Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-27-16 CHC Correspondence - Item 1 (Cooper 4)Meet1>i�g: 111' To: SLO Cultural Heritage Committee ItgM: 1 From: Allan Cooper, San Luis Obispo Regarding: 71 Palomar Honorable Chair and Committee Members - RECEIVED CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO JUN 2 7 2016 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT On the 27th of June, you will be asked to recommend to the Architectural Review Commission a finding that this project is consistent with the City's Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. It is my contention that you will not be able to make this finding based on the report submitted to the City by Applied Earthworks back in October 2015 and titled "Archaeological Resource Inventory, Significance Evaluation, and Design Review". This is because there are at least twenty errors made in this document... some minor and some major ... which I have attempted to correct (see below). Many of these findings are based on evidence that is either speculative, circumstantial, unsubstantiated, erroneous or based on inadequate and/or missing information. In the final analysis, per the Secretary's Standards, this very historical property deserves to be preserved or restored in situ (not merely rehabilitated) and under no circumstance should it be relocated. I am therefore recommending that you continue this project to a date uncertain pending the time when you are provided more accurate and complete information. Evidentiary Errors Pertaining to "Archaeological Resource Inventory, Significance Evaluation, and Design Review" Submitted By Applied EarthWorks, Inc. October 2015 1) "The repositioning of the historic residence will, as proposed, allow construction of a new 41 - unit apartment building on the west and north portions of the parcel." Correction: The apartment building complex can be built without relocating the historic residence. 2) "Historical research identified 13 owners of the subject property, although it does not appear that the first three owners made any improvements to the property." Correction: It does not appear that the first TWO owners made any improvements to the property. 3) "While no specific information was located confirming Wills -Sandford as the builder of the residence, the timeframe of Wills-Sandford's ownership as well as his affluence make it likely that the residence was constructed circa 1895 during his era of ownership." Correction: This is pure speculation. Wills-Sandford's wife was the oldest daughter of Chauncey Hatch Phillips. There is no evidence that Reginald Wills -Sandford was "affluent" or if his affluence might have resulted from his wife's inheritance. However, it's much more likely that Reginald's father-in-law selected the architect and financed the construction of the house on behalf of his eldest daughter. 4) "Jacobson was also a central figure in bringing the first television station to the region, founding KVEC-TV in 1953." Correction: Important omission: In 1953, Jacobson became the first female to own a TV station in America. 5) "By 1966, the property was owned by Alexander P. and Carolyn J. Quaglino." Correction: Important omission: The Quaglino's were roofers. The property needed a new roof and the Quaglino's took title to the property in exchange for replacing the roof (presumably the roof configuration was changed at this time from the original hip style to the Colonial gable style). 6) "The modern stucco siding is not original, and it is not known when that modification was made." Correction: This statement needs further substantiation. The stucco siding could be original to the house. 7) " The original windows were likely wood multi -light double -hung windows or wood French doors, which are both features of the Colonial Revival style." Correction: The arches over these windows are NOT features of the so-called "Colonial Revival style". These are features of the Italian Renaissance style of architecture (see illustration below). 8) "While documentation of the specific date of construction was never located, research indicates that circa 1895 appears to be the approximate date of construction. This date is consistent with the general time period associated with the Colonial Revival style and is associated with the ownership of Reginald Wills -Sandford, likely the first occupant of the residence, and for whom the building is named." Correction: The general time period associated with the Colonial Revival style here in San Luis Obispo is NOT circa 1895 but much later. 9) "The Sandford House is an example of the Colonial Revival style of American architecture. According to the City Guidelines: 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." Correction: Applied Earthworks initially states that the Colonial Revival style of architecture was popular around 1895. Later, the consultant states that this style was popular in the "early twentieth century". Which is it? 10) "The City Guidelines briefly list characteristics of the style, which include: A hipped or gambrel roof..." Correction: In this case the City Guidelines are in error and this should be corrected. Colonial Revival style residences are predominately gable roofed, not hipped, have ship -lapped siding and are not stuccoed. On the other hand, Mediterranean or Italian Renaissance style architecture lacks dormers, lacks shutters and is predominately stuccoed, all characteristics of the Sandford residence. 11) "The subject property does not appear significant for any association with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history... While Jacobson began the KVEC television station in 1953, during her era of residence at the Sandford House, she also divested her interest in all local media holdings just 3 years later... Based on this analysis, the Sandford House does not appear to be historically significant under this component of the Historic Criteria." Correction: This is an implausible statement! There are two important omissions here. First Christina Jacobson was the fifth female to own a radio station in the United States. Secondly, Christina Jacobson was the FIRST female to own a TV station in the United States. Over the 14 year period that she resided in this house, she was proprietor of both. 12) "Original side -gabled roof orientation is also intact." Correction: The 1907 photograph included in this report clearly shows a hipped roof. 13) "While there is no known formal garden or landscaping plan associated with the property, expansive lawns remain around the residence to the east, west, and south." Correction: The 1907 photograph included in this report clearly shows two formal hedges running some length down the hill and planted on axis to the entry porch of the house. There remains today formal planting of two Norfolk Island Pines and two Eugenias again planted on axis to the entry porch of the house. 14) "The size of the property itself has also been altered from 15.80 acres to today's 1.17 acres. The integrity of setting is significantly diminished." Correction: Based on the 1907 photograph included in this report, it is clear that the rear of the Sandford Residence has always been framed by a mature forest of trees. This remains in the form of extensive plantings of mature eucalyptus. Any urbanization that occurred behind this grove of trees did little to diminish the integrity of its setting. 15) "While the building currently features stucco siding, a departure from original wood siding, this alteration may have occurred within the period of significance." Correction: This statement is again pure speculation. The stucco siding could be original to the house. Earthworks later admits the following: "The two rear additions must be removed with the minimum amount of impact to original construction and it is unknown if removal of the first addition will reveal a stucco or wood -clad exterior wall." This proves that Earthworks is clearly guessing that the original siding was wood. 16) "The only change to the house will be the elimination of the twin chimneys at the rear (west) elevation, which are already largely invisible from the street." Correction: An important omission here is that the existing concrete day -lit basement will also be eliminated and replaced with a slab on -grade foundation. 17) "The Sandford House will be re -roofed with suitable composition shingle material." Correction: The roof should be restored to its original hip roof configuration. And consistent with Italian Renaissance architecture, the roofing shingles would more suitably be clay rather than composition. 18) "Based on historical research, the Sandford House at 71 Palomar Avenue is significant as a good example of the Colonial Revival architectural style and is appropriately listed on the City Master List of Historic Resources." Correction: Based on this report the Sandford House in its current state is NOT a "good example of the Colonial Revival architectural style". The house is lacking dormers, shutters, a hip roof and ship -lap siding. However, the Sandford House IS a "good example" of the Italian Renaissance architectural style. 19) "The proposed project appears to be consistent with the City Ordinance relocation criteria, City Guidelines, and the Secretary's Standards for Rehabilitation." Correction: According to Applied Earthworks, the proposed project may APPEAR to be consistent with the City Ordinance but it is not. Per the SLO Historic Preservation Ordinance - 14.01.070 "Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing", this property will no longer meet eligibility criteria if the property no longer "occupies its original site and the original foundation has been changed." 20) "Modern replacements for the first -floor solarium windows should minimally consist of window sash that is of the appropriate proportion to fit into the original openings; multi -light versions which replicate the original multi -light windows located throughout other areas of the residence could be employed, however no evidence has been found thus far that documents the original window design for the solarium." Correction: Besides the solarium windows, there is no mention of all the other windows. Are we to construe that, excepting the solarium, no other windows will be replaced or rehabilitated? Italian Renaissance late 1800's to eafly 19Ws low pdchetl - h roof V l�y thea on n■ an o0 on s■ ■■ on on se soon some owns T SEEN memo ■■■■ fit` .owns. area Wdint WW UN with columns front ISCade 1e typically syrnmetncal wWe roof — overhar g with Supporting brackets .tel+ I � � 1 + t arches common above first story windows. doofs and porches