HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-28-16 CHC Agenda Packet
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo
Agenda
Cultural Heritage Committee
Monday, November 28, 2016
5:30 p.m. REGULAR MEETING Council Hearing Room
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA
CALL
TO ORDER: Chair Hill
ROLL CALL: Sandy Baer, Craig Kincaid, Shannon Larrabee, James Papp, Leah Walthert,
Vice-Chair Thom Brajkovich, and Chair Jaime Hill
ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: Committee or staff may modify the order of items.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of the Special Joint Architectural Review Commission and Cultural Heritage Committee
meeting of September 19, 2016, and the Regular Cultural Heritage Committee meetings of
September 26, and October 24, 2016
PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, the public may address the Committee about items not on
the agenda. Items raised are generally referred to staff and, if action by the Committee is necessary,
may be scheduled for a future meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
NOTE: The action of the CHC is a recommendation to the Community Development Director,
another advisory body, or City Council and, therefore, is not final and cannot be appealed.
San Luis Obispo – Cultural Heritage Committee Agenda of November 28, 2016 Page 2
1. 785 Buchon Street. ARCH-3618-2016: Review of modifications to the historic Manuel
Marshall Home, including extension of the roofline to create a new gable end at the rear of
the building, and the addition of a roof dormer and three skylights (categorically exempt from
environmental review) R-2-H Zone; Brian Spaulding, applicant. (Walter Oetzell)
2. Citywide. Cultural Heritage Committee discussion of goals for the 2017 -2019 Financial
Plan/Budget Process.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
1. Agenda Forecast & Staff Updates
2. Memorandum – Status update on archaeological mitigation measures (Chinatown project
-SLO Hotel site)
ADJOURNMENT
Minutes - DRAFT
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
Monday, September 19, 2016
Special Joint Meeting of the
Architectural Review Commission
&
Cultural Heritage Committee
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission was called to order on Monday,
September 19th, 2016 at 5:07 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by ARC Chair Greg Wynn.
ROLL CALL
Present : (ARC) Commissioners Patricia Andreen (5:09), Amy Nemcik, Allen Root,
Angela Soll, Vice- Chair Suzan Ehdaie, and Chair Greg Wynn; (CHC)
Committee Members Sandy Baer, James Papp, Leah Walthert, and
Vice-Chair Thom Brajkovich
Absent: (CHC) Committee Members Craig Kincaid, Shannon Larrabee, and Chair
Jaime Hill
Staff: Principal Planner Tyler Corey, Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Assistant
City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, Associate Planner Rachel Cohen,
Recreation and Public Art Manager Melissa Mudgett, and Recording
Secretary Brad T. Opstad
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 1600 Bishop Street. ARCH-3336-2016: Review of the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of the
Sunny Acres building for 13 residential units, a community room and office as part of an
affordable housing residential care facility. The project also includes the construction of three
new residential structures that contain an additional 21 units. Environmental review includes a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; R-1, R-2-SF & C/OS zones;
Transitions Mental Health Association (TMHA) & Housing Authority of the City of San Luis
Obispo (HASLO), applicant.
DRAFT Minutes – ARC & CHC Special Joint Meeting for September 19, 2016 Page 2
Principal Planner Corey presented an overview of the evening’s proceedings, given the unique
circumstances of the joint Advisory Body Hearing. Chair Wynn provided an overview of the
Advisory Bodies’ respective purviews.
Planner Cohen provided the staff report on the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse project with
PowerPoint slides of the General Plan Elements and the discussion and analysis of the Community
Design Guidelines.
Planner Cohen passed a color and materials board among Commissioners and Committee
Members.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
Chair Wynn invited CHC Members to participate first in questions and commentary.
In response to CHC Vice-Chair Brajkovich’s inquiry, Senior Planner Leveille stipulated that the
Historical Preservation Ordinance does not make this project subject to Committee Review, but
because the building has been found to be potentially eligible for Master Listing, the Community
Development Director has requested that CHC provide input.
Committee Member Papp inquired about the ownership of the property surrounding the structure.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Jill Bolster-White, Executive Director of Transitions-Mental Health Association (TMHA) spoke
about her commitment to TMHA’s mission of family support, community education, employment
and housing; provided a PowerPoint presentation, noting the Association’s successes, the project
site’s location, and their partnership with HASLO on the philanthropic endeavor.
Scott Smith, Executive Director of HASLO, spoke on the organization’s support of the Bishop
Street Studios project as its co-developer, highlighting the long waiting list for permanent
affordable housing, and the unique challenges presented to those with disabilities in terms of
housing discrimination.
Joel Snyder, Architect, Ten Over Studio, reflected on the General Plan’s reinforcement for
project’s continued use as a transitional care medical facility; discussed project’s existing
condition, its proposed scale, visual impact, and neighborhood compatibility; showed a video of
the project’s proposed rendering.
Committee Member Papp inquired about relocation of the entry staircase; CHC Vice-Chair
Brajkovich inquired about the non-reinforced masonry mitigation’s effect on the existing building;
Commissioner Andreen inquired about the landscape selections; Commissioner Root inquired
about the potential creation of a photo archive of the existing building’s current interior graffiti.
DRAFT Minutes – ARC & CHC Special Joint Meeting for September 19, 2016 Page 3
Chair Wynn inquired about rough vs. smooth stucco; glazing of the arched-top opening windows;
the intent for window material per Condition #5; and about accessibility of an on-site manager’s
unit.
Chair Wynn and Vice-Chair Ehdaie both made inquiries about pedestrian access and circulation.
PUBLIC COMMENT
David Booker, San Luis Obispo, spoke as HASLO Commissioner; encouraged support to proceed
with Bishop Street Studios.
Elie Axelroth, San Luis Obispo, spoke about the need for specific types of basic amenities for
citizens with mental health issues and stated that TMHA regularly provides in their role as vital
asset to community.
Jerry Rioux, San Luis Obispo, SLO County Housing Trust Fund, stated that he supports the
approval of the Bishop Street Studios project.
Pam Zweifel, San Luis Obispo, spoke as Vice-President of National Alliance on Mental Illness of
SLO County; informed that entirety of membership supports the very special and innovative
proposal.
Dave Romero, San Luis Obispo, indicated that this location is an ideal site for the project.
Erica Flores Battodano, San Luis Obispo, expressed support of the Bishop Street Studios’ re-
purposing project.
Edith Kahn, San Luis Obispo, spoke as neighbor of Bishop Street Studios and retired Director of
Access Support Network; commented favorably about the TMHA’s past domicile preservation
efforts.
Wendy Brown, San Luis Obispo, spoke about the underserved population and TMHA’s stellar
neighbor outreach program.
Patty & Pete Pepper, San Luis Obispo, shared the rostrum; spoke favorably about the facilitation
of TMHA, adding that the project is a valuable to an underserved population in the community.
J.T. Haas, San Luis Obispo, spoke as a longtime volunteer with the TMHA and current President
of its Board in advocacy of its latest sustainable housing conversion project; cited TMHA’s
Mission Statement.
Michael Draze, San Luis Obispo, provided a brief background of the original building and his
personal involvement with the first historic survey of it and its subsequent salvaging efforts.
Chuck Crotser, San Luis Obispo, discussed the proposed use of the property and his support of the
project and discussed the windows as its character-defining architectural element.
DRAFT Minutes – ARC & CHC Special Joint Meeting for September 19, 2016 Page 4
Deb Linden, San Luis Obispo, TMHA; urged approval of Bishop Street Studios as an enriching
and transformative upgrade to an “attractive nuisance” in a blighted area.
Frank Ricceri, San Luis Obispo, TMHA, spoke about the existing building’s brick façade.
Cindy Johnson, San Luis Obispo, TMHA, expressed support to the goals of the project for the
City’s mentally ill population.
C.M. Florence, San Luis Obispo, urged the Commission to uphold Staff’s recommendation;
documented own personal history with the project’s properties.
Bob Vessely, San Luis Obispo, discussed the County’s 1986 plan to demolish the original Sunny
Acres building, which prompted lobbying efforts; shared support to the Applicant’s adaptive reuse
proposal.
Peter Kardel, San Luis Obispo, spoke on the first-rate job TMHA did restoring the property
proximal to his business on Nipomo Street.
Darryl Elliott, San Luis Obispo, National Alliance for Mental Illness of SLO County and TMHA,
spoke about the major component of recovery being environment and housing.
Steve Delmartini, San Luis Obispo, spoke as an advocate for City housing and supporter of the
infill housing project, as it relates with the number of City goals and policies that this development
meets.
Joel Diringer, San Luis Obispo, spoke as a longtime Johnson Avenue neighbor; shared a story
about the building’s bricks being offered up for sale during a time of potential demolition and how
exciting that a necessary Use for a building has been found.
Marti Reed, San Luis Obispo, spoke as a Commissioner of the Housing Authority, indicating favor
for the project.
Biz Steinberg, San Luis Obispo, Community Action Partnership of SLO County; stressed that the
City Council has valued affordable housing as one of its primary goals and that this site has been
a center of collaborative community goodwill for many years.
Anne Wyatt, San Luis Obispo, expressed support to the proposed project and noted that Flora
Street is part of Bicycle Master Plan as a bike route.
Brad Rudd, San Luis Obispo, spoke as a licensed mental health professional sharing exuberance
for the noble purpose of a repurposing project.
Mila Vujovich LaBarre, San Luis Obispo, spoke as a candidate for the City Council and applauded
team efforts of the Housing Authority and TMHA.
DRAFT Minutes – ARC & CHC Special Joint Meeting for September 19, 2016 Page 5
COMMISSION DELIBERATION AND DISCUSSION
Vice-Chair Brajkovich commented that the windows to be replaced should be true divided light
windows.
Committee Member Papp commented on and inquired about the architect’s intention of whether
three-dimensional or snap-in; suggested replacing the word “subordinate” with the word
“differentiated” in Finding #3 to further clarify the Secretary of Interior Standards.
Committee Member Walthert spoke about the existing building and suggested alternate forms for
brick elements of the lower buildings.
Chair Wynn instituted a five-minute recess; the Cultural Heritage Commission vacated the dais.
Vice-Chair Ehdaie inquired about the pedestrian circulation, bike connectivity, and any intentions
for future access points per the site plan.
Chair Wynn monitored the ARC discussion on the CHC’s list of talking points and potential
development of Conditions per the window treatment, the differentiation and coordination between
existing and new buildings, and creating an archival exhibit to preserve the historical aesthetic of
the structure.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY CHAIR WYNN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SOLL,
the Architectural Review Commission adopted the Draft Resolution which approves the project
and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, based on findings and subject to the following amended
conditions; on the following 6:0:0:0 vote:
AYES: Wynn, Soll, Andreen, Nemcik, Root, Ehdaie
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
A.) Finding #1: exchange the word “subordinate” with “differentiated” to now read: The
proposed construction of the three new residential structures is consistent with Secretary
of Interior Standards for new construction on historic properties since the new construction
is subordinate differentiated to and compatible with the scale, size, massing and
architectural features of the Sunny Acres building.
B.) Condition #5 to be modified with added underlined language: Replacement windows shall
not introduce incompatible materials or configurations which would be incompatible with
the architectural style and fenestration of the Sunny Acres building. The replacement
windows shall include three dimensional muntins and be compatible and complementary
with the existing windows in terms of color and finish so the historic architectural character
of the building is not detrimentally affected, subject to the approval of the Community
Development Director.
DRAFT Minutes – ARC & CHC Special Joint Meeting for September 19, 2016 Page 6
C.) Condition #6 to be modified with added underlined language: Plans submitted for a
building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed building surfaces and
other improvements. Colors and materials shall be consistent with the color and material
board submitted with Architectural Review application. The brick used on the new
structures shall have varied, non-monochromatic coloring consistent with the existing
Sunny Acres building.
D.) New Condition #7: The project shall soften the hard sides of buildings B & C adjacent to
the stairs by including design elements (such as landscaping, public art, etc.) that breaks
up the large expanses of blank walls, to the satisfaction of the Community Development
Director.
E.) New Condition #8: The applicant shall photo document the current interior and exterior
condition of the Sunny Acres building, to the approval of the Community Development
Director.
Chair Wynn instituted a five-minute recess.
BUSINESS ITEMS
2. Citywide. ARCH-3824-2016: Review of public art designs and locations proposed for the
2016 Utility Box Art project to paint city-owned utility boxes; Public Right-of-Way; City of
San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Department, applicant.
Manager Mudgett presented a background on the Downtown Beautification Project pilot program,
and its ultimate expansion as an ongoing program, in addition to providing PowerPoint slides of
the proposed designs and their respective locations.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
COMMISSION DELIBERATION AND DISCUSSION
Commissioner Nemcik inquired about the method in which three-dimensional and folded designs
would be applied to the protruding battery back-up units.
Commissioner Soll shared that it had been a great experience to have participated on the Box Art
Selection Jury; Commissioner Andreen commented favorably on the project’s variety.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ROOT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
ANDREEN, the Architectural Review Commission approved the artwork designs and traffic
signal locations for the 2016 Utility Box Art project as consistent with the adopted Guidelines for
DRAFT Minutes – ARC & CHC Special Joint Meeting for September 19, 2016 Page 7
Public Art; on the following 6:0:0:0 vote
AYES: Root, Andreen, Ehdaie, Nemcik, Soll, Wynn
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
COMMENT & DISCUSSION
Principal Planner Corey provided the Agenda Forecast:
October 3rd: Poly Performance expansion project @ 870 Industrial; Discovery SLO exterior
alterations@ 1144 Chorro; Mixed-use project @ 1042 Olive; Leadership SLO’s Demonstration
Garden
October 17th: SouthTown 18 and Lofts @ Nipomo Hearing in tandem; General Plan Program
2.13 implementation for Neighborhood Compatibility Workshop; Advisory Body goal time
Chair Wynn discussed City Council Subcommittee interviews for vacant Advisory Body seats
occurring on Thursday, September 22nd; sought volunteer to substitute for him on panel; Vice-
Chair Ehdaie volunteered.
Chair Wynn requested certain correspondence received in packets be sent digitally.
Commissioner Andreen announced her vacating of the Architecture Review Commission seat in
order to relocate to Riverside.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION: XX/XX/2016
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes
DDDDDDDRAFT DRAFT
Monday, September 26, 2016
Regular Meeting
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage Committee was called to order on
Monday, September 26, 2016 at 5:32 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at 990 Palm Street,
San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Hill.
ROLL CALL
Present: Committee Members Sandy Baer, Craig Kincaid, Shannon Larrabee, James Papp,
Leah Walthert, Vice-Chair Thom Brajkovich and Chair Jaime Hill
Absent: None
Staff: Community Development Director Michael Codron, Senior Planner Brian Leveille,
Parks & Recreation Director Shelly Stanwyck, Planning Technician Kip Morais,
Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell, Associate Planner Shawna Scott, Associate Planner
Rachel Cohen, and Recording Secretary Brad T. Opstad
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Shannon Larrabee, San Luis Obispo, spoke from the dais and provided an update on the Leadership
SLO Water-Wise Demonstration Garden.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
Minutes for Cultural Heritage Committee Regular Meeting of July 25, 2016:
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER PAPP, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER BAER, the CHC Minutes of July 25, 2016 were approved with the
following amendments:
1.) Page 3, Finding #4, end punctuation change (from ; to .)
2.) Page 4, third paragraph to read: “… provided local examples of painted wall signs from the
early 1900’s…”
3.) Page 5, seventh paragraph to read: Union Hardware Building; Miner’s minor sign exception
on the following 7:0:0 vote
AYES: Baer, Kincaid, Larrabee, Papp, Walthert, Vice-Chair Brajkovich, and Chair Hill
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of September 26, 2016 Page 2
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
1. Utility Box Art in Historic District locations. OTHR-3827-2016: Review of proposed
artwork designs and traffic signal locations for the 2016 Utility Box Art project at three
locations within the Old Town and Downtown Historic Districts with a categorical exemption
from environmental review, C-D-H & R-2-H zones; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Director Stanwyck spoke about the Utility Box Art Program and provided updates on the
downtown beautification effort with the Historic Districts.
Committee Member Kincaid inquired whether the front of any given utility box is determined by
it being street side or pedestrian side view.
Committee Member Baer discussed her experience as one of the fourteen (14) participants on the
Art Jury.
Chair Hill inquired about a traffic safety enhancement project being undertaken at the corner of
Monterey & Osos Streets; acknowledged that the Committee was in receipt of two pieces of public
correspondence.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
Committee Member Walthert commented that the art does not readily represent the historic nature
of the City’s inhabitants or the heritage; Committee Member Baer responded by differentiating
between art as specifically commissioned and art rendered via an open call to artists.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LARRABEE, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER BAER, the Cultural Heritage Committee adopted a draft Resolution
which provides the determination for City Council that the CHC finds the box art design for the
traffic signal utility boxes located in the Old Town and Downtown Historic Districts, as part of the
2016 Box Art Project, consistent with its Historical Preservation Program; on the following 7:0:0
vote:
AYES: Baer, Kincaid, Larrabee, Papp, Walthert, Vice-Chair Brajkovich, and Chair Hill
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
2. 840 Monterey Street. ARCH-3534-2016: Review of request to place a wall sign on an
elevation without a public entrance on a Contributing Historic Structure (Blackstone Hotel),
with a categorical exemption from environmental review; C-D-H zone; Coast Monument
Signs, applicant.
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of September 26, 2016 Page 3
Technician Morais presented a project description, historical background, and PowerPoint slides
of the proposed wall sign.
Committee Member Papp inquired about the frequency of variance requests for signs on elevations
without entrances; inquired about the necessity of placing a sign on the western façade, given the
existence and placement of the Monterey Street sign, and whether having a secondary sign is a
commercial imperative.
Committee Member Baer qualified that the Committee was considering the sign that faces Chorro
Street, as opposed to the Monterey Street sign with same logo, but also dissimilar in terms of size,
proportion, and placement.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Steve Fear, Coast Monument Signs, Arroyo Grande, discussed the sign installation being low-
impacted and Chorro Street being a major pedestrian thoroughfare.
Jennifer Kurtz, LuluLemon Athletica, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, discussed the
location and proportions of the proposed sign; requested that the Committee disregard the banner
sign indicated in the presentation materials, as it was part of an earlier sign submission.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
Committee Member Papp indicated that a request for a sign of this size and discretion was
reasonable unless the City was adamant that there should not be signs on sides of buildings without
entrances; Director Codron informed that the City is currently in the midst of updating sign
regulations and that this type of exception request is of frequent occurrence, and intent of current
sign regulations is to prevent sign proliferation.
Vice-Chair Brajkovich commented that the proposed sign does not detract from the Historical
Preservation Standards; commented favorably on its positioning and its repetitive use of the
architecture’s round elements.
Committee Member Baer commented unfavorably on the marketing signage commercializing the
Mission across the street with its placement.
Chair Hill commented further on sign’s inappropriateness in fronting Mission being sufficient
reason for not granting exception; pointed out excessive signage on Court Street as exemplary of
what is beginning to transpire in the downtown and is also inconsistent with the Guidelines.
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of September 26, 2016 Page 4
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LARRABEE, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER BAER, the Cultural Heritage Committee recommended the
Community Development Director deny approval of the project, as the sign at this location is not
consistent with the surrounding neighborhood and adds sign clutter at a critically sensitive
location facing the Mission; on the following 6:1:0:0 vote:
AYES: Baer, Kincaid, Larrabee, Papp, Walthert, and Chair Hill
NOES: Vice-Chair Brajkovich
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
3. 1119 Garden Street. ARCH-2588-2016: Review of proposed modifications to the façade of
the Union Hardware Building, a Master List Historic Structure, with a categorical exemption
from environmental review; C-D-H zone; Garden Street SLO Partners, applicant.
The Committee discussed particulars of a conflict-of-interest recusal with Community
Development Director Codron; based on the discussion, Committee Member Larrabee determined
she would not recuse for Garden Street Item 3.
Director Codron introduced the project as a part of recently approved Garden Street Terraces and
requested feedback; Planner Oetzell provided the staff report with PowerPoint slides displaying
the proposed façade modifications and character-defining architectural features.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Carol Florence, Principal Planner, Oasis Associates, presented the PowerPoint presentation which
provided a historic overview and site perspectives, while underscoring the public-private
partnership between the City and the project owners.
Beverly and Shaun Matthews, project partners and hoteliers, displayed PowerPoint slides of the
proposed reconfigurations on Garden Street and noted the projected complete restoration of two
buildings, and concepts for signage.
Robert Chattel, project preservation architect, discussed the initial Environmental Impact Report
and the updated design development documents; reported that both Master List Buildings will
undergo seismic retrofit as part of the project.
Chair Hill requested that the images be displayed of the windows being added to the site; Vice-
Chair Brajkovich inquired whether location of delivery door would remain the same.
Committee Member Papp inquired whether the Committee was to consider the windows on the
building’s side elevation, the street façade solely, or both; inquired whether the bulkhead removal
would be reversible; inquired about the reasoning behind shifting the original location of the
traditional ingress/egress from the building’s center to its side.
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of September 26, 2016 Page 5
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
Committee Member Papp commented favorably on the removal of awnings, restoration of the
transom, and retention of the structural and linear elements of the façade.
Vice-Chair Brajkovich indicated that the project’s having maintained the consistency of the façade
trumps the perceived small problem he initially had with the building being overly symmetrical.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER PAPP, SECONDED BY VICE-
CHAIR BRAJKOVICH, the Cultural Heritage Committee found the proposed storefront
modifications to be consistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance and adopted the draft
resolution recommending the director find the modifications consistent with the Secretary of the
Interior Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Properties; on the following 7:0:0 vote:
AYES: Baer, Kincaid, Larrabee, Papp, Walthert, Vice-Chair Brajkovich, and Chair Hill
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Chair Hill called for a five-minute recess.
4. 12165 Los Osos Valley Road. PRE-1293-2015: Pre-application review of the conceptual
plan for the multiple structures comprising the Froom Ranch Historic Complex, including
structure demolition, and structure relocation and adaptive reuse within a proposed proximate
park, in association with the Froom Ranch / Il Villagio Specific Plan (Madonna on Los Osos
Valley Road Specific Plan); John Madonna, applicant.
Associate Planner Shawna Scott provided the background of the pre-application review of the
conceptual proposal for the multiple structures comprising the Froom Ranch historic complex;
requested that the CHC provide collective directional items and feedback.
Chair Hill disclosed that the Committee Members toured the site with the Applicant.
Committee Member Papp inquired about a historic survey and indicated the site was eligible for
National, California and Local Historical Registers.
Committee Member Kincaid inquired whether an advisory body had authority to discuss any
criteria since the property has not yet been annexed to the City; Planner Leveille indicated that the
site has been evaluated as part of the General Plan and as part of one of the Specific Plan Areas;
Director Codron added that none of the approvals granted by the City would apply until the site
was under City jurisdiction, but would be those consulted and relied upon prior to construction.
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of September 26, 2016 Page 6
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Victor Montgomery, architect with RRM Design Group, spoke on behalf of the John & Susan
Madonna Trust; presented PowerPoint slides of the project site’s resources to either be relocated,
demolished, harvested, or adaptively re-used; shared that structural analysis had not been done to
determine viability for rehabilitation.
Vice-Chair Brajkovich inquired about the accumulation of historical artifacts inside the dairy barn;
Chair Hill requested dimensional comparisons with the Octagon Barn.
PUBLIC COMMENT
David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, stressed the present-day obligation to retain communicated
insights from the past, via the resources of remaining artifacts; urged for greater preservation
efforts.
Neil Havlik, San Luis Obispo, spoke about his concerns with the development above the 150-foot
elevation line; related that any such development should be strictly for public purpose, such as a
trailhead park.
Ray Walters, San Luis Obispo, opined that the best location for a trailhead park is adjacent to the
trailheads and that this property is better suited for some development above the 150-foot elevation
line.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
Committee Member Walthert shared how enamored she had become with the majestic nature of
the dairy barn; lobbied for maintaining its rounded corner as a vital component of historical value.
Committee Member Kincaid commented favorably on the concept of an adaptive re-use of the
property.
Committee Member Larrabee spoke favorably on the direction of the project; spoke of her
uncertainty for any type of restoration on site that could provide any degree of safe access;
suggested that the trailhead park using established infrastructure was of sound reasoning.
Committee Member Papp indicated that the historic survey provided sufficient differentiation of
structures’ status but that it is a task better suited for structural engineers to analyze toward
decision-making; indicated that the Committee is faced with the possibility of “demolition by
neglect” and further indicated that determining a commercially viable method to maintain
buildings is both an imperative aspect in preventing it and incumbent upon the developer and the
City to find creative, viable ways to salvage agricultural buildings of significance; indicated that
the first option should not have to be demolition.
Vice-Chair Brajkovich discussed replication and adaptive re-use options for the dairy barn.
Committee Member Baer considered the relocation of a main house as being incongruous in
proximity to a Home Depot and suggested alternative sites to be considered; urged recognition of
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of September 26, 2016 Page 7
the circular part of a dairy barn as a design motif that could be represented in other structures as a
valuable reminder of architectural history.
Chair Hill commented favorably on the organization of the structures on site and that any
relocation will destroy the historical narrative.
Committee Member Papp qualified that it would be difficult to arrive at a rating for each respective
structure; supposed that the Committee’s predominant interest in salvaging structures, to the extent
that they can be, is the overriding message to be conveyed.
Chair Hill indicated she based her own discussion points solely on information provided by the
First Carbon Solution, none of which states anything about any of the structures being non-
salvageable.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER PAPP, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER BAER, the Cultural Heritage Committee provided feedback on the
applicant’s conceptual plan for the multiple structures comprising the Froom Ranch Historic
Complex, including structure demolition, structure relocation, and adaptive reuse within a
proposed proximate park; made Motion indicating CHC is in favor of the preservation of structures
intact and in situ, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Secretary of
Interior’s Standards, and toward maintaining the historic narrative and meaning of the complex;
on the following 6:1:0:0 vote:
AYES: Baer, Larrabee, Papp, Walthert, Vice-Chair Brajkovich, and Chair Hill
NOES: Kincaid
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
5. 1027 Nipomo Street. ARCH-3216-2016: Review of a new four-story mixed-use
development proposed in the Downtown Historic District that includes 8,131 square-feet of
commercial/retail space, 23 residential units and hotel use (7 rooms), with a categorical
exemption from environmental review; C-D-H zone; Creekside Lofts, applicant.
Planner Cohen provided the Staff Report on the new four-story mixed-use structure.
In response to Committee Member Larrabee’s inquiry, Director Codron mentioned that the project
is subject to the City’s inclusionary housing requirements such that it will be paying a fee as a
percentage of the total project valuation.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Damien Mavis, Applicant representative, provided the historical and evolutionary context leading
to the third iteration of the project.
Chair Hill inquired about the trash enclosure and the building code allowance for the sign across
property lines between the project and Ciopinot.
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of September 26, 2016 Page 8
Vice-Chair Brajkovich inquired how the building’s height qualified and met Design Guidelines in
the low-scale neighborhood.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Mary Mitchell, Soda Water Works, San Luis Obispo; qualified that her building is zoned in a
Community Commercial Historic District with a Planned Development overlay (CC-HPD) area
and in full conformance of the Historic Preservation Guidelines; stated her opposition to the project
as presented for a variety of reasons, including that the modern and monolithic building violates
City guidelines relating to infill projects adjacent to properties on the Master List of Historic
Buildings.
Donna Duerk, San Luis Obispo, spoke in opposition to the project’s massing; lamented how the
project not stepping back its upper levels from the street infringes on her neighborhood’s privacy.
David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, opined that the project does not conform with either Downtown
Guidelines or Historic Preservation Guidelines.
Mary Neal, Sandy’s Liquor, San Luis Obispo; voiced objection to the project due to parking issues.
Nancy Hubbard, San Luis Obispo, spoke as member of development team and in favor of project;
discussed how established zoning regulations are set by civic leaders and then stringently adhered
to by developers in order to facilitate needs and requests for growth; discussed how the creek
creates a natural setback buffer between uses.
Thom Jess, Arris Studio Architects, San Luis Obispo; addressed an insulting comment provided
by a member of the public.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
Committee Member Papp discussed the current state of various Downtown projects severely
overshadowing the historic spatial nature of the Downtown Historic District and how to decide to
respond to it accordingly.
Committee Members Baer, Brajkovich, Larrabee, and Hill commented unfavorably on the
project’s scale, massing, and incompatibility with neighboring structures.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY CHAIR HILL, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE MEMBER
KINCAID, the Cultural Heritage Committee continued the item to a date uncertain with direction
to the Applicant to re-evaluate height, scale, massing and detailing for greater consistency with
neighboring historic structures within the Downtown Historic District; on the following 7:0:0 roll
call vote:
AYES: Baer, Kincaid, Larrabee, Papp, Walthert, Vice-Chair Brajkovich, and Chair Hill
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of September 26, 2016 Page 9
AGENDA FORECAST AND STAFF UPDATES
Planner Leveille provided the Agenda Forecast:
October 24th: Two-story addition on Master List structure at 752 Buchon; sign on
Chinatown project
Informal discussion ensued on the following:
A.) Length and breadth of this and future CHC Hearings;
B.) The difficulty in producing and using three-dimensional physical models for context in
scale for projects but potentially using GIS mapping and form-based code as alternatives;
C.) The recent Chinatown archaeological fiasco prompted need for matrix for identifying
cultural resource mitigation measures
ADJOURNMENT: 9:51 p.m.
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes
DDDDDDDRAFT DRAFT
DRAFT
Monday, October 24, 2016
Regular Meeting
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage Committee was called to order on
Monday, October 24, 2016 at 5:33 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street,
San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Hill.
ROLL CALL
Present: Committee Members Sandy Baer, Craig Kincaid, Shannon Larrabee, James Papp,
Leah Walthert, Vice-Chair Thom Brajkovich and Chair Jaime Hill
Absent: None
Staff: Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell, Planning Technician
Januar Saptono, Planning Technician Kyle Van Leeuwen, and Recording Secretary
Brad T. Opstad
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
Consideration of Minutes of the Cultural Heritage Committee Regular Meetings of April 25
& June 27, 2016:
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER PAPP, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER BAER, to approve the Cultural Heritage Committee meetings of April
25th and June 27th, 2016 as presented on the following 6:0:1:0 vote:
AYES: Papp, Baer, Kincaid, Larrabee, Walthert, Brajkovich
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Hill
ABSENT: None
Chair Hill voted to abstain, having not been in attendance at the June 27th Meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of October 24, 2016 Page 2
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
1. 752 Buchon Street. ARCH-3669-2016: Review of a proposed addition to the rear side
(northwest elevation) of the Master List Historic Stanton Home, with a categorical exemption
from environmental review; R-2-H zone; RRM Design Group, applicant.
Assistant Planner Oetzell provided the staff report and a PowerPoint presentation.
Chair Hill inquired about the time frame of construction for the addition to be demolished.
Duke Williams, Owner-Applicant, discussed the three reasons for pursuing the project while
maintaining preservation of the home’s Queen Anne style: The addressing of safety concerns, the
improvement of functionality, and the provision of privacy.
Randall Russom, Architect with RRM Design Group, indicated that the staff report spoke amply
to what the architects are looking to accomplish; responded to Chair Hill’s inquiry regarding the
previous additions to the home.
--End of Applicant Presentation--
Committee Member Papp inquired about whether the bridge to the garage would be retained;
inquired about the material on the base of the deck.
Committee Member Kincaid commented on the project being among the best-conceived that
Committee has viewed; Committee Member Larrabee commented that the project would provide
palpable upgrade to neighborhood.
Committee Member Papp indicated that intended renovations were respectful of the original
structure
Vice-Chair Brajkovich and Committee Member Baer commented on the mansard roof; Chair Hill
inquired about the retaining walls and the fencing; inquired whether plans required any exceptions.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER KINCAID, SECONDED BY VICE-
CHAIR BRAJKOVICH, the Cultural Heritage Committee recommended that the Community
Development Director find the project consistent with the Historic Preservation Program
Guidelines and Secretary of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with the
additional finding:
4.) That the existing addition, proposed to be demolished, is not a part of the original
construction of the historic structure.
On the following 7:0:0 vote:
AYES: Kincaid, Brajkovich, Larrabee, Papp, Baer, Walthert, Hill
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of October 24, 2016 Page 3
2. 864 Monterey Street. ARCH-3761-2016: Review of a wall sign on a building elevation with
no public entrance in the Downtown Historic District, with a categorical exemption from
environmental review; C-D-H zone; Coast Monument Signs, applicant.
Planning Technician Saptono provided Staff Report and PowerPoint presentation.
Steve Fear, Coastal Monument Sign, represented Williams-Sonoma; cited examples of second wall
signs with no public entrance in the downtown.
--End of Applicant Presentation--
Committee Member Kincaid clarified whether a smaller sign on the southwest façade would be
permissible; Committee Member Larrabee pointed out that the staff report stated that an etched
window sign would be permissible.
Committee Member Baer questioned why the sign exception request would be brought before the
Cultural Heritage Committee in order to find it inconsistent with Guidelines; voiced that the
proposed second wall sign is excessive, unnecessary, and Guideline-inconsistent.
Committee Member Papp indicated that Williams-Sonoma would be better served with a smaller
etched window sign as opposed to the proposed wall sign.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER LARRABEE, SECONDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER BAER, the Cultural Heritage Committee recommended the Community
Development Director find the project inconsistent with Historic Preservation Program
Guidelines; on the following 7:0:0 vote:
AYES: Larrabee, Baer, Kincaid, Papp, Walthert, Brajkovich, Hill
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Chair Hill requested a discussion on Downtown signs occur, following agenda items; Senior
Planner Leveille assented.
3. 723 Higuera Street. ARCH-3825-2016: Review of a proposed storefront remodel to a
Contributing Historic building within the Downtown Historic District, with a categorical
exemption from environmental review; C-D-H zone; FNT, Inc., applicant.
Planning Technician Van Leeuwen provided the staff report and PowerPoint presentation.
Vice-Chair Brajkovich inquired of roll-up sectional door and open-air sill in the new floor plans.
Chair Hill inquired about the raised metal-lettering sign that exists above the awning on the
proposed storefront elevation; Senior Planner Leveille indicated that this type and location of sign
would require an exception that is not evaluated in terms of Historic Preservation Guidelines , but
a recommendation would be provided for within Sign Regulations.
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of October 24, 2016 Page 4
Committee Member Larrabee inquired about the potential neighborhood noise concerns as they
apply to the roll-up door.
Joel Snyder and Aisling Fearon, Ten Over Studio, discussed the architectural details that are
reminiscent of the time period when the structure was built.
--End of Applicant Presentation—
Committee Member Walthert voiced opinion that the proposed façade is contextually too dark;
Vice-Chair Brajkovich commented that the remodel adequately maintains the building’s character
while the additional contemporary elements serve as artistically functional solution; Committee
Member Papp indicated that discussion of the color scheme is not within Cultural Heritage
Committee purview and suggested that it is questionable this building should be on the
Contributing Master List in the first place.
ACTION: UPON MOTION BY VICE-CHAIR BRAJKOVICH, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE
MEMBER PAPP, the Cultural Heritage Committee recommended the Community Development
Director find the project consistent with the Historic Preservation Guidelines; on the following
7:0:0 vote:
AYES: Brajkovich, Papp, Larrabee, Baer, Kincaid, Walthert, Hill
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
4. 2017-2019 Advisory Body Goals
By consensus of Cultural Heritage Committee Members, three (3) Goals were identified and
outlined under the rubric “Preservation Component of the Economic Development Plan”:
A.) Citywide Historic Resource Survey
B.) Specific cost-benefit analysis on municipally-owned historic resources
C.) New Historic District development
Discussion ensued regarding the creation of an ad hoc subcommittee; decision was made to form
a committee consisting of Chair Hill and Committee Members Papp and Baer for the purpose of
crafting and fine-tuning specific language pertaining to the 2017-2019 Advisory Body goal-setting
a deadline of November 7th.
5. Agenda Forecast & Staff Updates
Senior Planner Leveille provided the Agenda Forecast:
October 24th: Two-story addition on the Master List structure at 752 Buchon Street; a
sign on the Chinatown project
Cultural Heritage Committee Minutes DRAFT of October 24, 2016 Page 5
Informal discussion ensued on the following:
A.) Length and breadth of this and future CHC Hearings;
B.) The difficulty in producing and using three-dimensional physical models for context
in scale for projects either pending or in pipeline but potentially using GIS mapping
and form-based code as alternatives;
C.) The recent Chinatown archaeological situation prompted a need for a matrix for
identifying cultural resource mitigation measures.
ADJOURNMENT: Chair Hill adjourned the Meeting at 7:15 p.m.
Meeting Date: November 28, 2016
Item Number: 1
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of proposed building modifications to the historic Manuel Marshall Home,
to accommodate an attic conversion
ADDRESS: 785 Buchon St BY: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
FILE #: ARCH-3618-2016 Phone: 781-7593
E-mail: woetzell@slocity.org
FROM: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION: Find the project consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation
Ordinance and with the Secretary of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic.
SITE DATA
Applicant Brian Spaulding
Representative Thom Brajkovich,
Paragon Design
Submittal Date 8/4/2016
Complete Date 10/25/2016
General Plan Medium Density Residential
Zoning Med. Density Residential with
Historic Overlay (R-2-H)
Site Area 7,650 square feet
Historic Status Master List Resource
Old Town Historic District
Environmental
Status
Categorically Exempt
(CEQA Guidelines §15301:
Existing Facilities)
SUMMARY
The applicant has submitted an application for modifications to the Master List Historic Manual
Marshall Home which includes the addition of a gable roof end at the rear of the structure, a small
roof dormer on the west elevation, and skylights. The modifications are proposed to accommodate
conversion of attic space in the house to include a bathroom, bedroom, and den.
1.0 COMMITTEE’S PURVIEW
The Committee’s role is to review the proposed modifications and provide a recommendation to
the Community Development Director as to their consistency with Historic Preservation Program
Guidelines and Secretary of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
CHC1 - 1
ARCH-3618-2016 (785 Buchon)
Page 2
DISCUSSION
Site and Setting
The site is a 7,650 square-foot residential parcel on the south side of Buchon Street, between
Chorro and Garden Streets, in the Old Town Historic District. It is developed with the historic
Manuel Marshall Home, a single-family dwelling estimated to have been built in 1899. The
neighborhood is characterized by many examples of early 20th Century residential development
(see Figure 1). Almost all of the 16 properties in the 700 block of Buchon are on the City’s
Inventory of Historic Resources: 12 are on the “Master List” and 2 on the “Contributing List.”
Manuel Marshall Home
The Manuel Marshall Home is described as “basically
Neo-Classic,” with attributes of a Queen Anne cottage.
Among the notable features identified in the Historic
Resources Inventory for the Property (Attachment 3) are
front- and side-facing gables, multi-gabled roof lines,
shingle decoration, and a richly ornamented bay window.
It is also significant as the home of Manuel Marshall, a
jeweler who, with his wife Mabel, resided in the house at
the turn of the 20th Century. The property was designated
a Master List Historic Resource in 1983.
Project Description
The project involves the conversion of attic space to habitable space, including a bedroom,
bathroom, and den. The conversion includes a 13-foot extension of the main roofline at the rear of
the house, addition of a dormer to the west elevation of the building, and installation of three
skylights into the roof (see Figures 3 and 4; and Project Plans, Attachment 4).
The roof extension creates a new gable end across the rear building elevation, replacing the current
hipped roof form. The new dormer, 8 feet tall and 7 feet wide, is located next to an existing dormer
above a shallow bay window on the west elevation. Siding and decoration for the new gable and
dormer are proposed to match the horizontal siding and dentil molding used on other gables on the
house. The proposed dormer will have additional patterned shingle decoration to match the
existing dormer.
Figure 1: Historic structures within the vicinity
Figure 2: Manuel Marshall Home
CHC1 - 2
ARCH-3618-2016 (785 Buchon)
Page 3
EVALUATION
Evaluation of this project is focused on
determining whether the design of the roof
extension, new gable end, new dormer, and
skylights are compatible with the architectural
style and historic character of the building,
consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation
Ordinance, including the Historic Preservation
Program Guidelines (HPPG) and the Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties (SOI Standards).
The ridge of the new dormer, on the right side (west
elevation) of the house rises to a height three feet
above an existing dormer in front of it, and the
upper portion of the ridge, and two of the skylights,
will be visible from the public right-of-way. The
new gable roof end at the rear of the house is not visible from the public right-of-way.
Historic Preservation Program Guidelines
Historic Preservation Guidelines (HPPG) require that at least 75% of a building’s framework, roof,
and exterior walls be retained when alterations are proposed, and that additions be compatible with
the building’s original architecture:
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 original materials as feasible. (§ 3.4.2)
Figure 4: Rear elevation, with new gable
Figure 3: West elevation showing new dormer (left) and roof extension (right)
CHC1 - 3
ARCH-3618-2016 (785 Buchon)
Page 4
Further guidance is provided for 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. (§ 3.4.4)
Staff Analysis: The new gable roof end and dormer do not introduce new or conflicting
architectural elements to the building. The City’s Historic Context Statement lists gables among
the character-defining features of both the Queen Anne and Neo-Classical Cottage architectural
styles.1 These elements are already present on the house and on neighboring houses. The proposed
gable and dormer have been designed to be harmonious with existing gables and dormers, and
proposed new windows are consistent with the existing window pattern which is composed of a
variety of different window types, including casement windows.
The proposed modifications are limited to the roof area, with all walls and cladding to be retained.
Portions of the original roof framing will be modified and replaced, as depicted on the Sheet A-
3.2 (Roof Plan) of the project plans (Attachment 4). For reference, the roof area of the house is at
least 1,300 square feet (extending roughly 50 feet from front to rear, 26 feet in width). The roof
framing affected by the proposed modifications is about 260 square feet in area, leaving more than
80% of the estimated roof area unaffected. A condition of approval (Condition #3) is suggested,
requiring that the extent of the retention of framework, roof, and exterior walls be calculated and
provided on construction plans, to verify conformance to the 75% retention standard.
Secretary of Interior’s Standards
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (SOI Standards)2
are used to provide guidance for rehabilitation of historic buildings. Rehabilitation is a treatment
described in the SOI Standards that acknowledges that “some alterations to a historic building are
generally needed to assure its continued use […].” In this case, the applicant wishes to modify the
roof to create habitable space in the attic, and to use skylights to provide some natural lighting to
the new space. Of particular relevance to this project is the following Standard for Rehabilitation:
New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy
historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the
property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible
with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to
protect the integrity of the property and its environment. (Standard 9)
1 City of San Luis Obispo. Citywide Historic Context Statement, pp. 137, 138. Prepared by Historic Resources
Group, September 30, 2016.
2 U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties (Washington DC, 1995).
CHC1 - 4
ARCH-3618-2016 (785 Buchon)
Page 5
Guidelines are provided in the form of recommendations to follow in rehabilitation of historic
buildings for consistency with these Standards, along with actions that are not recommended:
Recommended: Designing additions to roofs such as residential, office, or storage
spaces; elevator housing; decks and terraces; or dormers or skylights when
required by the new use so that they are inconspicuous from the public right-of-
way and do not damage or obscure character-defining features.
Not recommended: Radically changing a character-defining roof shape or
damaging or destroying character-defining roofing material as a result of
incompatible design or improper installation techniques. (Page 78)
Staff Analysis. The proposed gable and dormer are designed in a manner consistent with the
building’s architectural style and historic character. The overall form of the roof, its height, pitch,
pyramidal form, front-facing gable, and dormers on the east and west elevations, are retained and
preserved. No character-defining features are removed, damaged, obscured, or destroyed. The
original roof and the new gable and dormer appears compatible since it reflects the form of the
existing rear gable and west-elevation dormer, using matching siding, and incorporating existing
decorative shingle and dentil details into the new gable and dormer. The new gable and dormer
are appropriately scaled and proportioned to blend them into the existing roof form such that they
are not conspicuous to the observer from the public right-of-way
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
It consists of the minor alteration of an existing structure, adding less than 10,000 square feet of
floor area, as described in CEQA Guidelines § 15301 (e) (2) (Existing Facilities). Public services
and facilities are available, and the project is not located within an environmentally sensitive area.
The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue consideration of the project with direction on pertinent issues.
2. Recommend denial of the project based on findings of inconsistency with the City’s Historic
Preservation Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Vicinity Map
3. Historic Resource Inventory (785 Buchon; Manuel Marshall Home)
4. Project plans (reduced size)
5. Excerpt: Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties
CHC1 - 5
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FIND THE
PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE HISTORIC MANUEL MARSHALL HOME
AT 785 BUCHON STREET CONSISTENT WITH HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PROGRAM GUIDELINES AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS
FOR THE TREATMENT OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES (ARCH-3618-2016)
WHEREAS, the applicant, Brian Spaulding, filed an application on August 4, 2016, for
review of proposed modifications to the roof of a residence at 785 Buchon Street, a Contributing
Historic Residence, including a new gable roof end, small roof dormer, and skylights; and,
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearing in the Council Hearing Room (Room 9) of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on November 28, 2016, for the purpose of reviewing the modifications to the
residence at 785 Buchon Street; and,
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and,
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee has duly considered all evidence, including
the testimony of the applicants, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by
staff, presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City
of San Luis Obispo as follows:
Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Cultural Heritage Committee makes
the following findings:
1. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance and
Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, and in particular § 3.1 and § 3.4 regarding
alterations to historic resources in historic districts. The proposed new gable, dormer,
and skylights do not sharply contrast with, block public views of, or visually detract
from the historic architectural character of the residence. The alterations are limited to
the roof area and all character-defining features of the building, including the multi-
gabled roofline, shingle decoration, and ornamented bay window, that define the
building’s historic character are retained and preserved. The new gable and dormer are
designed and detailed in a manner consistent with the building’s architectural style.
They are well-proportioned to the scale of the roof and the existing dormer and gable
features, and are given the same siding and dentil molding decoration, and, for the
dormer, decorative shingles.
ATTACHMENT 1
CHC1 - 6
Resolution No. XXXX-16
ARCH-3618-2016 (785 Buchon)
Page 2
2. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties. The property continues to be used for its historical use,
and its historic character is preserved. Distinctive materials, features, and finishes defining
the property’s historical character, including roofing material and multi-gabled roofline,
wood siding and trim, decorative shingles, and dentil molding will be retained and
preserved. As recommended by Standard #9 for rehabilitation of historic pr operties, the
new construction does not destroy any historic materials, features, or spatial relationships
that characterize the property, is compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale
and proportion, and massing, of the historic residence, and protects the integrity of the
property and its environment.
3. As conditioned, the project conforms to the goals and policies of the General Plan’s
Conservation and Open Space Policies, and in particular Policies 3.3.1, 3.3.4, and 3.3.5,
regarding the preservation of historical and architectural resources. The new gable, dormer,
and skylights are sensitively designed in a manner consistent with the building’s
architectural style and historic character, extending the roof’s ridgeline while preserving
the multi-gabled roofline. They are appropriately scaled and proportioned to blend into the
roof form so that they are not conspicuous to the observer. The alterations have been
designed in a manner that protects the historical character of the property, and follows the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
Section 2. Environmental Review. This project is exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as described in CEQA Guidelines §15301
(Existing Facilities). It involves minor alteration of an existing structure and will not cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
Section 3. Action. The Cultural Heritage Committee does hereby recommend that the
Community Development Director find the project consistent with the Historic Preservation
Ordinance, subject to incorporation of the following conditions into any approval granted to the
application:
Conditions:
1. Architectural Details: Plans submitted for construction permits shall clearly depict
materials, colors, and dimensions of the window elements of the new gable end and
dormer, including siding, window frames and mullions, lintels, sills, recesses, trim,
eaves, roofing material and other related features. Architectural details will be designed
and arranged in a manner consistent with the character of the historic residence and
with historic structures of similar architectural style, as represented in the project plans,
and to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
2. Skylights. Plans submitted for construction permits shall clearly depict the materials,
colors, and dimensions of the skylights and their frames, including the dimension of
any projection from the roof surface, to verify architectural compatibility with the
existing building elements.
ATTACHMENT 1
CHC1 - 7
Resolution No. XXXX-16
ARCH-3618-2016 (785 Buchon)
Page 3
3. Retention of historic resource. Plans submitted for construction permits shall include a
calculation of the extent of the building’s framework, roof, and exterior walls to be
retained, for verification of consistency with § 3.4.2. of the City’s Historic Preservation
Program Guidelines.
On motion by Committee Member ___________ , seconded by Committee Member
________________________________________ ,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 28th day of November, 2016.
________________________
Brian Leveille, Secretary
Cultural Heritage Committee
ATTACHMENT 1
CHC1 - 8
R-2-H
R-2-H
R-2-H
R-2-H
R-2
R-2-H
R-2-H
R-2-H
R-4-H
R-2
R-2-H
ISLAY
C
H
O
R
R
O
BUCH
O
N
G
A
R
D
E
N
VICINITY MAP ARCH-3618-2016785 Buchon St ¯
ATTACHMENT 2
CHC1 - 9
ATTACHMENT 3
CHC1 - 10
ATTACHMENT 3
CHC1 - 11
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
4
C
H
C
1
-
1
2
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
4
C
H
C
1
-
1
3
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
4
C
H
C
1
-
1
4
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
4
C
H
C
1
-
1
5
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
4
C
H
C
1
-
1
6
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
4
C
H
C
1
-
1
7
7
8
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
E
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
R
o
o
f
s
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
E
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
R
o
o
f
s
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
I
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
i
n
g
,
r
e
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
,
a
n
d
p
r
e
s
e
r
v
i
n
g
r
o
o
f
s
—
a
n
d
t
h
e
i
r
f
u
n
c
-
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
n
d
d
e
c
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
—
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
i
n
d
e
f
i
n
i
n
g
t
h
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
o
f
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
T
h
i
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
t
h
e
r
o
o
f
’
s
s
h
a
p
e
,
s
u
c
h
a
s
h
i
p
p
e
d
,
g
a
m
b
r
e
l
,
a
n
d
m
a
n
s
a
r
d
;
d
e
c
-
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
c
u
p
o
l
a
s
,
c
r
e
s
t
i
n
g
c
h
i
m
n
e
y
s
,
a
n
d
w
e
a
t
h
e
r
v
a
n
e
s
;
a
n
d
r
o
o
f
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
u
c
h
a
s
s
l
a
t
e
,
w
o
o
d
,
c
l
a
y
t
i
l
e
,
a
n
d
m
e
t
a
l
,
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
i
t
s
s
i
z
e
,
c
o
l
o
r
,
a
n
d
p
a
t
t
e
r
n
i
n
g
.
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
a
r
o
o
f
b
y
c
l
e
a
n
i
n
g
t
h
e
g
u
t
t
e
r
s
a
n
d
d
o
w
n
s
p
o
u
t
s
a
n
d
r
e
p
l
a
c
i
n
g
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
e
d
f
l
a
s
h
i
n
g
.
R
o
o
f
s
h
e
a
t
h
i
n
g
s
h
o
u
l
d
a
l
s
o
b
e
c
h
e
c
k
e
d
f
o
r
p
r
o
p
e
r
v
e
n
t
i
n
g
t
o
p
r
e
-
v
e
n
t
m
o
i
s
t
u
r
e
c
o
n
d
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
w
a
t
e
r
p
e
n
e
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
;
a
n
d
t
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
t
h
a
t
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
a
r
e
f
r
e
e
f
r
o
m
i
n
s
e
c
t
i
n
f
e
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
P
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
a
n
c
h
o
r
a
g
e
f
o
r
r
o
o
f
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
t
o
g
u
a
r
d
a
g
a
i
n
s
t
w
i
n
d
d
a
m
a
g
e
a
n
d
m
o
i
s
t
u
r
e
p
e
n
e
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
.
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
n
g
a
l
e
a
k
i
n
g
r
o
o
f
w
i
t
h
p
l
y
w
o
o
d
a
n
d
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
p
a
p
e
r
u
n
t
i
l
i
t
c
a
n
b
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
l
y
r
e
p
a
i
r
e
d
.
N
o
t
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
R
a
d
i
c
a
l
l
y
c
h
a
n
g
i
n
g
,
d
a
m
a
g
i
n
g
,
o
r
d
e
s
t
r
o
y
i
n
g
r
o
o
f
s
w
h
i
c
h
a
r
e
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
i
n
d
e
f
i
n
i
n
g
t
h
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
o
f
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
o
t
h
a
t
,
a
s
a
r
e
s
u
l
t
,
t
h
e
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
d
i
m
i
n
i
s
h
e
d
.
R
e
m
o
v
i
n
g
a
m
a
j
o
r
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
r
o
o
f
o
r
r
o
o
f
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
t
h
a
t
i
s
r
e
p
a
i
r
a
b
l
e
,
t
h
e
n
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
n
g
i
t
w
i
t
h
n
e
w
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
t
o
c
r
e
a
t
e
a
u
n
i
f
o
r
m
,
o
r
“
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
d
”
a
p
p
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
.
C
h
a
n
g
i
n
g
t
h
e
c
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
r
o
o
f
b
y
a
d
d
i
n
g
n
e
w
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
d
o
r
m
e
r
w
i
n
d
o
w
s
,
v
e
n
t
s
,
o
r
s
k
y
l
i
g
h
t
s
s
o
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
h
i
s
-
t
o
r
i
c
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
d
i
m
i
n
i
s
h
e
d
.
S
t
r
i
p
p
i
n
g
t
h
e
r
o
o
f
o
f
s
o
u
n
d
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
u
c
h
a
s
s
l
a
t
e
,
c
l
a
y
t
i
l
e
,
w
o
o
d
,
a
n
d
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
m
e
t
a
l
.
A
p
p
l
y
i
n
g
p
a
i
n
t
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
c
o
a
t
i
n
g
s
t
o
r
o
o
f
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
w
h
i
c
h
h
a
s
b
e
e
n
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
l
y
u
n
c
o
a
t
e
d
.
F
a
i
l
i
n
g
t
o
c
l
e
a
n
a
n
d
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
g
u
t
t
e
r
s
a
n
d
d
o
w
n
s
p
o
u
t
s
p
r
o
p
-
e
r
l
y
s
o
t
h
a
t
w
a
t
e
r
a
n
d
d
e
b
r
i
s
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
a
n
d
c
a
u
s
e
d
a
m
a
g
e
t
o
r
o
o
f
f
a
s
t
e
n
e
r
s
,
s
h
e
a
t
h
i
n
g
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
u
n
d
e
r
l
y
i
n
g
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
.
A
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
r
o
o
f
f
a
s
t
e
n
e
r
s
,
s
u
c
h
a
s
n
a
i
l
s
a
n
d
c
l
i
p
s
t
o
c
o
r
r
o
d
e
s
o
t
h
a
t
r
o
o
f
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
i
s
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
a
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
e
d
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
.
P
e
r
m
i
t
t
i
n
g
a
l
e
a
k
i
n
g
r
o
o
f
t
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
u
n
p
r
o
t
e
c
t
e
d
s
o
t
h
a
t
a
c
c
e
l
-
e
r
a
t
e
d
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
—
m
a
s
o
n
r
y
,
w
o
o
d
,
p
l
a
s
t
e
r
,
p
a
i
n
t
a
n
d
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
m
e
m
b
e
r
s
—
o
c
c
u
r
s
.
ATTACHMENT 5
CHC1 - 18
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
E
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
R
o
o
f
s
7
9
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
R
e
p
a
i
r
i
n
g
a
r
o
o
f
b
y
r
e
i
n
f
o
r
c
i
n
g
t
h
e
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
w
h
i
c
h
c
o
m
p
r
i
s
e
r
o
o
f
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
.
R
e
p
a
i
r
s
w
i
l
l
a
l
s
o
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
l
y
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
t
h
e
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
i
n
k
i
n
d
—
o
r
w
i
t
h
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
s
u
b
s
t
i
-
t
u
t
e
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
—
o
f
t
h
o
s
e
e
x
t
e
n
s
i
v
e
l
y
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
e
d
o
r
m
i
s
s
i
n
g
p
a
r
t
s
o
f
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
w
h
e
n
t
h
e
r
e
a
r
e
s
u
r
v
i
v
i
n
g
p
r
o
t
o
t
y
p
e
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
c
u
p
o
l
a
l
o
u
v
e
r
s
,
d
e
n
t
i
l
s
,
d
o
r
m
e
r
r
o
o
f
i
n
g
;
o
r
s
l
a
t
e
s
,
t
i
l
e
s
,
o
r
w
o
o
d
s
h
i
n
g
l
e
s
o
n
a
m
a
i
n
r
o
o
f
.
R
e
p
l
a
c
i
n
g
i
n
k
i
n
d
a
n
e
n
t
i
r
e
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
r
o
o
f
t
h
a
t
i
s
t
o
o
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
e
d
t
o
r
e
p
a
i
r
—
i
f
t
h
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
f
o
r
m
a
n
d
d
e
t
a
i
l
i
n
g
a
r
e
s
t
i
l
l
e
v
i
d
e
n
t
—
u
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
p
h
y
s
i
c
a
l
e
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
a
s
a
m
o
d
e
l
t
o
r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
t
h
e
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
.
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
s
c
a
n
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
a
l
a
r
g
e
s
e
c
-
t
i
o
n
o
f
r
o
o
f
i
n
g
,
o
r
a
d
o
r
m
e
r
o
r
c
h
i
m
n
e
y
.
I
f
u
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
s
a
m
e
k
i
n
d
o
f
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
i
s
n
o
t
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
l
y
o
r
e
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
a
l
l
y
f
e
a
s
i
b
l
e
,
t
h
e
n
a
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
s
u
b
s
t
i
t
u
t
e
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
m
a
y
b
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
.
N
o
t
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
R
e
p
l
a
c
i
n
g
a
n
e
n
t
i
r
e
r
o
o
f
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
u
c
h
a
s
a
c
u
p
o
l
a
o
r
d
o
r
m
e
r
w
h
e
n
r
e
p
a
i
r
o
f
t
h
e
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
a
n
d
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
e
d
o
r
m
i
s
s
i
n
g
p
a
r
t
s
a
r
e
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
.
F
a
i
l
i
n
g
t
o
r
e
u
s
e
i
n
t
a
c
t
s
l
a
t
e
o
r
t
i
l
e
w
h
e
n
o
n
l
y
t
h
e
r
o
o
f
i
n
g
s
u
b
-
s
t
r
a
t
e
n
e
e
d
s
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
.
U
s
i
n
g
a
s
u
b
s
t
i
t
u
t
e
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
f
o
r
t
h
e
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
p
a
r
t
t
h
a
t
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
c
o
n
v
e
y
t
h
e
v
i
s
u
a
l
a
p
p
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
s
u
r
v
i
v
i
n
g
p
a
r
t
s
o
f
t
h
e
r
o
o
f
o
r
t
h
a
t
i
s
p
h
y
s
i
c
a
l
l
y
o
r
c
h
e
m
i
c
a
l
l
y
i
n
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
.
R
e
m
o
v
i
n
g
a
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
r
o
o
f
t
h
a
t
i
s
u
n
r
e
p
a
i
r
a
b
l
e
,
s
u
c
h
a
s
a
c
h
i
m
n
e
y
o
r
d
o
r
m
e
r
,
a
n
d
n
o
t
r
e
p
l
a
c
i
n
g
i
t
;
o
r
r
e
p
l
a
c
i
n
g
i
t
w
i
t
h
a
n
e
w
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
t
h
a
t
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
c
o
n
v
e
y
t
h
e
s
a
m
e
v
i
s
u
a
l
a
p
p
e
a
r
-
a
n
c
e
.
ATTACHMENT 5
CHC1 - 19
8
0
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
E
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
R
o
o
f
s
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
D
e
s
i
g
n
f
o
r
t
h
e
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
M
i
s
s
i
n
g
H
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
F
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
D
e
s
i
g
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
n
g
a
n
e
w
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
w
h
e
n
t
h
e
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
i
s
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
l
y
m
i
s
s
i
n
g
,
s
u
c
h
a
s
c
h
i
m
n
e
y
o
r
c
u
p
o
l
a
.
I
t
m
a
y
b
e
a
n
a
c
c
u
r
a
t
e
r
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
u
s
i
n
g
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
,
p
i
c
t
o
r
i
a
l
,
a
n
d
p
h
y
s
i
c
a
l
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
;
o
r
b
e
a
n
e
w
d
e
s
i
g
n
t
h
a
t
i
s
c
o
m
-
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
i
z
e
,
s
c
a
l
e
,
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
,
a
n
d
c
o
l
o
r
o
f
t
h
e
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
A
l
t
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
/
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
N
e
w
U
s
e
I
n
s
t
a
l
l
i
n
g
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
c
a
l
a
n
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
e
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
o
n
t
h
e
r
o
o
f
s
u
c
h
a
s
a
i
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
i
n
g
,
t
r
a
n
s
f
o
r
m
e
r
s
,
o
r
s
o
l
a
r
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
o
r
s
w
h
e
n
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
e
n
e
w
u
s
e
s
o
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
i
n
c
o
n
s
p
i
c
u
o
u
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
a
n
d
d
o
n
o
t
d
a
m
a
g
e
o
r
o
b
s
c
u
r
e
c
h
a
r
-
a
c
t
e
r
-
d
e
f
i
n
i
n
g
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
.
D
e
s
i
g
n
i
n
g
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
r
o
o
f
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
,
o
f
f
i
c
e
,
o
r
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
s
p
a
c
e
s
;
e
l
e
v
a
t
o
r
h
o
u
s
i
n
g
;
d
e
c
k
s
a
n
d
t
e
r
r
a
c
e
s
;
o
r
d
o
r
m
-
e
r
s
o
r
s
k
y
l
i
g
h
t
s
w
h
e
n
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
n
e
w
u
s
e
s
o
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
i
n
c
o
n
s
p
i
c
u
o
u
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
a
n
d
d
o
n
o
t
d
a
m
-
a
g
e
o
r
o
b
s
c
u
r
e
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
-
d
e
f
i
n
i
n
g
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
.
N
o
t
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
C
r
e
a
t
i
n
g
a
f
a
l
s
e
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
a
p
p
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
d
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
i
s
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
i
n
s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
,
p
i
c
t
o
r
i
a
l
,
a
n
d
p
h
y
s
i
-
c
a
l
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
I
n
t
r
o
d
u
c
i
n
g
a
n
e
w
r
o
o
f
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
t
h
a
t
i
s
i
n
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
i
n
s
i
z
e
,
s
c
a
l
e
,
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
a
n
d
c
o
l
o
r
.
I
n
s
t
a
l
l
i
n
g
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
c
a
l
o
r
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
e
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
s
o
t
h
a
t
i
t
d
a
m
a
g
e
s
o
r
o
b
s
c
u
r
e
s
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
-
d
e
f
i
n
i
n
g
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
;
o
r
i
s
c
o
n
s
p
i
c
u
o
u
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
r
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
.
R
a
d
i
c
a
l
l
y
c
h
a
n
g
i
n
g
a
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
-
d
e
f
i
n
i
n
g
r
o
o
f
s
h
a
p
e
o
r
d
a
m
a
g
-
i
n
g
o
r
d
e
s
t
r
o
y
i
n
g
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
-
d
e
f
i
n
i
n
g
r
o
o
f
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
a
s
a
r
e
s
u
l
t
o
f
i
n
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
o
r
i
m
p
r
o
p
e
r
i
n
s
t
a
l
l
a
t
i
o
n
t
e
c
h
-
n
i
q
u
e
s
.
T
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
w
o
r
k
i
s
h
i
g
h
l
i
g
h
t
e
d
t
o
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
t
h
a
t
i
t
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
s
t
h
e
p
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
e
x
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
o
r
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
s
p
e
c
t
s
o
f
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
a
n
d
s
h
o
u
l
d
o
n
l
y
b
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
a
f
t
e
r
t
h
e
p
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
c
o
n
c
e
r
n
s
l
i
s
t
e
d
a
b
o
v
e
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
e
d
.
ATTACHMENT 5
CHC1 - 20
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: 2017-2019 Cultural Heritage Committee Goal Setting and the Financial
Plan/Budget Process.
PROJECT ADDRESS: City-Wide BY: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner
FILE NUMBER: N/A FROM: Xzandrea Fowler, Deputy Director
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION:
Review the draft CHC list of goals and consolidated list of goals from all City advisory bodies and
forward a final recommendation to the City Council for their review during the goal setting process
beginning in January 2017.
DISCUSSION
On October 24, 2016 The Cultural Heritage Committee discussed goals for recommendation to the
City Council as part of the next financial planning cycle, and general consensus was reached on
the main direction. A subcommittee was formed for the purpose of refining CHC goals. The
subcommittee consisted of Chair Hill, and Committee Members James Papp, and Sandy Baer. The
subcommittee refined the general discussion from the meeting and arrived at the below
recommended CHC goals for the 2017-2019 Financial Plan budget/goal setting process. A
consolidated list of recommended goals from all advisory bodies is attached. The CHC should
review the refined CHC goals prepared by the subcommittee, and goals that have been prepared
by other advisory bodies (Attachment 1) to determine if any modifications should be made prior
to forwarding final goals to the City Council as part of the 2017-2019 goal setting process.
Cultural Heritage Committee Goals FY 2015-2017
The Cultural Heritage Committee requests the City Council consider the following goals:
Historic Preservation and Economic Development
Recent statistical research shows that urban neighborhoods comprising smaller buildings
of diverse age provide
• greater density of population, businesses, and creative economy jobs per commercial
square foot
• a significantly higher proportion of new, local, and women- and minority-owned
businesses
• a lower median age and greater diversity of age and race
Meeting Date: November 28, 2016
Item Number: 2
CHC 2-1
Cultural Heritage Committee: 2017-2019 Financial Plan Goal Setting
Page 2
• more nightlife, walkability, and transit friendliness.1
The Cultural Heritage Committee recommends city government invest in the following
projects to harness our Historic Preservation Program in support of sustainable
economic development:
1. A citywide update of our inventory of historic buildings and landscapes with a
historic resource survey and report
The California Office of Historic Preservation recommends updating historic resource
inventories every five years. San Luis Obispo has not done a global revision in thirty-
five years, making development decisions difficult and unpredictable. The CLG grant-
funded City of San Luis Obispo Citywide Historic Context Statement of 2014 logically
leads to a historic resource survey.
2. A strategic cost-benefit analysis of maintenance, rehabilitation, and use for city-
owned historic buildings
These range from the National Register Carnegie Library and Jack House and Garden
to City Hall and numerous adobes.
3. A re-evaluation of existing historic district boundaries and evaluation of
new historic districts
New districts may include a West End Historic District encompassing the area of
Higuera and Marsh Streets southwest of the Downtown Historic District and an
Anholm Addition Historic District surrounding Broad Street north of US Route 101.
Attachments:
1. Consolidated Advisory Body Goals
2. October 24, 2016 CHC Staff Report (w/o attachment)
1 Preservation Green Lab, Impresa, Basemap, Gehl Studio, State of Place, Older, Smaller, Better: Measuring How the
Character of Buildings and Blocks Influences Urban Vitality, National Trust for Historic Preservation, 2014.
CHC 2-2
Advisory Body or
Committee Recommended Goals Why Goals is Important Proposed Funding
Architectural Review
Commission
1. Alternative Transportation Incentives
Encourage expansion of the transit system by expanding routes, providing free WIFI on buses and at
stops, developing a rent-a-bike program, and exploring public/private partnerships.
Use in-lieu parking fees and other
transportation revenue sources to
implement continuous bicycle
path linkages throughout the city.
Architectural Review
Commission 2. Community Design Guidelines Update
Prepare a comprehensive update to the document including, but not limited to the following:
a. Develop criteria for compatible development in historic zones.
b. Update CDG for neighborhood compatibility to address transitions between neighborhood
commercial development and adjacent residential neighborhoods (LUCE §3.5.7.9).
c. Include more images and reference photos to highlight guideline language.
d. Review existing visual resource inventory and provide recommendations for additional database
improvements. Update the City’s GIS system by including 3D data for buildings by starting in the
downtown and moving outward from there. Provide guidelines for use of data base in the analysis of
projects as well as additional guidance for the protection of views and vistas (LUCE §15.1.2).
e. Strengthen and more clearly define guidelines for storefronts and windows in commercial areas to
maintain transparency and prevent the installation of opaque film and interior signs and displays that
obstruct views into stores.
Architectural Review
Commission 3. Recycled Water
Prioritize recycled water (“purple pipe”) by using it at all City Public facilities for landscaping purposes
and expanding the system so private development can tie into the system.
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 1: Railroad Safety Trail- Design and construct:
1) Pepper to the train station
2) Jennifer St. bridge to Iris (connecting to French
Hospital Trail)
3) Class I connection from RRST to Sacramento
This goal provides a huge safety enhancement for a large volume of bicyclists, a safe bike route to the
University, schools, & parks: implements General Plan goals to increase bicycle use and supports Grand
Jury recommendations to close gaps.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 2: Bob Jones Trail Design and construct:
4) Bike path extension from LOVR to the Octagon Barn
5) Grade separated crossing of LOVR at Highway 101
6) Prefumo Creek bike path from Target to Calle Joaquin.
The City-to-Sea trail continues to be a high priority for residents. Additionally, SLO County is moving
forward with its section of the trail which will increase the desire for the crossing.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 3: Misc. Bicycle Facility Improvements
Provide $100,000 in annual funding for misc. projects
such as safe routes to school, signing & striping projects
ideally incorporated into other construction projects.Completing these projects as part of other construction projects results in substantial cost savings.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project4 : Pacheco and Bishop Peak-Safe Routes to
School
Design and construct
Enhanced bicycle/pedestrian crossing of Foothill Blvd at
Ferrini
This project has been requested by neighborhood families that have difficulty crossing Foothill as they
walk and bicycle their kids to school.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 5: Pacheco and Bishop Peak-Safe Routes to
School
Design and construct enhance bicycle/pedestrian
crossing of Foothill Blvd at Patricia and La Entrada
This project has been requested by neighborhood families that have difficulty crossing Foothill as they
walk and bicycle their kids to school.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
DRAFT - Advisory Body/Committee Consolidated Goals for 2017-19 Financial Plan
11/15/2016
1 of 6
CH
C
2
-
3
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
1
Advisory Body or
Committee Recommended Goals Why Goals is Important Proposed Funding
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 6: Oceanaire Connection to Madonna Inn-
Design and construct a two-way bike path on NW side of
Madonna Road from the Madonna Inn to Oceanaire
Drive This project will improve bicycle access to Laguna Middle School.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 7: N Broad to Madonna Bike Path Class I
connection
This goal is to provide an off street option for bicycle access from the N Broad neighborhood to Laguna
Middle School. The goal will work in conjunction with the Oceanaire Connection to Madonna Inn.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 8: Prado Road Class I-
Design and construct a Class I bikeway from the current
terminus of Prado Road to Broad Street.
Constructing this bikeway connection ahead of development will provide an important east/west
bikeway connection and alternative to Tank Farm Road during the Chevron remediation efforts.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 9: Sinsheimer Park Pathway-
Construct a paved path through Sinsheimer Park from
Helena Street to the Railroad Safety Trail This project has been requested by residents from throughout the community.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 10: Penny Lane Bridge-
Design and construct a bicycle/pedestrian bridge over
the railroad tracks at Penny Lane
This bridge will provide a connection from downtown to the Johnson Avenue and Ella Street
neighborhoods via the bicycle facilities recently constructed at French Hospital.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 11: Islay Bicycle Boulevard-
Design and construct the City’s third bicycle boulevard.
Bicycle boulevards are facilities that bicyclists of all abilities feel comfortable using and therefore
increase ridership.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 12: Broad Street Class I-
Design and construct a Class I bikeway from Damon
Garcia sports fields to Rockview Place
In conjunction with the Prado Road Class I bikeway, this segment provides an alternative route to the
busy Broad Street corridor.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Project 13: US 101 Crossing Improvements-
Improve bikeway crossings of US 101 between Marsh
and Madonna
The intent of this goal is to improve east-west connectivity of communities west of the US 101 to the
east side of the freeway.
State funds, Federal funds,
General Fund, City debt financing,
Fundraising efforts, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Program: Bicycle Safety Education:
Maintain $7,500 in annual funding
Educating the public on cycling awareness and safety reduces collisions. Goal supports Grand Jury goal
of promoting safe cycling.
State and Federal grants,
Transportation Development Act
funds, General Fund, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Program: Ped/Bikeway Maintenance:
Maintain $60,000 annually for bicycle and pedestrian
facilities
Performing pavement maintenance and weed control on pedestrian and bicycle paths will increase the
life of these facilities and reduce the risk of accidents.
State and Federal grants,
Transportation Development Act
funds, General Fund, Measure G
Bicycle Advisory
Committee
Staff: Active Transportation Manager:
Maintain position.
The Active Transportation Manager implements the Bicycle Transportation Plan policies and programs,
prepares grant applications, and helps manage capital projects.General Fund, Measure G
2 of 6
CH
C
2
-
4
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
1
Advisory Body or
Committee Recommended Goals Why Goals is Important Proposed Funding
Cultural Heritage
Committee Historic Preservation and Economic Development
Recent statistical research shows that urban neighborhoods comprising smaller buildings of diverse age
provide
• greater density of population, businesses, and creative economy jobs per commercial square foot
• a significantly higher proportion of new, local, and women- and minority-owned businesses
• a lower median age and greater diversity of age and race
• more nightlife, walkability, and transit friendliness 1.
1Preservation Green Lab, Impresa, Basemap, Gehl Studio, State of Place, Older, Smaller, Better: Measuring How the Character of Buildings and
Blocks Influences Urban Vitality, National Trust for Historic Preservation, 2014.
Cultural Heritage
Committee
Economic Development:
1. A citywide update of our inventory of historic
buildings and landscapes with a historic resource survey
and report
The California Office of Historic Preservation recommends updating historic resource inventories every
five years. San Luis Obispo has not done a global revision in thirty-five years, making development
decisions difficult and unpredictable. The CLG grant-funded City of San Luis Obispo Citywide Historic
Context Statement of 2014 logically leads to a historic resource survey.
Cultural Heritage
Committee
Economic Development:
2. A strategic cost-benefit analysis of maintenance,
rehabilitation, and use for city-owned historic buildings
These range from the National Register Carnegie Library and Jack House and Garden to City Hall and
numerous adobes.
Cultural Heritage
Committee
Economic Development:
A re-evaluation of existing historic district boundaries
and evaluation of new historic districts
New districts may include a West End Historic District encompassing the area of Higuera and Marsh
Streets southwest of the Downtown Historic District and an Anholm Addition Historic District
surrounding Broad Street north of US Route 101.
Human Relations
Commission 1. Housing
Continue to implement the Housing Element, facilitate affordable, supportive, and transitional housing
options; promote creative land use and density opportunities, and modify City fees and processes to
increase housing production.
Tasks and funding priorities should focus on:
a. Explore ways to increase the affordable, alternative, and transitional housing inventory,
b. Increase both rental and ownership opportunities within the City’s housing stock,
c. Promote smaller, efficiency units and adjust development fees accordingly,
d. Work with Cal Poly to increase housing on campus to reduce rental burdens in the City,
e. Update zoning regulations to support housing using creative solutions and greater densities where
appropriate,
f. Evaluate current entitlement processes to be sure they do not deter new housing development (i.e.
expedite the development review entitlement process),
g. Review the City’s high occupancy regulations to accommodate shared housing options in
underutilized housing stock,
h. CDBG funding should continue to be prioritized for the production and rehabilitation of affordable
housing units. CDBG funding
3 of 6
CH
C
2
-
5
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
1
Advisory Body or
Committee Recommended Goals Why Goals is Important Proposed Funding
Human Relations
Commission 2. Homeless Prevention
Continue to support a long-term, proactive, sustainable program that addresses homelessness and
focuses on transitioning children, families, and individuals out of homelessness into permanent housing.
Tasks and funding priorities should focus on:
a. Prevention of homelessness primarily with the most vulnerable populations,
b. Increase support and awareness for mental and physical health and wellness,
c. Continue to work with the County and other local municipalities in implementing the San Luis Obispo
Countywide 10-year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness,
d. Continue support of 40 Prado and implement the Good Neighbor Plan to require case management
enrollment,
e. Balance needs of the homeless population and neighborhood wellness (i.e. expanded safe parking
program, transitional programs, meals, etc.),
f. Explore ways to increase transitional and supportive housing using creative financing and
partnerships,
g. Increase the HRC Grants in Aid Budget and General Fund support to allow greater financial assistance
to non-profits in the community who serve those less fortunate.
HRC Grants in Aid Budget and
General Fund support
Mass Transit
Advisory Committee 1. Multi-Modal Transportation
Renewed support of Multi-Modal Transportation, specifically in the use of Public Transit and in line with
City adopted mode split goals, by means of acquiring advancements in technological transit equipment
such as, but not limited to: electric transit vehicles, smart bus stops, operational management software
and public amenities
Mass Transit
Advisory Committee 2. Multi-Modal Transportation
Renewed support of Multi-Modal Transportation, specifically in the use of Public Transit and in line with
City adopted mode split goals, by means of dedicating funds for a dedicated Multi-Modal Transportation
(Transit) Center for both local and regional transit services.
Mass Transit
Advisory Committee 3. Multi-Modal Transportation
Further financial support of Multi-Modal Transportation, specifically in the use of Public Transit and in
line with City adopted mode split goals, by financially supporting public transit by introducing a Transit
Impact fee for all new developments Introduce a Transit Impact fee
Mass Transit
Advisory Committee 4. Multi-Modal Transportation
Further financial support of Multi-Modal Transportation, specifically in the use of Public Transit and in
line with City adopted mode split goals, by locally solving first mile and last mile travel in conjunction
with other local transportation service providers
Mass Transit
Advisory Committee 5. Multi-Modal Transportation
5. Support of Multi-Modal Transportation programs, specifically in the use of Public Transit and in line
with City adopted mode split goals, by supplying at least one additional full-time staffing position in
order to administer transit related programs.
Parks and
Recreation
Commission
1. Sustainable Landscapes: City Parks, Laguna Lake Golf
Course
Provide funding to develop a master plan for sustainable landscapes in City parks and at the Laguna Lake
Golf Course.
Parks and
Recreation
Commission 2. Fund an update of the Parks and Recreation Element Fund an update of the Parks and Recreation Element
Parks and
Recreation
Commission 3. Lighted Tennis Courts
In 2017-19 construct lighted Tennis Courts @ Sinsheimer Park and dedicated Pickleball Courts in the
City.
Parks and
Recreation
Commission 4. Dog Parks
Identify locations within the City for neighborhood dog parks and fund one for construction during 2017-
19.
Parks and
Recreation
Commission 5. City parks facilities Increase the number of City parks facilities and maximize the potential of existing parks.
Promotional
Coordinating
Committee City Beautification
Beautification of the City and opportunities to incorporate art into public spaces. Support the
enforcement of City policies affecting the look of the City and the gateways.
4 of 6
CH
C
2
-
6
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
1
Advisory Body or
Committee Recommended Goals Why Goals is Important Proposed Funding
Promotional
Coordinating
Committee Pedestrian & Bike Friendly Community
Increase the efforts to make SLO more pedestrian and bike friendly by enhancing the local infrastructure
and signage, and increase the awareness of their availability.
Promotional
Coordinating
Committee Natural Spaces Enhancement & Awareness
Enhance awareness and availability of the natural spaces in and around town to residents and visitors.
Support the effort of the Tree Committee and the enhancement of the Urban Forest.
Promotional
Coordinating
Committee High Quality of Life
As a City embrace and facilitate ways to enhance the quality of life for residents and visitors.
o Find ways to make the event/activity processes easy, cost effective, and user friendly.
o Support collaboration with local cultural, recreational and competitive sports events to drive visitors
to San Luis Obispo.
o Recognize and support the individual contributions of the PCC and TBID in our efforts to collaborate.
o Increased GIA funding to support nonprofits.
Promotional
Coordinating
Committee Mission Plaza Implementation of the Mission Plaza Concept Plan.
Promotional
Coordinating
Committee Wayfinding Program Finish the build-out of the directional wayfinding program.
Promotional
Coordinating
Committee Homeless Population Address the issues relative to the transient and homeless populations throughout the City.
Promotional
Coordinating
Committee Economic Development Strategic Plan Support the update of the Economic Development Strategic Plan to address the quality of life.
Planning
Commission
1. Housing: Increase Affordable and Workforce
Housing; Address Homelessness
Emphasize affordable housing programs, encourage a non-traditional housing mix which facilitates
development of workforce housing cost control through the use of, for example, Development
Agreements, accessory and junior accessory dwelling units, and identify non-traditional partnerships for
financing workforce housing and homeless shelters.
Planning
Commission
2. Land Use: Focus on LUCE Identified Special Focus
Areas and Specific Plan Areas
Implement the Land Use Element by conducting an update of the Zoning Regulations with priority given
to LUCE-identified Special Focus Areas 1-15 (Land Use Element page 183) and Specific Plan Areas.
Implement the Downtown Concept Plan and Mission Plaza Master Plan.
Planning
Commission 3. Energy Efficiency in City Built Environment:
Implement the Climate Action Plan with emphasis on improving residential energy efficiency in existing,
older housing stock and sustainability by incentivizing solar, alternative fuels, and other energy sources
into the City’s built environment.
Planning
Commission 4. Infill Development and Multi-Modal Circulation:
Implement the Circulation Element and the City’s Multi-Modal objectives with emphasis on in-fill
development and non-automobile alternatives by rebalancing, innovation, pricing, guidance, and
parking structures. Support non-auto related transportation alternatives in plan and project approvals
and program implementation.
Tourism Business
Improvement
District Tourism Integration
Recognize tourism as an integral aspect of the City’s economic development efforts and support the
tourism promotion activities of the TBID and PCC.
Tourism Business
Improvement
District Open Space
Recognize the importance of Open Space in the City’s tourism marketing efforts. Evaluate barriers
between resident and visitor use.
Tourism Business
Improvement
District Compliance
Prioritize the enforcement to gain compliance of properties with the City’s Homestay Ordinance with
the goal for 100% compliance with Homestay policy within the City.
5 of 6
CH
C
2
-
7
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
1
Advisory Body or
Committee Recommended Goals Why Goals is Important Proposed Funding
Tourism Business
Improvement
District Airport
Support the San Luis Obispo Airport in its efforts to keep and expand airline service and assist with
marketing efforts to bring visitors to San Luis Obispo by plane.
Tourism Business
Improvement
District Promotional Coordinating Committee
Increase funding for the Promotional Coordinating Committee in its efforts to promote cultural,
recreational, and social events that bring and keep tourists in San Luis Obispo. Consider establishing a
correlation between PCC funding and TOT collection.
Tourism Business
Improvement
District Beautification
Beautification of City Gateways and the City’s downtown core and continue the implementation of the
wayfinding sign program.
Tourism Business
Improvement
District Security
Enhance security relative to transient populations throughout the City so residents and tourists can feel
safe while enjoying activities in San Luis Obispo.
Tourism Business
Improvement
District Pedestrian & Bike Friendly Community
Increase emphasis on making the City more bike and pedestrian friendly and completion of the Bob
Jones bike path as a connection between San Luis Obispo and the beach.
Tourism Business
Improvement
District Diablo Canyon Closure
Strategize and mitigate the revenue impact from the closure of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant on the
tourism industry in the City.
6 of 6
CH
C
2
-
8
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
1
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: 2017-2019 Cultural Heritage Committee Goal Setting and the Financial
Plan/Budget Process.
PROJECT ADDRESS: City-Wide BY: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner
FILE NUMBER: N/A FROM: Xzandrea Fowler, Deputy Director
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION:
Review 2015-2017 CHC goals, take public testimony, and identify Committee goals and work
program items for the 2017-2019 Financial Plan.
DISCUSSION
Situation
Every two years the City adopts a budget and financial plan. To prepare for the budget process,
all City departments and advisory bodies are asked to identify their goals and major work programs
for the next two years. The City Council then uses this information, along with public comment
and other input to set community priorities and allocate resources to accomplish the most important
City goals.
Advisory body members are involved in the goal setting process to provide important input as
representatives of the community, with special expertise and experience working locally within
their specific area of representation. Below are some key points to consider as the City embarks
on the goal-setting process:
1. The Council is seeking advisory body input fo cused on the purview of the advisory body,
but is also interested in input on other issues important to the community.
2. Advisory body input is highly valued by the Council and the staff.
3. Goals can include completing projects from a previous work program.
4. Identifying priorities implies recommending fewer rather than more goals to the Council.
The CHC should recommend only those activities that can reasonably be accomplished in
the two-year budget period and can reasonably be accomplished with limited resources.
Outcome
This is a public process and citizens are encouraged to contribute. Tonight’s meeting will result
in two items: 1) a list of CHC goals and implementation programs; and 2) a letter from the CHC
Chair to the City Council outlining recommended goals and programs for 2017-2019 and if
necessary, requesting resources for specific activities (staff will prepare the letter for the Chair’s
signature).
Meeting Date: October 24, 2016
Item Number: 4
CHC 2-9
Attachment 2
The Process
At the meeting, staff will provide a brief presentation introducing the budget process, advisory
body role, and status of previous recommended goals. The City last revised its goals and work
program in October 2014, in preparation for the 2015-2017 Financial Plan/Budget. Staff, advisory
bodies, and Council members are now preparing for the nex t Financial Plan cycle: 2017-2019.
During past goal-setting sessions, the CHC has generally followed the steps outlined below.
1. Review and understand the goal-setting and Financial Plan/Budget process.
2. Evaluate previous goals and work programs. Determine which goals and programs were
accomplished and can be deleted or ones that no longer reflect the aims of the CHC.
3. Determine which goals or programs have not been completed and should be carried
forward.
4. Identify new goals or programs for possible inclusion in the work program.
5. Prioritize the goals and programs, based on the CHC’s adopted goals and General Plan
goals (from the Conservation and Open Space Element – excerpt attached).
6. Identify activities which may require additional resources to accomplish, including special
funding for specific survey, tasks or consultant work (i.e. historic inventories or research),
construction or other implementation costs, additional staff time, etc. This may include
references to possible community partnerships or outside funding sources.
The Committee will establish goals for the next two years and identify three to five key tasks or
programs it intends to complete in the period. The Committee should discuss how these goals and
activities relate to important Council goals and at the same time, consider the fiscal context for the
goal-setting process, including resources needed to accomplish the task.
During the past goal-setting session for the 2015-2017 Financial plan, the Committee
recommended the following projects to the Council:
1) City owned Adobes
A. Focus efforts on the preservation and adaptive re-use of the City owned La Loma
Adobe on Lizzie Street and work with the Friends of La Loma Adobe to support their
efforts in stewarding the fundraising efforts towards the property. The structure is in
dire need of a new roof, site maintenance, and exterior work to help avoid the loss of
the resource.
B. Create a re-use plan and preservation plan for the Rosa Butron Adobe on Dana Street.
The structure is in need of a new roof, the removal of non-historic additions, and
maintenance of the site to alleviate potential attractive nuisances.
2) Historic Preservation Guidelines Integrate/Update the Historic Context Statement with
the Historic Preservation Guidelines and update the Community Design Guidelines to
include historic preservation standards.
3) Historic Resource Surveys/Historic District Boundaries In alignment with the City’s
status as a Certified Local Government, continue historic resource survey efforts and
CHC 2-10
Attachment 2
examine the boundaries of existing historic districts to determine if amendments are
needed. Utilize a CLG grant and matching City funds to assist with this effort.
4) Cultural Heritage “Commission” Explore options for additional collaboration between
the Architectural Review Commission and the CHC -or allow the committee to seek
Commission status to gain autonomy and to allow final actions to be taken, thereby
streamlining and focusing the development review process for historic properties or
historic districts.
What’s Next?
Advisory body goals are due by November 7, 2016. All advisory bodies will receive a consolidated
listing of all recommended advisory body goals by November 21, 2016. This provides an
opportunity to review what other advisory bodies see as high community priorities. It is also an
opportunity to revise goals accordingly if the Commission so chooses. Final changes are due by
December 13, 2016. The Council will receive the final report with all advisory body
recommendations before they begin the goal-setting process in January 2017.
Attachments:
1. Conservation and Open Space Element Policies for Historic Preservation
CHC 2-11
Attachment 2