a significant negative impact. Homeowners, especially families, will leave areas where they don't feel safe and are unable to determine who belongs in the neighborhood and who doesn't. The loss of a stable residential population, people who take pride in their work and their homes, has had a profound effect on many historic downtown neighborhoods throughout the state. In preparing this document, the city has stated that it wants to use these neighborhoods for tourism, mentioning the economic benefit to the city many times. No assessment was done of the impacts that this increase in traffic,noise, garbage, damage to vehicles, homes, property, and the effect on the quality of life that residents will be subjected to. The emphasis on bringing more strangers into neighborhoods in this day and age is a safety concern for many residents. The city does not enforce its noise ordinances,Residents 5 and 6 blocks away in the historic districts are impacted by the noise generated from city-sponsored events. The city wants to have more concerts and party venues without any analysis of what affect existing ones are already having on historic neighborhoods. For the record, this issue doesn't. just affect residents in historic neighborhoods, children standing in front of those loudspeakers are being subjected to decibel levels many times any acceptable or safe levels. 4. This ordinance did not start with asking residents in the historical neighborhoods what problems they were having and how those issues could be addressed. There is no relationship between what is working for people with the existing Historic Guidelines and what is being proposed in the new Historic Ordinance. Instead, because no surveys were conducted and there were no meetings in the neighborhoods, the proposed new ordinance left out any concern or remedy for the impediments towards actual renovations that residents may be experiencing. The change from 'help' to 'you shall' is not inconsequential, it is already having a very dramatic negative impact. People are not likely to want to be on any city historical 'list' after seeing the city's actions of threats, fines and fees. These impacts cannot be ignored and should be subject to CEQA review. G. As part of this document, a wholesale change in zonin4 regulations is to occur that absolutely cannot be exempt from CEOA review. There is the provision that the planning director is be given the discretionary authority to grant exemptions from the city's adopted zoning ordinances. As part of this ordinance and guidelines, the city intends to grant itself the power to: (Ch.4.1.3.b) "Re-establishment of the property's historic use...provided the Director determines such uses are compatible with adjacent uses." and (c) "Any other uses which is determined to be compatible with its surroundings and..." This is to be an "incentive", meaning that the city sees this as a good thing. This policy is against the General Plan which explicitly states what is allowed in each zoning category. This proposed change has not been subjected to any environmental review. The ordinance and guidelines state that the planning director can grant "original uses" and "any other uses..." in what are now legally designated R-2, R-3. R-4, (etc.) neighborhoods. "Original uses" include hospitals, sanitariums, machine shops, doctors offices, upholstery shops, hair salons, and even a brothel...uses not allowed under the current residential zoning ordinance. Past history in the city of San Luis Obispo has shown that this is the single most destructive policy change that the city could have ever introduced. People move here with the expectation that this will remain a residential area. They rely on the zoning laws as the most basic level of protection for their home. That now, different uses can be permitted, effectively undoing the current General Plan zoning laws, and that applications for these permits could become a constant challenge to residents to have to fight against, is more than a neighborhood can withstand. It's what almost brought down the largest historical neighborhood, the Old Town area, 30 years ago. Residents fought the constant threat of developers wanting to turn housing into offices or other speculative uses. Those changes would have had buildings vacant after 5 p.m., on weekends and holidays thereby isolating families. "Neighborhood Watch", a community's best safety net, would be rendered ineffective. That alone is a very significant environmental impact. This discretionary method of determining allowable uses in any zone is not according to the City's adopted General Plan - which had undergone a full E.I.R. review approved by the council. This change cannot be exempt from CEQA since it is in opposition to the city's adopted General Plan. These zoning variances are discretionary actions, and have a significant environmental impact, as such, they require a CEQA review. This ordinance should be subjected to a full EIR and CEQA review. hard coor. email: RED FILE �ac°,,v"M t 07 DM MEETING AGENDA JeAWCif °rMEco" c!►rroaM &W= DAT ITEM # �Na if cM�xxroxzc &?W a�m November 7, 2010 a rMMM grUMDM or rt WTAM o HR M e ffiACrrYNM Qcouxm. Dear Honorable Mayor and Council Members— e MGR CUMK As Chairman of Save Our Downtown and as a long-time resident(24 years) of a circa 1880 folk Victorian residence located in the heart of San Luis Obispo, I am endeavoring to refute the contents of a rather lengthy letter you received from Peg Pinard dated November 4, 2010 regarding the proposed Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines. I would like to do so on a point-by-point basis. Of course Peg and I both share a common concern for the preservation of the historic fabric of our community. However,most of the points that Peg raises are insupportable and somewhat unfair with regards to the City's jurisprudence and due diligence while deliberating on the formulation of a proposed Historical Ordinance and Guidelines. PLEASE, do not be intimidated by her accusations that due process was not followed or that you, the City, has failed utterly as a responsible regulatory agency. Permit me to begin: 1) Concern: Regarding inadequate notification:"To help residents preserve and enhance their neighborhoods, the City will involve residents early in reviewing proposed public and private projects that could have neighborhood impacts,by notifying residents and property owners and holding meetings at convenient times and places within the neighborhoods" (these are Peg's caps). Rebuttal: It becomes increasingly apparent that Peg's concerns do not overlap onto the Downtown Core historical district(which is, of course, our primary concern) and that her primary focus is on the so-called Old Town Neighborhood. Assuming this, let me suggest that most of the Old Town Neighborhood is located approximately FOUR BLOCKS away from the City Council Chambers where all of these deliberations took place. The other Historical districts are located even closer to City Hall than this. 2) Concern: Regarding inadequate notification: "It was the same postcard that the City used for notifying residents of a building project in their area...." Rebuttal: It has been my observation over the sixteen years that I have served on both the SLO Architectural Review Commission and the Planning Commission that public turnout is far greater when the proposed change occurs within the resident's proverbial "back yard" as opposed to the public turnout one would expect in response to city-wide policy changes. 3) Concern: Regarding inadequate notification: "This ordinance affects everyone in a historical district yet the City only sent postcards to Master List and Contributing List property owners". Rebuttal: Am I mistaken,or are the Master and Contributing List property owners the only ones affected by this change? RECEIVE® NOV 0 8 2010 SLO CITY CLERK 4) Concern: That the City does not have"clean hands": "The City is not a responsible regulatory agency for the protection of historic structures" Rebuttal. This is an apparent"catch 22". The City would LIKE to become a more responsible agency in this regard through accessing the revenue streams that a C.L.G will provide. 5) Concern: That the City does not have"clean hands": "The City is responsible for the greatest number of demolitions of historic structures." Rebuttal: It is patently UNFAIR to assume that without an Historical Preservation Ordinance, the City had any other option besides demolition as soon as the City Building Department deemed the structures unsafe or uninhabitable. AND, the City seldom initiated these demolitions...rather they were initiated by property owners. This past track record could have been avoided had the City already had in place an Historic Preservation Ordinance...another"catch 22". 6) Concern: That the City does not have"clean hands": "This ordinance is really about the City discovering a new revenue source—it's not about historic preservation". Rebuttal: How could Peg have served as Council Member, Mayor and County Supervisor without understanding the fiduciary implications of responsible enforcement of public policy? YES, proper administration of an Historic Preservation Ordinance will require adequately-funded staff time and an on-going investment in the education of new Cultural Heritage Committee members. Discretionary decision-making bodies need to keep current on legislative and regulatory changes being made regularly at both the City and State level. 7) Concern: That the City does not have "clean hands": "The City cannot exempt itself from environmental review and CEQA because the City has been the MAIN CAUSE of destruction and deterioration to other historic properties in the historic districts." Rebuttal: Can the City be held responsible—without an Historic Preservation Ordinance in place—for the several property owners' benign neglect of the following historically listed buildings that resulted in demolition: the Lubliner Building, the Sauer Grocery and Bakery Building, the Swiss-Italian Building and the Quintana Block otherwise known as the Blackstone Hotel,to name a few? 8) Concern: That the City does not have"clean hands": "The City cannot exempt itself from environmental review and CEQA due to its DELIBERATE actions to WITHHOLD information from the public about this ordinance... (for example) the manner of taking minutes of the Cultural Heritage Committee changed and left the public without the usual access to be informed about any action or discussion taking place with the Commission (Peg should have inserted "Committee" here). This is unlike any other CLG community's minutes that we have read". Rebuttal: But we are NOT a CLG (yet) and that is why we DON'T have the funded staff time to keep proper minutes for this committee. Perhaps if this "committee" were elevated to the status of a"commission"where it might have a final `say' on certain decisions, the"minutes"might become more of an issue. 9) Concern: That there should be analysis of the historical, social and economic impacts of the new ordinance (presumably proving that an ordinance is not required): "The City has been operating under Historic Preservation Guidelines for the past 30+years and these have been proven to be VERY EFFECTIVE in the preservation of historic neighborhoods". Rebuttal: Here, Peg is clearly speaking out of"both sides of her mouth". On the one hand,the City doesn't have "clean hands"because it has recklessly presided over numerous unnecessary demolitions of historically-listed properties...and yet the antiquated and(in many instances unenforceable) guidelines have been"VERY EFFECTIVE". 10) Concern: That there should be analysis of the historical, social and economic impacts of the new ordinance (presumably proving that an ordinance should not be required): "The City has taken the fact that, so far, residents have enjoyed living here for granted. It has ignored the fact that more and more people are MOVING OUT AGAIN." Rebuttal: Ask any realtor and property appraiser and (s)he will tell you that property values for in-town residences have gone up or held their own(I recently refinanced my mortgage and was informed that my appraised value was directly linked to it's desirable proximity to the Downtown Core). If people in the Old Town Neighborhood are moving out(which I haven't heard documented anywhere) it's because they are cashing out on their respective"gold-mines" and new residents are eagerly moving in. 11) Concern: That there should be analysis of the historical, social and economic impacts of the new ordinance (presumably proving that an ordinance should not be required): "In preparing this document, the City has stated that it wants to use these neighborhoods for tourism,mentioning the economic benefit to the City many times. No assessment was done of the impacts that this INCREASE in traffic, noise, garbage, damage to vehicles, home,property, and the effect on the quality of life that residents will be subjected to." Rebuttal: It is problematic to assume that through traffic will increase. As it is,tourists have to circulate through these neighborhoods (mine as well) to get.INTO the Downtown Core. Nothing will change in this regard. 12) Concern: That there should be analysis of the historical, social and economic impacts of the new ordinance(presumably proving that an ordinance should not be required): "The change from `help' to `you shall' is not inconsequential,it is already having a very dramatic negative impract. People are not likely to want to be on any City historical `list' after seeing the City's action of THREATS, FINES, and FEES". C �1 Rebuttal: Peg should know that most outlying neighborhoods throughout this City and other cities (that have homeowner's associations)have C.C.&R.s governing such things as property maintenance, color choices, etc. She chooses to construe that these types of restrictions (which she likens to THREATS, FINES, and FEES) do not serve to protect property values but rather jeopardize property values. This conception is simply insupportable! On another level, we as CUSTODIANS of historically listed or contributing properties should have special entitlements (i.e., funding) and obligations (backed up with fines or fees)to insure that these properties can survive for the enjoyment of succeeding generations. 13) Concern: That there should be analysis of the historical, social and economic impacts of the new ordinance (presumably proving that an ordinance should not be required): "The ordinance and guidelines state that the Planning Director can grant `original uses" and "any other uses..."in what are now legally designated R-2, R-3, R-4, etc. neighborhoods . `Original uses' include hospitals, sanitariums, machine shops, doctors offices, upholstery shops, hair salons, and even a brothel..." Rebuttal: This appears to be a"red herring"issue. With the exception of the so-called brothels (which we can hardly substantiate, even if we wanted to!), these were seldom ORIGINAL USES within the Old Town Neighborhood. I know you have many other important issues on which to deliberate in the next several days and so I therefore thank you for your time consideration in this matter. Respectfully Submitted, Allan Cooper, Chair Save Our Downtown 756 Broad Street San Luis Obispo, CA acooper@calpoly.edu RECEIVED From: Geoffrey Moreland [mailto:gwm847@att.net] NOV O 9 2010 Sent:Tuesday, November 09, 2010 10:26 AM To: Dunsmore, Phil SLO CITY CLERK Subject: Postpone hearing of Cultural Heritage Committee recommendations Hi, As a friend of one of the homeowners that will be directly affected by the implementation of the recommendations of the Cultural Heritage Committee, 1 am asking that the hearing be postponed to a later date. Many of the folks that have a direct interest have been busy with the recent election and could use a little more time to prepare themselves to respond to the committee's recommendations. I appreciate your consideration in this matter. Respecfully, G. Moreland Iwrd 90AW, mail: dCOUNM GKMD DIR KaWmc t CPUDIR RED FILE IrAW00' °maw w MMRNEY W w re MEETING AGENDA ir�'PM X16 dPO1G�°� PIB e'PARKSBRECDIR DATE Zr c1rr mt // 9/O ITEM # ��oZ cNEwra�s . .. d$ItD1R_ VS[AdNNEWS IrCOUNCIL arpwmait 41 cLERx hard co email: o COUNCIL u CDD DIR c CrIYMGR c FlTDIR J' o ASST CM o ME CHIEF o ATTORNEY a PW DER o CLERMRIG c POUCECHIIEF o PIE o PAPM&RECDDt c TRIBUNE o UIUDIR 9 November 2010 o NEWTIMES G HRDIR o SLO CrIYNEWS aCOUNCIL a CITY MGM To: Mayor Dave Romero and SLO City Councilmembers C CLERK From: Deborah Cash, Executive Director, SLO Downtown Association Re: Historic Preservation Ordinance The Downtown Association Board of Directors at its meeting today, voted to unanimously support the recommendation of the Economic Activities Committee regarding the Historic Preservation Ordinance with revisions that you will be discussing at tonight's meeting. The recommendation was submitted to Kim Murry last week with the comment that it had not yet received board approval and was therefore a committee recommendation that would be reviewed by the Board. The purpose of this memo is to provide documentation of that subsequent action by the Board today. The memo is attached to this document. Thank you for your consideration of the Downtown Association's concerns and for your efforts in establishing preservation measures for our city's historic properties. Attachment: Memo to Kim Murry,November 2,2010 Cc: SLO Downtown Association Board of Directors Kim Murry, Deputy Director, Long Range Planning Robert Horch, City Parking Manager/Downtown Champion 2 November 2010 RED FILE To: Kim Murry, Deputy Director,Long Range Planning MEETING AGENDA Community Development, City of SLO DATE//I9/o ITEM k—Ph'--2- From: Deborah Cash, Executive Director, SLO Downtown-Association Re: Historic Preservation Ordinance The Downtown Association Economic Activities Committee recently reviewed the draft updated Historic Preservation provided on October 19. The consensus of the committee was that the changes included in the ordinance are acceptable and likely to achieve a high level of community acceptance. There are two recommendations the committee would like to submit for the Council's consideration, although at this point in time, these recommendations have not been reviewed nor approved by the Board of Directors which meets next on November 9. RECEIVE-- NOV 0 9 2010 SLO CITY CLERK J However, the committee feels confident that the recommendations warrant consideration and will be asking for board support at that time.. These are: (Page 26) Section D. Violation—Penalty. Every property owner and/or responsible party, as defined in this chapter who violates provisions of this chapter is subject to penalty as set forth in chapter 1.12 or administrative enforcement as set forth under chapter 1.24 of this code. Comment: While it seems the intent of the modification to the formerly presented ordinance is to eliminate the monetary penalty section of the ordinance associated with the demolition of historic resources, the language in this section does continue to reference penalties and it is not clear whether they remain or not. The committee feels this section should clearly spell out what violations are being referenced and if penalties are actually eliminated or if they are just shifted to another section. (Page 9) 46. Responsible party: any person,business, corporation or entity, and the parent or legal guardian of any person under the age of eighteen (18) years, who has committed,permitted, directed or controlled any act constituting a violation of this ordinance. Comment: A responsible party should designate only someone who has ownership or control of the property. This is not clearly spelled out and could seemingly be applied to someone who is working on a property at the direction of a property owner but who should not be held liable for violating the ordinance if following the direction of the owner. Thank you for considering these comments for next Tuesday's night public hearing. After the SLO Downtown Board of Directors meets on Tuesday, I will provide additional information regarding board support of these comments. CC: SLO Downtown Association Board of Directors Economic Activities Committee Robert Horch, City SLO I I Sent: Tuesday,November 09, 2010 9:59:28 AM RECEIVED To: Council, SloCity NOV 0 9 2010 Subject: Historic Preservation Ordinance Auto forwarded by a Rule SLO CITY CLERK Mayor Romero & Council Members, Once again, I'm writing to ask you to pass the historic preservation ordinance tonight,. Clearly the opposition has no intention of providing anything constructive or they would have by now. From the Council's goal setting process, through the committee and commission hearings to the Council's review and modification of the proposed ordinance,this has been an open process in which many people; elected officials, staff and citizens have participated. Mayor Romero and Council Member Settle, you have worked long and hard to make the City a better place and now that you are retiring from the council it would be fitting to tie up this loose end. Thank you, Bob Vessely hart cojw. email: COUNCIL dCDD DIR RED FILE crWYMOR aFrrDnt IrAMCM WTMCH F MEETING AGENDA,' " DM Ir"c MMIU i d ouacm" DAT // /o ITEM # d PM gran'�Dm or NWTAW &M DM eSLOWYNM QOXINM ff Cu'RK From: Marco Rizzo[SMTP:MARCOLRIZZO@GMAIL.COM] RECEIVED Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 5:59:56 PM To: Council, SloCity NOV 0 9 2010 Subject: Historic Preservation Ordinance Auto forwarded by a Rule SLO CITY CLERK Dear City Council Members : I am writing to ask that tomorrow night's vote on the proposed Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines be postponed so that I can have more time read the proposed ordinance with its newest changes. I own two properties in the City of San Luis Obispo, 1421 Osos Street and 1028 Church Street, that are on the Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources that will be affected by the proposed ordinance and I need more time to read through it and figure out how exactly the new ordinance will affect me. I'm neither "for" or "against" it at this time but rather need more time and can't see how postponing the vote on it will have disastrous consequences. Regards, beta copr. email: d COUNCIL. CrCDD DIR Marco Rizzo dCr1YMGR V-MDIR RED FILE 6�� ppWW IR Ar CLERIGORIG dPOUCE CSF MEETING AGENDA PAW&MDUL Marco L Rizzo Ir 7RI11UNE 0*- DATE// W ITEM # �ffa � maEc ROMSLOANEws =CL www.caferomaslo.comOR www.t)erbaccocellars.com 805431-2972 MEMORANDUM RECEIVED NOV 0 9 2010 To: Mayor and City Council SLO CITY CLERK From: Council Member Jan Marx Re: Item PH 2 (Historic Preservation Guidelines and Ordinance) Date: November 9, 2010 Please consider my comments on the proposed Guidelines and Ordinance are handwritten on the attached pages from the documents we are considering. bud co v DM IrAWCM FW dPW= W�RIDWG p_ouacw Y �CIIYNhlV3ocoumm - RED FILE — MEETING AGENDA DA 11 a- ITEM # Ytfz Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 chXACR 3: tRea►tment of his oRic ResouRces 3.1 Construction in Historic Districts and on Properties with Historic Resources 3.1.1 Conformance with design standards. Construction in historic districts and on properties that contain listed historic resources shall conform with the goals and policies of the General Plan, the Historic Preservation Ordinance, these Guidelines, the Community Design Guidelines, any applicable specific or area plan, and the Secretary of the lu;mor's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. 3.1.2 Review of development projects. The Director 9W, ref rya development project application for a property located within a historic distriet:,or an a MAO.with a listed Historic Resource to the CHC for review,unless the Director detes'the projeclEYs:,i (a)Exempt from the California Environmental., lity Act;-pd y';:•f:' (b)Designed such that it would have no effect on- �.storic;q ,;Arcbaeological resources, and 3.,, (c)Consistent with 3.1.1 above. r'_ 3.1.3 Approval conditions. The CHC mai z w end condttio v sort environmental mitigation measures for construction in historic diki'ls'` =on_properttes;fihat contain listed historic resources. The Director, ARC,Planning Corinissioor:Gy,Cquiicil may impose conditions of approval and or environ ^ntL mitigation measure`for ply ag actions affecting Historic and Archaeological Resourc s i 3.1.4 Environmental" w. Dovelopment projeelgon properties that contain listed historic resources,and on ro erhiloca htstoric districts shall be considered environmentally P P ' y sensitive pint tn,the Corina Ejii o3tinenral Quality Act (CEQA) and require at a minimu WSii� hid!-.s�'ady to evahrate the projects potential effects on the resource axeept-Mw a �U the DimUor det ,nes.Q. rojectfk, (ffbbs not involve, =L z" 1) *;significant chat�e to the exterior (or interior, subject to Section 3.4.6) of a historicfi lure, 2) reloc4yn,or demolition of part or all of a historic or potentially historic structure, Or 3) grading on )3S_)e`d historic property or identified archaeological site;or ; ip, (b) is minor or incidental and has no potential to adversely affect cultural resources. l CGvs►'d G��(z' ! -9- PH2-175 Attachment Auachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 3.2 Construction in Historic Districts Figure 1-Historic Districts in San Luis Obispo,2010 city or san Luis oBispo histoRic OistRicts o' N, Nr 0 023 JP 3.2.1 Architecturally compatible development within Historic Districts. New structures in historic districts shall be designed to be architecturally compatible with the district's prevailing historic character as measured by their consistency with the scale, massing, rhythm, signature architectur-al elements, exterior materials, siting and street yard setbacks of the district's historic structures, as described in Figures 2 and 3. New structures shall copy or imitate historic structures,or seek to create the illusion that a new building is historic E +0 C-OP - 10- (J14 I-Jof-kf 6'aVL1e- "-m- 4* jTAct-- PH2-176 1 Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 Figure 6-Additions in Historic Districts N fm CN t- Guf OP•g OcAj.oAM IV Gl� EMBANG�67F:Gi�:S TA9IXO)lD 8M6TlxC-i : RF,fi a 47 p aD ��• b lip eAII.Af� ZC 6t. AMMON 6U(=.Of-JChLE A001T14'! MA00t&e OF A NEW A=rn vt4 i 1_A H OMILA L, NF.161f VSQ 3.4.6 Interior but7dmg changes. Interior cItanges'ttjyblicly accible?Il sted historic buildings r. whose architectural or historic significance i whoilyior`'Fsr# 11 -used on interior architectural characters or features shalLpz�s,a ,ve and restor$'�ign6ificant iMnor architectural features. iiy+" 3.4.7 Acquired histo C,rfsignificr# e. Changes'#gufisted historic resources that the Director or the CHC determines to4lia5ce acquftd historic sig ificance in their own right shall be retained g_. e and preserved - *v 4l r 35 Reconstractton Siston?-Resources! 3.5.I ;rc building coif; Recotzstntction of listed historic structures should preserve the original luAotr character q ;#he historic resource to the maximum extent possible; use of California HiYc Building cE de is encouraged to accomplish such preservation. 35.2 Consistency §tandards. Reconstruction shall follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards,and shall bei,used on conclusive evidence such as architectural plans,photos, as-built I drawings and other reliable and accurate information. I 35.3 Minor variations. The Director or the ARC, on recommendation by the CHC, may approve minor variations from the original design to meet code requirements; provided the overall architectural character is maintained and character defining features are accurately recreated f f I i 1i - 17- I I PH2-183 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines Attachment 6 June 2010 i chaptER 4: pReseizvation tools ana incentives 4.1 Cultural Resource Preservation Incentives and Benefit Programs The City intends to establish and maintain incentives to support and encourage the identification, preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction and continued use of historic and cultural resources. The City Council may offer these or additional preservation incentives to property owners of listed historic resources, as budget and/or fimding sources,allow: I 4.1.1 Reconstruction after loss. Subject to Director approval h sto is resources damaged or destroyed by fire or natural disasters may be reconstructed to: natch",historic appearance as existing before the damage without complying with.,development standards for setback, lot i coverage,height,parking requirements or other Zoning Regulations. ; 4.1.2 Modified development standards. Property._,develo inert standards u the Zoning Regulations and Parking and Driveway Standards maybe„relaxed by an Administrative Use Permit, following procedures set forth in SLOMC Chapfe x;;7;,58, if the modifications facilitate the preservation and/or rehabilitation &,,a,,historic resource;:nr. serve to reduce or eliminate impacts of development to a historic resource 4.13 Additional uses. The following additional uses n-be allowed on Historic Properties by an Administrative Use Permit: (a) Bed and Breakfast Inns with- dross floor ar6a not exceeding 2,500 square feet or three guest rooms in the W-3-ft zoi�,es a'pF'k (b)Re-establishm,Ent of thelpto)p rty� iitsto c u e'(defined as the historic resource's original use when tt tspeed bxe use`fgr which the"fesource was designed), provided the Director determin such uses are compati_le with adjacent used and Zoning Codeeen . `q��ofkoDd t ✓ i t7.22 anddesigo 4.1.4 Use permit review. (A) To apply for a Use Permit under this Chapter, the property owner or owner's agent shall submit a planning application, fee and supporting information to the Department. The application shall include a historic preservation report, as described in these Guidelines. The CHC shall evaluate whether the proposed land use and related building modifications are consistent with these guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties conformance reasonably necessary to preserve or j rehabilitate the historic resource, and shall report its findings to the Director. (B) In granting a Use Permit, the Director shall make the findings pursuant to SLOMC Chapter 17.58, including these specific findings: - 19 - PH2-185 i Attachment 6 City of San Luis Obispo-Draft Historic Preservation Program Guidelines June 2010 (a) Impacts of the use, including traffic and parking, would not be detrimental to the surrounding area. (b)Flexible development standards and/or uses conform to an approved historic preservation report and are necessary for the preservation and/or rehabilitation of an historic resource. (c) Preservation agreements, contracts or fagade easements between the property owner and City that would provide for preservation, restoration or rehabilitatioa�.6f-&xterior or interior features of an historic resource may be required as a condition of"e Permit. 4.1.5 Rehabilitation tax credits and grants. Historic resources may'lbe eligible for the State Historical Building Code, Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credits;Mills A&*p-joperty Tax Reduction Program,Community Development Block Grant and other programs that' y: . established by state,federal,or non-profit agencies,or by the City CQincil. 4.1.6 Historic and fagade easements. Prop erty""Q hers may,dedicate his* or facade easements to the City or to a non-profit organization t6"0sds&Ve cultural and historic resources. S<:5H Such dedication may qualify for fee waivers,rehabilitation`g ets,permit streamlining,Mills Act program participation or other incentiveQ,_..N ct to the approve 4f the City Council. u f 4.1.7 Transfer of development credit Fa proje m preserve.7,Wtural or historic resources on site,the City may enter into an agreements( trap erid opmbnt credit or density to another Y%Q^ (,S appropriate site proportiox the commercW6or area Ott number of dwellings possible to develop under current zp g Wtheresource we&,removed. 4.1.8 Fee waiver or ruction. property owns : ay apply for the waiver or reduction of ti _ planning,building and en" z,u.�_51a �t'on man permit fees for designated historic resources. The City Cgt +wazve�oatg or a '"feesT.fit can be demonstrated that the waiver will assist in the pre.Ae ii<on d sxgnated ko toric resource. 4.19`FritaUial assistance:E With 044 'Council approval, the City may use the Historic and Cultural Wftce Preservatidxi;Trust'Fund, State or Federal grants, affordable housing fiords or other fimdin`g° achieve hist'Fi is preservation objectives, especially for exceptional preservation projects whereile community objectives such as affordable housing, historic preservation, removal of spot Nk,ozAore sustainable property development can be achieved with such j assistance. i r�A l :« u•"S t� 1 4.1.9 Historic plaque program. Upon available funding,the City may provide standard historic plaques for designated historic properties and at no or reduced cost to property owners. High quality bronze historic plaques will be available to purchase through the City at manufacturer's cost plus handling. 4.1.10 Historic library. Property owners of historic properties shall have use of the CHC reference library in the Department. I -20 - PH2-186 j v _J Ordim=No. (20 10 series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 3 14.01.070 Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing 14.01.080 Historic District Designation Purpose and Application 14.01.090 Process for establishing or amending a Historic District 14.01.100 Demolition of Historic Resources 14.01.110 Relocation of Historic Resources 14.01.120 Unpermitted Demolition or Destruction of Historic Resources 14.01.130 Historic Preservation Fund 14.01.140 Enforcement 14.01.150 Appeals 14.01.160 Severability i 14.01.010 Findings and Purpose. i A. Findings. E 1. The City of San Luis Obispo has a distinctive physical character and rich history that are reflected in its many cultural resources, such as historic structures and sites. These irreplaceable resources are important to the community's economic vitality, quality of life, and sense of place, and need protection from deterioration, damage, and inappropriate alteration or demolition. i 2. The City of San Luis Obispo has been fortunate to have owners who care about the history of their community and have undertaken the costly and time-consuming task of restoring, maintaining and enhancing their historic homes and commercial buildings. Their efforts have enhanced the distinctive character and sense of place of the community. 3. The Califomia Environmental Quality Act requires special treatment of historic resources and the establishment of clear local guidance for the identification and preservation of such resources lends clarity and certainty to the rey*ew of development applications involving historic resources. S� ses�(io"` 3. �• 4 s d fhb'-Fo�c PWS4�-�01 Pte°/�•', i B. Purpose. The broad purpose of this ordinance is to promote the public health, safety and welfare through the identification, protection, enhancement and preservation of those properties, structures, sites, artifacts and other cultural resources that represent distinctive elements of San Luis Obispo's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural history. Specifically,this ordinance sets forth regulations and procedures to: 1. Identify, protect, preserve, and promote the continuing use and upkeep of San Luis Obispo's historic structures,sites and districts. 2. Foster the retention and restoration of historic buildings and other cultural resources �. that promote tourism, economic vitality, sense of place,and diversity. PH2-250 1 v � , Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) 'r- Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 5 4.Alteration: change,repair,replacement, odel, modification,or new construction to:(1) the exterior of an historic resource or adj t building, (2) the structural elements which support the exterior walls, roof, or ext ` r elements of the historic resource or adjacent building, (3) other construction on a lot, (4) character defining features of the interior of a historic resource if the structure's signifi ce is wholly or partially based on interior features and the resource is publicly-accessible "Alteration" does not include ordinary landscape maintenance, unless the landscaping is identified as significant at the time a property is listed. "Alteration" also does not include ordinary property maintenance or repair that is exempt from a building permit, or is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties. 5. Archaeological Site: those areas where archaeological resources are present and may be larger or smaller than the project site. An archaeologicaLsite may include prehistoric Native American archaeological site, Historic archaeological sites; sites or natural landscapes associated with important human events;and Native American Sacred Places and Cultural landscapes. i 6.ARC:the Architectural Review Commission as appointed by the City Council. 7. California Register: California Register of Historical Resources defined in California PRC 5024.1 and in CCR Title 14 Chap 11.5, Sec 4850 et seq. as it may be amended. 8.CHC:the Cultural Heritage Committee as appointed by the City Council. 9. Character Defining Features: 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, finishes, etc. i 10.City: the City of San Luis Obispo. 11. Community Design Guidelines: the most recent version of the City's Community Design Guidelines as adopted and amended from time to time. I 12. Contributing Resource or Property: Buildings or other resources at least 50 years old that maintain their original or attained historic and architectural character, and contribute either by V- themselves or in conjunction with other structures to the unique or historic character of a j neighborhood, district,or to the City as a whole.. They need not be located in a historic district. 1 In some cases,buildings or other resources that are less than 50 years old,but are nonetheless significant based on architecture, craftsmanship or other criteria as described herein maybe designated as a Contributing resource. gql) A" e_r) PH2-252 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 6 13.Council:the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo. 14.Cultural Resource: any prehistoric or historic district, site, landscape,building, structure, or object included in, or potentially eligible for local, State or National historic designation, including artifacts,.records,and material remains related to such a property or resource. 15. Demolition: for the purpose of this ordinance, "demolition"refers to any act or failure to act that destroys,removes,or relocates, in whole or part a historical resource such that its historic or architectural character and significance are materially altered. 16. Deterioration: the significant worsening of a structure's condition, architectural or historic integrity,due to lack of maintenance, organisms,neglect,weathering and other natural forces. 17. Director: the Director of the Community Development Department, or another person authorized by the Director to act on his or her behalf. 18. Feasible: capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account cultural, economic, environmental, historic, legal, social and technological factors. Structural feasibility means that a building or other structure can be repaired or rehabilitated so as to be safe and usable without significant loss of historic fabric; Factors to be considered when making this determination include the existence of technology that will allow the design of the work and the ability to repair, supplement or replace load-bearing members and the thermal and moisture protection systems required for continued use of the structure; and the physical capacity of the structure to withstand the repair and/or rehabilitation process without the danger of farther damage. 0. Historic Building Code. the most recent version of the California Historical Building Code, Title 25, Part, 8, as defined in Sections 18950 to 18961 of Division 12, Part 2.7 of Health and Safety Code(H&SC), a part of California State law. 20. Historic Context: Historic context are those patterns, themes or trends in history by which a specific occurrence, property, or site is understood and its meaning and significance is made clear. 21. Historic District/Historical Preservation District: areas or neighborhoods with a collection or concentration of listed or potentially contributing historic properties or archaeologically significant sites, where historic properties help define the area or neighborhood's unique architectural, cultural, and historic character or sense of place. Historic districts wAy=bep. Mv-d delineated on the official zoning map as Historic (H) overlay zone under San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 17,54. PH2-253 Ordinance No.(2010 series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 9 44. Rehabilitation: the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its architectural,cultural, or historic values. 45. Relocation: removal of a resource from its original site and its re-establishment at another locatio essentially the s , ce and architectural de in 46. Responsible party: any person; business, corporation or entity, and the parent or legal guardian of any person under the age of eighteen (18) years, who has committed, permitted, directed or controlled any act constituting a violation of this ordinance. 47. Restoration the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period. 1 48. Scale: the proportions of architectural design that relate to human size or other relative size measure. i 49. Secretary of the Interior's Standards: the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as published by the U.S. Department of the Interior and as amended from time to time. 50.Setting: the physical area, environment or neighborhood in which a resource is located. i 51. Sensitive Site: a site determined by the Community Development Director, Planning Commission, Architectural Review Commission or Council, upon recommendation of the Cultural Heritage Committee, to have special characteristics, constraints or community value such as: historic significance, historic. context, creek side location or visual prominence, requiring more detailed development review than would otherwise be required for other similarly } zoned lots. 52. Site: as used in this ordinance, the location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined, or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural, or archeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. 53.Siting;the placement of structures and improvements on a property or site. 54. Stabilization; the act or process of applying measures designed to reestablish a weather resistant enclosure and the structural stability of an unsafe or deteriorated property while maintaining the essential form as it exists at present. j PH2-256 i n i Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page l l 2. Properties for inclusion on the City's List of Historic Resources those properties, areas,sites, buildings, structures or other features having significant historical, cultural, architectural, community,scientific or aesthetic value to the citizens of San.Luis Obispo. 3. The Master and Contributing Properties Lists of Historic Resources, and.Historic Property and Archaeological Site Inventories. 4. Actions subject to discretionary City review and approval that may affect significant archaeological, cultural or historic resources. 5. The application of architectural, historic, and cultural preservation standards and guidelines to projects and approvals involving historic sites, districts, and structures. 6. Consolidation of information about cultural resources and promotion, participation in, or sponsorship of educational and interpretive programs that foster public awareness and appreciation of cultural resources. 7. Q,ida�tee-eft restoration, alteration, decoration, landscaping and maintenance related to development or demolition applications involving listed resources, and properties within historic preservation districts. 8. Incentive programs approved by the Council that are directed at preserving and maintaining cultural resources. 9 Information for property owners preparing local, state and federal historic nominations to utilize preservation incentives, including the Mills Act and federal tax incentives, such as rehabilitation tax credits. 17v C 44 C -gha0 �- 0-function within the guidelines and policies of the Advisory Body Handbook and perform •. {° 0304� other duties as assigned by Council. ^O.Ae--lam �, a S7 ,5 (as,F J"e4j"Ce C. Actions Subject to Cultural Heritage Committee Review. The Committee shall review and make recommendations to the Director, Architectural Review Commission, Planning Commission or City Council on applications and development review i projects which include any of the following: 1. Changes to the Inventory of Historic Resources. 2. Changes to historic districts and applications to establish new historic districts. i r PH2-258 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 12 3. Statements of historic significance and historic inventories for existing and proposed historic districts. 4. New construction, additions or alterations located in historic districts, or on historically listed properties,or sensitive archaeological sites. 5. Applications to demolish or relocate listed historic resources or structures. 6. s aa -jwtd acdons- to the Committee by the Community Development Director ("Directoel,Architectural Review Commission,Planning Commission,or Council. 7M rR � tof public agencies that may affect historic or cultural resources within the City. 4or lack v�,aCHOA 14.01.040 Community Development Director Role The CHC is assisted by staff of the Community Development Department. The Community Development Director ("Director) is responsible for interpreting and implementing this ordinance and helping the CHC carry out its duties. Notwithstanding Section 14.01.030C 1-5 and 7 of this ordinance, the Director may determine that CHC review is not required for actions or projects that: 1) do not adversely affect historic resources, or 2) are consistent with this ordinance, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and no public purpose would.be served by requiring CHC review. 14.01.050 Historic Resource Designation The following classifications shall be used to designate historic resources and properties. The primary categories of historic significance are "Master List" and "Contnouting!' 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 Resources or Properties. Buildings or other resources at least 50 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, but.should be visible to the public. In some cases,buildings or other resources that are less than 50 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. PH2-259 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 18 (1) A map (8-1/2" x 11") from the official zoning map, with the area to be changed shaded or outlined in a heavy,black line, with the proposed area to be changed clearly labeled, and (2) Information showing how the application meets the criteria to establish or alter a historic district designation. (3) A Statement of historic significance. A statement of historic significance shall be prepared by a qualified professional, as listed in the City's List of Qualified Historians. The Director may waive the requirement that the statement be prepared by a qualified professional if the applicant provides adequate information to enable informed review of the proposed district. C. Contents. Statements of Historic Significance shall include, but not be limited to the following; (1)A visual and written description of the district's boundaries. (2) A description of the district's architectural, historic, and cultural resources, character and significance, including a historic survey documenting the period of significance and how historic properties meet adopted local, state and where applicable,federal criteria for historic listing. (3)Preservation goals and concerns for the district including but not limited to; q Identification of preservation priorities, important features, goals and objectives, and b. Identification of potential obstacles to preservation,and c. Identification of historic land use policies and goals for future land use, and d. Special considerations for development review of projects both involving and not involving historic resources. (4) Graphic and written design guidelines applicable to the district's preservation goals, historic character and features which shall include,but not be limited to: (a) Guidelines for projects involving historic resources, focused on preserving the ' district's character and significant archeological, architectural, and historic features; and i i (b) Guidelines for projects within the district but not involving historically designated properties, focused on maintaining street character and compatibility with the district's historic character while not,mimicking historic styles. l I ^17C 710 J4 p1Q(,e Jf'a fe � I PH2-265 Ordinance No.(20 10 Series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 21 G. Historic acknowledgement. An acknowledgment of demolished resources shall be provided through historic signage and/or the reuse or display of historic materials and artifacts on site, at the owner's expense,to the Director's approval. H. Code requirements. Demolitions shall follow standards and procedures in the Demolition and Building Relocation Code and California Building Code as locally amended. I 1. Expiration of demolition approval. Demolition approval of a listed historic resource shall expire two years after its date of approval, unless a building permit has been issued and construction has begun. A one year extension may be granted by the Director. Additional time extensions shall require reapplication to, and approval by the CHC. J. Economic Hardship. An economic hardship provision is established to ensure that denial of _ a demolition permit does not impose undue hardship on the owner of a historical resource. If the applicant presents evidence clearly demonstrating to the satisfaction of the CHC or the City Council that the action will cause an extreme hardship, the CHC may recommend approval, and the Council may approve or conditionally approve a demolition or other application to modify a listed historic resource even though it does not meet one or more standards sex forth herein. The applicant shall be responsible for providing substantiation of the claim to the Director, who shall review the information with the Director of Finance and make a joint recommendation to the CHC on the hardship request. The CHC shall consider and make a recommendation to the Council regarding the financial impacts of denial of the demolition permit. Private financial information shall be maintained in confidence by the City. The CHC is authorized to request that the applicant furnish information,documentation and expert testimony, the cost of which shall be i paid by the applicant, to be considered by the Committee in its related findings. All additional required information shall be provided by a qualified individual or firm approved by the Director. In determining whether extreme hardship exists, the Committee and Council shall consider evidence that demonstrates: j (1)Denial of the application will diminish the value of the subject property so as to leave substantially no economic value, after considering other means of offsetting the costs of retaining �Yr G th str—Rc urce, including, but not limited to, tax abatements, financial assistance, building $ code mo i cations, changes in allowed uses, grants,; or (2)Sale or rental of the property is impractical, when compared to the cost of holding such property for uses permitted in the zoning district; or (3)Utilization of the property for lawful purposes is prohibited or impractical; I 14.01.110 Relocation of Historic Resources. Relocation has the potential to adversely affect the significance of a historic resource and is discouraged. Relocation applications shall be evaluated as follows: i PH2-268 Ordinance No. (2010 series) Attachment 7 GPI 72-09 Historic Preservation Ordinance Page 26 warranted. Additional time to correct the violation may be allowed where the property owner is exercising due diligence in acting to correct noticed violations. The Director shall have the authority to place reasonable conditions on such an extension. Notwithstanding these provisions, if the Director or the Chief Building Official determines there is an imminent threat to a listed historic or cultural resource, the Director shall notify the property owner of the imminent threat and property owner shall be required to provide urgent measures deemed reasonable and necessary to protect the public health and safety and for the protection of the resource within 72 hours of notification. C. Work stoppage. In addition to any other fines, penalties or enforcement provisions set forth in this ordinance, failure to comply with an approved application shall constitute grounds for immediate stoppage of the work involved in the noncompliance until the matter is resolved. D. Violation — Penalty. Every property owner and/or responsible party, as defined in this chapter who violates provisions of this chapter is subject to penalty as set forth in chapter 1.12 or administrative enforcement as set forth under chapter 1.24 of the Municipal Code. 14.01.150 Appeals Decisions of any city official or body under the provisions of this chapter are appealable in a9pordance with the provisions of Ordinance 1.20 of the Municipal Code -ex Ar a fpml-c �lx� W '}'�A r Lltq Elr �jy �ih G/��, hCf/rGLL/►7� �C['ILG✓vU'�1 14.01.160 Severability. /�lasler l�'1 F 0- 60--14r 341'11 �IrJ rer, aaL n.e Should any section or other portion of this ordinance be determined unlawful or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction; the remaining section(s) and portion(s) of this ordinance shall pp be considered severable and shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council i Jurvr�/ members voting for and against, shall be published at Ieast five(5) days prior to its final passage, in the Telegram-Tnbune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty(30)days after its final passage. i INTRODUCED on the 9t'day of November, 2010 AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the j Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the . day of , 2010, on the following roll j call vote: 1! I PH2-273 hard coDr. email: ffo�9DUNCD. �DD1A O� 6ITTrDIR crmyrcm UfUCZF �ATfORlIEY WMDalouCM cmu CrM QAAW &RWDM FroSent Wednesday, Novem: Susan Tbes 3S 2010 2 0906 PMD.COM] a rows �Dm To: Ashbaugh, John Cc: Mark@mrcoward.com; Council, SloCity Pr Iry Subject: Re: FW: Historic resources ordinance Auto forwarded by a Rule RED FILE MEETING AGENDA Hi, John DATE U 9 /o ITEM # F/f 0", I'm sorry it's taken so long to get back to you. I o appreciate your outreach, I've just been terribly busy the last week or so. I've copied the City Council on this response because I'd like to share these thoughts with them, also. Thank you for the offer to meet with us. I would love to meet... after every owner of property deemed historic or in a historic district is notified of the meeting and invited to join us. Because, as you know, that's really my big gripe, that the public wasn't adequately informed, and therefore, involved. If the City has any intention of having historic preservation be a partnership between the City and property owners, this whole thing has been terribly mishandled. If historic preservation is of such importance to the City,why hasn't the City been in regular contact with owners of historic properties over the years? Some of the people who should be involved here don't even know their properties have historic designations! It's heartbreaking. We've owned this home for 12 years and never once did the City contact us or our neighbors and say, "Hey, we think your house is cool and your historic neighborhood is a great asset to our city. We want to help you and your neighbors keep it that way. Let's sit down, set some goals, review our challenges and see what we can do!" Instead, we're suddenly getting new ordinances. And, had some of us not been alert, we'd also be living under the threat of huge new fines and criminal charges. I'm sure with your background in educational leadership and organizations, you know a lot about the roles communication,motivation and participation play in effective partnerships. Imagine the results if people were invited into a true and mutually beneficial partnership to encourage and increase historic preservation efforts. It would start with improving the communication between the City and property owners in order to improve relationships and promote goodwill. There are so many great things that could be done. And sadly, there are so many potential benefits that will go unrealized if we push this thing through simply for the sake of expediency or because we feel we owe it those who have already put time into it. It reminds me of the poster on the wall at my old job. "If you can't find time to do it right the first time,how will you find time to do it again?" Wouldn't you love to do this right the first time? Let's gather our thoughts and come up RECEIVE® NOV 0 3 1010 SLO CITY CLERK with some ideas about how to do so. In the meantime, I will hope that you and other Council Members will acknowledge the value of doing things the right way and ask for a continuance. Thank you again for staying in touch. Susan On 10/23/2010 5:37 PM,Ashbaugh, John wrote: I had sent this e-mail to you Mark earlier this week-not sure whether Mark checks his district e-mail, and obviously I had the wrong e-mail for you. And all this time, Kim Murry is way ahead of me(as usual) in doing outreach. As stated in the original e-mail, I'm quite willing to meet with you and Mark and others from the neighborhood at a mutually convenient time. Thanks! John B. Ashbaugh San Luis Obispo City Council 990 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805/550-7713 From: Ashbaugh, John Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 10:46 AM To: 'mcowardC&slcusd.org'; 'scoward0slonet.org' Cc: Murry, Kim; Richardson, April Subject Historic resources ordinance Mark and Susan, I'm guessing on your email addresses here— please forward this to each other if needed, please. The City just published a notice in the paper that the ordinance draft would be available on our web site at 5 pm today. If you would like a"hard copy," I'm sure that can be arranged. Meanwhile, my offer stands as to meeting with you and your neighbors at Mitchell Park and/or in the Senior Center, or another convenient place(Parks & Rec has a conference room too), at a mutually convenient time. Often it's best to ask April Richardson, our Administrative Assistant, to arrange some time since she has access to my Outlook calendar. Just wanted to give you a heads-up. I'm sure that staff would be available for questions, too. Please keep me in the loop, if you can, about any queries and answers from the staff, so that I don't inadvertently contradict something that they might be saying. Thanks! John B. Ashbaugh San Luis Obispo City Council From: Michael Boudreau[SMTP:MIKEB@MTBARCHITECTURE.COM] c Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 4:45:13 PM RG�I— I"VED To: Council, SloCity Subject: Preservation Ordinance NOV 0 3 1010 Auto forwarded by a Rule Dear Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, SLA CITY CLERK Regarding Historical Preservation Ordinance I know this is a tough idea and with all due respect to the hard work put into this effort, please consider shelving the new historical preservation ordinance. I believe it in the best interest of the citizens of San Luis Obispo that this lot of new regulation be permanently set aside, or at least set aside until better days. This ordinance, even as well crafted as it is, will inevitably make it just that much more difficult for many property owners to replace or modernize their obsolete structures as we move forward with investment into our future, new green technologies and sustainable construction techniques abound and we must remain flexible. Requiring owners to preserve marginal, failed and obsolete examples of construction, (i.e old cost plus building) will limit our collective ability to shape the future. Some history must make way for a new story to be told. At a time when the city is having trouble preserving it's own historic properties (i.e. Adobes) it rings odd that there would be such a push to increase regulation in such a small facet of our city. There are better things to do with the precious time of our city staff. Generally speaking, most property owners have no trouble preserving their"well- built" structures and homes. The "Sinsheimer Building" is just one example currently in progress. We do not need a new ordinance to continue with common sense. While a $25,000 grant is something, it is not worth the amount of"process" and anxiety this ordinance will generate. Please consider setting this ordinance aside. All my best, bord coprn emu: :�bN111 R DD 01 Crl':-M.6i t�M,DIP x Michael Boudreau, AIA v-=Ck �IRsc 1009 Morro Street, Suite 205 crC�A7R1RNi?Y W7WD1R San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 cl-pla ewraic c u�ct� (805) 549-0400 direct line RED FILE ErTRMM er�aRD�DDt MEETING AGENDA IrNmTrmps ff JIM DM mikeb(a)MTBarchitecture.com DAMO D ITEM # '�u� v1wcrryNm ru L .� RECEIVE® NOV 0 5 2010 SLG GI-r.. a ERK From: Richardson, April Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 8:26 AM To: Chippendale, Sue Subject: FW: Historic Preservation Ordinance RED FILE April Richardson MEPNG AGENDA Administrative Assistant City of San Luis Obispo DA GITEM C-N 805-781-7123 Visit our website at www.slocitv.orc From: Council, SloCity [mailto:slocitycouncil@slocity.org] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 6:07 PM To: Richardson, April bard 009!r. emafl: Subject: FW: Historic Preservation Ordinance 0 COUNCIL OCMDM 0 CnYMGR C RTDM 0 AWCM O ME CWF 0 ATTORNEY o PW DIR 0 CLERR/ORIG o POLICE CHEF 0 PM o PAM&RECDIR 0 1REWM o unLDIR From: Bob Vessely[SMTP:RVESSELY@CALLAMERICACOM.NET] 0 0 NEWrrYN °�nm SLOCnYNEWS o CDUNCII, Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 6:07:20 PM o ciryMGR To: Council, SloCity 0 CLL Subject: Historic Preservation Ordinance Auto forwarded by a Rule Mayor Romero & Council members, I wasn't planning on writing you again but I've just heard that Peg& all have hired Saro Rizzo & he has sent a letter to the council requesting postponement of the Historic Preservation Ordinance. Obviously Saro is just parroting Peg's lines: "inadequate notice" based on the fact (as she admits)that she didn't read the back of the post cards sent to her; "failure to follow the General Plan" based on ignorance of the General Plan; "more time to analyze",the public workshop called by staff at the request of Ms. Pinard was held in AUGUST! How much time do they need?!? Clearly the opposition has no intention of anything other than obstructing the process and Ms. Pinard has an irrational need to stir up controversy where none need exist (shades of Measure H?). I urge you to honor those who invested the time to participate in the process & move this ordinance along. Thank you, Bob Vessely RECEIVED NOV 0 5 2010 From: Richardson, April SLO CITY CLERK Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 11:44 AM To: Chippendale, Sue Subject: FW: Preservation ordinance. RED FILE April Richardson M NG AGENDA Administrative Assistant City of San Luis Obispo DA 11 to ITEM # _ 805-781-7123 Visit our website at www.slocity.ore From: Council, Slocity [mailto:slocitycouncil@slocity.org] herd 92M. eOaE° Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 11:38 AM o �mm o ADM To: Richardson, April c AWCM c FMaHU Subject: FW: Preservation ordinance. o � o�CMIT o PM o PARK &WDIR o TRUM O UTI.DM O )w7u 4 o HRDIR o sLocrryN VS n COUNCIL o CITY MGR o CLERK From: Michael Boudreau[SMTP:MIKEB@MTBARCHITECTURE.COMj Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 11:39:50 AM To: Council, SloCity Subject: Preservation ordinance. Auto forwarded by a Rule Dear Mayor and members of the Council, Regarding Preservation Ordinance I want to thank John Ashbaugh for keeping many of us informed. In response to the latest opinions and ideas, I still believe this ordinance will burden all of us that are "LISTED" in the ordinance, my wife and I included. I will not go on and on but there are many examples of new roadblocks and more "process" implemented by language in this ordinance. Section 14.01.010 Why must our distinctive character be fixed in late 1800 and early 1900 architecture? You can't buy affordable redwood siding any more. Old growth redwood was harvested to build many of these listed structures. In addition, language suggests my home is irreplaceable, it's not. Do those of us on the list now own museums? Will the city help listed property owners like me subsidize the cost of preservation when my redwood siding eventually rots 1 away? I truly do not understand why the character of our community must be a fixed idea. Section 14.01.010 B Health, safety and welfare? It seems to be only about character. Section 3.4.3 Requires that 75% of the original framework be preserved? I've worked on award winning historical projects where almost 80% of the structure was removed due to failure and wear. In the language, If you exceed 25% it is deemed a demolition? Why these numbers? Why not 50%, 60% or 80%? Should this not be case by case? Section 4.1.4. Use Permit review. requires a "historic preservation report" Do you know how much those will cost? How much is a Use Permit these days? More process and more fees means less money for owners to invest into their buildings... Section 14.01.060 C I will need to request a RE-ZONE from the city to get off this list? How did my property get on the list in the first place? I don't remember a RE-ZONING action on my property. How much will it cost to get off list? Section 14.01.100 J How will the CHC determine economic hardship? How will CHC determine a proposed demolition was actually bad idea when we look back at it 100 years from today? Will CHC want a copy of my tax returns? Will CHC do a full economic pro forma on the project? Will CHC positions be filled with financial advisors, economist, contractors and architects? On the face of things, the CHC will have too much say and control over our property rights. Again, I suggest you shelve this ordinance. We already have plenty of "PROCESS" in our world today. Sincerely, Michael Boudreau, AIA 1009 Morro Street, Suite 205 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805)549-0400 direct line m ikeb(cDMTBarchitectu re.com Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus,version of virus signature database 5595 (20101105) The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com From: Bob Vessely[SMTP:RVESSELY@CALLAM ERICACOM.NET] RECEIVE Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:07:00 PM To: Council, SloCity NOV 0 4 2010 Subject: Historic Preservation Ordinance Auto forwarded by a Rule SLO CITY CLERK Mayor Romero & Council Members, I am writing to you to encourage you to ignore the senseless calls for a delay in passage of the Historic Preservation Ordinance. There has been a tremendous amount of work put into this proposed ordinance by staff,the CHC, the public and the Council. The product is a well thought out &thoroughly reviewed proposal and those who find imaginary sinister intentions in the language will find them wherever they look. We need to honor the process and not heed the irrational, emotional wailing that has been stirred up regarding this issue. Thank you, Bob Vessely hard emr. emma :I DDIR D$ RED FILEe'A►ssrcle eF=CMU o' My ROW DIR dawr M MIU0 xrppuceo=e MEETING AGENDA MrRmvr� o'PAW&RWDIR DA // jO ITEM # d►�wm�s V11D1 y'swcrrrmm or, aL a en Mir sae cDnM Saro G. Rizzo crVoutm M �� Attorney At Law RED FILE CrATTORM QpwDa 1457 Marsh Street,Suite loo _ MEETING AGENDA o' AIo o'POiIMOM San Luis Obispo,Ca.93401 � RBCD11 Tel(805)783-1735 Fax(805)858-9505 DA `7 /O ITEM # Pffa eftlBiP'rWo CIRDIR Q slocrnrrlews wMUNM oWYMGalt 11/4/2010 dQ,>3Ic VIA HAND DELIVERY San Luis Obispo City Council RECEIVED City of San Luis Obispo NOV 0 4 1010 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 SLO CITY CLERK RE: Request For Postponement Of Action On Adoption of Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines (GPI 72-09) Dear Mayor Romero and City Council Members: My office represents Saving San Luis Obispo Homes which is a committee of San Luis Obispo residents that will be affected by the draft Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines if adopted at the upcoming November 9, 2010, City Council meeting. On behalf of my client I am asking that consideration of this matter be postponed so that my client and the hundreds of other similarly situated homeowners will have more time to analyze it and provide input thereon. As you are aware from previous communications from representatives of the committee,the city failed to get early and meaningful input from the residents before writing the document and then failed to follow its own General Plan requiring the city to hold meetings in the neighborhoods. Further,there were problems with the post card notifications in that the information on the cards themselves was inadequate. In fact, the main body of one of the postcards stated: "The Cultural Heritage Committee will conduct a hearing to consider an application near your property or residence." Obviously this did not notify recipients that new laws were being formulated that could have long term negative impacts associated with them. It was also pointed out by city staff that postcards were not mailed for every meeting because public hearing items are typically continued from one meeting to subsequent meetings. Without getting too much into the history of what has and has not taken place with regards to making the neighborhoods aware of what was in the works, the reality is that many homeowners are just now becoming aware of the specifics of the proposed ordinance and guidelines and many have some real concerns and questions about them. Further, the staff report for this coming Tuesday's hearing on the proposed ordinance and guidelines just came out this week and is over two hundred and seventy pages long. The document is not only full of changes to the previously proposed ordinance and guidelines, but also full of legal jargon which makes it complicated for many of the homeowners to understand without further clarification from staff. As I'm sure you will agree, good legislation takes time and tries to address the concerns of all who will be affected. The Council's proposed hearing schedule will not accomplish this goal and will, effectively, shut out the effort of homeowners to have meaningful input into laws that will affect them for years to come. I therefore request that the upcoming November 9, 2010, City Council meeting on this issue be rescheduled to allow sufficient time for meaningful input from the historic residential neighborhoods. Si er ell , ar 'zzo A * me for Sa IRSOb o Homes cc: Babak Naficy Peg Pinard / k9E w2o 0J # � r- m Cr =r O M $ Cl) % o n 2 0 n& 7 M f \ 9 k < .0\ m m o k � « one r � or Cl) cr 0iE0 0 EG .> E o � \ \ k c